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 - gerontocrat

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 169
1
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: July 12, 2020, 09:33:07 PM »

Public transport is great where it works.  Outside of that everyone for whom it does not work simply ignores the argument and votes for more roads.

UK roads urgently need upgrading to reduce congestion and, conversely, emissions driven by that congestion.

That is a fact and trying to ignore it fails to make the case.
In other words, to maintain BAU you have to be BAU - except maybe an EV instead of an ICE.
Some of us think that may not be an adequate response to, e.g., the 6th Mass Extinction.

2
Bloomberg thinks the markets will behave as follows....

Bulls to Gain Ground in Market Primed for Virus-Defying Rally


3
The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: July 12, 2020, 07:32:10 PM »
I would ask that the new management team consider some sort of mission statement which reflects a commitment to scientific integrity. I would ask people to consider whether it is legitimate to be concerned about messaging that potentially dissuades people from hoping for a solution if such messaging is not grounded in science.
Every so often people start to want to mould the ASIF into a vehicle for themselves. Demanding a mission statement is often a prelude to a takeover bid.

Me? that's when I start to smell censorship - & that's when I start thinking about packing my bags and heading for the hills. The more different points of view on how all this mess is going to turn out the better. Don't try to fence me and the rest of us in.

(Bad behavior is a different story, as is being boring.)


4
Data from...
http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/
http://ensemblesrt3.dmi.dk/data/prudence/temp/PLA/PP_GSMB/

Data as at 11 July 2020.
Melt very much the same as 3rd June to 10 July. Melt down a bit to 39.7% of the surface area of Greenland, 2nd highest for the year.
But Precipitation highbut less than yesterday. The result was a daily SMB loss of 4.4 GT, about the average for this day.

It still looks like melt moderating considerably during the next week or two, but what do I know? (sigh).

5
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 12, 2020, 06:23:57 PM »
NSIDC Total Area as at 11-Jul-2020 (5 day trailing average) 5,827,158 KM2         
         
Total Area         
 5,827,158    km2      
-333,845    km2   <   2010's average.
 165,249    km2   >   2019
-1,080,704    km2   <   2000's average.
         
Total Change   -78    k   loss
Peripheral Seas   -34    k   loss
Central Seas___   -44    k   loss
         
Peripheral Seas         
Okhotsk______   -0    k   loss
Bering _______   -0    k   loss
Hudson Bay___   -19    k   loss
Baffin  Bay____   -8    k   loss
St Lawrence___   -0    k   loss
Greenland____   -4    k   loss
Barents ______   -3    k   loss
         
Central Arctic  Ocean Seas         
Chukchi______   -3    k   loss
Beaufort_____   -6    k   loss
CAA_________    0    k   gain
East Siberian__   -10    k   loss
Central Arctic_   -9    k   loss
Laptev_______   -9    k   loss
Kara_________   -7    k   loss
         
Sea ice area loss on this day 78 k, 16 k less than the 2010's average loss of 94 k         
         
- 2020 area is at position #3 in the satellite record.         
- 2020 Area is 334 k less than the 2010's average         
- 2020 Area is 1,081 k less than the 2000's average         
- 2020 Area is 46 k less than 2016         
- 2020 Area is 165 k more than 2019          
- 2020 Area is 20 k more than 2012[/b]         
___________________________________________         
Note: Click once on each image to see it full-size         

6
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 12, 2020, 12:54:45 PM »
The only way is up.

I guess in the USA the percentage of people who in the name of "Freedom!" will defy all social distancing and self-protection measures may be enough to keep the graph heading up for some time to come.

7
Arctic sea ice / Re: Global sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 12, 2020, 11:00:25 AM »
JAXA GLOBAL SEA ICE EXTENT:  22,932,955 KM2 as at 11-Jul-2020

- Extent loss on this day 89k, 69 k more than the average loss on this day (of the last 10 years) of 20k,
- Extent gain from minimum on this date is 6.21 million km2, 1.23 million km2, 16.5% less than the 10 year average gain of 7.44 million km2.
- Extent is at position #3 in the satellite record
- 2020 Extent is  0.26 million km2 MORE than 2019,
On average 81.0% of sea ice gain from minimum to maximum done, and 116 days to maximum

Projections of the Unknown Quantity. (Table JAXA-AA1)

Average remaining sea ice gain (of the last 10 years) would produce a maximum in November 2020 of 24.68 million km2, 0.92 million km2 above the 2016 record low maximum of 23.76 million km2.
___________________________________________________
The false maximum was reached on the 28th June. We are now in up to 2 months or more of extent losses up to the false minimum in August/September. After that is the late run of extent  gains to  the “maximum maximum” for the year in late October/early November.

N.B. In 2016 the maximum was reached on the 7th July. i.e. the November maximum was less than the “false” maximum.
___________________________________________________
In the last few days above average Arctic sea ice extent losses and mostly below average Antarctic sea ice gains have resulted in large Global sea ice reductions.
___________________________________________________
N.B. Click once for full-size images

8
Antarctica / Re: Sea Ice Extent around Antarctica
« on: July 12, 2020, 10:38:15 AM »
JAXA ANTARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT:  15,405,526 KM2 as at 11-Jul-2020

- Extent gain on this day 45k, 30 k less than the average gain on this day (of the last 10 years) of 75k,
- Extent gain from minimum on this date is 12.65 million km2, 0.25 million km2, (1.9%) less than the 10 year average of 12.89 million km2.
- Extent is at position #14 in the satellite record of which 7 lower values are in the years before 2000
- Extent is  295 k LESS than 2016
- Extent is  745 k MORE than 2017
- Extent is  115 k MORE than 2018
- Extent is  508 k MORE than 2019
- Extent is  117 k LESS than the 1980's Average

- On average 80.7% of ice gain from minimum to maximum done, and 71 days to maximum

Projections. (Table JAXA-Arc1)

