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 - Wildcatter

Pages: [1]
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: June 19, 2020, 04:42:42 AM »
     ''at best Arctic weather can be predicted 3 days out whereas 90 days remain to minimum. i see zero interest in 3-10 day forecasts -- why not just wait the 3 days? it is already a full plate trying to track what is happening and reanalysis for what caused it.''                                               

Haha, I agree with that. However, in certain circumstances, the 4th day can be implied. If the euro and GFS align (which I always check) for the next 3 days, it's fairly reliable. In this case, on the 3rd day, a low pressure system develops. By its very nature, cyclonic winds, anti-clockwise (ha ha okay counter-clockwise) ice movement, you can discern with high reliability that its winds would affect the crack, even if the winds shifted slightly or became less powerful, as the winds would have to completely stop or reverse direction for the effect to be nullified. The only reason for the quote was because it was a mere continuation, its relevance to the topic and the melt season as a whole, and to provide context without having to be so explicit in follow-up analysis. Trust me, I'd rather chew glass than try and prove I am "cool" on an Arctic ice forum, ha ha, but there was information I'd rather not have to convey each post, in what is my opinion, a fairly significant development. So, maybe others, readers, people following along, can follow-up and observe for themselves, watch it occur as it happens, and possibly even learn something  :P

That's really my only goal. If I do say something that's 4 days out, i'll always preface it with something like, "looks" "possibly", etc. This isn't because i'm trying to hedge risk for my vaunted internet reputation, it's so others - as we move forward, can observe what's happening in the CAA, and while they're checking whatever it is all these rascals check, they can "keep an eye on it". It also comes from many hours of self-study of effects on the actual ice. There is value in models, and high-level overview, but it also needs implementation, "how is it going to effect THIS ice pack?", which also requires context because it's never truly the same, ala low pressure systems can be very damaging when we consider the melt season is iterative, cumulative. And i'll never say something is "inevitable", unless it truly follows the laws of physics, and I will rarely say that in the context of the Arctic. Let's be honest, these systems can make an honest woman out of any man ha ha.

To add-on to your last comment, my current occupation as a software engineer that's moved to developing for the web, even apart from data usage, it is also a simple fact that download speeds, loading times, etc have a significant impact on readers, access, etc. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, simply a common acknowledgement in the industry. The solution isn't overly difficult, it's basically a step that's run after submission, and it can actually save pretty significant server/storage space. Nowadays with so much focus on the web, images, etc, implementation can be followed pretty easily. An alternative could also be restricting file size uploads, and then including a link to an easy, free tool, that allows people to optimize them to meet the requirements. That's basically what I do, and i'm sure others do as well.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: June 17, 2020, 03:33:36 PM »
Latest Five Day Forecast
Wind + Temp @ Surface
Thank you FG.
It looks like the CAA will be very warm throughout the forecast period. I wonder if the storm will manage to break some of the fast ice in the channels.

Yep, looking back (to 2013 because 2012 wasn't easily accessible), it looks like 2020 is going to have quite a bit more energy into it, at an earlier date, than we've seen. Starts hitting its stride more today. A little troubling, it's looked worse every day. Has there ever been any real structural damage to the CAA ice in June? I looked at the NASA and it didn't really seem like it. There's also been no other year where most of the ESS + Laptev coastal ice has melted/broken off in June.

The next 4 days (including this one), when remembering the melt season is iterative, look like they could be a major issue. The cyclone isn't situated in the middle of the Arctic, it's in the lower left (when looking at the map anyway, haha with NA on the bottom). The crack next to Severnaya, down through 80N, is going to get forced open, it's inevitable in the next couple days. The bodies of water (New Siberian Islands + Laptev), are going to go from holding hands to becoming one homogenous blob pretty soon anyway (just like marriage ha ha), but the winds over the next 4 days are going to drag and expand them. Atlantic gets pummeled some more.

To add insult to injury, a high pressure system forms in the Greenland Sea, going "against the grain" of the Greenland ice, with winds also getting sucked into the cyclone. That starts in about 24 hours or so, lasts for days.

