Short to Medium Term Arctic Sea Ice Conditions Discussion

[jdallen]

How much salinity increase, how so no melt?  I'm not sure melt would happen *that* quickly, nor necessarily express itself in decreased area, considering the relatively short time frames involved.  Chewing through even 2 meters of ice is going to be a slow process, even with very good melt conditions.

I'm not sure that we'd necessarily see that great an increase in open area with upwelling.  I'd actually expect instead to see decreases in overall thickness.   If we knew what the expected salinity would be, with no melt, the difference between that and observed might give us a clue as to how much volume actually has been lost.

[crandles]

I'm not sure melt would happen *that* quickly

Certainly not through a metre plus of ice in less than a week. However I do expect Ekman pumping would cause *some* melt at bottom of ice.


The salinity we are looking at is SSS, presumably that is surface skin salinity or sea surface salinity. Top of ice surface salinity wouldn't be so salty so presumably it is water skin salinity. However, is it water skin in leads only or is it mainly water skin beneath ice?


Ekman pumping may well not disturb the surface skin in leads. If leads grow wider, extra water is getting between the ice floes but such water could be added from below without disturbing lead skin salinity much?

If it isn't just the leads sea surface, then perhaps just 1mm of ice melt means that 1mm of water is then the sea surface skin?

[crandles]

Changes in 2013 seem pretty similar to changes in 2012. So I am not sure we can tell anything from this.

[ChrisReynolds]

Crandles,

I think it's reasonable to conclude that both sea ice transport and Ekman pumping are in play.

What I see in the animated gif of surface salinity is a marginal increase in speed of decline of salinity, but as I say, because we can't be sure what would have happened without the storm we can't be sure it's related, or real.

I didn't see anything in the individual images, it was only in the time series.

[Shared Humanity]

Crandles,

I think it's reasonable to conclude that both sea ice transport and Ekman pumping are in play.

What I see in the animated gif of surface salinity is a marginal increase in speed of decline of salinity, but as I say, because we can't be sure what would have happened without the storm we can't be sure it's related, or real.

I didn't see anything in the individual images, it was only in the time series.

Would these surface salinity animations be worth visiting as the Arctic becomes ice free through the melt season? What might they tell us?

[Richard Rathbone]

I'm not sure melt would happen *that* quickly

Certainly not through a metre plus of ice in less than a week. However I do expect Ekman pumping would cause *some* melt at bottom of ice.

Why?

I'd expect it to be completely irrelevant because i) its a polar cyclone, ii) ice prevents most of the shear being tranmitted to the water.

[ChrisReynolds]

What they'll continue to show is the Atlantic Water (AW) drops from the surface as it enters the Nansen Basin because it is more dense than Arctic Ocean Water. AW ultimately comes from more southerly (warmer) seas which can dissolve more salt, and the Arctic Ocean has a lot of freshwater input from rivers and during the melt season, from ice melt.

Brine rejection from ice formation raises surface salinity in late autumn/early winter, but this increase of salinity does not bring surface salinity to near that of AW. I work on the assumption that surface salinity remains a good proxy for AW, and that were the oft-claimed event of an overturning to occur, bringing deep AW into contact with the ice, we'd first see it in modelled surface salinity. I think it most unlikely that such a large event would not be apparent in models like HYCOM or PIOMAS.

Richard,

It might seem that due to the slower rotation speeds in the polar region that Ekman transport may not play a role. But WHOI have published research into its role and they conclude it has a major role.
http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=97670&tid=3622&cid=44107
Furthermore there is coupling between atmosphere and ocean through the ice. Whether this storm alone is enough to disturb the halocline and bring warmer water up is an interesting question, to which I do not know the answer. The event may be too short to have much of an effect with ice in place (different to the effect over open ocean).

[weatherintel]

One of the largest single areas of 'Blue Ice' I can recall seeing:

http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?subset=Arctic_r04c01.2013151.terra.250m&vectors=coast%2Bborders

The melt-out of this region will be fast and furious when it starts.