Average remaining freeze (of the last 10 years) would produce a maximum in Sept 2020 of 18.49 million km2, 0.43 million km2 above the 2017 record low maximum of 18.06 million km2.
___________________________________________________________

9
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 12, 2020, 10:27:13 AM »
JAXA ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT:  7,527,429 KM2 as at 11-Jul-2020

- Extent loss on this day 134k, 40 k more than the average loss on this day (of the last 10 years) of 94k,
- Extent loss from maximum on this date is 6,920 k, 810 k, 13.3% more than the 10 year average of 6,110 k.
- Extent is at position #1 in the satellite record
- Extent is  245 k LESS than 2019,
- Extent is  520 k LESS than 2016,
- Extent is  339 k LESS than 2012
- Extent is  644 k LESS than 2007
_____________________________________________
On average 61.4% of melting from maximum to minimum done, and 65 days to minimum

Projections. (Table JAXA-Arc1)

Average remaining melt (of the last 10 years) would produce a minimum in Sept 2020 of 3.69 million km2, 0.51 million km2 above the 2012 minimum of 3.18 million km2.
______________________________
To match the record low minimum of 2012 remaining melt needs to be 13.3% greater than the 10 year average (24k less than yesterday).

10
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 11, 2020, 08:05:17 PM »
Peripheral Seas - sea ice area

The Okhotsk, Bering, and St Lawrence are history for this year.

Of the 4 remaining in play..
- Another ordinary year in Hudson Bay i.e. finished in a week or two (though with it being very warm maybe very quickly),
- Looks like Baffin Bay is finishing melting out with a final flourish,
- The Barents Sea is nearly done - onl possibility is ice being ushed in from the Central Arctic,

- The Greenland Sea If not for a continuous supply of ice via the Fram and pushed south by the strong East Greenland Ocean Current, the Greenland Sea would be ice free by now. So the final minimum for this sea all depends on how much new ice is heading its way for the remainder of this melting season.

11
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 11, 2020, 03:26:32 PM »
NSIDC Total Area as at 10-Jul-2020 (5 day trailing average) 5,905,398 KM2         
         
Total Area         
 5,905,398    km2      
-350,048    km2   <   2010's average.
 123,008    km2   >   2019
-1,092,853    km2   <   2000's average.
         
Total Change   -61    k   loss
Peripheral Seas   -45    k   loss
Central Seas___   -16    k   loss
         
Peripheral Seas         
Okhotsk______   -0    k   loss
Bering _______    0    k   gain
Hudson Bay___   -23    k   loss
Baffin  Bay____   -8    k   loss
St Lawrence___   -0    k   loss
Greenland____   -11    k   loss
Barents ______   -3    k   loss
         
Central Arctic  Ocean Seas         
Chukchi______   -9    k   loss
Beaufort_____    1    k   gain
CAA_________    1    k   gain
East Siberian__   -11    k   loss
Central Arctic_    18    k   gain
Laptev_______   -8    k   loss
Kara_________   -8    k   loss
         
Sea ice area loss on this day 61 k, 39 k less than the 2010's average loss of 100 k         
         
- 2020 area is at position #2 in the satellite record.         
- 2020 Area is 350 k less than the 2010's average         
- 2020 Area is 1,093 k less than the 2000's average         
- 2020 Area is 84 k less than 2016         
- 2020 Area is 123 k more than 2019          
- 2020 Area is 40 k less than 2012
         
___________________________________________         
Extent has now completed 10 days of century breaks, a total sea ice extent loss of  1.53 million km2.

Is sea ice area going to resume above average losses in the coming days?

12
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: July 11, 2020, 02:58:40 PM »

Tesla sells all it can make at a profit margin per car estimated at around 30%.  Plenty of room to bring price down to keep the competition at bay as and when they can build competitive cars .

That 30% is not net profit.  I don't think it is even the con known as EBITDA. And it relates to the China factory.

I can agree the rest of your post except that if ICE cars are simply replaced by EVs it will be because the world is still in thrall to the God of infinite GDP growth.  Say goodbye to most of what remains of life on earth. 


13
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: July 11, 2020, 01:28:37 PM »
With a market cap of 250 billion, a p/e ratio of 25 requires a net profit (NOT EBITDA) of 10 billion per annum. 

That's a few gigafactories down the track. Maybe Musk will be on Mars by then.

I remember the Japanese NIKKEI back in the late 80's when a p/e ratio of 100 was quite normal. Didn't last.

Mind you, I still think that Tesla has a really good chance of being a very successful company.  It's just that my view is that the US economy is heading for a rough time by the fall (when the bills come in and the Fed cash spigot starts to run dry) and for some time after. An out of control Covid-19 virus won't help. The financial markets may well take a beating. (Same applies elsewhere in the world).

14
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 11, 2020, 12:31:57 PM »
While everyone is arguing the data for the World & the USA is starting to look like the Tesla Share Price graph.

Remember when Fauci said 60k dead would be a good result for the USA?

15
Data from...
http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/
http://ensemblesrt3.dmi.dk/data/prudence/temp/PLA/PP_GSMB/

Data as at 10 July 2020.
Melt very much the same as 3rd June to 9 July. Melt unexpectedly rose to 42.3% of the surface area of Greenland, highest for the year.
But Precipitation much higher than I expected. The result was a daily SMB loss of 2 GT, well below the average for this day.

