Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Jim Hunt

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Arctic sea ice / Re: MOSAiC news
« on: December 13, 2019, 11:49:02 AM »
Round-about route the last day as the going got toughter but docking as expected to the east of the Polarstern on the 05:31 on Dec 13th. The Kapitan Dranitsyn is still moving into position between 03:43 and 05:21. The 07:00 S1B just misses in its coverage.

The tracks have to be captured within 24 hrs on a S1AB or they become all but impossible to follow.

The large extended black lead to the south (up) is an unexpected overnight development but so far seems to have no effect on fueling or Mosaic ice camp equipment. It is not notably active between 03:43 and 07:00. There is no sign of it yesterday on the 05:30 S1A.

Regionally, there is quite a bit of ice dynamics, mostly shearing. The PS and KD are perhaps 10 km north (down) of a massive block shear zone. The overnight pair of images below are being viewed in a coordinate system in which the Polarstern is fixed.

This would have been a full-on disaster had the shear line come through Ice Camp while the Polarstern was refueling or exchanging out equipment and scientists. It didn't and people on the ground may have been oblivious to it.

The explanation of the event is the passing of mild wind shear from southeast to northwest across the Polarstern's position. At no time were winds extreme; instead the delta of wind (6 km/hr to 31 km/hr) caused the ice to move differentially across the gradient.

The ice is still too mechanically weak this winter to distort south of the PS's position so brittle-fractured along a line parallel to wind stress where it is thicker. The event is largely over per GFS though ice movement is foreseen to somewhat reverse in coming days. Again, this was not a winter cyclone, just uneven regional wind stress.

On uniq's upcoming (we hope!) mega buoy animation, we can expect some sharp zigzags distinguishing buoy sets above and below the event. This will greatly improve time resolution of the main fracture over what 24-hr S1AB can do, in this instance 24 less 2:36 hrs compared to half-hourly or even ten minutes.

2019 12 13 0343
2019 12 12 0619

Start at the location below and step back in 3-hr steps (keyboard 'j').,90.00,1100/loc=119.5,86.6

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 13, 2019, 03:16:27 PM »
I worked with a guy in Holland.  He worked for Lotus Consulting.  He always wore an extremely expensive suit.

When a colleague asked him why he wore those suits every day he replied.

"you can look the job or you can do the job; the customer can't tell the difference".

I dress to the level of the company.  Today that is Jeans and T shirt in the office.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 17, 2019, 06:07:05 PM »

On the "refreeze" front I don't see any "new ice" on the Canadian stage of development charts yet.

A lump of grey ice (purple shade in image) here Jim. But it's more really in the Arctic Ocean (at 80 N) and away from Canadian inshore waters. Probably something similar to what Mike Horn's boat was plowing through.,2886.msg229100.html#msg229100

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 15, 2019, 07:48:55 AM »
P.S.: 2019 is 8,454 above the 2016 minimum of  4,017,264 km2.

That high over the NP looks set to intensify over the next 48+hrs according to GFS, and with just 8-9k more melt + compaction to add to the 144k lost over the last 5 days the next Jaxa update could very well take 2019 to 2nd lowest Arctic sea ice extent on record after 2012 with melt potentially continuing through this next week given the heat anomalies ... last years min was on 21 Sep!

What a remarkable melt season! Extreme weather events no longer appear to matter as the post 2012 new normal includes constant subtropical heat bombs, overheated peripheral seas and suppressed freezing seasons.

I've really enjoyed following the melt seasons here since 2013, and the freezing seasons since Frank rained on the NP in the dead of the Arctic night post Xmas 2015.

+1 to Jim Hunt and all the other seasoned commentators here who share their expertise and make this space such an informative place for the vast bulk of us lurkers. Please keep it coming!

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 15, 2019, 02:38:57 AM »
Be careful with answering Jim Hunt, you seem a candid poster and he's the worst troll if he wants to.
He sure is. He's never ever once replied to one of my messages, other than to complain. If you write over 4000 messages, and people like less than 200 of them, maybe it's a sign...

Jim Hunt is one of the top contributors here. I learn a great deal from his posts, far more than I learn from your daily postings of weather gifs. And this site is about sharing real insight into AGW, not getting likes.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 12, 2019, 10:07:13 PM »
The latest NSIDC "quick look" sea ice age map:
Thanks Jim. Animation for (most of) this melting season from week ending mar25-sep2
edit: ani removed as it is reposted downthread

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 12, 2019, 10:01:36 AM »
I’m really surprised that the lightning strikes 300 miles from the North Pole yesterday did not cause more discussion on the forum. 

