Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    15,508
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    kgottwald
    Newest Member
    kgottwald
    Joined
ORH_wxman

Arctic Sea Ice Extent, Area, and Volume

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, chubbs said:

Think this will go down to the wire. The Pac-side pack has been deteriorating in a favorable pattern. 

Arctic_AMSR2_nic.png

The Arctic experienced a record May and June combination of warmth and high pressure. So we have been seeing steep declines this week even with more favorable conditions than the last few months.

9ED6EED2-FD58-4A92-8B11-F1F07248A7E8.png.de183418c74a8948a23f39212c60437d.png

84F46297-02E4-4C9A-94FC-F2D85BBC8193.png.d99bbfc0dca5e2d1c6d4d113f9437864.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, etudiant said:

Simultaneously, this indication of thick ice north of Svalbard.

http://maritimebulletin.net/2019/07/19/icebreaker-turned-back-encountering-heavy-ice-in-ice-free-arctic/

So the ice conditions are quite variable. That however does not preclude a record low this season.

I mentioned before that Atlantic and CAA may prevent us from getting a new record. Much more ice there this year than 2012. But we still have a chance if ESS/Laptev can melt back far enough. 

We're tied for area right now. 2012 has some epic losses in early August though which is why I'm still a bit skeptical in addition to just looking at the individual regional concentration maps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bluewave said:

The Arctic experienced a record May and June combination of warmth and high pressure. So we have been seeing steep declines this week even with more favorable conditions than the last few months.

9ED6EED2-FD58-4A92-8B11-F1F07248A7E8.png.de183418c74a8948a23f39212c60437d.png

84F46297-02E4-4C9A-94FC-F2D85BBC8193.png.d99bbfc0dca5e2d1c6d4d113f9437864.png

The crazy thing is, with that temp trendline, this May-June period will be merely average by 2030-2035 -- though I would expect it to slow down after a while due to widespread melt moving earlier and capping temps near the melting point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

I mentioned before that Atlantic and CAA may prevent us from getting a new record. Much more ice there this year than 2012. But we still have a chance if ESS/Laptev can melt back far enough. 

We're tied for area right now. 2012 has some epic losses in early August though which is why I'm still a bit skeptical in addition to just looking at the individual regional concentration maps. 

Yeah, going to be tough to beat that early Aug. swan dive that 2012 had. Upcoming dipole might help give it a run for its money though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s a quote from Wipneus on the July 15th PIOMAS update:

PIOMAS has updated the gridded thickness data to the 15th of this month. Volume calculated from this was 8.77 [1000km3]. That is the lowest for the day, with quite a margin.

789FA740-3A3D-4201-9ABF-A10D5C5D2C1E.thumb.png.8d381e923b87b32478cf7992c6a370e4.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This dipole will probably largely finish off the ESS, Chukchi and Laptev. Beaufort probably won't have much left either. Not looking great for the CAB either. Only the Atlantic side is doing okay this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, csnavywx said:

This dipole will probably largely finish off the ESS, Chukchi and Laptev. Beaufort probably won't have much left either. Not looking great for the CAB either. Only the Atlantic side is doing okay this year.

12z Euro has record breaking 500mb heights and surface pressures over the CAB for this time of year.

BD5768EB-60C8-43CF-B74E-A0438AFD01E4.thumb.png.ee0e50c3f7c2711633841dd392456ce3.png

24D1D785-D05F-414F-901D-B5338B99F5CD.thumb.png.b331a6569a74bc777ff953783b8e4c15.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 We now have a warm low headed over siberia increasing the pressure grad there pluss all the heat from NW Europe is bound for Greenland/Atlantic side of the basin.

Folk need to look at the near real time sat images to see just how messy some areas of the ice are! Any extra heat input is just going to take out the ice rubble in rapid order leaving isolated floes in open water just in time for 'bottom melt' end of the season to kick in.

Not looking good at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The arctic is literally on FIRE with 2,300,000 hectares burning and counting. Almost ALL of greenland is forecasted to go above freezing. Ice thickness plummeting. Near record low extent. The environment is flashing red alarm bells and we still argue if global warming is happening. Absolutely mind boggling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The arctic is literally on FIRE with 2,3000,0000 hectares burning and counting. Almost ALL of greenland is forecasted to go above freezing. Ice thickness plummeting. Near record low extent. The environment is flashing red alarm bells and we still argue if global warming is happening. Absolutely mind boggling. 

 
 
This post would be more persuasive if SN_Lover took the time to proofread his own posts and perhaps to relate the current data to the historical record.
As is, it comes across as overwrought at best, if not trolling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Melting , via the oceans warmth, overtakes the failing solar surface melt around this time of year I believe?

Problem is ,as floes get smaller, there comes a size where 'side melt' overtakes bottom melt in the losses produced? ( I think the magic size is 100m across?) meaning even faster loss of the ice for the same energies available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, etudiant said:

The arctic is literally on FIRE with 2,3000,0000 hectares burning and counting. Almost ALL of greenland is forecasted to go above freezing. Ice thickness plummeting. Near record low extent. The environment is flashing red alarm bells and we still argue if global warming is happening. Absolutely mind boggling. 

 
 
This post would be more persuasive if SN_Lover took the time to proofread his own posts and perhaps to relate the current data to the historical record.
As is, it comes across as overwrought at best, if not trolling.

What's trolling is global warming deniers sticking their heads in the sand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, etudiant said:

The arctic is literally on FIRE with 2,3000,0000 hectares burning and counting. Almost ALL of greenland is forecasted to go above freezing. Ice thickness plummeting. Near record low extent. The environment is flashing red alarm bells and we still argue if global warming is happening. Absolutely mind boggling. 