It still looks like melt moderating considerably during the next week or two, but what do I know (sigh).
[/quote]

16
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 11, 2020, 11:22:26 AM »
JAXA ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT:  7,661,609 KM2 as at 10-Jul-2020

- Extent loss on this day 97k, 4 k more than the average loss on this day (of the last 10 years) of 93k,
- Extent loss from maximum on this date is 6,786 k, 770 k, 12.8% more than the 10 year average of 6,016 k.
- Extent is at position #1 in the satellite record
- Extent is  178 k LESS than 2019,
- Extent is  463 k LESS than 2016,
- Extent is  315 k LESS than 2012
- Extent is  621 k LESS than 2007
_____________________________________________
On average 60.5% of melting from maximum to minimum done, and 66 days to minimum

Projections. (Table JAXA-Arc1)

Average remaining melt (of the last 10 years) would produce a minimum in Sept 2020 of 3.73 million km2, 0.55 million km2 above the 2012 minimum of 3.18 million km2.
______________________________
8 out of 10 of the projections from remaining melt in the last 10 years result in a minimum below 4 million km2.
The 2012 remaining melt that produced the record low was 22% above the average. For 2020 to produce a new record low requires remaining melt of 14% above the average. Still unlikely but no longer in the impossible category.

17
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: July 10, 2020, 08:56:01 PM »
Quote
One could buy C1450 for $5.70, and sell C1500 for $2.1, a cheap trade with much better payout profile than straight C1500.
10x or more on the money in a day. Damn... maybe I should follow this roller coaster more closely again.
In investment terms this is complete craziness, I agree sedziobs, all speculation here.
The NASDAQ is 29% above a year ago. The markets are piling into stocks that might do OK out of Covid - i.e. tech, online retail, even renewable energy stuff.

So Tesla is out in the front of all this Wall Street huff and puff. I suppose one day the markets will have to look at earnings and money in Jane & Joe's pocket book rather than the Fed's current largesse.

One of the adverts to attract daytraders to their platform has the disclaimer "70% of day traders on our site lose money". Tears before bedtme?

18
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 10, 2020, 08:42:17 PM »
I'd like to remind folks of Jim Petit's graphs (https://sites.google.com/view/pettitclimategraphs) and particularly this favorite of mine. 
Is it just me & my tired old eyes (& tired old laptop) that wish the colour contrast between some of the months was far stronger. Blink blink.

19
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: July 10, 2020, 07:37:43 PM »
The pie-in-the-sky hydrogen fuel cell option seems to exist simply to cover the fact that Nikola is unable to build a long-range pure battery semi or pickup.
I can see H2 as a valid option for ocean-going shipping, and as replacements for gas peaker plants in a renewable energy dominated electricity grid where solar & wind at times produce large amounts of excess electricity to make H2.

I, for one, would not like to be driving a semi, and even less a pickup, with H2 at 5 to 10,000 psi (330 to 660 bar) on board. 
______________________________________________
Combustion

Hydrogen gas (dihydrogen or molecular hydrogen,[13] is highly flammable:

2 H2(g) + O2(g) → 2 H2O(l) + 572 kJ (286 kJ/mol)[note 2]
The enthalpy of combustion is −286 kJ/mol:[14]

Hydrogen gas forms explosive mixtures with air in concentrations from 4–74%[15] and with chlorine at 5–95%. The explosive reactions may be triggered by spark, heat, or sunlight.
_______________________________________
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/consumer/hydrogen/basics/storage.htm
Quote
In the case of on-board storage of hydrogen for vehicular applications, automobile manufacturers require lightweight, compact, safe, and cost-effective storage plus the ability to achieve a driving range of at least 300 miles. The 300-mile driving range requires 5-10 kg of usable hydrogen depending upon the size of the vehicle. Although various hydrogen storage technologies are presently available, none completely satisfies all of the auto industry requirements. In fact, finding a solution to the hydrogen storage problem is considered by many to be the foremost challenge for the hydrogen economy.

Hydrogen can be stored in three ways:
-As a compressed gas in high-pressure tanks.
-As a liquid in dewars or tanks (stored at -253°C).
-As a solid by either absorbing or reacting with metals or chemical compounds or storing in an alternative chemical form.
To meet the storage challenge, basic research is needed to identify new materials and to address a host of associated performance and system issues.
Issues include operating pressure and temperature; the life span of the storage material (stability); the requirements for hydrogen purity imposed by the fuel cell; the reversibility of hydrogen uptake and release; the refueling conditions of rate and time; the hydrogen delivery pressure; overall safety, toxicity, and system-efficiency and cost. No material available today comes close to meeting all the requirements for onboard storage of hydrogen for fueling a fuel cell/electric vehicle.

Picture of Experimental test bed for evaluation of zero-boil-off cryogenic sys.
Experimental test bed for evaluation of zero-boil-off cryogenic sys, FSEC H2 Lab, J. Baik (Photo: N. Waters)
These requirements are often contradictory to each other (like the need for high specific energy and high energy density), and the requirement to simultaneously address these issues adds to the magnitude of the challenge. In fact, some of the requirements for onboard hydrogen storage seem unattainable especially with gaseous or liquid methods.

Storage of hydrogen in chemical compounds offers a much wider range of possibilities to meet the transportation requirements, but no single material investigated to date exhibits all the necessary properties. The storage solution requires breakthroughs in materials performance that can only come from innovative and basic research that looks beyond the materials considered, to date. The exacting demands on storage capacity, charge and discharge conditions, stability, and cost span the traditional disciplines of chemistry, physics, materials science and engineering. The fundamental factors that control bond strength, desorption kinetics, degradation due to cycling, and the role of nanosize and nanostructure in bonding and kinetics must be researched and new materials found.

At present, only three systems for on-board hydrogen storage are close to commercialization. They are compressed gas at high pressures (5,000 to 10,000 psi in composite cylinders), liquid hydrogen which requires a cryogenic temperature of -253 ° C, and materials-based storage in solids which involves the use of metal hydrides, carbon-based materials/high surface area sorbents, and/or chemical hydrogen storage.

The current status of various storage technologies in terms of weight, volume and costs is given below. These systems show a three to eight times performance gap in meeting the DOE goals.

