Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,275
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Chicago85
    Newest Member
    Chicago85
    Joined

Arctic Sea Ice Extent, Area, and Volume


ORH_wxman
 Share

Recommended Posts

The early forecasts based on the May conditions in the Arctic are forecasting an average September extent  in the 4.3 to 4.5 million sq km range.The 15 year era from 2007 to 2021 featured 10 out of 15 years finishing in the 4s. Only two years finished below 4.00 million sq km. With just three finishing slightly above 5.00 million sq km. 
 

September 2022 forecast 

 

https://www.arcus.org/files/sio/33269/cpom_ucl_gregory_et_al.pdf

This statistical model computes a forecast of pan-Arctic September sea ice extent . Monthly averaged May sea ice concentration and sea-surface temperature fields between 1979 and 2022 were used to create a climate network (based on the approach of Gregory et al 2020). This was then utilised in a Bayesian Linear Regression in order to forecast September extent. The model predicts a pan-Arctic extent of 4.5 million square kilometres. Sea ice concentration data were taken from NSIDC (Cavalieri et al., 1996; Maslanik and Stroeve,1999) and sea-surface temperature data were taken from ERA5 (Hersbach et al., 2019)
Brief explanation of Outlook method (using 300 words or less).
Monthly averaged May sea ice concentration (SIC) and sea-surface temperature (SST) data between 1979 and 2022 were used to create a May SIC-SST climate(complex) network. Individual SIC grid cells were first clustered into regions of spatio-temporal homogeneity (and similarly for SST) by using a community detection algorithm (see Gregory et al, 2020). Links between each of these network regions (covariance) were then passed into a Bayesian Linear Regression to derive an estimate on the prior distribution of the regression parameters. Subsequently a posterior distribution of the regression parameters was then derived in order to generate the forecast of September sea ice extent.

https://www.arcus.org/files/sio/33269/cpom.pdf

Executive summary" of your Outlook contribution (using 300 words or less) describe how and why your contribution was formulated. To the extent possible, use non-technical language.
We predict the September ice extent 2022 to be 4.3 (3.8-4.8) million km2. This is just above the trend line. In spite of the large sea ice extent in May 2022, sea ice thickness and melt pond cover are quite normal with respect to the last decade.
Brief explanation of Outlook method (using 300 words or less).
This is a statistical prediction based on the correlation between the ice area covered by melt- ponds in May and ice extent in September. The melt pond area is derived from a simulation with the sea ice model CICE in which we incorporated a physically based melt-pond model1. See our publication in Nature Climate Change http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v4/n5/full/nclimate2203.html for details2.


2021……4.92

2020……3.92

2019……4.32

2018…...4.71

2017……4.87

2016……4.72

2015…..4.63

2014…..5.28

2013…..5.35

2012…..3.60

2011……4.61

2010…..4.90

2009….5.36

2008….4.67

2007…..4.28

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update:

The accelerated melt ponding from the dipole has pushed 2022 more toward the higher melt years of the pack now instead of being near the high-retention years....but still not into the highest tier level like 2012.

NSIDC SIA on 6/29/22 stood at 7.12 million sq km. Below are how other years compared on the same date:

2021: +40k

2020: -50k

2019: -280k

2018: +490k

2017: +310k

2016: +20k

2015: +410k

2014: +400k

2013: +560k

2012: -510k

2011: -30k

2010: -310k

2009: +910k

2008: +550k

2007: -180k

 

I'm away the next few days but I'll have my final prediction for SIA minimum when I get back and the 6/30 and 7/1 data is in. Unless there are drastic changes over the next couple days, this year's prediction is probably going to be somewhere between a top 5 and top 10 melt year....I don't think it has quite enough juice to make a top 3 and the dipole recently has done enough damage to take a result like 2009/2013/2014/2018 out of the equation.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ORH_wxman said:

Update:

The accelerated melt ponding from the dipole has pushed 2022 more toward the higher melt years of the pack now instead of being near the high-retention years....but still not into the highest tier level like 2012.