The scientists on climate Twitter could not find any instance of lightning so far north.

It was a strange, and in my opinion important, event.  The arctic is changing!

This is from work, so no one has seen the following pictures... The IFS 0.125° for the 11th at 00Z, wet bulb potential temperature at 850 hPa, vorticity at 850 hPa (above 16, step 4), SLP, thickness 500 (Z500-Z100). There is  a front with a ribbon of vorticity to the North, stretching from the low over Barents to the Chucki sea, with low and mid level clouds, as visible from sat pictures. But associated with the low over Laptev, to the west of the head of the low, there is a maximum of vorticity. Sounding show mid level instability from ~800 hPa to ~250hPa with ~100 to ~200 J/Kg. Marginal, be with good forcings enough for TS.
As Rod said, this is significant.
For one part, this is an illustration of the evolving Arctic. Again, CBs were probably not directly linked to the crazy warm SST, but it is definitively showing that Arctic is warming. The warm air advection was extreme, and was able to carry a potentialy instable airmass up to 85°N. Mid level CBs at the head of a thermal wave are not a thing of the Arctic, up to today...
For the other part, this also means that cyclogenesis is on the move on the Arctic. This low had some characteristics of a warm seclusion with a slight max of temperature, TA and wind around 850 hPa - 900 hPa. Cold, pure baroclinic process are loosing a bit of grip and now warm core process and moist instability is starting to play a role. For the second point, it was of course more evident with the low over Beaufort at the start of the month for example. Here a lone CB will not make any meaningfull difference of course. But next year it could be 10 CBs, then etc... And on the end it will change the cyclogenesis process. It could also be noted that Laptev sea being shallow, it could quickly warm without sea ice. With Siberia snow free earlier and earlier, this could mean a quick increases of moist instability with a warming Arctic.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: June 18, 2019, 06:54:21 AM »

Too tempting to point out how optimistic your error was (considering I find all your other comments to be in the same vein).

I am an optimist. Not the pollyanna type, but someone who tries to stay grounded with facts and believes that we can solve most of our problems if we look for answers.  I also believe that being a pessimist is a likely route to failure.   

I'll try to avoid disparaging comments in the future...

That would be nice.  The older I get the less tolerance I have for a-holes.

So, I am totally committed and on board for changing the world to be 90% plus off of fossil fuels in the next 2 decades...BUT I don't think it is possible with the same sort of lifestyle the 1st world currently lives. You seem to disagree and believe there are like-for-like substitutes which can make (for example: CARS) effectively "green". I do not hold this belief.  I would love to, in good faith, discuss this.

First, let's recognize the difference between "could" and "will".  My comment was that we have the technology in hand to eliminate fossil fuel use for grid generation in the next 20 years by simply doubling the effort we've made in recent years.

I am not optimistic about that happening because we're losing time with this regressive administration and Senate trying to return us to the days of the robber barons.  I think there's a good chance of putting a decent person in the White House but I'm afraid we won't adequately deal with the Senate.  I think Republicans will cost us at least five years with their foot-dragging.

As for the rest of the world, Europe is likely to quit fossil fuels faster than the US.  China and India may surprise us and switch over fairly rapidly.  Russia probably won't. Africa is likely to have the greenest energy on the planet because it's cheaper for them to leapfrog over fossil fuels and go straight to renewables.

I think the world will move to EVs fairly rapidly.  For the simple reason that we are on the cusp of it being cheaper to manufacture an EV than an ICEV.  And it's already much cheaper to operate an EV. (edited: incorrected entered ICEV)  It's going to take a few more years for some of the major car manufacturers to transition into EV manufacturers but I think some of them now realize that it is necessary for their survival.

There are a number of other issues around sustainability in terms of materials for manufactured goods but I'm not dwelling on those.  If we run out of 'whatever' then we'll use something else.  We don't have an option to move to a planet with a better climate if we screw up this one.  Personally, I'm zeroed in on electricity, transportation, and heat.  The areas in which we turn fossil fuels into CO2.

To establish a mutual level of understanding: what is your personal familiarity with manufacturing, mining, transportation, fluid transportation, industry at large, etc?

I've never worked in any of those areas.

(for those who claim this is off topic: tesla's "glory" (at least on ASIF) is about its ability to aid humanity in removing itself for activities which increase GHG levels. thus, if you don't understand how this is germane, shut up and let the adults converse)

How about we do this.  Use this thread for Tesla.  There are threads for renewable energy and electric vehicles.  Perhaps there should be one for greening up industry and mining.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: June 15, 2019, 11:36:49 PM »
Ruth Mottram (a climate scientist at the DMI) posted this image on Twitter a little while ago. 