20
Policy and solutions / Re: Batteries: Today's Energy Solution
« on: July 10, 2020, 06:50:45 PM »
Just maybe a new kid on the block...

https://theprint.in/tech/power-pioneer-invents-new-battery-thats-90-cheaper-than-lithium-ion/457316/
Power pioneer invents new battery that’s 90% cheaper than lithium-ion

Japan's Hideaki Horie, who helped commercialize the batteries, has developed an approach he says can speed up manufacturing, making it as easy as 'buttering toast.'
Quote
“The problem with making lithium batteries now is that it’s device manufacturing like semiconductors,” Horie said in an interview. “Our goal is to make it more like steel production.”

The making of a cell, every battery’s basic unit, is a complicated process requiring cleanroom conditions — with airlocks to control moisture, constant air filtering and exacting precision to prevent contamination of highly reactive materials. The setup can be so expensive that a handful of top players like South Korea’s LG Chem Ltd., China’s CATL and Japan’s Panasonic Corp. spend billions of dollars to build a suitable factory.

Horie’s innovation is to replace the battery’s basic components — metal-lined electrodes and liquid electrolytes — with a resin construction. He says this approach dramatically simplifies and speeds up manufacturing, making it as easy as “buttering toast.” It allows for 10-meter-long battery sheets that can be stacked on top of each other “like seat cushions” to increase capacity, he said. Importantly, the resin-based batteries are also resistant to catching fire when punctured.

In March, APB raised 8 billion yen ($74 million), which is tiny by the wider industry’s standards but will be enough to fully equip one factory for mass production slated to start next year. Horie estimates the funds will get his plant in central Japan to 1 gigawatt-hour capacity by 2023.

Horie acknowledges that APB can’t compete with battery giants who are already benefiting from economies of scale after investing billions. Instead of targeting the “red ocean” of the automotive sector, APB will first focus on stationary batteries used in buildings, offices and power plants.

That market will be worth $100 billion by 2025 worldwide, more than five times its size last year, according to estimates by Wood Mackenzie. The U.S. alone — which together with China will be the main source of increased energy storage demand — is likely to see a 10-fold increase to $7 billion in the period.

21
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 10, 2020, 06:30:46 PM »
USA Time to keep an eye on the daily deaths 7 day trailing average

22
Arctic sea ice / Re: Re: Tides
« on: July 10, 2020, 06:14:50 PM »
Yeah, Atlantic and Gulf would be more pertinent than Arctic.
You are unlikely to find anything beyond one year. King tides, often known elsewhere as Spring Tides, tend to occur close to the Spring and Autumn equinoxes, when the earth's rotation is in close alignment with the sun and the moon. During the moon's 29 day cycle the highest tides are at new and full moon. You can get New Moon and Full Moon dates for anywhere from this site..

https://www.timeanddate.com/moon/phases/usa/fort-lauderdale

The highest tides in the Gulf occur in Autumn when sea temperatures are at maximum,which increases the general sea level. Hence the table below.

King Tides and High Tides | City of Fort Lauderdale
Anticipated King Tides in 2020


September 16 - 22.
October 14 - 21.
November 13 - 18.
December 13 - 15.

Of course September & October are also high risk months for Hurricanes. One day a hurricane will make landfall with a nasty storm surge on top of a King Tide.

Note that this year the New Moon on October 16 is a Super Moon - i.e. the moon closer than usual to the earth. The King tide could be bigly on that date.

23
The politics / Re: Brexit...
« on: July 10, 2020, 05:10:47 PM »
paddy as it was a Brexit thread I assumed you were talking about europeans sanctions vis a vis the uk, only in this context does my above comment apply
Look mate, this 'ere is the brexit fred. Those bloody EUcrats are gonna put a big tax on our exports of cheese and we will have to pay more for their bloody oranges, and pay a fortune to drink English beer in benidorm. How much more can a true blue Honky Englishman take from these bloody furriners?

24
The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: July 10, 2020, 03:44:01 PM »
This thread started with a poll.

Should it be resurrected? Mind you, last time the USA got Trump. Those of a superstitious leaning might not want to tempt fate a second time.

25
The politics / Re: Your 2020 US Presidential Election Map
« on: July 10, 2020, 03:39:28 PM »
Thank the Lord it's "Your 2020 US Presidential Election Map" and not mine.

On the other hand - back here in the UK we are stuck with 4 more years of Boris Johnson.

26
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 10, 2020, 03:33:06 PM »
NSIDC Total Area as at 09-Jul-2020 (5 day trailing average) 5,966,478 KM2         
         
Total Area         
 5,966,478    km2      
-389,338    km2   <   2010's average.
 70,076    km2   >   2019
-1,119,322    km2   <   2000's average.
         
Total Change   -32    k   loss
Peripheral Seas   -40    k   loss
Central Seas___    8    k   gain
         
Peripheral Seas         
Okhotsk______   -0    k   loss
Bering _______    0    k   gain
Hudson Bay___   -21    k   loss
Baffin  Bay____   -12    k   loss
St Lawrence___   -0    k   loss
Greenland____   -5    k   loss
Barents ______   -3    k   loss
         
Central Arctic  Ocean Seas         
Chukchi______   -8    k   loss
Beaufort_____    1    k   gain
CAA_________    6    k   gain
East Siberian__   -19    k   loss
Central Arctic_    42    k   gain
Laptev_______   -8    k   loss
Kara_________   -6    k   loss
         
Sea ice area loss on this day 32 k, 67 k less than the 2010's average loss of 99 k         
         
- 2020 area is at position #2 in the satellite record.         
- 2020 Area is 389 k less than the 2010's average         
- 2020 Area is 1,119 k less than the 2000's average         
- 2020 Area is 148 k less than 2016         
- 2020 Area is 70 k more than 2019          
- 2020 Area is 76 k less than 2012
         
___________________________________________         
The last few days have been all about the Central Arctic Sea switching from extreme area losses to extreme area gains. Melt ponds? Compaction? But perhaps if nothing else an indication that the sea ice in the Central Arctic Sea is unstable - at the mercy of the elements. It is not a great big solid lump anymore.