NSIDC SIA on 6/29/22 stood at 7.12 million sq km. Below are how other years compared on the same date:

2021: +40k

2020: -50k

2019: -280k

2018: +490k

2017: +310k

2016: +20k

2015: +410k

2014: +400k

2013: +560k

2012: -510k

2011: -30k

2010: -310k

2009: +910k

2008: +550k

2007: -180k

 

I'm away the next few days but I'll have my final prediction for SIA minimum when I get back and the 6/30 and 7/1 data is in. Unless there are drastic changes over the next couple days, this year's prediction is probably going to be somewhere between a top 5 and top 10 melt year....I don't think it has quite enough juice to make a top 3 and the dipole recently has done enough damage to take a result like 2009/2013/2014/2018 out of the equation.

  This means that during the last nine days vs the average of the last 15 years, 2022 has had a pretty dramatic 380K downturn from +240K to -140K (just over 40K/day).

  Recap of current vs avg. of last 15 years as of:

6/15/22: +70K

6/16/22: +120K

6/20/22: +240K

6/22/22: +140K

6/29/22: -140K

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 

  This means that during the last nine days vs the average of the last 15 years, 2022 has had a pretty dramatic 380K downturn from +240K to -140K (just over 40K/day).

  Recap of current vs avg. of last 15 years as of:

6/15/22: +70K

6/16/22: +120K

6/20/22: +240K

6/22/22: +140K

6/29/22: -140K

Yeah the melt-ponding has been very extensive over the Beaufort/Chukchi/CAA portion of the ice....see below. The first image is the NSIDC (SSMI/S source) one and the second is AMSR2. Note how the concentration is much higher on the AMSR2 image because it's not fooled by melt-ponding nearly as much like SSMI/S is.

 

image.png.e3baf161156ad98a5263e6abc91349e7.png

 

image.png.81f7842fa1ccf3704c773692215587b0.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have discovered a negative feedback for Arctic sea ice loss that was unknown back in the historic 2007-2012 decline era. Most observers in 2012 thought that the record set that season would probably be eclipsed within several years. But the rapid rebound in 2013 and 2014 began to change that idea. A paper came out in 2013 that showed the much thinner ice would lead to slower rates of extent decline in the near future. A study below published last year builds in this understanding. So given these findings, it’s no surprise that the 2022 melt season so far looks pretty average for the last decade with nothing close to the rates of loss seen in 2012. 
 

Recent Slowdown in the Decline of Arctic Sea Ice Volume Under Increasingly Warm Atmospheric and Oceanic Conditions

First published: 25 August 2021


https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2021GL094780

4 Concluding Remarks

PIOMAS shows a significant decline of Arctic SIV over much of the period 1979–2020, in line with previous studies (e.g., Kwok & Rothrock, 2009; Lindsay & Schweiger, 2015). However, it also shows that the Arctic SIV decline is slowing down during 2007–2020, which is in line with CS2 observations of largely stabilized Arctic SIV over 2011–2020. The slowdown of Arctic SIV decline occurs despite increasingly warm SAT and UOT. The reason for the slowdown of the SIV decline is because of a change in ice mass balance such that the decrease in ice export at the open boundaries of the Arctic exceeds the decrease in net ice production inside the Arctic.

The magnitude of ice export depends on SIV or thickness and ice motion. The relatively strong decrease in ice export in 2007–2020 is attributed mainly to two factors: (a) Ice is thinning inside the Arctic Ocean and therefore less available for export. (b) The increase in ice speed is lower than the decrease in SIV or thickness and unable to drive more ice out of the Arctic (Zhang et al., 2012). Thus, the behavior of ice export at a time of SIV decline serves as a negative feedback to retard the decline.

The relatively weak decrease in net ice production in 2007–2020 is because of a strong increase in ice growth in fall and winter, which compensates for some of the ice loss in summer due to elevated ice melt associated with ice-albedo feedback. The strong increase in ice growth is attributed mainly to three factors: (a) Thinner and less compact ice has much higher growth rates than thicker ice under freezing conditions. (b) There is an increase in dynamic open water creation due to enhanced ice divergence and shear deformation as a thinner ice cover is more mobile and easier to deform. (c) There is a decrease in surface net longwave radiation in fall and winter because of an increase in surface temperature that promotes upward longwave radiation.

Open water creation is closely correlated with ice growth in much of the Arctic, particularly in the Canada Basin where the correlation is often above R = 0.8. By increasing the area of open water, the open water creation process helps to boost ice growth in fall and winter in 2007–2020. The behavior in ice growth at a time of SIV decline, aided by increased open water creation induced by increased ice motion and deformation, serves as a negative feedback to retard the decline, and therefore plays a role in the slowdown of the Arctic SIV decline during 2007–2020 under increasingly warm atmospheric and oceanic conditions.