Steve

[Richard Rathbone]

Richard,

It might seem that due to the slower rotation speeds in the polar region that Ekman transport may not play a role. But WHOI have published research into its role and they conclude it has a major role.
http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=97670&tid=3622&cid=44107
Furthermore there is coupling between atmosphere and ocean through the ice. Whether this storm alone is enough to disturb the halocline and bring warmer water up is an interesting question, to which I do not know the answer. The event may be too short to have much of an effect with ice in place (different to the effect over open ocean).

Woods Hole give figures of the order of a centimetre per day for upwelling velocity. I don't see that being a significant contributor to heat transport to the ice.

Its not to do with slower rotation speeds of polar cyclones, its to do with them being near the pole. Ekman transport is driven by the offset between the axis of the cyclone and the axis of the earth. If a cyclone is over the pole, its zero.

[Nightvid Cole]

Its not to do with slower rotation speeds of polar cyclones, its to do with them being near the pole. Ekman transport is driven by the offset between the axis of the cyclone and the axis of the earth. If a cyclone is over the pole, its zero.

Why does it depend on the axis offset like that? The Coriolis effect is maximum, not zero, at the poles.

[danp]

Woods Hole give figures of the order of a centimetre per day for upwelling velocity. I don't see that being a significant contributor to heat transport to the ice.

Those cm/day figures are averaged for the whole basin over the whole year, since that report was focused on long-term changes in Ekman pumping rates driven by AO or other changes.  I doubt the figure's at all accurate for a particular episode of Ekman pumping at the center of a storm localized in time and place.  These strong systems must by definition make up a disproportionate share of that average, though I have no idea exactly what their role is compared with more ordinary weather (or if anyone knows). 

I agree it seems odd that such a mechanism could work through thick ice, especially during the 1990s when the trends described in the Woods Hole report were happening.  So my assumption is that it's my mental model of the ice that's overly simple; after all, even thick Arctic ice cracks and moves, and I don't see why lumpy-bottomed ice that moves divergently couldn't transmit shear force to water below it as effectively as an equivalent layer of liquid water would.

[ChrisReynolds]

Why does it depend on the axis offset like that? The Coriolis effect is maximum, not zero, at the poles.

Thanks, I'd got mixed up.

The coriolis effect is maximum at the pole. The reason is explained here:
http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap11/conversation.html
Warning - that page is one of those terrible html pages with music on it - argh!

Q. Why did you say the effect is small near the equator?

A. Because places at the equator do not rotate in the same way that places at high latitudes do. A man standing at the north pole with arms outstretched finds his right hand advances towards the Sun during the day, and it is the left hand which advances for someone at the south pole, but a person at the equator does not turn about his own axis at all. Without such turning there is no Coriolis effect.

The opposite directions of turning in the two hemispheres explain the different directions of the Coriolis effect. One may thus consider the effect as positive in one hemisphere and negative in the other, from which it follows that it is zero at the equator between.

As for coupling through ice, you need ice movement to couple to the ocean. So the effect is far less marked for ice covered than for open ocean (such as the August storm of 2012).

[Frivolousz21]

In terms of direct melting from above.

Things are about to pop off:

The Canadian Arpichelago Northern Canada it self will plunge way way way way below normal in snow cover with that torch.

Greenland ice melt will be taking off within 2 days and getting worse.

While overall pattern set up, slowly moves to the big time melt weather patterns.

[crandles]

As for coupling through ice, you need ice movement to couple to the ocean. So the effect is far less marked for ice covered than for open ocean (such as the August storm of 2012).

I imagine a solid unbroken ice sheet without any leads just about fully preventing any linkage. But if the pack is more broken up than usual for the time of year then presumably you would get more coupling than usual?

IJIS and NSIDC extent measures seem to be changing unusually slowly for the time of year. Is that a sign of coupling through ice?

