Happy New Year 2024 (and sorry for the forum being offline some hours) /DM
So yeah, all very interesting, but we still can't say which way this will go.
So, the story so far, was that PIOMAS volume is record low, which speaks in favour of a possible new record low minimum this year, whereas snow cover, melt ponding and SST spoke (somewhat) against it.
In the meantime, snow cover no longer plays a role:
SST anomaly is still not making a lot of progress on the Atlantic side of the Arctic, but is still going strong on the Pacific side (and possibly within the various holes, although these will always show up as strong anomaly because normally there's ice there):...And compactness has been dropping fast lately, which is probably a sign of melt ponding (corroborated by the bluish hue on satellite images of the Arctic), although dispersion is probably also playing a role, given the big cyclone churning things up right now:
But PIOMAS has stalled somewhat, and with 2012 dropping precipitously around this time of year it's almost on a par with 2017 (more info on the mid-month update in the PIOMAS thread):
Quote from: RoxTheGeologist on June 26, 2017, 02:02:19 AMI'm confused why you think this is a slow melting season when Wip's numbers show that the CAB is at a record minimum area for this date, and I think we are around third lowest for extent on NSIDC. Surely a slow melting season would have us at above average extent?Because 2017 had a headstart on both SIE and volume, which is no longer there. May extent loss was an unimpressive 12th smallest, June has been a little quicker, relative to other years, but still far behind 2012. The snow cover was slow to melt, melt ponds came late and there hasn't been much melt momentum - until now - just a steady chiping away of ice which was record thin and weak to begin with. 2017 would end nowhere close to 2012 minimum if this trend contiued another month. Fortunately, it wont.
I'm confused why you think this is a slow melting season when Wip's numbers show that the CAB is at a record minimum area for this date, and I think we are around third lowest for extent on NSIDC. Surely a slow melting season would have us at above average extent?
I think that a pretty good amount of ice was getting melted all along, but this was disguised by excessive dispersion.
It has been a very interesting struggle so far between ice volume and land snow/ice concentration/melting ponds, and it seems that so far they have evened out.But I personally feel a bit uncomfortable now with that new dipole coming up...
... May extent loss was an unimpressive 12th smallest, June has been a little quicker, relative to other years, but still far behind 2012. The snow cover was slow to melt, melt ponds came late and there hasn't been much melt momentum - until now - just a steady chiping away of ice which was record thin and weak to begin with. 2017 would end nowhere close to 2012 minimum if this trend contiued another month. Fortunately, it wont.
Quote from: magnamentis on June 25, 2017, 07:46:45 PMQuote from: Clenchie on June 25, 2017, 07:04:35 PMThe ice round Prince Charles island looks particularly brown. Sorry if this is a basic question but is there a likely cause?http://www.arctic.io/explorer/4Xa5A/2017-06-01/8-N82.50546-W48.71926an idea that's not necessarily the case is that with the ice getting thinner each year, more and more dirt/soot accumulates on the surface. an example for this happening is the glaciers in the alps (and elsewhere) that get darker and darker in summer when the snow cover melted and this year's surface melt adds to the previous years.there is a certain amount of sand and other dirt in the ice and some glaciers know entire regions where the ice is almost fully covered by the stuff, which of course accelerates the melting process through increased albedo. the end result in some places is a black surface and not all is just dust, at times there are small stone fragments, at least on glaciers, not necessarily/probable in the arctic and most propably not on sea-ice due to lack of sources for stones. what remains is the dust made from volcanic ashes from centuries and sand imported from deserts over time.An interesting idea Maggie, and I get where you are coming from, but this particular ice melts out in the summer.
Quote from: Clenchie on June 25, 2017, 07:04:35 PMThe ice round Prince Charles island looks particularly brown. Sorry if this is a basic question but is there a likely cause?http://www.arctic.io/explorer/4Xa5A/2017-06-01/8-N82.50546-W48.71926an idea that's not necessarily the case is that with the ice getting thinner each year, more and more dirt/soot accumulates on the surface. an example for this happening is the glaciers in the alps (and elsewhere) that get darker and darker in summer when the snow cover melted and this year's surface melt adds to the previous years.there is a certain amount of sand and other dirt in the ice and some glaciers know entire regions where the ice is almost fully covered by the stuff, which of course accelerates the melting process through increased albedo. the end result in some places is a black surface and not all is just dust, at times there are small stone fragments, at least on glaciers, not necessarily/probable in the arctic and most propably not on sea-ice due to lack of sources for stones. what remains is the dust made from volcanic ashes from centuries and sand imported from deserts over time.