Here, 2007 is selected as a starting year to examine the slowdown of the Arctic SIV in recent years. This is based on the consideration that 2007 saw a record low summer ice extent at that time, before a new record set in 2012. Nevertheless, the selection is somewhat arbitrary, and one can certainly select a different starting year for analysis. However, moderately shifting the starting year away from 2007 (e.g., 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2009) would not fundamentally change this model study's conclusions that a slowdown of the Arctic SIV decline has occurred in recent years.

Note that the model simulated Arctic SIV drops from 1979 to a local minimum in 1982 and then peaks in 1987 (Figure 2a). There is no significant trend in SIV during the period 1979–1987. While there is no significant trend in SIV either during the period 2007–2020, the later period differs from the early period 1979–1987 in two key aspects: (a) SIV in 2007–2020 is much lower than in 1979–1987, and (b) SAT and UOT are climbing increasingly higher in 2007–2020, while dropping in 1979–1987. The thinner ice cover during 2007–2020 leads the ice export and growth processes to play a role in serving as a negative feedback to slow down the SIV decline, which is not seen in 1979–1987. It is expected that such a role may become more prominent in the future. In other words, the slowdown of the Arctic SIV decline may continue for some time in the future unless a stronger Arctic warming than the present would occur. Whether it is true remains to be seen through enhanced observations and modeling.


24E2CBB0-79B1-4EB4-BF18-842006F9754D.png.f7958d372565eea0545a72d9ed8e4118.png

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 After June 28th became the first day in ~45 days back up to normal, the average Arctic temperature north of 80N went right back down and is now near the coldest for July 4th going back to 1958, which is just above freezing (see image below). Variance in summer is very low. The last time it was this cold on July 4th was in 2014. If the past is a good indication, it should level off near here. The coldest on any date in midsummer back to 1958 is only down to near -0.5 C. (The blue line is at 0C.) The warmest is +2.5 C, set in 1991, 94, and 95.

E529B099-CFE8-430F-981B-F047D91B9519.png.dd43c7cfffbd4b2ddf87f8c8fb66791c.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update:

On 7/1, the NSIDC SIA sootd at 7.07 million sq km. Here's how other years compared on the same date:

2021: -70k

2020: -510k

2019: -450k

2018: +320k

2017: +10k

2016: -240k

2015: +130k

2014: +260k

2013: +340k

2012: -650k

2011: -210k

2010: -380k

2009:+640k

2008: +220k

2007: -400k

 

For the minimum Sea ICe Area prediction, we can use prior years' melt out from July 1st onward to estimate how this tear will turn out because there hasn't been much of a trend in ice loss after 7/1....the big trend has been prior to 7/1. We have maybe seen a slight increase in melt from 7/1 since 2007, so I will weight those years more.

Below is a table of how 2022 would turn out if it followed previous years' melt out from 7/1 onward....

 

image.png.881f7655db1d54ec04000ae2a38e71a7.png

 

For example, if we used 1989's ice loss from here on out, we'd finish at 2.66 million sq km. 2016 had the highest meltout beyond 7/1 on record, and would produce a final SIA min of 2.55 million sq km if we followed that path in 2022. You'll note that the record year of 2012 is only like 4th or 5th most ice loss from 7/1 onward which means most of the damage was done prior to 7/1. We can pretty much rule out a new record this season based on this data. We'd need to obliterate the post 7/1 loss record set in 2016 to achieve it. A top 3 lowest min is probably out too.....likewise, a top 3 highest min in the post-2007 context is likely out as well....though another 2010 from here on out would achieve it. All other post-2007 years would fail, however.

 

All that said, the average ice loss from 7/1 onward in the post-2007 era is 4.09 million sq km which would produce a 2022 min of 2.98 million sq km (7.07 million minus 4.09 million). I'm going to stick very close to this number and go with a final minimum of 3 million sq km +/- 300k. I might hedge a little higher if the forecast was colder on the Beaufort/CAA side over the next week but they will continue to see mild weather so I will stick with 3 million.