This pack is also going to move. And this all happens while the ESS and Laptev get cooked, and the CAA is turning up the heat. Greenland's entire perimeter gets warm, including to the north, I'm guessing there's a big melt event projected there. Depending on how long this cyclone goes on for, the Greenland ice relevant to the Arctic could get interesting. Curious about possible CAB transfer too, the pack is a lot more mobile than usual years. And the small things, like the ESS movement, Atlantic movement, even budging the Chukchi ice block down some would accelerate melt from surface area exposure.

That's one thing that's going to be important this season, surface area exposure to water. And developments such as basin ambient temp, considering Eurasia looks like it'll essentially be open water with equitably distributed heat (opposed to one big "bite"), and encapsulated in an inferno. Some interesting branches off that, air column and rain over periphery of ice, wind effects, even baroclinity and the weather/storm formation.

But, keep an eye out (everyone, not just you oren  :P  ) for the expansion of the pools of water in the Laptev + the Savernaya crack. It's just June 17, last thing we friggin' need is essentially a bunch of open water at 80N on July 1.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: June 16, 2020, 05:34:05 AM »
I'm back. Took some time to go out to my farm, only checking the ice + emails (you'd be amazing at what clients can burn down given free reign). *crickets* Ha.

The 5-day looks pretty bad. I never look at the longer range models, but I decided to glance at it. If the Euro shapes up, that's going to be atrocious. And the heat in CAA starts to ramp up over the next few days, landmass behind starts to get hot too.

It's night-time here, but I'm going to start posting daily updates tomorrow, simply because this June looks like it's going to be one to remember. Things are going to get weird this season, and it's going to take a pretty nasty turn here shortly.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: June 07, 2020, 02:05:19 AM »
The Fat Lady hasn't sung yet, but she is warming up.

Ha ha ha. No.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: June 06, 2020, 12:40:36 AM »

The low itself does not pull in the heat, its an Arctic low hence its own cold air blob and low thicknesses. The warmth comes in via a ridge over the ESS and Chukchi but there's uncertainty just how much heat comes in and how long it lasts for. E.g on the GFS it looks brief but some signs on the ECM it may last longer.

Nullschool uses the GFS and auto-updates, usually a ~4.5-5 day forecast. Haha yeah, on nullschool anyway, it cuts off right as its centered in the Chukchi with some decent winds, heat, and moisture. Looks like it could continue to some degree, has some winds coming off Alaska, could be the impetus to break open the Beaufort channel if the winds don't do it over the next few days. Could be the straw that breaks up some of that turquoise/dark coast ice in the ESS + Chukchi too, since that side of Eurasia heating up. We'll see.

Low pressure system over the next few days will probably help expand that body of water in the Laptev, and most of that "ice" on the inner Severnaya coast (island between Kara and Laptev) is basically just rubble pushed up against it, so likely to open up a bit in some fashion. Ice in more northern Laptev where winds are blowing might be worth paying attention to given the state of things.

Cyclone coming looks like it's going to be pretty effective. Kara tongue will continue to get beat up, Svalbard going to get it, we'll see what happens to the FJL ice. If the low pressure winds open up the inner Severnaya coast and the body of Laptev water expands, all the ice between the Laptev + Kara gets a lot more interesting pretty quick.

Will be an interesting next 5 days. Eurasia starting to heat, looks like warmth starts to peak over into the CAA a bit towards the end of it. Good northerlies heading down Baffin, Hudson gets a bit too. Atlantic may play a more important role this year.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: April 23, 2020, 07:06:52 AM »
Hmmmm. I'm seeing a ton of snow melt across Eurasia with that low pressure system advecting a bunch of heat, possibly in the running for near-record low in Eurasia, by the end of April. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong Arctic.  ;D  NA snow has started its melt, enough to advect some heat + winds over the Hudson in about 4 days. It's a hot year.

Baffin volume record low for April 15 (thanks Wipneus and Oren!), will also get additional heat + and some winds soon.

Also, just for reference, it's still April 22. The first screenshot I attached is Bremen for April 15, as a lot of additional volume this year was stored in the Barents, Kara, and Greenland Seas, per Wipneus an Oren's work in the volume thread. The second screenshot, will be Bremen from April 30, 2019, to provide a frame of reference. And the third, is from today's Bremen - April 22, 2020.