Central Arctic Sea ice extent is showing a stead, modest gradually increasing daily loss over the last week.

27
Data from...
http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/
http://ensemblesrt3.dmi.dk/data/prudence/temp/PLA/PP_GSMB/

Data as at 9 July 2020.
Melt very much the same as 3rd June to 8 July. Melt as expected rose to 37.8% of the surface area of Greenland.
Precipitation   higher than I expected. The result was a daily SMB loss of 3.6 GT, whichbelow average for this day.

It looks like melt moderating considerably during the next eek or two.

28
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 10, 2020, 12:55:23 PM »
Not a lot of comfort in the temperature forecasts from Environment Canada and the Russian Met Office.

29
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 10, 2020, 12:37:00 PM »
JAXA ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT:  7,758,502 KM2 as at 09-Jul-2020

- Extent loss on this day 104k, 4 k more than the average loss on this day (of the last 10 years) of 100k,
- Extent loss from maximum on this date is 6,689 k, 767 k, 12.9% more than the 10 year average of 5,922 k.
- Extent is at position #1 in the satellite record
- Extent is  195 k LESS than 2019,
- Extent is  430 k LESS than 2016,
- Extent is  351 k LESS than 2012
- Extent is  664 k LESS than 2007
_____________________________________________
On average 59.5% of melting from maximum to minimum done, and 67 days to minimum

Projections. (Table JAXA-Arc1)

Average remaining melt (of the last 10 years) would produce a minimum in Sept 2020 of 3.73 million km2, 0.55 million km2 above the 2012 minimum of 3.18 million km2.
______________________________

30
Data from...
http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/
http://ensemblesrt3.dmi.dk/data/prudence/temp/PLA/PP_GSMB/

Data as at 8 July 2020.
Melt very much the same as 3rd June to 7 July. Melt is down a bit to 34.9% of the surface area of Greenland.
Precipitation   low. The result was a daily SMB loss of 5.8 GT, which is above average for this day and the highest so far this year.

Might be an extra high melt on Thursday (i.e. today) + low precipitation apart from the SW quadrant - but that looks like mainly rain. So maybe a big daily SMB loss. After that looks more like melt moderating considerably.

31
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 09, 2020, 04:45:35 PM »
But NSIDC data is here...

NSIDC Total Area as at 08-Jul-2020 (5 day trailing average) 5,998,358 KM2         
         
Total Area         
 5,998,358    km2      
-456,436    km2   <   2010's average.
 2,775    km2   >   2019
-1,176,927    km2   <   2000's average.
         
Total Change   -52    k   loss
Peripheral Seas   -42    k   loss
Central Seas___   -10    k   loss
         
Peripheral Seas         
Okhotsk______   -0    k   loss
Bering _______    0    k   gain
Hudson Bay___   -22    k   loss
Baffin  Bay____   -11    k   loss
St Lawrence___   -0    k   loss
Greenland____   -6    k   loss
Barents ______   -3    k   loss
         
Central Arctic  Ocean Seas         
Chukchi______   -12    k   loss
Beaufort_____   -1    k   loss
CAA_________    8    k   gain
East Siberian__   -24    k   loss
Central Arctic_    35    k   gain
Laptev_______   -7    k   loss
Kara_________   -9    k   loss
         
Sea ice area loss on this day 52 k, 49 k less than the 2010's average loss of 101 k         
         
- 2020 area is at position #2 in the satellite record.         
- 2020 Area is 456 k less than the 2010's average         
- 2020 Area is 1,177 k less than the 2000's average         
- 2020 Area is 260 k less than 2016         
- 2020 Area is 3 k more than 2019          
- 2020 Area is 131 k less than 2012
         
___________________________________________         
Area may be now at #2, but NSIDC Extent & JAXA Extent are still at #1.
And as Jack Nicholson, in the role of US President in "Mars Attacks", remarks after the Martians have zapped Congress " We've still got the Judiciary, we've still got the Executive, and 2 out of 3 ain't bad".

Note how the Central Arctic Sea has switched from large area losses to large area gains.


32
Last month I said 3.75-4.25, because I was not brave enough to go with anecdotal evidence form the Mosaic project and others on the rotten state of the winter ice (thin, little structural integrity) + Polar Amplification of AGW + forecasts from Russia of a long, hot Siberian summer for the Arctic shore.

Now I am now not brave enough to go beyond the projection in my spreadsheet from remaining average melt of the last 10 years of 3.77 million km2 (from July 7 data).

So 3.5 to 4.00 for me, although 3.25 to 3.75 is tempting. And low confidence as my predictions have about the same success rate as The Farmer's Almanac & Mystic Meg's Horoscopes for the year.

33
Policy and solutions / Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« on: July 08, 2020, 06:40:17 PM »
This one might not do a lot of harm and might do farmland & farmers a bit of good...

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/08/spreading-rock-dust-on-fields-could-remove-vast-amounts-of-co2-from-air
Spreading rock dust on fields could remove vast amounts of CO2 from air
It may be best near-term way to remove CO2, say scientists, but cutting fossil fuel use remains critical

Quote
Spreading rock dust on farmland could suck billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide from the air every year, according to the first detailed global analysis of the technique.

The chemical reactions that degrade the rock particles lock the greenhouse gas into carbonates within months, and some scientists say this approach may be the best near-term way of removing CO2 from the atmosphere.

The researchers are clear that cutting the fossil fuel burning that releases CO2 is the most important action needed to tackle the climate emergency. But climate scientists also agree that, in addition, massive amounts of CO2 need to be removed from the air to meet the Paris agreement goals of keeping global temperature rise below 2C.

The rock dust approach, called enhanced rock weathering (ERW), has several advantages, the researchers say. First, many farmers already add limestone dust to soils to reduce acidification, and adding other rock dust improves fertility and crop yields, meaning application could be routine and desirable.