 

Final extent prediction is a lot harder than area because extent relies a lot upon compaction/dispersion which is really hard to forecast. But that said, usually something in the 3 million sq km range for area will produce an extent min on NSIDC of around 4.5-4.8 million sq km. So I will go with 4.6 million +/- 500k....I have larger error bars on the extent. (side note: JAXA extent usually comes in around 200k lower than NSIDC extent after their algorithm update post-2013....so I will not be using Jaxa to verify this prediction. Only NSIDC daily extent)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

Update:

On 7/1, the NSIDC SIA sootd at 7.07 million sq km. Here's how other years compared on the same date:

2021: -70k

2020: -510k

2019: -450k

2018: +320k

2017: +10k

2016: -240k

2015: +130k

2014: +260k

2013: +340k

2012: -650k

2011: -210k

2010: -380k

2009:+640k

2008: +220k

2007: -400k

 

For the minimum Sea ICe Area prediction, we can use prior years' melt out from July 1st onward to estimate how this tear will turn out because there hasn't been much of a trend in ice loss after 7/1....the big trend has been prior to 7/1. We have maybe seen a slight increase in melt from 7/1 since 2007, so I will weight those years more.

Below is a table of how 2022 would turn out if it followed previous years' melt out from 7/1 onward....

 

image.png.881f7655db1d54ec04000ae2a38e71a7.png

 

For example, if we used 1989's ice loss from here on out, we'd finish at 2.66 million sq km. 2016 had the highest meltout beyond 7/1 on record, and would produce a final SIA min of 2.55 million sq km if we followed that path in 2022. You'll note that the record year of 2012 is only like 4th or 5th most ice loss from 7/1 onward which means most of the damage was done prior to 7/1. We can pretty much rule out a new record this season based on this data. We'd need to obliterate the post 7/1 loss record set in 2016 to achieve it. A top 3 lowest min is probably out too.....likewise, a top 3 highest min in the post-2007 context is likely out as well....though another 2010 from here on out would achieve it. All other post-2007 years would fail, however.

 

All that said, the average ice loss from 7/1 onward in the post-2007 era is 4.09 million sq km which would produce a 2022 min of 2.98 million sq km (7.07 million minus 4.09 million). I'm going to stick very close to this number and go with a final minimum of 3 million sq km +/- 300k. I might hedge a little higher if the forecast was colder on the Beaufort/CAA side over the next week but they will continue to see mild weather so I will stick with 3 million.

 

Final extent prediction is a lot harder than area because extent relies a lot upon compaction/dispersion which is really hard to forecast. But that said, usually something in the 3 million sq km range for area will produce an extent min on NSIDC of around 4.5-4.8 million sq km. So I will go with 4.6 million +/- 500k....I have larger error bars on the extent. (side note: JAXA extent usually comes in around 200k lower than NSIDC extent after their algorithm update post-2013....so I will not be using Jaxa to verify this prediction. Only NSIDC daily extent)

This 7/1/22 update translates to a nice recovery vs just two days prior of +210K vs the average of the last 15 years from -140K to +70K. That's quite a reversal after the 380K loss (+240K to -140K) vs this average over the nine day period preceding these last two days. Is this merely a temporary recovery or the start of a new trend? We'll see.
 

Recap of current vs avg. of last 15 years as of:

6/15/22: +70K

6/16/22: +120K

6/20/22: +240K

6/22/22: +140K

6/29/22: -140K

7/1/22:     +70K

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GaWx said:

This 7/1/22 update translates to a nice recovery vs just two days prior of +210K vs the average of the last 15 years from -140K to +70K. That's quite a reversal after the 380K loss (+240K to -140K) vs this average over the nine day period preceding these last two days. Is this merely a temporary recovery or the start of a new trend? We'll see.
 

Recap of current vs avg. of last 15 years as of:

6/15/22: +70K

6/16/22: +120K

6/20/22: +240K

6/22/22: +140K

6/29/22: -140K

7/1/22:     +70K

recovery to what? pre 2007 ice levels are not coming back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

recovery to what? pre 2007 ice levels are not coming back

 I'm referring to recovering vs the average of 2007-2021, which are the years that @ORH_wxman has been comparing to ITT since June 15th. I'm not referring at all to pre-2007. I agree that pre-2007 levels aren't coming back.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update: 

Now having data 10 days into July, we’ve seen 2022’s melt slow even further relative to the post-2007 field. On 7/10, NSIDC area stood at 6.35 million sq km. Here are where other years stood compared to 2022 on the same date:

2021: -480k

2020: -620k

2019: -820k

2018: -190k

2017: -20k

2016: -540k

2015: -90k

2014: +200k

2013: +20k

2012: -680k

2011: -280k

2010: -270k

2009: +230k

2008: +130k

2007: -350k

 

Theres currently a deep, cold low pressure over most of the CAB right now and that is not forecasted to move much over the next 5-6 days….so I’m skeptical we play much catch-up in the next week. There are signs that it may try and drift more to the ESS/Chukchi beyond that time frame, so perhaps the melt will pick up again if that happens. But we’re wasting what’s left of the prime sun angle up there in the meantime. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Update: 

Now having data 10 days into July, we’ve seen 2022’s melt slow even further relative to the post-2007 field. On 7/10, NSIDC area stood at 6.35 million sq km. Here are where other years stood compared to 2022 on the same date:

2021: -480k

2020: -620k

2019: -820k

2018: -190k

2017: -20k

2016: -540k

2015: -90k

2014: +200k

2013: +20k

2012: -680k

2011: -280k

2010: -270k

2009: +230k

2008: +130k

2007: -350k

 

Theres currently a deep, cold low pressure over most of the CAB right now and that is not forecasted to move much over the next 5-6 days….so I’m skeptical we play much catch-up in the next week. There are signs that it may try and drift more to the ESS/Chukchi beyond that time frame, so perhaps the melt will pick up again if that happens. But we’re wasting what’s left of the prime sun angle up there in the meantime. 

 So, this is a continuation of the sudden reversal toward recovery vs the 2007-21 average that started just after 6/29. It has actually reversed to the best position (+250K) vs that 15 year period since that period started being followed here on June 15th, barely bettering the +240K of 6/20/22. This is a 390K recovery vs that 15 year average over just the last 11 days:

 

Recap of current vs avg. of last 15 years as of:

6/15/22: +70K

6/16/22: +120K

6/20/22: +240K

6/22/22: +140K

6/29/22: -140K

7/1/22:     +70K

7/10/22:  +250K

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the rate of extent loss has slowed since 2007-2012, the multiyear ice levels continue to run near all-time lows. So the 2007-2012 era shifted the ice to a much thinner state. It’s  easier for the winds to push the mostly first year ice  around and cause big yearly extent variations like 2012-2013 and 2020-2021. 
 

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/with-thick-ice-gone-arctic-sea-ice-changes-more-slowly
The Arctic Ocean's sea ice blanket has already lost most of its old ice and two-thirds of its thickness. The younger ice is thinning more slowly and variably.

The Arctic Ocean's blanket of sea ice has changed since 1958 from predominantly older, thicker ice to mostly younger, thinner ice, according to new research published by NASA scientist Ron Kwok of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California. With so little thick, old ice left, the rate of decrease in ice thickness has slowed. New ice grows faster but is more vulnerable to weather and wind, so ice thickness is now more variable, rather than dominated by the effect of global warming.

 

Working from a combination of satellite records and declassified submarine sonar data, NASA scientists have constructed a 60-year record of Arctic sea ice thickness. Right now, Arctic sea ice is the youngest and thinnest its been since we started keeping records. More than 70 percent of Arctic sea ice is now seasonal, which means it grows in the winter and melts in the summer, but doesn't last from year to year. This seasonal ice melts faster and breaks up easier, making it much more susceptible to wind and atmospheric conditions.

Kwok's research, published today in the journal Environmental Research Letters, combined decades of declassified U.S. Navy submarine measurements with more recent data from four satellites to create the 60-year record of changes in Arctic sea ice thickness. He found that since 1958, Arctic ice cover has lost about two-thirds of its thickness, as averaged across the Arctic at the end of summer. Older ice has shrunk in area by almost 800,000 square miles (more than 2 million square kilometers). Today, 70 percent of the ice cover consists of ice that forms and melts within a single year, which scientists call seasonal ice.

Sea ice of any age is frozen ocean water. However, as sea ice survives through several melt seasons, its characteristics change. Multiyear ice is thicker, stronger and rougher than seasonal ice. It is much less salty than seasonal ice; Arctic explorers used it as drinking water. Satellite sensors observe enough of these differences that scientists can use spaceborne data to distinguish between the two types of ice.

Thinner, weaker seasonal ice is innately more vulnerable to weather than thick, multiyear ice. It can be pushed around more easily by wind, as happened in the summer of 2013. During that time, prevailing winds piled up the ice cover against coastlines, which made the ice cover thicker for months.