[ChrisReynolds]

Crandles,

I presume so, but the short fetch available on leads between floes, along with the mass of the ice, would still make it much less than we'd see in late July and onwards.

The reason why extent/area hasn't dropped as we'd normally see (for the past few years) seems to me to be the divergence of the pack caused by the recent storm. There's been a lot of movement into the Atlantic.

[Frivolousz21]

Major pattern change in progress.  The Canadian Archipelago and Greenland get smoked while the Dipole Anomaly sets up. 

In a week Greenland's dark layer will be fully present. 

[Bob Wallace]

Major pattern change in progress.  The Canadian Archipelago and Greenland get smoked while the Dipole Anomaly sets up. 

In a week Greenland's dark layer will be fully present.

Do you keep data on your prediction hit rate?

[Richard Rathbone]

Its not to do with slower rotation speeds of polar cyclones, its to do with them being near the pole. Ekman transport is driven by the offset between the axis of the cyclone and the axis of the earth. If a cyclone is over the pole, its zero.

Why does it depend on the axis offset like that? The Coriolis effect is maximum, not zero, at the poles.

The horizontal Coriolis effect is maximum, but the vertical is minimum. We are talking about vertical motion here. The upwellings the wiki Ekman articles refer to are equatorial.

[SteveMDFP]

Its not to do with slower rotation speeds of polar cyclones, its to do with them being near the pole. Ekman transport is driven by the offset between the axis of the cyclone and the axis of the earth. If a cyclone is over the pole, its zero.

Why does it depend on the axis offset like that? The Coriolis effect is maximum, not zero, at the poles.

The horizontal Coriolis effect is maximum, but the vertical is minimum. We are talking about vertical motion here. The upwellings the wiki Ekman articles refer to are equatorial.

Not at all true.  The upwelling is vertical, but that's not where the Coriolis forces are having an effect.  In a cyclonic wind field, sea ice and surface waters are driven radially outwards--that's a well-known fact.  The upwelling is simply the water below rising to "fill a vacuum."

In an area of high pressure, directions are reversed--ice and surface waters are drawn to the center by Coriolis forces.  Water in the center is thus driven downwards.

When a low-pressure and high-pressure system are in rough proximity, additive effects develop.  The "dipole" effect on wind is well-known among regulars here.  But there is also additive effects on mixing from upwelling and downwelling in the two systems.

[Frivolousz21]

Major pattern change in progress.  The Canadian Archipelago and Greenland get smoked while the Dipole Anomaly sets up. 

In a week Greenland's dark layer will be fully present.

Do you keep data on your prediction hit rate?

I am not sure what you mean.  It's not my prediction, it's what the computer model says.

[Laurent]

The Lincoln sea has been hit by the cyclone !

[Richard Rathbone]

Its not to do with slower rotation speeds of polar cyclones, its to do with them being near the pole. Ekman transport is driven by the offset between the axis of the cyclone and the axis of the earth. If a cyclone is over the pole, its zero.

Why does it depend on the axis offset like that? The Coriolis effect is maximum, not zero, at the poles.

The horizontal Coriolis effect is maximum, but the vertical is minimum. We are talking about vertical motion here. The upwellings the wiki Ekman articles refer to are equatorial.

Not at all true.  The upwelling is vertical, but that's not where the Coriolis forces are having an effect.  In a cyclonic wind field, sea ice and surface waters are driven radially outwards--that's a well-known fact.  The upwelling is simply the water below rising to "fill a vacuum."

In an area of high pressure, directions are reversed--ice and surface waters are drawn to the center by Coriolis forces.  Water in the center is thus driven downwards.

When a low-pressure and high-pressure system are in rough proximity, additive effects develop.  The "dipole" effect on wind is well-known among regulars here.  But there is also additive effects on mixing from upwelling and downwelling in the two systems.