Basalt is the best rock for capturing CO2, and many mines already produce dust as a byproduct, so stockpiles already exist. The researchers also found that the world’s biggest polluters, China, the US and India, have the greatest potential for ERW, as they have large areas of cropland and relatively warm weather, which speeds up the chemical reactions.

The analysis, published in the journal Nature, estimates that treating about half of farmland could capture 2bn tonnes of CO2 each year, equivalent to the combined emissions of Germany and Japan.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2448-9

34
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 08, 2020, 05:37:12 PM »
Italy had a bad time, but many of us could wish that we are today where Italy is now.

Mind you, the virus hasn't gone away.

35
Wot the fuck? This thread is not getting enough foul language. So as part of the Foul Language Deficiency Emergency Response Programme herewith I present.....

https://www.indy100.com/article/british-swear-words-ranked-ofcom-7340446
Every British swear word has been officially ranked in order of offensiveness

Mild:
Arse Bloody Bugger Cow Crap Damn Ginger Git God Goddam Jesus Christ Minger Sod-off

Medium:
Arsehole Balls Bint Bitch Bollocks Bullshit Feck Munter Pissed/pissed off Shit Son of a bitch Tits

Strong:
Bastard Beaver Beef curtains Bellend Bloodclaat Clunge Cock Dick Dickhead Fanny Flaps
Gash Knob Minge Prick Punani Pussy Snatch Twat

Strongest:
Cunt Fuck Motherfucker

36
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 08, 2020, 03:48:54 PM »
NSIDC Total Area as at 07-Jul-2020 (5 day trailing average) 6,050,105 KM2         
         
Total Area         
 6,050,105    km2      
-505,717    km2   <   2010's average.
-51,116    km2   <   2019
-1,209,936    km2   <   2000's average.
         
Total Change   -93    k   loss
Peripheral Seas   -49    k   loss
Central Seas___   -44    k   loss
         
Peripheral Seas         
Okhotsk______   -0    k   loss
Bering _______   -0    k   loss
Hudson Bay___   -26    k   loss
Baffin  Bay____   -10    k   loss
St Lawrence___   -0    k   loss
Greenland____   -7    k   loss
Barents ______   -4    k   loss
         
Central Arctic  Ocean Seas         
Chukchi______   -14    k   loss
Beaufort_____   -0    k   loss
CAA_________    9    k   gain
East Siberian__   -29    k   loss
Central Arctic_    7    k   gain
Laptev_______   -8    k   loss
Kara_________   -9    k   loss
         
Sea ice area loss on this day 93 k, 16 k less than the 2010's average loss of 109 k         
         
- 2020 area is at position #1 in the satellite record.         
- 2020 Area is 506 k less than the 2010's average         
- 2020 Area is 1,210 k less than the 2000's average         
- 2020 Area is 308 k less than 2016         
- 2020 Area is 51 k less than 2019          
- 2020 Area is 146 k less than 2012
         
___________________________________________         
As expected , Area loss declined while extent loss remained high         
As a result, for the first day this year extent is lowest in the satellite record         
So NSIDC 5-day Area & Extent + JAXA Extent are all at #1.
         

37
Data from...
http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/
http://ensemblesrt3.dmi.dk/data/prudence/temp/PLA/PP_GSMB/

Data as at 6 July 2020.
Melt very much the same as 3rd June to 6 July. Melt is up a bit to 35.1% of the surface area of Greenland.
Precipitation   low. The result was a daily SMB loss of 5.7 GT, which is above average for this day and the highest so far this year.

Might be an extra high melt on Thursday + low precipitation apart from the SW quadrant - but that looks like mainly rain. So maybe a big daily SMB loss. After that looks more like melt moderating somewhat.

38
Arctic sea ice / Re: Global sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 08, 2020, 02:04:46 PM »
JAXA GLOBAL SEA ICE EXTENT:  23,158,084 KM2 as at 07-Jul-2020

A 2nd day of very high Arctic extent loss and low Antarctic extent gain makes it almost a certainty that the false maximum was reached on the 28th June. Now follows up to 2 months or more of extent losses up to the false minimum in August/September. After that is the late run of extent  gains to  the “maximum maximum” for the year in late October/early November.
___________________________________________________
- Extent loss on this day 110k, 102 k more than the average loss on this day (of the last 10 years) of 8k,
- Extent gain from minimum on this date is 6.44 million km2, 1.10 million km2, 14.6% less than the 10 year average gain of 7.54 million km2.
- Extent is at position #4 in the satellite record
- 2020 Extent is  0.46 million km2 MORE than 2019,
On average 82.1% of sea ice gain from minimum to maximum done, and 120 days to maximum

Projections of the Unknown Quantity. (Table JAXA-AA1)

Average remaining sea ice gain (of the last 10 years) would produce a maximum in November 2020 of 24.80 million km2, 1.04 million km2 above the 2016 record low maximum of 23.76 million km2.
___________________________________________________
N.B. In 2016 the maximum was reached on this day – the 7th July. i.e. the November maximum was less than the “false” maximum.

39
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 08, 2020, 01:01:01 PM »
JAXA ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT:  8,001,159 KM2 as at 07-Jul-2020

- Extent loss on this day 179k, 88 k more than the average loss on this day (of the last 10 years) of 91k,
- Extent loss from maximum on this date is 6,446 k, 728 k, 12.7% more than the 10 year average of 5,718 k.
- Extent is at position #1 in the satellite record
- Extent is  284 k LESS than 2019,
- Extent is  346 k LESS than 2016,
- Extent is  370 k LESS than 2012
- Extent is  625 k LESS than 2007
_____________________________________________
On average 57.5% of melting from maximum to minimum done, and 69 days to minimum

Projections. (Table JAXA-Arc1)

Average remaining melt (of the last 10 years) would produce a minimum in Sept 2020 of 3.77 million km2, 0.59 million km2 above the 2012 minimum of 3.18 million km2.
______________________________

40
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 07, 2020, 06:20:39 PM »
Very interesting visualisation!

