• Member Statistics

    16,628
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Javon75
    Newest Member
    Javon75
    Joined
ORH_wxman

Arctic Sea Ice Extent, Area, and Volume

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, nycwinter said:

nyc is billions in debt now...

And by being in debt, they join most municipalities and state governments, all sovereign governments I'm aware of including the US, and every single corporate entity on the Fortune 500. So that statement means nothing unless you have something else to contribute besides drive-by one-liners.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arctic ice area is lowest ever for the date, 4.082MM km**2. Area is probably a somewhat better measure of the ice level than extent..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that as of July 27. 2020, area is only 3.959MM km **2, the lowest on record for the date and the earliest date ever for sub 4MM km**2..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reduction in extent losses was inevitable with how compact the ice had become (I made a post 5 days ago on this). However, we have had some good area losses recently, so there will be room for extent losses to pick back up if we can get another favorable pattern....for now, the reverse dipole looks to intensify over the next week, and then we'll see what happens after that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BillT said:

IF global warming is causing a loss of the ice and going to be catastrophic, why are show many here openly HOPING it is happening?

Good question brother but is way beyond the scope of arctic sea ice discussion. To bring some closure we were already on a bad path with or without global warming.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I imagine the implications may become personal for many when the task of pumping and sandbagging become every day tasks. As always ....

I'll know that the Federal Government accepts the reality of global warming when they refuse flood insurance for anyone not at least 10 feet above sea level.

Looking at the beach front mega mansions on Long Island, that day has not yet come.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/31/2020 at 4:08 PM, etudiant said:

I'll know that the Federal Government accepts the reality of global warming when they refuse flood insurance for anyone not at least 10 feet above sea level.

Looking at the beach front mega mansions on Long Island, that day has not yet come.

A day of reckoning eventually comes for all of us. As always .......

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/24/2020 at 2:26 PM, ORH_wxman said:

The ice is the most compact going back to 2007 for this date...just ahead of 2013. We're narrowly ahead of 2012 for least area on record on this date, but 2020 currently has over 800,000 sq km less ice extent than 2012. In comparison, 2012 and 2007 were the least compact at this point though both would become very compact later in the season near the minimum.

This tells me that we're likely going to see a huge slowdown in extent loss coming up pretty soon.

2012 has a huge area loss event coming up in the first 10 days of August, so I think 2020 is going to have to build a bigger lead on 2012 over the next week to have a good chance to finish below 2012 in area. Extent is a different story, that may be easier to achieve, though still not easy IMHO despite the current 800k lead. 2012's extent loss in August is unmatched in the record....so it's going to be all about "holding on" to a lead in 2012 as it will begin making up ground very quickly...and as mentioned above, the compactness of 2020 right now is going to make it harder to sustain big extent losses going forward unless we see a big area loss event.

 

We’ve now fallen behind 2012 on both area and extent for losses. It didn’t take long to close the 800k extent gap.

There is a good amount of weakened ice in the Beaufort/Chukchi sector, but I don’t see us finishing below 2012 on either metric. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/30/2020 at 6:16 PM, BillT said:

IF global warming is causing a loss of the ice and going to be catastrophic, why are so many here openly HOPING it is happening?

I like the droughts more, as the higher dew points result in breathing difficulties and more pollution.  

Do you think it will be possible to invent a global dehumidifier to suck out all this excess humidity?  After all, water vapor is a GHG.

 I wouldn't mind if humankind found a way to lower sea levels by reclaiming some of the land lost to the oceans (70% oceans is a little too much, it should be more like 50% ocean 50% land.)

Anything that happens can also be geoengineered away.  It's high time humanity started tinkering with the environment to fix it rather than just let it all go downhill.  Looks like we will be doing the same on Mars within the next few decades, as NASA just sent a rover there that converts CO2 to O2.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2020 at 11:38 AM, ORH_wxman said:

We’ve now fallen behind 2012 on both area and extent for losses. It didn’t take long to close the 800k extent gap.