Thats a tiny effect on the ice though. The ice coverage is changing because its being moved, not because water coming up to replace it is melting it. At the most its 1% melt:99% dispersal and it might be -1% melt:101% dispersal. Following up the lead Chris gave me, I found a paper on  "The Seasonal Variability of the Arctic Ocean Ekman Transport and Its Role in the Mixed Layer Heat and Salt Fluxes" which finds oceanic Ekman upwelling has a cooling effect. Heating from Ekman currents is due to surface movement from warm to cold parts of the Arctic and upwelling next to land.

https://darchive.mblwhoilibrary.org/bitstream/handle/1912/4179/jcli3892.1.pdf?sequence=1

There's nothing I can find in the literature that leads to the conclusion that Ekman upwelling from the storm we are discussing can have anything but a trivial effect on the ice, and if anything its a negative one, not one that causes increased melt.

[PhilGChapman]

As there's some confusion about the Coriolis force (if anyone says it's simple they probably don't really understand it), I thought I'd link to an excellent primer in the form of a relatively short three part series in the journal 'Weather' from 2000 by Anders Persson. I've linked to it before on 'the blog' and it seemed to be appreciated. The links below provide links to the three free to download pdfs of the series, collectively titled 'Back to Basics.'
Part One
Part Two
Part Three

[Vergent]

At any rate HYCOM got it right. Many polynyas opening up in the CAB.

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?subset=Arctic_r04c04.2013153.terra


ro4co4 from Lance Modis.

Vergent

[Frivolousz21]

The higher resolution Bremen(AMSR2) and NSIDC data shows 2013 and 2012 virtually tied.

Cryosphere today is way behind because of the ice dispersal since area is calculated differently.


Jaxa is a bit behind because they don't even use AMSR2 yet but windsat still according to their website.

It's quite amazing how it may appear it's so far behind when their are not compressed area's of pools of open water like last year as much but instead the vortex has created holes all over only the higher resolution products can pick up.

[TerryM]

Richard


Try this link for an explanation of Ekman Pumping. Figure 2 offers a quick explanation of the process being discussed.


http://www.whoi.edu/fileserver.do?id=92424&pt=2&p=44107


Terry

[Richard Rathbone]

Richard


Try this link for an explanation of Ekman Pumping. Figure 2 offers a quick explanation of the process being discussed.


http://www.whoi.edu/fileserver.do?id=92424&pt=2&p=44107


Terry

Thats where I got the figures of cm per day for the rate from, and the paper I linked upthread which says it decreases melt (because the water at the Ekman depth is colder than the water in the surface mixed layer) is by the same author.

Just because it happens, doesn't mean it has a significant or even positive effect on melt. Melting from the convected heat from Ekman pumping under a cyclone is at most trivial compared to the changes in ice due to dispersion, and the typical effect is of the wrong sign. Ekman pumping reduces melt.

Edit. For anyone else looking at that Figure 2, note that its a description of the author's model, which takes wind and ice measurements as independent inputs to a calculation of water motion. Actually they are not independent and ice isn't driven by wind in the way Figure 2 implies.

[ChrisReynolds]

At any rate HYCOM got it right. Many polynyas opening up in the CAB.

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?subset=Arctic_r04c04.2013153.terra


ro4co4 from Lance Modis.

Vergent

Whoo Hooo!

This is great!

 

[Shared Humanity]

On the HYCOM image, what are the areas intermixed with the ice that has polynyas and a different color? Is this thicker MYI that is less prone to fracturing?

[ChrisReynolds]

Animated gif of cell R04C04 since 2009.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3pB-kdzoLU3VmwtQkl6QldtVEk/edit?usp=sharing

To repeat from my blog:

I've used the highest resolution, 250m per pixcel, and stacked a series of images in an image editor, then used crop to select a single region to show ice conditions since 2009 over the exact same region of the pack for the same day of the year (with dither to avoid cloud white-outs), and the 2013 state before the May Storm. I have then turned each image into a negative in order to bring out the water between ice floes, even under cloud. No other manipulation has been done, all images are in original resolution. The ice shows up dark, water between floes as white striations.