Arctic Sea Ice Volume and Extent June 2020

Video at link >> https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/hml6v8/arctic_sea_ice_volume_and_extent_june_2020_oc/

via /u/kevpluck

That is indeed interesting.  One thing I noticed is that a line where y=x, which (loosely) represents the average ice depth being 1 meter, appears to now be reached during the part of the year when extent is around 8*10^6 and volume around 8*10^3, but perhaps not reached at the annual minimums (yet).
To use extent in the calculation of thickness is bad news...it underestimates average thickness especially at the minimum (when sea ice concentration is lowest) by up to 40%.

Thickness = volume / AREA;  not volume / EXTENT.

Attached is volume, area & average thickness at the minimum - September MONTHLY averages.

41
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 07, 2020, 04:19:33 PM »
NSIDC Total Area as at 06-Jul-2020 (5 day trailing average) 6,142,884 KM2         
         
Total Area         
 6,142,884    km2      
-521,570    km2   <   2010's average.
-71,666    km2   <   2019
-1,192,587    km2   <   2000's average.
         
Total Change   -113    k   loss
Peripheral Seas   -43    k   loss
Central Seas___   -70    k   loss
         
Peripheral Seas         
Okhotsk______   -1    k   loss
Bering _______   -0    k   loss
Hudson Bay___   -18    k   loss
Baffin  Bay____   -12    k   loss
St Lawrence___    0    k   gain
Greenland____   -6    k   loss
Barents ______   -6    k   loss
         
Central Arctic  Ocean Seas         
Chukchi______   -13    k   loss
Beaufort_____    3    k   gain
CAA_________    11    k   gain
East Siberian__   -36    k   loss
Central Arctic_   -16    k   loss
Laptev_______   -11    k   loss
Kara_________   -8    k   loss
         
Sea ice area loss on this day 113 k, 8 k more than the 2010's average loss of 105 k         
         
- 2020 area is at position #1 in the satellite record.         
- 2020 Area is 522 k less than the 2010's average         
- 2020 Area is 1,193 k less than the 2000's average         
- 2020 Area is 324 k less than 2016         
- 2020 Area is 72 k less than 2019          
- 2020 Area is 101 k less than 2012
         
___________________________________________         

42
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: July 07, 2020, 02:54:19 PM »
Inverter systems can frequency match or if they are large enough make the frequency.
Even  my off grid  inverter can match output frequency to a generator or the grid when its connected to another power source.
A previous Now twenty year old one I had could load share with the grid.
It is not much of a leap for a grid tye  type inverter system that has sufficient capacity to control the grids frequency as   horsdale power reserve does with Tesla's battery's and inverters. Tesla is building a virtual power plant in Au based on distributed inverters and storage that can do grid scale frequency modulation just as the hornsdale power reserve  does .
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/teslas-australian-virtual-power-plant-propped-up-grid-during-coal-outage/568812/
Quote
The 50,000-home virtual power plant (VPP) Tesla is developing in South Australia helped maintain grid stability when a coal-fired unit in Queensland tripped offline and reduced system supply by 748 MW in October.
According to the Australian Energy Market Operator, the outage caused power system frequency to drop below normal levels but Tesla's VPP was able to inject power from hundreds of individual residential batteries to help return the system frequency back to stable levels.
The flywheel is kept going all the time and improves frequency control all the time. It needs little power to maintain its rotation until the grid demands energy. And of course items such as the bearings will need replacing from time to time. A maintenance free system does not exist.

A mixture of large-scale batteries, large numbers of small batteries in home systems/EVs, and flywheels installed according to need would provide additional system resilience - belt & braces. They are not mutually exclusive, though some of the reaction to my post seems to imply otherwise.






43
Data from...
http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/
http://ensemblesrt3.dmi.dk/data/prudence/temp/PLA/PP_GSMB/

Data as at 6 July 2020.
Melt very much the same as 3rd June to 5 July. Melt is down a bit to 35.1% of the surface area of Greenland.
Precipitation very low. The result was a daily SMB loss of 5.4 GT, which is above average for this day.

Might be a extra high melt on Thursday + low precipitation apart frm the SW corner - but that looks like mainly rain. So maybe a big daily SMB loss. After that looks more like melt moderating somewhat.

44
Arctic sea ice / Re: Global sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 07, 2020, 10:55:16 AM »
JAXA GLOBAL SEA ICE EXTENT:  23,268,020 KM2 as at 06-Jul-2020

We have probably past the false maximum of late June  or early July, especially after the extreme extent loss on this day. However, note how 2019 flattered to deceive.
We should see  up to 2 months or more of extent losses up to the false minimum in August/September. After that is the late run of extent  gains to  the “maximum maximum” for the year in late October/early November.

___________________________________________________
- Extent loss on this day 137k, 147 k different from the average gain on this day (of the last 10 years) of 10k (after this day consistent average extent losses for some time),
- Extent gain from minimum on this date is 6.55 million km2, 0.99 million km2, 13.2% less than the 10 year average gain of 7.54 million km2.
- Extent is at position #4 in the satellite record
- 2020 Extent is  0.53 million km2 MORE than 2019,
On average 82.2% of sea ice gain from minimum to maximum done, and 121 days to maximum

Projections of the Unknown Quantity. (Table JAXA-AA1)

Average remaining sea ice gain (of the last 10 years) would produce a maximum in November 2020 of 24.90 million km2, 1.14 million km2 above the 2016 record low maximum of 23.76 million km2.