As a digestif, over the next 4-5 days, there is a cyclone forming that will move over the Kara tomorrow, progressing over Severnaya the next day, with tail winds from the low pressure system over Laptev coast. More winds pushing into Barents, some CAB, export in some form or another. Pack over there has seen better days.
Low pressure system moving across Eurasia helping snow melt will come to the Laptev and ESS, New Siberian Islands shortly after. If the forecast works out. Mini cyclone system predicted to form, could be interesting with the volume numbers. Wind effect on coasts could be pretty significant for April.

You may be interested in the Nullschool after seeing the attached images, so here you go.,81.75,450/loc=175.423,74.073

Let the games begin.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: March 13, 2020, 05:32:22 AM »
Extent is now down about 180k from it's peak.

Cracks showing along coasts of Bering on both sides, up ESS and down Chukchi and Beaufort. Cracks + chunks peeling off coasts in ESS and Laptev.

Okhotsk ice detaching and looks like a bunch of rubble, Hudson looks like it's starting to get dinged up.

With the forecast, I'd be surprised if we passed the former peak extent, even with the cold in the Barents + Fram/Greenland Sea (the killing fields) and dispersion, drift.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: March 09, 2020, 12:51:46 AM »
Nullschool 3-13,81.29,461/loc=-171.519,70.953

Nullschool 3-13 ~9 hours later, with clouds,81.29,461/loc=-168.000,62.477

(In the box in the lower left, you can adjust settings, the << >> arrows under "Control" are hour and day selectors, TCW = cloud water)

Influx of heat + wind and clouds coming over Bering, moving from Chukchi to Beaufort. Kara also covered with clouds and winds. Bering really gets hit starting on 3-12.

The ice just north of Greenland looks like it's going to get a bit of a rough start, with winds picking up there and along the Lincoln + even parts of CAA on 3-10. The winds, in general, look like they could really strain the ice. Looks like they're going to try their hardest to shove the East CAB into the Barents/Fram/Greenland Sea.

It's hard to say if we've hit "max extent" already, if you see the temps + wind. There's also going to be cloud cover which can usually skew extent numbers a bit. Regardless, I think we can all agree that this setup is noticeably worse than any temporary gain in "extent" will be.

The +NAO/+AO this season has led to these big cyclones all winter season, except for a small break in late Feb/Early March. Now we see not only Atlantic cyclones entering the Arctic, but a Pacific cyclone that gathers steam in the Sea of Okhotsk and rolls over into the Arctic. I've seen differing projections on the NAO for the 2nd half of March, so not sure if the Atlantic portion keeps the same cycle. But, in the short-term, the ice is about to get hit from both sides on the onset of melt season.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: January 15, 2020, 04:13:56 AM »
Hi all,

As an amateur observer, I've paid quite close attention to the Arctic this season, so maybe others can elaborate on some things i've noticed.

1) Cyclones in the North Atlantic. For the last 2-3 weeks, deep developing cyclones have been a constant. A couple have reached 940mbar, real monsters. Pulling right down the Greenland current, and undoubtedly affecting Arctic inflow with Atlantic water. Sidenote: I have to imagine these winds and 15m waves hitting Greenland, probably has some affect on underwater melting via mixing?

2) Incoming collapse of the Beaufort High. The typical anti-cyclonic gyre wind and pressure is getting increasingly encroached by cyclonic low-pressure. I don't know enough about this, but the research i've seen has insinuated the effect on ice formation in the Pacific ice, Beaufort/Chukchi/ESS, but can also affect the CAA.

Zack Labe actually had a picture in the melting season, that showed the significant meridional anomaly right up the Bering for the year (pic link right below). I'm guessing it was the high pressures from the Pacific contrasting with the Aleutian lows. I haven't watched enough years for precedent data, but there's also been some cyclone formation closer to the land masses on the Pacific this winter season. That can advect some real warmth.

And just my opinion, but baroclinity and cyclone formation + the low pressure patterns they arise from (and contrasting high pressures) with baroclinity differences seem like they may be understated in the grand scheme of things. We've seen the effect in late summer, the effect it can have over the Barents, and the water flow + advection they can perform, which could serve to only exacerbate the situation. Long term, anyway.

The US has also been getting hit by severe weather, and more coming the next 5-7 days. So if you're interested in snow extent, snow depth, etc, may want to check on that the next week. There was also a minor chance of a vortex disruption, but who knows. The last few have occurred around early February for US weather, I believe.