Shared Humanity,

Which HYCOM image?

For what it's worth there's no MYI to the east of the Pole.

[ChrisReynolds]

Bremen SSMIS

31 May 2012
http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/ssmisdata/asi_daygrid_swath/n6250/2012/may/asi-SSMIS17-n6250-20120531-v5_visual.png

31 May 2013
http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/ssmisdata/asi_daygrid_swath/n6250/2013/may/asi-SSMIS-n6250-20130531-v5_visual.png

[Bob Wallace]

Here's some crops from Chris's May 31, 2012/13 links.

[crandles]

Just because it happens, doesn't mean it has a significant or even positive effect on melt. Melting from the convected heat from Ekman pumping under a cyclone is at most trivial compared to the changes in ice due to dispersion, and the typical effect is of the wrong sign. Ekman pumping reduces melt.

Edit. For anyone else looking at that Figure 2, note that its a description of the author's model, which takes wind and ice measurements as independent inputs to a calculation of water motion. Actually they are not independent and ice isn't driven by wind in the way Figure 2 implies.

Immediately after the 1.82cm /day figure they say

Therefore, the strengthening of the upwelling resulted in approximately an additional 30 meters of uplift of the halocline between 1991 and 1998 as compared with that prior to 1991.

30 meters of uplift is significant particularly if that is an average over the basin. The diagram seems to show the melt layer not getting any thinner but main effect is Atlantic Water rising. The upward heat flux comes from heat in the AW layer diffusing upward. Even if that 30m is not a basin average, 30m less to travel upwards would be a considerable increase in the heat gradient through the CHL and ML. Increase in heat gradient results in an increase in heat flux. So it does result in increase melting. I agree that divergence is the more significant factor being seen; it takes a long time to melt through a meter + of ice whereas widening leads in the centre and tightening them up away from the centre takes much less time.


AFAICS, The movement of the ice can be resolved into two components being a cyclonic wind component and an Ekman transport divergence component away from the centre of rotation, so I don't see your quarrel with the way the ice movement is shown.

[ChrisReynolds]

Thanks Bob,

I'm not sure about scaling images here, and didn't have the time to crop and upload to my Flickr account.

[Neven]

I've just compared air temperatures for May 2012 vs 2013:



I suspect this is the main reason for the slow start, but I can't explain the low temps. Except for Bering 2013 is behind 2012 in all CT SIA regions.

[OldLeatherneck]

I've just compared air temperatures for May 2012 vs 2013:

................ but I can't explain the low temps..........

The Jet Stream did not file a flight plan, got lost, doesn't know where to go.  Meanwhile, it's just wandering aimlessly around the globe, causing havoc in places other than the arctic.

[crandles]

I suspect this is the main reason for the slow start, but I can't explain the low temps. Except for Bering 2013 is behind 2012 in all CT SIA regions.

The low pressure has been rather centrally located keeping Arctic air in the Arctic. Last year the low was displaced bringing warmer air to the Arctic from Russia and CAA.

Top two are temp last two are pressure:

[Neven]

I made a 500 mb SLP comparison as well for May 2012 and 2013, but didn't know how to interpret it:

[CraigsIsland]

I've just compared air temperatures for May 2012 vs 2013:

................ but I can't explain the low temps..........

The Jet Stream did not file a flight plan, got lost, doesn't know where to go.  Meanwhile, it's just wandering aimlessly around the globe, causing havoc in places other than the arctic.

Jet Stream sounds drunk

[Bob Wallace]

Jet Stream sounds drunk

Heat stroke....

[Frivolousz21]

Big time arctic torching, ice compression, ice melt, and huge ocean heating in the North Atlantc underway.

Greenland land ice/snow is about to get un-thawed rapidly.  Baffin ice get's exposed to very warm Southerly/SW winds by day 3-4 and Sunshine. 