The ice round Prince Charles island looks particularly brown. Sorry if this is a basic question but is there a likely cause?http://www.arctic.io/explorer/4Xa5A/2017-06-01/8-N82.50546-W48.71926
Quote from: Rob Dekker on June 26, 2017, 08:57:55 AMIt has been a very interesting struggle so far between ice volume and land snow/ice concentration/melting ponds, and it seems that so far they have evened out.But I personally feel a bit uncomfortable now with that new dipole coming up...Yes, the weather forecast isn't looking good for the ice. High pressure over the Beaufort Sea (and possible beyond) could deliver a massive blow to the already thin ice. I wouldn't be surprised if this is then followed by another, more powerful cyclone in July.Fortunately, the Atlantic seems to run less 'hot' than we've seen in previous years.
Quote from: Clenchie on June 25, 2017, 08:02:22 PMQuote from: magnamentis on June 25, 2017, 07:46:45 PMQuote from: Clenchie on June 25, 2017, 07:04:35 PMThe ice round Prince Charles island looks particularly brown. Sorry if this is a basic question but is there a likely cause?http://www.arctic.io/explorer/4Xa5A/2017-06-01/8-N82.50546-W48.71926an idea that's not necessarily the case is that with the ice getting thinner each year, more and more dirt/soot accumulates on the surface. an example for this happening is the glaciers in the alps (and elsewhere) that get darker and darker in summer when the snow cover melted and this year's surface melt adds to the previous years.there is a certain amount of sand and other dirt in the ice and some glaciers know entire regions where the ice is almost fully covered by the stuff, which of course accelerates the melting process through increased albedo. the end result in some places is a black surface and not all is just dust, at times there are small stone fragments, at least on glaciers, not necessarily/probable in the arctic and most propably not on sea-ice due to lack of sources for stones. what remains is the dust made from volcanic ashes from centuries and sand imported from deserts over time.An interesting idea Maggie, and I get where you are coming from, but this particular ice melts out in the summer.ok, thanks for the heads up, was focusing on soot instead of considering the exact location, so it either is fresh ash etc. or something in the imagery. resume, idea not valid, thanks, perhaps someone else has more insight, let's see.
: RoxTheGeologist Today at 02:02:19 AMI'm confused why you think this is a slow melting season when Wip's numbers show that the CAB is at a record minimum area for this date, and I think we are around third lowest for extent on NSIDC. Surely a slow melting season would have us at above average extent?: Rubikscube Today at 07:46:56 AMBecause 2017 had a headstart on both SIE and volume, which is no longer there. May extent loss was an unimpressive 12th smallest, June has been a little quicker, relative to other years, but still far behind 2012. The snow cover was slow to melt, melt ponds came late and there hasn't been much melt momentum - until now - just a steady chiping away of ice which was record thin and weak to begin with. 2017 would end nowhere close to 2012 minimum if this trend continued another month. Fortunately, it wont.
Except that the Arctic Ocean is currently the lowest volume on record is it not?
"Fortunately"? Why it'd be "fortunate"?
some people fall into the optimist bias trap and start looking for confirmation that this is going to be another record breaker instead of trying to analyze the data objectively.
Quote from: F.Tnioli on June 26, 2017, 01:20:52 PM"Fortunately"? Why it'd be "fortunate"?I believe the general arguments for that can be found in another thread, but I'm not gonna pretend that I have any moralist qualms about being exited by the prospect of new record minimums.
I don't think this is about moralist qualms once one grasps the possible consequences of a blue ocean event.
Quote from: Thomas Barlow on June 26, 2017, 03:57:53 PMExcept that the Arctic Ocean is currently the lowest volume on record is it not?And your point is?