The linked article shows maps of where nitrous oxide has been emitted recently, and reminds us that wildfires is a significant source of nitrous oxide emissions:

Title: "Where nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas 300-times stronger than CO2, is being emitted"

Extract: "If something is burning, nitrous oxide is flowing into the atmosphere. Increasingly, the most concentrated nitrous oxide sources come from humans burning fossil fuels and transforming ecosystems. Natural sources, such as Australia’s currently raging wildfires contribute too (if those fires can even be considered “natural”).

As a greenhouse gas, it gets less attention than carbon dioxide, accounting for just 6% of all emissions in 2017. But it’s a major factor intensifying climate change: NOx, as the gas is known, lasts for a century and is far more potent. It is nearly 300 times stronger than carbon dioxide at trapping heat."

Addendum: Preliminary study showing permafrost melt releasing much more NOx than previously assumed.

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: December 19, 2019, 04:23:24 AM »
The year-end spending bill in the US extended the tax credit for wind projects by one year.  The solar tax credit is down to 10% for developer-owned systems.

Just a slight correction :)

Solar tax credit = 26% in 2020
2021 = 22%
2022+ = 10%

A little annoyed at the wind extension, since my education and first career was in the energy industry in TX. Solar is perfect for TX because of all the high demand, hot days that align perfectly with solar's generation profile, but since it's a "competitive" market, and PPAs are still the main vehicle for helping reduce risk in renewable installations (companies buy certain amounts of output, and electricity is cheap in a competitive market so developers + finance are hesitant to just play the market with solar since there really isn't a whole lot of precedent on big projects. playing the market is typically called a "merchant" project), the PTC has made wind extremely cheap in TX. $18-20/MWh, solar can't beat that yet, so all the companies who just want the cheapest electricity they can get, decide to just sign PPAs for wind offtake instead. That's why TX is going to have about 30GW next year (or soon after), and a criminal amount of solar, considering it's the fastest growing electricity demand in the US and reserves have been tight in the summer.

Was hoping with the wind credit coming to an end you'd see some of the 50-60GW of solar in the interconnection queue get financed. But, probably be a trickle in 2020 now. Oh well, silver lining, when solar does boom in TX, and it will, there will be a ton of wind (wind actually generated 22% of all TX electricity in 1st half 2019, there was about 30% of that amount of wind under construction or advanced development a couple months ago), and solar will be even cheaper. Won't even need "storage" for storage sake for a while, and the sheer amount of wind will help cover more of the 24hr load.

One reason wind got extended was undoubtedly because fossil groups much prefer it. Classic generators and interest groups in TX, who pay the pencil pushers 200k in the capital to lobby, don't want to give up those high demand daytime hours where they overwhelmingly meet demand and soak up the reserve adders (they get $7,000-$9,500/MWh when reserves are tight during TX summer days). Wind typically generates early evening through the night. Why yes, solar would be perfect for all of these days, and as much as people love to talk about "capacity factors" as some sort of detriment, even the modules currently installed are pumping out 80%+ nameplate during 100+ degree days. But, if wind is cheaper for companies to buy electricity from, it's hard to get a bunch of solar installed, currently anyway (finance + developer risk). TX is pretty unique in its market, but I wouldn't be surprised if similar factors were at play in other states, like the midwest. You get to say you're not against renewables, you get to be "pro business" with companies buying cheap offtake from wind, and you get to prolong all the classic fossil generators most profitable hours (and by extension, the fossil suppliers + pipelines).

But, 2020 solar credit at 26% won't change much. 2021 at 22%, maybe. It wouldn't if we didn't have such high tariffs disabling us from taking advantage of the ridiculous changes that happen basically quarterly in China. Hard to say, because if the orange turd is defeated, obviously it changes the game. On that note, hopefully whoever it is realizes is semi-competent and realizes rooftop is much more expensive than it should be. I actually am in the works preparing for something like that, as an energy professional turned software/web guy. I'll let you guys know if it works out  ;D . I'll give you a hint, "customer acquisition" can be 20-30% of an installation's cost to generate profits, and who really wants to plan to have 3-4 solar idiots coming to their place, not knowing if they're full of crap or not? Seems like it'd be much easier to have one person come out, and handle it like a real estate agent, using their expertise to find you the best deal. Solar companies can then pay the "agent" saving $$ on customer acquisition, at no costs to the person getting them installed. Solar companies already pay commission to their own sales teams. Design a web portal, keep tally of what companies actually do good work, in the future when battery costs come down or they want an EV charger, you can help arrange that too. On that note, if you have kids, electrical engineering/electricians in the future will probably have more work than they can handle, especially when EVs are common and solar panels are 500-600W, weigh 10 pounds, cost about $.80c/watt to install, and can get a rooftop install done before lunch with just a couple of hands, batteries become more common, smart homes, HVAC + appliance adoption/replacement.