The Hudson, Southern 1/2 of the Canadian Archipelago into the Baffin area later get crushed this next week with a huge blow torch.

 If that is not enough.  Models continue to trend towards a stronger Dipole Anomaly. 

Maybe the incoming HUGE AREA OF 2-5C+ sst anomaly's from North of Great Britian over to SE/Eastern Greenland coast North along the ice edge up to the Kara/Barents. 

This might be why the models keep trending stronger with a vortex just sitting over the Eastern kara with that kind of jet fuel to keep it going. 

In turn if it does end up that strong MAJOR WARMTH WILL COME OUT OF EASTERN SIBERIA AND SLAM THE ESB/EASTERN LAPTEV. 

On top of that the incoming massive albedo shift over Northern Canada/Hudson/Baffin/Greenland will fuel pattern changes.

Almost every Summer recently the models in this situation totally under-estimate the prowess of the Canadian side HP and the heat as well.

Likely due to not compensating for the rapid albedo change taking place right now.

Northern Canada snow cover anomaly is about to go seriously negative in a matter of 2-3 days.

Yesterday snow cover(June 3rd)



Climo for June 11th



And what it actually looks like:




The model's are all over-estimating the strength of the remaining snow pack on the incoming torch.  Some of the EC forecast's are going to horribly bust.

The NAM is the warmest and vs real time this morning it is also to cool by quite a bit.  There is no way temps don't go over 5C in the area where snow cover is still at least 50 percent or higher.

Today I will go with 6-12C NNW of the Hudson.  Tomorrow when there is a deep Southerly flow and temp's in the FREAKING UPPER 70s to low 80'S dropping into the UPPER 30s within 50-75 miles because of the snow cover left on the visible image above from Yesterday is a joke.

Conditions in this situation are extremely changeable  and quick.  But as of now for tomorrow I bet it's 10-15C there.  I won't be surprised to see 20C where the models have under 5C.











I can't put out any predictions past Wednesday yet because the models will adjust  to initial folly.  Which in the case of 4 days in a row of deep fetch WAA is likely an extreme wrong by the weather models.

This is what makes weather/climate exciting to track and forecast.  Having to make adjustments but also paying attention to these small details.

Put it this way.  What would be the difference of air hitting the Canadian Archipelago channel's in the mid to upper 30s with Dew Points around 0-3C versus conditions being temps in the low 60s to upper 60s and Dew Point's in the mid 40s to near 50.  And then for two more days highs in the low to mid 70s and DP's in the mid to upper 50s VS highs in the mid 40s to low 50s and DPs in the upper 30s to mid 40s?

In say a 72 hour period.  Accounting for some diurnal change.  But DP's would be high during the night still.

I recall reading a paper about this talking about the snow/ice melt becoming absurd.  Especially since solar insolation is so high.

[BornFromTheVoid]

A post I made in netweather, but I think it might be useful here...

The next week could prove very interesting across the Arctic.
 
We have a somewhat deep low pressure across the Arctic for the next few days dipping below 980hPa at times with a tight pressure gradient.




Generally this isn't a problem. Low pressure, or +ve AO, in summer can be associated with cooler temperatures, cloudiness and a less amplified jet stream. The increased wind wouldn't do much as the ice pack would be quite solid and thick.
 
Nowadays, as was shown by last weeks conditions, even a moderate low can disrupt the central pack, lowering the concentration and leaving the ice more susceptible to future conditions. In this case, the likely disruption of the pack is going to be followed a strong dipole pattern, which will drive the sea ice toward the Atlantic and bring in much milder conditions across the central and Pacific side of the Arctic.



The low pressure over the Eurasian side and the high pressure across the N. American side (the dipole pattern) drives the sea ice towards the Atlantic. At the same time, warmer air gets dragged in towards the Chukchi sea, just north of the Bering strait, and across the central Arctic (the dipole was a strong contributor towards the 2007 event, and the 4 record minima before that).