Slater's #s for August have taken a nosedive in the past few days and I expect the trend will only worsen as we get a clear picture of just how much of the Arctic is about to melt out. The extent/area numbers hide this year's volume deficit (in particular, across the Beaufort/western CAB).
The fact is, 2017 has the lowest volume as of this date. All else that might be said about the volume metric entails a bias or an emphasis that departs from objectivity.
Quote from: Rubikscube on June 26, 2017, 05:29:57 PMAnd your point is? the point is that every post that tries to reduce the gravity of the current conditions as well as development over recent years leaves a bit of a smell of bias and/or talk just to talk or contradict just to be heard.
And your point is?
Quote from: magnamentis on June 26, 2017, 06:41:31 PMQuote from: Rubikscube on June 26, 2017, 05:29:57 PMAnd your point is? the point is that every post that tries to reduce the gravity of the current conditions as well as development over recent years leaves a bit of a smell of bias and/or talk just to talk or contradict just to be heard.Haha, I first came here to comment (#2288 ) on what a scorcher this melting season is now setting up to be. Then I'm asked to answer for my moderating bi-sentence, and in going so subsequently being accused of contradicting the common narrative just to grab attention (trolling?)? Anyway, Seaicesailor gets my point - and makes a good summary of the situation - if you don't, lets just agree to disagree (just don't come back in September and tell me "I told you so" ).
Quote from: jplotinus on June 26, 2017, 06:22:49 PMThe fact is, 2017 has the lowest volume as of this date. All else that might be said about the volume metric entails a bias or an emphasis that departs from objectivity.I don't agree. All Rubikscube says is there is another metric, the rate of volume decline, and this one has been in the low side since May. Objectively, this is correct, and not wanting to see it is biased thinking. There was a lot of snow in the NH, a lot of coldness associated and it really showed.Said so, the melting has really gained momentum with the heat dragged by the storm, didn't it? Prospects are not good.EDIT. Actually I would say that the rate of volume decline has not been smaller, but has been delayed by weeks, as delayed as the snow cover melt in the NH has been, as was clearly shown in the Rutgers maps. The thing is: the solstice comes at the same date always, give or take one day, so that delay means for sure more ice in September
Quote from: seaicesailor on June 26, 2017, 07:31:18 PMQuote from: jplotinus on June 26, 2017, 06:22:49 PMThe fact is, 2017 has the lowest volume as of this date. All else that might be said about the volume metric entails a bias or an emphasis that departs from objectivity.I don't agree. All Rubikscube says is there is another metric, the rate of volume decline, and this one has been in the low side since May. Objectively, this is correct, and not wanting to see it is biased thinking. There was a lot of snow in the NH, a lot of coldness associated and it really showed.Said so, the melting has really gained momentum with the heat dragged by the storm, didn't it? Prospects are not good.EDIT. Actually I would say that the rate of volume decline has not been smaller, but has been delayed by weeks, as delayed as the snow cover melt in the NH has been, as was clearly shown in the Rutgers maps. The thing is: the solstice comes at the same date always, give or take one day, so that delay means for sure more ice in SeptemberYour edit suggests that you do not agree with Ribikscube, though you don't actually say that. I would add that I do not consider Rubikscube as having introduced a metric of rate of volume decline because Rubikscube has chosen to limit the field of data comparison to only a handful of years, precisely in a manner that might be seen as a bias in favor of predicting a high, non-record, minimum.
QuoteI don't think this is about moralist qualms once one grasps the possible consequences of a blue ocean event.That would make a good thread: What Can Blue Do For You? (No link yet, just in conceptual stage)
Sea ice at both Kimmirut and Barrow moving in last 24 hours . . .
Say hello, wave goodbye to the ice in the Beaufort Sea while it's still there.
Finally, remember - the words of people on this forum don't really change the September outcome. It only seems that way
Take a look at the Inner Basin volume chart. The season is very long, it can't be over one way or the other yet.Finally, remember - the words of people on this forum don't really change the September outcome. It only seems that way
...The thing is: the solstice comes at the same date always, give or take one day, so that delay means for sure more ice in September
Relative to the last 7 years, that is called a slow melt.
Looks hot in the NW Passage now.O-Bouy:
<snippage> If this set-up remains dominant into July, this year is top 3 material. At the very least.