There is a good amount of weakened ice in the Beaufort/Chukchi sector, but I don’t see us finishing below 2012 on either metric. 

 

For 8.9.2020, the NSIDC northern hemisphere sea ice area single daily value is 3.456533 millions of square kilometers. This is a decrease of 17,270 square kilometers from the previous day.

The change from the previous daily value, over the past five days are as follows:

-780 (8.5)

-30,586 (8.6)

-4,347 (8.7)

-13,048 (8.8)

-17,270 (8.9)

2020 is now in fourth place for the date (factoring in leap year). Area losses continue to be significantly below average. NSIDC compaction increased on this day.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For 8.11.2020, the NSIDC northern hemisphere sea ice extent single daily value is 5.579 millions of square kilometers. This is a decrease of 16,000 square kilometers from the previous day.

2020 is now in fifth place for the date. 2020 now has more sea ice extent for the date, than 2007,2012, 2017, and 2019. 2020 may fall into sixth place in the next days, as 2016 has some significant losses the next several days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Weatherdude88 said:

For 8.11.2020, the NSIDC northern hemisphere sea ice extent single daily value is 5.579 millions of square kilometers. This is a decrease of 16,000 square kilometers from the previous day.

2020 is now in fifth place for the date. 2020 now has more sea ice extent for the date, than 2007,2012, 2017, and 2019. 2020 may fall into sixth place in the next days, as 2016 has some significant losses the next several days.

There's a lot of weak ice in the Beaufort/Chukchi region so I'd expect extent losses to accelerate again soon as a lot of that melts out and/or compacts, but we've lost any chance at a new record. I'm still expecting a top 3 lowest extent and area finish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d take the over at this point on 2035. We’ve basically had no trend in volume loss going back to 2010. You’d like to see something more discernible.

Maybe there is another notable step-down currently in the works that will soon change the odds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2020 at 11:38 AM, LibertyBell said:

I like the droughts more, as the higher dew points result in breathing difficulties and more pollution.  

Do you think it will be possible to invent a global dehumidifier to suck out all this excess humidity?  After all, water vapor is a GHG.

 I wouldn't mind if humankind found a way to lower sea levels by reclaiming some of the land lost to the oceans (70% oceans is a little too much, it should be more like 50% ocean 50% land.)

Anything that happens can also be geoengineered away.  It's high time humanity started tinkering with the environment to fix it rather than just let it all go downhill.  Looks like we will be doing the same on Mars within the next few decades, as NASA just sent a rover there that converts CO2 to O2.

 

 

Any biologist will tell you these are terrible ideas. Nature is far too complex to tinker with and not further contribute to our current mass extinction event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, skierinvermont said:

Any biologist will tell you these are terrible ideas. Nature is far too complex to tinker with and not further contribute to our current mass extinction event.

They might say that but we're tinkering with nature already.  Also, we're going to be tinkering with other planets anyway, like Mars.  The only real way to fix something bad we've done is to neutralize it by doing something good.  Doing "something good" also consists of prosecuting the fossil fuel industry, imprisoning the people who run those companies and fining them to bankruptcy and seizing all their assets, and yes this needs to be done on a worldwide level.  I'm sure by now you've read about how they've been going after lawyers who file lawsuits against them on behalf of third world nations where they cause more pollution and death than anywhere else.

 

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

I’d take the over at this point on 2035. We’ve basically had no trend in volume loss going back to 2010. You’d like to see something more discernible.

Maybe there is another notable step-down currently in the works that will soon change the odds. 

I think the major news over the upcoming decade will be the rapid melting in Antarctica.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

I think the major news over the upcoming decade will be the rapid melting in Antarctica.  

a lot of us won't even be around before ice melt becomes a serious issue..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nycwinter said:

a lot of us won't even be around before ice melt becomes a serious issue..