This pulls surface temperatures up above 0C across most of the Arctic also




Coupled with all this, it appears that conditions around Hudson bay are going to warm up significantly and stay warm for the next week at least, so we could see some high losses here too.
 
Between the conditions across the Arctic, and Hudson Bay, we should start seeing our first regular >100,000km2 losses by about next weekend.

[Neven]

Maybe this is normal, but I'm noticing that, despite a big high stretched from Barentsz to the East Siberian Sea, the view isn't very clear on the LANCE-MODIS satellite images. It's all hazy and stuff. Does anyone know why that is, and does this mean these zones are getting less insolation when compared to completely cloudless skies?

[ChrisReynolds]

Born From The Void,

Thanks for your summary. Now that we're in June we should expect the ridge over Greenland to intensify and the summer dipole to set it.

Neven,

Having been rooting around for some clear skies in past years to compare with this year, I can confirm it's normal. It's hard to tell how high that is. Sometimes the cloud sheet has dappling that indicates interference with the ground, suggesting low cloud. Low cloud is important because IR emission can compete with insolation as an ice melter, and the ice albedo effect works just as well with this IR as with visible light (I think). Basically if you can see the ice through the cloud it's not dull underneath, and with the low angle of incidence cloud can be an aid to absorption of light because it diffuses the direct rays which would otherwise tend to be at a low angle of incidence and reflect more.

[Neven]

Thanks for yet another great answer, Chris!

And thanks to BFTV as well for the weather forecast.

[SATire]

By viewing MODIS-jpg in gimp I can confirm, that clouds over ice lower albedo by 5-10% compared to ice without clouds. Same amount of albedo change ist visible between fast ice and brocken ice e.g. by the storm. (Details can not be seen in jpg because of dithering). So clouds seem to increase albedo only over water or land - not over ice.

[crandles]

Arctic Sea Ice News
June 4 2013 Unbaked Alaska
is up.

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

[Apocalypse4Real]

To demonstrate what is happening already in Alaska, this video from weather.com illustrates the rapid ice and snow melt.

In Alaska, a cold spell followed by a rapid warm-up lead to fast-melting, and fast-moving ice.
http://www.weather.com/video/warm-up-causes-meltdown-37123

[frankendoodle]

Instead of Small Arctic Cyclones I humbly suggest we call these little rascals "Varmint Storms". Allow me to explain....
Varmints are small mammals that are considered "pests". They are opportunistic carnivores who's favorite prey is an unguarded nest of eggs.
The current ASI cap is much like an undefended egg in a nest. It's a strong yet thin veneer holding in all kinds of calories and nutrients. But in this analogy the shell is holding in heat (lots of it) as opposed to a yoke.
That's why these little devils are persisting longer than normal. The ice is so thin that they're able to break the shell and tap into all that juicy energy beneath.
VAs (Varmint Storms TM).
Or as an alternate we can call them HBCs (Honey Badger Cyclones).
Anyway, the point is that they are hanging around longer because they are "drilling for oil" sport of speak.
 

[Frivolousz21]

Wow.

Doubt it's that cold.  But look at the Super torch over Canada.  The Hudson is toast. The Canadian Archipelago is going to be totally ravished.

Greenland's land ice melt is in the explosion process.  Dipole flow, big sun, Kara melted.  Normal melt season.




Then there is this:

May was 3rd worst on record for NH snow cover



Eurasia set the record low for May:



North America was negative but a bit behind or May would of been a record overall.



But that has already changed and given the weather pattern:



Snow cover anomaly will rapidly expand and within 5 to 6 days the only snow left in Northern Canad will be in the Northern 1/2 of the CA Islands.

Oh and again Environment Canada is going to have some epic bust from their forecasts before yesterdays update's.

More busts to come.

Models show Mid 80s on the Western Greenland coast in two days.  Upper 70s to low 80s tomorrow.




those are way to low.

the GFS is possibly showing wall to wall super torch on both continents.