It is a Sentinel2 image from today of Inglefield Bredning, the location of the sled dogs in Jim Hunts post #1841.

The melting in far northwest Greenland this early in the year is remarkable.

... and to add some historical context, here it is in worldview, along with the same time in 2012 + 2016 ...

The rest / Re: Brexit...
« on: May 29, 2019, 04:40:08 PM »
Only to the House

How was this never posted here???

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: May 29, 2019, 01:55:36 PM »
The Barrow AK temperature mystery comes from the weatherbug website (1st link below) which was mentioned upthread as a "weather" link from the webcam page (2nd link below).

The mystery arises when the weatherbug page is reset from Fahrenheit to Celsius (button on the top tool bar). Odd things happen unless the page is refreshed.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: May 29, 2019, 11:35:51 AM »
Hi everyone
first time poster and attentive reader of the forum  :)

Maybe that helps dissolve some of the confussion about the weather in barrow:

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: May 24, 2019, 07:54:38 AM »

Not meaning to be overly pedantic, just think it's a distinction worth making.

it's not overly pedantic, on the contrary, it's obvious and self-evident and this is the probable reason why it's not talked about that much.

But, that wasn't my point.

the echo to your repeated mention

Twice? LOL...

of this is not because we don't believe you, but because i for one think, yeah, sure, has been clear from day one and nobody ever said otherwise. so we fully agree

Well, of course you do! But that also was not my point...

and sometimes it's worth to remember that one fact does often not exclude another. mentioning one reason does not mean it's the only reason etc. etc.

Also not a point I had made. But thanks for the pat on the head! ;-)

hence all good you're 100% correct with your assessment.

Generally, yes. But also not my point.

My point:

When I first arrived at the SIB many years ago, the language was pretty dense, the references to places, locations, effects, resources a mess for me. I had no problem understanding the ice dynamics in and of themselves because, well, I'm neither uneducated nor of low intelligence. In fact, I posted somewhat regularly and didn't feel out of place doing so. However, the jargon, the info, the labels... tough. (Now? Ten years and little participation since 2012/13 or so has left me well behind. I won't be posting much bc you all can do better than I.)

So, if, as you say, the posters here know it all, so need not point out the obvious, then how does such a statement as this slip through?

"being in better shape,"

It's a misleading description of conditions. Thus, was the poster being a bit too colloquial/relaxed, or had the poster not realized the dynamics at play? As you should understand from my post, I assumed the latter. But, I also explained the dynamics. Why? For you? For Neven? For Hunt?

Of course not. For:
this is an important dynamic that I think a little more clarity in language will help make clear for those less versed or for newbies so they understand the ice dynamics.

Because I remember what it was like in the beginning for me and, as a teacher, I try to notice when I am stating things that are assumptions for me, but not for my audience.

And that was why I posted, not to inform you of ice dynamics, but to remind long-time posters that what is background to you is likely mysterious to new users.

Better shape? Not really. Bad news. Newbies might have missed this.


Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: May 24, 2019, 06:18:06 AM »
ASCAT arctic sea ice comparison 2012, 2016, 2018 and 2019 Jan1–May22
click zoom icon to expand

Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The Nares Strait thread
« on: April 26, 2019, 09:05:56 PM »
Hello all, thought I would introduce myself.  I've been following this thread with a great deal of curiosity since I found it about a month ago, in lieu of the great breakup of March 20th.  I'm the operator of the Dr. Neil Trivett Global Atmosphere Watch Observatory in Alert, NU, so I've been watching all of this ice movement first-hand.  It's been a very different winter this year with a lot of fog and precipitation thanks to all the open water immediately offshore.

Here's a view a little different from the satellite imagery you usually get to see, taken a moment ago from the top of our instrument tower at the lab.

- Kevin

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: April 03, 2019, 04:04:54 PM »
Jim thanks for posting the article on transpolar drift, but when I followed the link, the text of article was broken up and unreadable. Advice welcome.
another readable link can be found here: (sharing link points to an epdf file that is not working)

Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: April 03, 2019, 03:07:03 PM »
Polar bears sparring while a wolf walks by

Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The Nares Strait thread
« on: March 18, 2019, 12:59:47 PM »
Seemed like a good day to go historical. Here is worldview Terra/Modis, least cloudy days between mar16-20, 2000-2019.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: March 02, 2019, 11:53:43 AM »
A History Recap may be a helpful reminder again

First Post by Neven on this Topic

This thread is to be used for the most part to post articles that Tesla Inc. is either successfully implementing its business model, or that it's failing to do so. The Internet is full of tiresome discussions on this subject, so I'd appreciate it if you partake in them elsewhere. Post your evidence for either stance, and then exercise patience.

