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 - Hans

Pages: [1]
1
Antarctica / Re: Rift in Larsen C
« on: June 21, 2017, 03:38:23 PM »
According the Dutch news site nu.nl: "Scientists issued a warning on Wednesday to ships in Antarctica in the coming days. A giant ice plateau, as big as the island of Bali, is about to break loose."

Project Midas is mentioned in the text, but unclear to me who "the scientist" are.
Anybody knows a real source?
link :http://www.nu.nl/klimaat/4783929/schepen-bij-antarctica-gewaarschuwd-enorm-scheurend-ijsplateau.html

2

Look at how much snow cover has been lost. Impressive.
I assume just melted in 14 days time; it's summer ;). Not due to land slide.

But: Please help me to spot the landslide in these images. I do not see a difference.. :-\

3
Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: June 10, 2017, 10:28:18 PM »
My guess is the white lines are thicker ice in these estuary like channels.  The dark is low lying land that has become wet.  ...
indeed. I was referring to the bottom left corner of the image. I think you are correct regarding the top right corner.... :)

4
Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: June 10, 2017, 01:18:06 PM »
..., the white lines against a dark backround I find puzzling. ....
Just a guess (never been there  :) ) Grey/dark is sea ice flooded with meltwater from the river. White lines are ridges in the ice, still covered with snow?

5
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: June 04, 2017, 05:29:13 PM »
From the website of NS, the Dutch railway company: ."... 1.4 TWh / year...all sourced from new build wind parks..." It is not only The NS, but all rail companies operating in NL: ProRail, Arriva, Connexxion, Kombi Rail Europe, DB Schenker, ERS Railways, HSL Logistik, Rotterdam Rail Feeding en Rurtalbahn Benelux.

6
Consequences / Re: Weird Weather and anecdotal stories about climate change
« on: February 06, 2017, 07:01:19 PM »
Extreme cold in Quatar. Only 1.5C   ;) A record low.
http://www.qweather.gov.qa/NewsDetail.aspx

7
Antarctica / Re: PIG has calved
« on: January 28, 2017, 10:25:27 AM »
Dumb question time. How is PIG related to the long Larsen C crack shown here:
Hi Susan, I think the crack in LarsenC is around 150 km long now.
The full width of PIG is around 40 km
The length of the fraction that cracked of in the images of 26 January is.. well.. just a fraction of it. ;)

8
Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: January 13, 2017, 04:11:12 PM »
Yesterday, the twittter bird directed me to a page on Carbonbrief. A guest post by Richard Betts of 8 November last year: How scientists predicted CO2 would breach 400ppm in 2016. It shows a very nice correlation between Enso and annual increase. We can use this for improving our estimates!
Link: https://www.carbonbrief.org/how-scientists-predicted-co2-would-breach-400pm-2016

9
Antarctica / Re: Rift in Larsen C
« on: January 06, 2017, 10:44:34 PM »
You now can make some money out of this rift. :D

<Changed the link; N.>

10
Antarctica / Re: PIG has calved
« on: December 25, 2016, 06:16:59 PM »
Not knowing exactly where PIG was, I started google maps. I was surprised by the details of some photo's. Not the most recent ones, of course, But nevertheless worth a visit
https://www.google.nl/maps/@-75.0761623,-101.4182596,3682m/data=!3m1!1e3
Zooming in and wandering around gives some nice details.

11
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016/2017 freezing season
« on: December 06, 2016, 01:48:25 PM »
Ah, that one (was on the Dutch TV last week in DWDD)
Look at the site of Wipneus: https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/grf and try to find nsidc_global_extent_byyear_b.png
 :)

12
Arctic sea ice / Re: Albedo-Warming Potential
« on: December 05, 2016, 07:01:47 PM »
New study +14C in winter 2100:
Albedo impact is not largest Summer when the sun shines, but has a delayed impact in winter temperatures. See study by Richard Bintanja and Folmer Krikken of the KNMI: 'Magnitude and pattern of Arctic warming governed by the seasonality of radiative forcing' in http://www.nature.com/articles/srep38287. Expected annual average + 8C, but for winter +14C due to late refreeze and related changes in forcing... Ouch! + 14C ??? oh dear.... :-\

Is this what we see also now develloping?

13
Consequences / Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« on: October 16, 2016, 09:17:47 PM »
Nasa/GISS will update their data tomorrow. Anomaly for September 2014 was 0.9 (L+O).
Based on the data of Karsten Hasten I estimated/calculated 0.886 as best guess for GISS. +/- 0.02.  Will be a close finish! Finally an end to record after record?


14
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2016 melting season
« on: September 11, 2016, 05:23:47 PM »
Oden is on a joint scientific NP expedition together with Canada's CCGS Louis S St. Laurent.
Here's the Canadian version of the NP event:

http://www.science.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=5666A052-1&offset=7&toc=show

From the blog Hefaistos mentioned:
Quote
.... and finally “We’re at the top of the world!” as the ship’s horn blasted to announce our arrival. As we sailed three times around the world :) to find hard ice :(, the decks filled with .....

(smileys inserted by me)

15
Arctic sea ice / Re: Ice free predictions and their uncertainty
« on: August 30, 2016, 01:08:53 PM »

I am not trying to disqualify all models and certainly, I want to respect the honest scientists working on these projects. But IPCC comes from "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change" and they are more than 10,000 people. How many of them are real and honest scientists? So, from my point of view, some thousand(s) IPCC people are politicians and it could be another thousand coming from the fossil fuel industry.