The ice's vulnerability may also be demonstrated by the increased variation in Arctic sea ice thickness and extent from year to year over the last decade. In the past, sea ice rarely melted in the Arctic Ocean. Each year, some multiyear ice flowed out of the ocean into the East Greenland Sea and melted there, and some ice grew thick enough to survive the melt season and become multiyear ice. As air temperatures in the polar regions have warmed in recent decades, however, large amounts of multiyear ice now melt within the Arctic Ocean itself. Far less seasonal ice now thickens enough over the winter to survive the summer. As a result, not only is there less ice overall, but the proportions of multiyear ice to seasonal ice have also changed in favor of the young ice.

Seasonal ice now grows to a depth of about six feet (two meters) in winter, and most of it melts in summer. That basic pattern is likely to continue, Kwok said. "The thickness and coverage in the Arctic are now dominated by the growth, melting and deformation of seasonal ice."

The increase in seasonal ice also means record-breaking changes in ice cover such as those of the 1990s and 2000s are likely to be less common, Kwok noted. In fact, there has not been a new record sea ice minimum since 2012, despite years of warm weather in the Arctic. "We've lost so much of the thick ice that changes in thickness are going to be slower due to the different behavior of this ice type," Kwok said.

Kwok used data from U.S. Navy submarine sonars from 1958 to 2000; satellite altimeters on NASA's ICESat and the European CryoSat-2, which span from 2003 to 2018; and scatterometer measurements from NASA's QuikSCAT and the European ASCAT from 1999 to 2017.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this tends to not be everyone's favorite but this is just abysmal. Mind you we are only about mid July right now too. Still have a solid month of decent melt that can occur. GFS has been trying to push the idea of another ridging episode in the last week or so of July too which may just be the final push needed to melt out Beaufort, ESS, and parts of CAA. Somehow the Atlantic front is still sustaining itself even though it was the weakest portion of the ice starting into the melt season.

arcticictn_nowcast_anim30d (2).gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it possible that with extent numbers still relatively higher than the descending average and choppy ice that we see a quicker cooldown scenario going into fall allowing for a potential of thicker ice as we move into the winter? I assume this would not allow for heat to escape in anyway shape or form from the ocean though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update:

As of 7/12, NSIDC area was 6.26 million sq km. The cold cyclone over the CAB right now continues to slow the area loss. 
 

Here are where other years compared on the same date:

2021: -730k

2020: -750k

2019: -930k

2018: -190k

2017: -70k

2016: -620k

2015: -210k

2014: +30k

2013: -120k

2012: -940k

2011: -460k

2010: -330k

2009: +230k

2008: +40k

2007: -490k

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

Update:

As of 7/12, NSIDC area was 6.26 million sq km. The cold cyclone over the CAB right now continues to slow the area loss. 
 

Here are where other years compared on the same date:

2021: -730k

2020: -750k

2019: -930k

2018: -190k

2017: -70k

2016: -620k

2015: -210k

2014: +30k

2013: -120k

2012: -940k

2011: -460k

2010: -330k

2009: +230k

2008: +40k

2007: -490k

 Based on these numbers, the last two days have continued the significant increase based on the date of 2022 area vs the 2007-21 average area that started ~6/29. As of 7/12, the 2022 area was +370K vs the 2007-21 average. This is a 510K increase vs the 2007-21 average just since June 29th (see table below).
 
 Based on the graph at the bottom of this post of the minimum area for 2007-21, I roughly estimate an average minimum area for 2007-21 of 3.9 msk. The range in msk is roughly 2.9 to 4.6. 
 

 If the +370K vs 2007-21 average were to still be the case when the 2022 minimum is hit, that would mean a 2022 minimum area of ~4.3 msk. If that were to occur, that would mean a minimum higher than all years 2007-21 except for 2009, 2013, and 2014. However, having a +370K vs 2007-21 at the minimum of the year is very optimistic, especially considering the near record low multiyear ice levels as of last September that @bluewaveposted about yesterday. So, average ice thickness was then at near record lows. Thus, I think that the chance of this year's minimum being significantly lower than 4.3 msk is high. 
 