Oh, and Ken, i do peruse this thread every so often. One thing that is drastically underrated, is petrochemicals. These are massive sources of emissions. And yes, the electricity game is changing (very quickly in the big scheme of things, but not quickly enough unfortunately, the convergence and material, computing/modeling age we're entering is going to be very interesting indeed, as well as the bi-directional grid and demand response adaptation of the grid. btw if anyone's interested in something neat, watch "perovskite" development.), however, as countries develop like SE Asia, demand for a bunch of stupid crap goes up. Look around you right now, look in your cabinets, petrochemicals used in production of material goods are all over the place. Electricity generation and transportation are two huge areas of the energy industry, and it's great that we're seeing them develop, but industry + chemicals is also a massive emitter, and "developing countries" consumption of these are going to increase.

Hydrogen as a feedstock is a no-brainer (which is why it's getting attention, you can also inventory it and fire it off in turbines for extreme weather events), but genetically engineered biofuels and recycling are absolutely 100% going to have to evolve.  You can't create matter from nothing, after all. And this is a major challenge. I only mention this because you seem genuinely interested, so maybe you feel inclined to check updates on developments in this area. If there's a "promising" outlook for this sector, it's that genetic research is advancing pretty quickly, and the nanomaterial arena like interfaces, handling, observable data, is leading to a lot of very interesting and novel catalyst research. And the computing + modeling (ML/AI), with the breadth of research data is helping things a lot. But, these are "musts", and replacing countries' established petrochemical value chain that powers cheap material goods is going to be a heavy lift.

Anywho, sorry for the long diatribe, i might post more if people want. Here's something fun, increasing silicon wafer size -> goes into solar cell manufacturing is an easy way to increase power. The biggest producer marginally increased size and wanted everyone to adopt it, so the 2nd biggest producer said, "DIS.. IS.. CHINA", and increased that size about 30%, so there's going to be a 500W utility scale panel in Q1-Q2 next year, thinking they can take it up to 600W. Wafer wars? Other producers will probably go up to that size, so no telling what the biggest producer ends up doing. 500W bifacial panel is a good chunk of power though. If you're interested in solar the trends over the next year or two are going to be wafer size, and interest in "passivated contacts". The rate of scale and iteration in China is unreal. Just for reference, in 2018 the average module from top producers was about ~340W, and a small segment of bifacial (~8-15% gain). 2019 saw 415-430W and a bigger adoption of bifacial, and 2020 will see plenty of 500W+ and bifacial will be pretty standard, all while the entire industry basically shifted to a specific type, monocrystalline PERC. Production lines are basically turnkey 5GW-10GW now. And there's still headroom from better quality wafers and passivation, like TOPcon, HJT (these are what's considered passivated contacts, because they use an "n-type" wafer, which is of better quality, but equipment hasn't evolved to be more cost effective vs the current ridiculous throughputs of the "p-type" PERC products, which managed to corner a 100GW market in 12 months).

Okay, i'm done  :D

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 14, 2019, 03:41:41 AM »
With the giga3 up, just needing to ramp production, Tesla basically beat the odds. Most of the hardest work is over. Largely because of the red carpet they rolled out for Tesla. I think Elon can be a real idiot, but let's look at why that deal was significant.

10% purchase tax on Teslas removed. Immediate 10% price reduction, increasing demand which was already growing.

About another 10% cost reduction coming from Tesla themselves, for China made Model 3s. Roughly a 20% cost reduction in all. 10% of which only came out of Teslas pocket.

However, 25% import duty removed. That's an immediate cost that goes right back into Teslas pocket for every Model 3 sold. And they'll sell every one in China.