Please have a look at the IPCC website about their organization. IPCC is a very small group, but for there reports they invite scientist from all over the world.

From IPCC AR5, WGI, chapter 11.3.4.1 Sea Ice (page 995, published in 2013)
Quote
Though most of the CMIP5 models project a nearly ice-free Arctic (sea ice extent less than 1 × 106 km2 for at least 5 consecutive years) at the end of summer by 2100 in the RCP8.5 scenario (see Section 12.4.6.1), some show large changes in the near term as well. Some previous models project an ice-free summer period in the Arctic Ocean by 2040 (Holland et al., 2006), and even as early as the late 2030s using a criterion of 80% sea ice area loss (e.g., Zhang, 2010). By scaling six CMIP3 models to recent observed September sea ice changes, a nearly ice-free Arctic in September is projected to occur by 2037, reaching the  rst quartile of the distribution for timing of September sea ice loss by 2028 (Wang and Overland, 2009).
The full chapter 11 was written by around 55 authors. (I assume not all were involved in the sea ice paragraph.) However the authors did not base their wording only on own publications but analysed a broad spectrum of the scientific literature. Before publication the report was reviewed by many others.

It is the final Synthesis Report and the "Summary for policymakers"  were the big (political) discussions about the wording starts. Not about text on page 995.

PS: haven a look at the report: there is also something about "ice free in 2016" (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter11_FINAL.pdf)

16
IPCC is about Climate, and climate is not weather. In that view, 5 years is a short period, where 30 year averages are more common in climate definitions.
I fully support this definition. Anybody is free to set his own definition of ice free. It is not about an incidental summer, but about a general trend.
Remind that also 1 million km2 is just a number. Why not 1.1 or 0.4?
IPCC is well aware that there will be no return to the good old days. That is not the reason to wait 5 years. No definition of IPCC wil have impact on the real situation. lt is just wording. The main goal is to compare scenario calculations. Not to close down all coal fired power stations the day we dip below the "target".But if you want to compare different model forecasts from different research groups, it's nice to have a common agreement what you are comparing.

For me, the day someone is able to sail to the NP, without help from ice breakers will be the day. I guess that will have far more impact on the general public than any definition with "only 1 million left".

17
Policy and solutions / Re: Coal
« on: March 25, 2016, 10:35:49 PM »
Scotland has closed its last coal power plant.

Quote
...
"For the first time in more than a century no power produced in Scotland will come from burning coal.

But in The Netherlands they are burning more and more...
Coal for power production: was 10,914 kton coal, but 13,477 in 2015  >:(
(Steel changed from 4,306 to 4,447  :-[ and " other use" went down from 73 to 53 kton   :P)

Source: CBS: http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?VW=T&DM=SLNL&PA=37621&LA=NL

18
Policy and solutions / Re: Green energy is not always perfect
« on: August 22, 2014, 09:11:59 PM »
Good stuff, Bob.

Fossil-fueled power stations kill about 9.4 birds per GWh. (34.8x wind)

This obviously does not include such externalities as climate change. I suspect the ultimate toll on birds from fossil-fueled power stations is, and certainly will be, much higher.

No. it obviously DOES include. read the paper:

0.02 as result of mountain top removal/deforrestation for coal mining
0.07 collides with or faces electrocution at thermoelectric power plant equipment"
0.05 acid rain
0.06 other hazardous pollutants

And for climate change: "...projected that 15%to 37% of all species of birds could be extinct by 2050. These numbers, too, can be tentatively quantified into 9.16 deaths per GWh from oil, natural gas, and coal-fired power stations"

"Adding the avian deaths from coal mining, plant operation, acid rain, mercury,
and climate change together results in a total of 9.36 fatalities per GWh"

How else could this figure be this high?

19
Now this is 60km upstream. Here the movement is much faster, about 3.5 m/day.

(must click this one as well)
A remarkable feature in the 2014-08-04 image of the animation above. The meltwater lake in the bottom-right corner has some faint echo imprints down stream. We have seen in other occasions that melt lakes year-on-year form on the same geographic location and don't move with the ice. Are these white spots the remains of the "same" melt lake in previous years?

21
Arctic sea ice / Re: What the Buoys are telling
« on: May 26, 2014, 05:47:23 AM »
Webcam 1 has regular updates of the time stamp, but the clouds are as drozen as the ice. This part of the pole wil not met this year.

22
Science / Re: Fifth IPCC assessment report released
« on: October 04, 2013, 07:43:59 AM »
Final draft has been published online, ......I wonder why they say "Do Not Cite, Quote or Distribute" on every page. Is it all right to post pictures in forums?
This is the draft report, as pulished on 7 june. At that time, publication was not permitted. Note that the this week published draft is a draft. There is already a list of corrections to be made, as a results of last weeks dicussion and acceptance of the SPM. See the Changes to the Underlying Scientific/Technical Assessment , also available on the pages you referred to. These changes are NOT incorporated in the draft yet. (And as you will understasnd they will move the pictures and tables from the end of the chapters to the right position in the text)

23
Arctic sea ice / Re: Melt Ponds!
« on: August 07, 2013, 07:52:26 AM »
Question: has webcam 1 been attacked by a polar bear?

Pages: [1]