 
 
This post would be more persuasive if SN_Lover took the time to proofread his own posts and perhaps to relate the current data to the historical record.
As is, it comes across as overwrought at best, if not trolling.

 

GW as being a fallacy:   objectivity elided/forced by an opposition that is more likely incapable of perceiving consequence for their stance - 'else, they would not do that.

The reasons for that inability are varied from individual to individual, special interest group to special interest group... But by and large, mostly because the specter of what it all means is probably just too untenable within the vaster multi-facets of society, and would not resonate based on verbal warnings alone.  However, written on the epitaph of Humanity's headstone, "this is just a fad concern".

The human gestalt has never responded as well to threats that are vocal, ..which, compounding, the early efforts to do so attacked the institutions that have procured multiple generations of successful living ( by and large ...) - very bad PR. Compared to when the perception of the threat is corporeal in nature?   If a threat can be seen, touched, smelled, felt, or tasted ... people move out of the way.  Even now... as the measurements are arriving in clear, coherent datum ... Pompeiians tried to run - when they could finally see it...

For everyone else, it would most certainly be abhorrently stirring to deny what was scienced decades ago...and is verifying in the Global environment today.   Akin to being warned not to grab the red hot poker... grabbing it, then attempting to persuade people it is not really hot - the onus of persuasion really falls on the other side of that debate at this point if anything at all.... 

The correlation to the ending preposition - related to global warming - is more likely true than not, given all science on the matter.  This all hearkens to a separate issue having to do with modern technology and conveniences effecting perceptions.  People are being protected by the former, in such a way ...a bad decision here and there...is no longer resulting in as dire of consequence for a miss-calculation.  Integrate that culturally over... it's not helping the AGW--> consequence model in a positive way.  As my professorial circle of associates and I have discussed, ...this is as much a sociological crisis as it is a physical sciences one - and until the former is equally addressed... the solutions for the latter will be partial at best.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SN_Lover said:

What's trolling is global warming deniers sticking their heads in the sand. 

I stopped giving a rats ass about those people, they're as repugnant as anti-vaxxers or flat-earthers though having said trolls lead gov't is quite terrifying.

Still even the most scientifically scholared gov'ts don't mind turning their back on what they know to be true. 

So at this point it's a big waiting game. Will we innovate ourselves out of GW or will GW shut us down permanently.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Orangeburgwx said:

Yet during the age of the Dinos CO2 and temps were higher than they are now... But GW and CC aside, this is not the place for that shitstorm

Quote

 this is not the place for that shitstorm

But proceeds to post shitstorm "facts".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On July 26, Arctic Sea Ice Extent was 6.385 million square kilometers (JAXA). That was below the previous minimum for the date of 6.512 million square kilometers, which was set in 2012. 2012 went on to have a record low minimum figure of 3.177 million square kilometers. At present, it appears likely that 2019 will become only the second year on record with a minimum Arctic sea ice extent figure below 4.000 million square kilometers.

Ongoing climate change has been driving a long-term decline in Arctic sea ice extent, even as there have been yearly fluctuations due to internal variability. Since 2000, record low figures have occurred abruptly every few years followed by partial recovery. Since 2000, record figures below 6.000 million square kilometers were established as follows:

2002: 5.513 million square kilometers (peak prior to the next record: 5.934 million square kilometers, 2003)
2005: 5.179 million square kilometers (peak prior to the next record: 5.625 million square kilometers, 2006)
2007: 4.066 million square kilometers (peak prior to the next record: 5.054 million square kilometers, 2009)
2012: 3.177 million square kilometers (peak since then: 4.884 million square kilometers, 2014)

Potential Minimum Extent Scenarios:

Smallest decline from 7/25 to the minimum (2000-18): 4.810 million square kilometers
Smallest decline from 7/25 to the minimum (2010-18): 4.323 million square kilometers
Mean decline from 7/25 to the minimum (2010-18): 3.886 million square kilometers
Median decline from 7/25 to the minimum (2010-18): 3.966 million square kilometers
Maximum decline from 7/25 to the minimum (2010-18): 3.069 million square kilometers

Statistical Minimum Extent Scenarios (2010-18 Data):

5.000 million square kilometers or below: 99.9%
4.500 million square kilometers or below: 95%
4.000 million square kilometers or below: 62%
3.750 million square kilometers or below: 36%
3.500 million square kilometers or below: 15%
3.000 million square kilometers or below: 1%

New Record Low Minimum: 3%

What could change things:

These are statistical measures. Greater warmth and/or a more unfavorable pattern for preserving ice could lead to larger declines than implied statistically. A sustained period of cooler weather and/or a more favorable pattern for preserving ice could lead to higher figures than implied statistically. At least through the remainder of July, the balance of risks favors a greater decline than implied statistically. In part, the historic heat in Europe that is forecast to move into Iceland and Greenland in coming days may be partially the result of the warming Arctic via Arctic Amplification and the slowing of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), as well as induced changes to the jet stream that lead to greater pattern persistence.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A purely statistical model would have basically "missed" 2012 at this point. Probably 2007 as well. I suspect the issue has to with the behavior of extent numbers when volume gets very low.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, csnavywx said:

A purely statistical model would have basically "missed" 2012 at this point. Probably 2007 as well. I suspect the issue has to with the behavior of extent numbers when volume gets very low.

I agree. That's part of the reason I provided a brief discussion of what could change things. I suspect that changes in ice minima may not be normally distributed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×