So, adding them up, Chinese consumers will get a 20% cost reduction, and Tesla will get an immediate 15% improvement in margins for every Model 3 made at giga3.

But, there are some additional cost savings too. Both labor and parts will come in cheaper. And the logistical costs from shipping to China will no longer be incurred. That's not insignificant. So, all of a sudden, China became a pretty high margin market for model 3s, and with a 20% cost reduction, they'll sell them probably as fast as they make them.

The crossover market is also better. Model Y will probably be a pretty big hit, and more significant margins. Especially with the "Made in China" stuff, Tesla doesn't even need to advertise. That's crazy.

Their profitability in the short term just depends on how fast they can ramp, given they went through the Fremont nightmare and probably planned to get up and going as efficiently as possible. That's logical. The sweet spot is probably 3k vehicles per week, and then they'll be rolling downhill for the most part.

And the capex depreciation thing reminds me of when my options trading buddies at big tradinghouses were extremely confident, and even mocking me, for buying 5k shares of AMD at $10. Or when I bought nickel futures. I even tried to tell them Enphase and a solar ETF was the easiest money they'd ever make (my area of expertise). Rubber stamp benchmarks simply do not apply in some circumstances. Especially in emerging, capital intensive industry. Because no one in the US does it anymore. It's a foreign concept to finance guys, because we quit doing it. In this case, you would expect capex to be higher than depreciation for a duration, you simply cannot scale in that type of market and prepare for profitability, while also being technologically competitive. If you live in the US, it probably hasn't been done in your lifetime. Finance, and simple lack of will, has meant the US has largely lost this ability. If we want to be global competitors in next gen manufacturing, which is a niche we need to pursue, given the "material age" we're about to enter, we're going to have to find this ability again, and we need to tailor finance + gov flexibility to pursue these endeavors, because there will be a lot of "depreciation > capex " moments. China isn't scared of it, happens frequently, and they are the reason every technology becomes economically viable, as the best scalers in the world. If they had our research abilities, which they're catching up on, they will corner ever single emerging market like they already did with silicon, just about every electronic, solar, and will soon output more batteries than the rest of the world combined. Step changes are coming, and so is automation, there are opportunities arising, we need more companies to be like Tesla. We also need to stop the throat slitting by big finance, who would gladly see US companies trying to put a premier manufactured product on a global scale, go bankrupt if it meant they increased profitability by 2% for one quarter.

That being said, objectively speaking, I think we can largely assume that China's red carpet move with Tesla has probably assured their success. Maybe not in a quarter, probably not in two. But, I'll probably buy some shares, because 3k/week is the sweet spot, and I think they likely hit that faster than people think. I think it's assured in 2020, and scaling up Model Y, next year will be the last "unprofitable" quarters we see, and once sentiment turns, that'll probably be the last time you get it near this price. I'd much rather be 10 months early, than late.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: October 09, 2019, 07:44:30 AM »
Someone keep an eye on the Beaufort Low this season!  + breakdowns of the Beaufort High. (sea level pressure).

It will be valuable insight for the freeze season, given some of correlation in the 2017 freeze season.

Anti-cyclonic circulation has been the general trend for about 15-20 years? And the connection with the gyre ice movement (clockwise).

Policy and solutions / Re: But, but, but, China....
« on: September 28, 2019, 06:57:42 PM »
From a geopolitical point of view it is very intelligent for China to reorient their natural gas and oil imports to friendly nations with over-land transportation. Same as attempting to ramp up domestic natural gas production. This helps remove their oil and gas imports as a weakness that the USA can utilize in a conflict (just like with Japan just before Pearl Harbour). They have also built up a very large strategic oil reserve.

They should also be going full speed with EV's as they replace imported oil with domestic electricity production (coal, natural gas, nuclear and renewables). Their removal of subsidies to EV's and the renewable sector is very short sighted geopolitically and really bad for the climate. Even at 80% coal share in electricity production EV's generate less CO2 due to the efficiency of the electrical engine (and power generating stations).

Removing subsidies actually makes perfect sense for China, although it does suck for climate. Although, it could potentially even out.