For a more general discussion on EVs and their future, usefulness and technological aspects, use the thread that was always meant for that: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....

Neven, please don't take Zizek out. We can handle a few angry voices around here.

I won't, but I want him to take his rants about the moral implications of Tesla/Musk elsewhere, like here or here.

This thread isn't about Tesla per se, but about whether Tesla is going to go bankrupt soon or not.

And then I read this thread. Sigmetnow has a particular knack for posting only positive news about Tesla. And obsessively.

That's the whole idea of this thread! How often do I need to repeat it?


Take the rants elsewhere (preferably a Green BAU thread) or create your own thread. I've been very clear about what this thread is about: Tesla's survival/demise. Not the consequences of its survival/demise, or the moral implications. Next rant will be snipped.

Enough with the general debates already! This is a forum full of threads, and if you can't find one to fit your general debate, then create one!

I have to sleep at night, and now there are too many off-topic rants, one after the other. But the next time I will delete every single one of them. I created this thread to discuss Tesla glory/failure. I want to see bull/bear links, op-eds, videos, whatever, and not too much personal opinion, let alone rants and insults.

This is going to play out for a while, so please, have some patience and stop this repetitive vicious cycle.

NASA completes certification of SpaceX Dragon Crew capsule; sets March 2 launch date for Demo-1 flight to International Space Station; will provide live coverage and updates.

Off topic. Nothing to do with Tesla, nothing to do with it's ultimate success or failure as per N. guidelines (?). Others talking about spaceX the same.

I agree, SpaceX stuff should go elsewhere, perhaps a new thread in the same location as astronomical news? It's off-topic here.

SpaceX thread is here.

"It's not Rocket Science!"   ;D

Another big calving:

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 22, 2018, 07:41:50 AM »

Bollinger Motors claims it received 10,000 reservations for its all-electric truck

Bollinger has 18,500 reservations as of last week. And after my suggestion, Robert has asked Elon Musk if Bollinger can use Tesla's Supercharger Network.


Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The Nares Strait thread
« on: June 29, 2018, 11:55:21 PM »
The Lincoln sea ice is already funnelling into the gap left further up the channel. With the collapse of the arch this should continue.

Click to animate.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Operation IceBridge - Arctic Spring 2018
« on: June 28, 2018, 10:14:40 PM »
Operation IceBridge "quick look" data for the spring 2018 campaign have been posted yesterday by NSIDC (link).  According to the website:

This quick look product is experimental and is designed to be applicable for time-sensitive projects such as sea ice forecasting.

For what it's worth, I downloaded the data and plotted the snow depth and sea ice thickness.

Snow depth:

Sea ice thickness:

For comparison, here are the corresponding images for previous years:

2017 snow depth
2016 snow depth
2015 snow depth
2012 snow depth

2017 ice thickness
2016 ice thickness
2015 ice thickness
2012 ice thickness

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018 melting season
« on: June 18, 2018, 09:43:15 AM »

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018 melting season
« on: June 18, 2018, 12:20:45 AM »
The swell is going to make a mark on the ice edge.

The weather this spring has been cold over the Kara sea until the last 5 days. There has been a large transfer of heat in the North Atlantic but it only made it up to southern Sweden and Norway on the SST maps.

After the big Greenland melt years of 2010 and 2012 the Greenland and Labrador seas had a large excess of fresh water that reduced deep water formation and northward heat and salt transport into the Norwegian current. That temporarily stabilized the Arctic ice pack, in my opinion leading to the apparent recovery in 2013 and 2014.

If Greenland continues to stay relatively cool this summer I think it will be bad for next summer's Arctic ice because another surge of warm salty water will likely keep on pumping into the Arctic. I think we have reached the point where Greenland or the Arctic ice can do well, but not both. However, there's a lag of 1 to 2 years on the effect of Greenland melting on Arctic sea ice.

The pressure anomaly pattern for the past 30 days has helped keep the ice in the Kara sea that was long gone on this date in 2012.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018 melting season
« on: June 17, 2018, 07:45:42 PM »
I love watching you eat it, Jim. Do you remember how deep long period swell waves penetrate and how much mixing they cause?

P.S. I learned a lot about long-period waves bodysurfing the beach breaks,  point breaks and reef breaks of Kauai. Long-period waves of even modest amplitude have the power to crush things, especially surfers.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5