How long do you plan to be around though?  I'd put the hard limit at around 2050 which I'm sure 90% of coastal residents living near sea level will have experienced it in some way, shape or form.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris, Death Valley recorded the first 130 degree temp in the shade in modern history......and if verified, it will be the first verified 130 degree temp ever recorded (all the ones before are being challenged because no other nearby location was nearly as hot.)  While, at the same time, there was a unique severe thunderstorm and heavy rain going on in SF.......

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2020 at 8:28 AM, LibertyBell said:

Chris, Death Valley recorded the first 130 degree temp in the shade in modern history......and if verified, it will be the first verified 130 degree temp ever recorded (all the ones before are being challenged because no other nearby location was nearly as hot.)  While, at the same time, there was a unique severe thunderstorm and heavy rain going on in SF.......

 

 

Of course there's just no way they observed the correct record of 134 in 1913. Just has to be wrong...right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, stadiumwave said:

 

Of course there's just no way they observed the correct record of 134 in 1913. Just has to be wrong...right?

Probably. Yes. There is an incredibly detailed and lengthy write up by William Reid and Christopher Burt regarding the matter. The investigation is still on-going, but unless something has changed it is my understanding that this will eventually be presented to the WMO for official review. 

The following is a lengthy 8-part series summarizing the state of the investigation through March 2020 from William Reid.

http://stormbruiser.com/chase/2013/08/29/death-valleys-134f-record-temperature-study-part-one/

You can review a considerably more consolidated summary on Christopher Burt's blog.

https://www.wunderground.com/blog/weatherhistorian/an-investigation-of-death-valleys-134f-world-temperature-record.html 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/14/2020 at 7:16 AM, bluewave said:

While the models have captured the general decline in Arctic sea ice as the planet has warmed, specific regional forecasts have really struggled. Remember how the extreme dipole patterns during the summers just popped up around 2007. They continued through the record minimum in 2012 and then reversed for a while beginning in 2013. We need to be able to forecast those circulation changes far enough in advance to know whether the first ice free summer will be closer to 2035 or 2055. Perhaps the insights from this new study will help clarify the issue leading to  improved regional climate forecasts.

 

 

https://www.awi.de/en/about-us/service/press/press-release/mosaic-expedition-reaches-the-north-pole.html

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the North Pole now. As the article states, mush up through 88N and that's what's at the pole. Safe to say that the MYI and thicker ice didn't make it through the melt season unscathed. CAB and the thickest ice took the biggest hit this year. It will be interesting to see what CryoSat shows this fall.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2020 at 2:39 PM, bdgwx said:

Probably. Yes. There is an incredibly detailed and lengthy write up by William Reid and Christopher Burt regarding the matter. The investigation is still on-going, but unless something has changed it is my understanding that this will eventually be presented to the WMO for official review. 

The following is a lengthy 8-part series summarizing the state of the investigation through March 2020 from William Reid.

http://stormbruiser.com/chase/2013/08/29/death-valleys-134f-record-temperature-study-part-one/

You can review a considerably more consolidated summary on Christopher Burt's blog.

https://www.wunderground.com/blog/weatherhistorian/an-investigation-of-death-valleys-134f-world-temperature-record.html 

 

Count me unimpressed. Revisionist history. Maybe they will figure out a clever way to say 100 years from how stupid we were & our temperature data was way off....lol. I mean...come on. This is about setting the stage for new records.

Climate change is real but I'm sorry I'm bothered by this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, stadiumwave said:

 

Count me unimpressed. Revisionist history. Maybe they will figure out a clever way to say 100 years from how stupid we were & our temperature data was way off....lol. I mean...come on. This is about setting the stage for new records.

Climate change is real but I'm sorry I'm bothered by this. 

I’ve always thought there was pretty compelling evidence that the 134F wasn’t real.

Its a much tougher case to say for sure it was under 130F, but I don’t think questioning the 134F is that nefarious. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.