They "plant 1000 seeds", scale up, start to corner markets, and then they drop subsidies to encourage further cost efficiency, separating the wheat from the chaffe, and monopolize global markets. That's how they do it, and it's very efficient. They did it with solar, EVs, and will do it with batteries (probably). And they've cornered silicon, solar, and will outpace everyone in battery production by multiple times, while having the biggest EV market that will dominate exports to SE Asia, and anyone who imports them, as well as having a huge presence in global electric buses.

It's actually very effective, in a cutthroat kinda way. They are very good at it. I say it may even out, because they drop costs so significantly through scale, and then optimization + innovation and iteration in manufacturing. They're basically the reason why solar is as cheap as it is, and why batteries will drop in costs as well, at economies of scale. So, it's a catch 22.

What we can expect is that they'll do a "tick, tock" type installation with renewables. They're also going to scale up offshore wind with all their coastal population. By tick tock, I mean they installed a large amount, now they're letting domestic suppliers scale up massively and corner markets, also dropping costs, and when this new expansion has optimized processes and cost efficiency with a whole bunch more supply, they'll do another series of large installs, so it doesn't hamper their global supply too much and they maximize value domestically.

It also has the effect of letting them catch up on grid utilization. As can be expected, they had a good amount of grid problems adding all those renewables, lot of curtailment, bottleneck issues, transmission/distribution. A period of slower growth means they can alleviate some of these issues, while letting them plan better for the future. In the near term, they'll likely be adding grid storage while building their grid, to try and get the most effective options, to aid in transmission/distribution and ancillary services for example.

I guess the positive with China is knowing that they actually want energy independence. Besides the global markets, their rate of oil consumption was projected to be astronomical, which has pushed them towards EVs more. Removing subsidies was actually to reduce costs as fast as possible. No one should be too surprised if they renew some EV subsidies in the future, when their markets stabilize a bit and EVs are even more cost efficient and producing more at scale.

It's no surprise about natural gas, it allows them to flex their muscles in Central Asia as well as strategic agreements in the Middle East, part of the Belt n Road. It also allows them to get plentiful of cheap supply, and to them it's less damaging than coal, so it's a win/win for them as it also helps influence + good faith with all those countries as well as pipelines and $$.

I don't really agree with their methods, but removing subsidies has been an effective way to reduce costs. They'll probably renew some of them at a later date. They know their current rates of consumption are basically unsustainable, so that's a silver lining I guess. There is a method to their madness though, so we'll see. If the world goes into a recession, it will probably hurt renewables + EVs, but I imagine we'll see efforts pick up again in the near future. Hopefully, anyway.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: September 16, 2019, 05:36:08 AM »
Filling in for Mr. Juan Garcia :)

September 15, 2019:
4,006,036 = A decrease of -19,682 km2.

Passed 2016's minimum of 4,017,264 km2

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 15, 2019, 11:02:48 PM »
I was wondering when you guys were going to wake up at the tail end of this season :) it's very interesting. What's up with those geo heights? I'm very curious about the upcoming PIOmas. Also looks like some of the heavy activity in the North Atlantic with heavy winds blowing right into the Norwegian currents has died down a bit.

Really need a good freeze season along the CAA and N Greenland. Gyre will shove some CAB into it, but its dwindled last few years into barely any thickness at all.

The meriodional anomaly up the Bering that's been persistent could be an influential factor

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 27, 2019, 05:08:38 PM »
Not sure I'd call a Beaufort Low with a cyclonic Beaufort Gyre + Bering high and minimal ice pack cover and wind aid, probable ekman divergence + alaska coastal downwelling and enhanced Pacific transport, wind drag across the pack, continuous cyclones in the North Atlantic with pressure gradients up currents, "best conditions I could ask for", but alrighty then!

These conditions actually favor a delay in the freezing season. And as long as this low over Beaufort stays around, or in Arctic with cyclonic Gyre, especially with the reach across Siberia/ESS and North Atlantic, I'm not really ruling anything out. I think given the next 3-5 day forecast, an "early" freezing season is probably out of the question. And I expect models to keep changing, there's a lot going on.

I, too, think the "measurements" are odd given what we can see. Maybe its semantics, maybe it's the daily artifacts from atmospheric conditions, not sure. Obviously been quite a bit of dispersion. In the context of this season, the state of the refuge of ice bordering CAA with a cyclonic gyre and wind aid is interesting (I would imagine some of the ice along ellesmere is worse than it looks, maybe not), also the atmospheric elements are likely hiding some CAB conditions on AMSR2.