45
Antarctica / Re: Sea Ice Extent around Antarctica
« on: July 07, 2020, 10:46:37 AM »
JAXA ANTARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT:  15,087,784 KM2 as at 06-Jul-2020

- Extent gain on this day 58k, 45 k less than the average gain on this day (of the last 10 years) of 103k,
- Extent gain from minimum on this date is 12.33 million km2, 0.19 million km2, (1.5%) less than the 10 year average of 12.52 million km2.
- Extent is at position #17 in the satellite record of which 9 lower values are in the years before 2000
- Extent is  193 k LESS than 2016
- Extent is  799 k MORE than 2017
- Extent is  180 k MORE than 2018
- Extent is  757 k MORE than 2019
- Extent is  68 k LESS than the 1980's Average

- On average 78.4% of ice gain from minimum to maximum done, and 76 days to maximum

Projections. (Table JAXA-Arc1)

Average remaining freeze (of the last 10 years) would produce a maximum in Sept 2020 of 18.54 million km2, 0.48 million km2 above the 2017 record low maximum of 18.06 million km2.
___________________________________________________________

46
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 07, 2020, 09:57:02 AM »
JAXA ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT:  8,180,236 KM2 as at 06-Jul-2020

- Extent loss on this day 195k, 102 k more than the average loss on this day (of the last 10 years) of 93k,
- Extent loss from maximum on this date is 6,267 k, 640 k, 11.4% more than the 10 year average of 5,628 k.
- Extent is at position #1 in the satellite record
- Extent is  230 k LESS than 2019,
- Extent is  221 k LESS than 2016,
- Extent is  243 k LESS than 2012
- Extent is  543 k LESS than 2007
_____________________________________________
On average 56.6% of melting from maximum to minimum done, and 70 days to minimum

Projections. (Table JAXA-Arc1)

Average remaining melt (of the last 10 years) would produce a minimum in Sept 2020 of 3.86 million km2, 0.68 million km2 above the 2012 minimum of 3.18 million km2.
______________________________
Note that if remaining melt this year matches the remaining melt of 2012, the resulting minimum would be less than 3 million km2.
Note also that remaining melt in 6 of the last 10 years would give a minimum of less than 4 million km2.

47
Science / Re: Satellite News
« on: July 06, 2020, 11:43:36 PM »
You are incorrectly informed. JAXA firmly intends to launch into space a replacement AMSR2, AMSR3, around 2023.

In the near future, we will only lose NSDIC data. They are low resolution, and now are of little value.
"and now are of little value." Pardon? I assume you do not access the NSIDC data on the 2020 Area & Extent Data" thread. Time for me to shut up shop? Time for NSIDC to close down?
An awful lot of scientists might disagree with your view.

The problem is that you cannot properly merge new high-res data into the low-res NSIDC record without a long overlap to establish the variation between the results from the different sensors, and even then comparisons between data from NSIDC and the new datasets may be problematical. That is why no-one links the high-res data from AMSR2 to the NSIDC data record.

I asked NSIDC last September about their plans - the answer was...

"As for the satellite series, we are investigating the alternatives, but we don't have any information published yet."
_______________________________
It is possible the new JAXA satellite will produce 2 data streams, one lower-res for compatibility with the current JAXA long-term record, and the other higher-res to take advantage of the no doubt improved sensors on board.

48
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: July 06, 2020, 10:30:55 PM »
Now this has the hallmark of simplicity approaching genius...

Note that the UK National Grid has the ambition to be able to operate the GB electricity system carbon-free by 2025. If the UK can do it, anywhere can do it.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jul/06/giant-flywheel-project-in-scotland-could-prevent-uk-blackouts-energy
Giant flywheel project in Scotland could prevent UK blackouts.
Trailblazing system would help to stabilise the energy grid’s electrical frequency.

Quote
A giant flywheel in north-east Scotland could soon help to prevent blackouts across Britain by mimicking the effect of a power station but without using fossil fuels.

The trailblazing project near Keith in Moray, thought to cost about £25m, will not generate electricity or produce carbon emissions – but it could help keep the lights on by stabilising the energy grid’s electrical frequency.

The Norwegian energy company Statkraft hopes that from next winter the new flywheel, designed by a division of General Electric, will be able to mimic the spinning turbines of a traditional power station, which have helped to balance the grid’s frequency at about 50 hertz for decades.

Currently, the National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO) is forced to shut down windfarms and run gas power stations even when there is more than enough renewable energy to meet Britain’s electricity demand, in order to keep the grid’s frequency steady.

By simulating the spinning metal mass of a power station turbine without producing emissions, Statkraft should be able to help ESO rely less on fossil fuels and use renewable energy more.

This is the first time a project of this kind will be used anywhere in the world and ESO believes it could be a “huge step forward” in running a zero-carbon electricity grid.

The task of keeping the electrical frequency of the grid steady is becoming more challenging because Britain’s growing stable of renewable energy projects do not use the same giant spinning turbines that typically help to keep frequency stable.

In August last year more than a million people across the UK were plunged into darkness during one of the worst power blackouts in more than a decade after the frequency of the grid fell to 48.88Hz.

Since then, National Grid ESO has accelerated plans for new blackout safeguards to avoid another energy system shock, including schemes and new technologies that can help protect the grid’s frequency without increasing its carbon footprint.

“This approach is the first of its kind anywhere in the world and is a huge step forward in our ambition to be able to operate the GB electricity system carbon-free by 2025.”

49
Consequences / Re: 2020 ENSO
« on: July 06, 2020, 07:45:54 PM »
A La Nina watch has been issued by the Bureau of Meteorology for the first time since February 2018,

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-24/la-nina-watch-issued-increasing-chance-of-rain-2020/12385876

Key points:
A La Nina 'watch' has been issued by the Bureau of Meteorology
There is now twice the chance of a La Nina developing in 2020
Drought-breaking rain is considerably more likely in a La Nina year

50
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 06, 2020, 06:59:55 PM »
A closer look at Arctic SST anomalies from DMI @ http://ocean.dmi.dk/satellite/index.uk.php

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 169