Very interesting season.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 12, 2019, 02:08:15 AM »
What's interesting is the tug of war at 500hpa that's been going on and continues, at least over the next 3-5 days. After that last cyclone, 570-575mb heights moved over the entire northern Arctic with those temps, also over Baffin Bay with eastern CAA and N. Greenland feeling it. It looks like the next 3-5 days we might see similar 565-570mb stretching right across the pole. Negative phase oscillation? "Cold" front expected across most of US

Also a very interesting pressure gradient that looks like it'd encourage export out to Fram/Barents. High pressure over Greenland/most of CAA, as well as the ESS/laptev, across the pole, with low pressure in the Kara/Barents and some good wind speeds. Not sure what to make of that, doesn't look great for the Laptev or CAB (i imagine worse if it's sitting under the effects of higher mb at 500hpa)

Doesn't look very encouraging for all that CAA/Greenland border ice either. Haven't been able to get a very good look with AMSR2, but NSIDC has a better view. "Not great" would probably be accurate, haha.

i just thought the geo height and oscillation aspect was interesting, someone can feel free to correct me or elaborate.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 08, 2019, 06:00:52 AM »
7 August is another date where Neven has a year-to-year comparison of the U. Bremen AMSR2 sea ice concentration maps.

See figure below. The latest 2019 map is bottom right. It can be compared by eye to some of the previous worst years for sea ice minimum extent. Other recent years are available for comparison on the web page.

2019 looks worse to me on this date than any of the previous years other than 2012 and 2007. (2016 caught up later in the month - see the web page.) Even so, it's still to be determined how much of this year's lowered-concentration regions -- particularly in the Laptev sector, and north of the CAA -- will melt out by the minimum.

Keep in mind, most of that "thick" ice, if not all of it, along the CAA border, is an artefact (an error).

Might have something to do with part of the gulf stream being pulled into that system, cloud cover, not really sure, it happens sometimes with AMRS2 though.

The ice thickness there is probably at a lower level than it's been in any of those years. More pressure + heat over the CAA for a while too.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 05, 2019, 12:45:45 PM »
Weather pretty unfortunate given state of the ice.

Along with the Pacific side, CAA is about to get pummeled. As is Greenland, including the Northern border, and the open water NE. The ice, cracks, all along the CAA/Greenland border will likely worsen with the CAA melt accelerating as well.

System right over the Arctic could be pretty effective clearing out a not insignificant amount of the CAB. The forecast also has westerlies that may affect drift in the Beaufort/along CAA, basically the exact opposite of what we've seen all season. It'll be interesting to see the possible effects of that.

ESS will probably see some compaction if not outright melted, ESS and Laptev going to have a lot of dispersion. It's going to be an interesting next few days.

This forecast looks to be the next 24-72 hours (at minimum). Oof. I really hope that chunk above Ellesmere island isn't an artefact on the Bremen map.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 14, 2019, 06:29:29 PM »
ASMR2 recent history + weather notes

1) Another poster mentioned ESS, you can see how the system parked over this area has effectively given the ice a close shave. The dispersion on more inland ice even over a few days is quite dramatic. Since the system looks to be consistent for a few days, something to watch. NSIDC related 40k loss in area yesterday, i wouldn't be surprised if it's more today.
2) Beaufort looks like it's probably going to start seeing drops. Looks like the 24h change wasn't reflected in extent measurements, but it's noticeable. Low pressure system has moved on, melt may affect SSTs, abating some loss, but it is noticeably more damaged than July 12 AMSR. NSIDC area loss = 10k yesterday,
3) Laptev water is anomalously warm, system may even be slowing it down, but it looks like that system has also shaved a thinner route to Pole. ESS border ice affected by #1, so it will be interesting to see how these factors reflect extent tomorrow.
4)  Kara hasn't been as noticeable but SST anomalies are high, mini cyclone has probably dampened losses.
5) Water between FJL + Svalbard is warm, Atlantification persists. Haven't checked drift data, but it's probably having an effect.

Interesting case study given the conditions. Given trend of the system, ESS might just blow away

Pages: [1]