 But it does appear that the chance of it being at or above the 2007-21 average minimum of 3.9 msk has increased quite a bit vs how it looked on June 29th. Along with this, it appears that the chance for a September SIE at or above 4.8 msk has increased. That compares to the rough average Sept. extent of 4.7 msk for 2007-21 based on the Sept. SIE graph that @bluewaveshowed Monday.

 

Recap of current area vs avg. of last 15 years as of:

6/15/22: +70K

6/16/22: +120K

6/20/22: +240K

6/22/22: +140K

6/29/22: -140K

7/1/22:     +70K

7/10/22:  +250K

7/12/22:  +370K

 

Graph of Arctic annual ice area minimum since late 1970s from https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/5002

E49F77E2-2510-4AC1-9F8B-6F100FBC2FA0.thumb.jpeg.c63cb11cdfbb1e20ab7cc99616588277.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GaWx said:

 Based on these numbers, the last two days have continued the significant increase based on the date of 2022 area vs the 2007-21 average area that started ~6/29. As of 7/12, the 2022 area was +370K vs the 2007-21 average. This is a 510K increase vs the 2007-21 average just since June 29th (see table below).
 
 Based on the graph at the bottom of this post of the minimum area for 2007-21, I roughly estimate an average minimum area for 2007-21 of 3.9 msk. The range in msk is roughly 2.9 to 4.6. 
 

 If the +370K vs 2007-21 average were to still be the case when the 2022 minimum is hit, that would mean a 2022 minimum area of ~4.3 msk. If that were to occur, that would mean a minimum higher than all years 2007-21 except for 2009, 2013, and 2014. However, having a +370K vs 2007-21 at the minimum of the year is very optimistic, especially considering the near record low multiyear ice levels as of last September that @bluewaveposted about yesterday. So, average ice thickness was then at near record lows. Thus, I think that the chance of this year's minimum being significantly lower than 4.3 msk is high. 
 

 But it does appear that the chance of it being at or above the 2007-21 average minimum of 3.9 msk has increased quite a bit vs how it looked on June 29th. Along with this, it appears that the chance for a September SIE at or above 4.8 msk has increased. That compares to the rough average Sept. extent of 4.7 msk for 2007-21 based on the Sept. SIE graph that @bluewaveshowed Monday.

 

Recap of current area vs avg. of last 15 years as of:

6/15/22: +70K

6/16/22: +120K

6/20/22: +240K

6/22/22: +140K

6/29/22: -140K

7/1/22:     +70K

7/10/22:  +250K

7/12/22:  +370K

 

Graph of Arctic annual ice area minimum since late 1970s from https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/5002

E49F77E2-2510-4AC1-9F8B-6F100FBC2FA0.thumb.jpeg.c63cb11cdfbb1e20ab7cc99616588277.jpeg

Bluewave’s numbers were extent while I’m posting area. Area is a little different. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ORH_wxman said:

Bluewave’s numbers were extent while I’m posting area. Area is a little different. 

 Yeah, I realized that when I posted though it certainly can get confusing. 

 I said: "But it does appear that the chance of it being at or above the 2007-21 average minimum of 3.9 msk has increased quite a bit vs how it looked on June 29th. Along with this, it appears that the chance for a September SIE at or above 4.8 msk has increased. That compares to the rough average Sept. extent of 4.7 msk for 2007-21 based on the Sept. SIE graph that @bluewaveshowed Monday."

 So, I first referred to an increased chance for the minimum area to be 3.9+ msk (at or above the 2007-21 average minimum area). Then I referred to an increased chance for the September extent (SIE) to be 4.8+ msk (near or above the 2007-21 average minimum extent).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 Yeah, I realized that when I posted though it certainly can get confusing. 

 I said: "But it does appear that the chance of it being at or above the 2007-21 average minimum of 3.9 msk has increased quite a bit vs how it looked on June 29th. Along with this, it appears that the chance for a September SIE at or above 4.8 msk has increased. That compares to the rough average Sept. extent of 4.7 msk for 2007-21 based on the Sept. SIE graph that @bluewaveshowed Monday."

 So, I first referred to an increased chance for the minimum area to be 3.9+ msk (at or above the 2007-21 average minimum area). Then I referred to an increased chance for the September extent (SIE) to be 4.8+ msk (near or above the 2007-21 average minimum extent).

Where are you getting the area numbers from? There hasn’t been a minimum above 4 million sqkm since 2006. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

Where are you getting the area numbers from? There hasn’t been a minimum above 4 million sqkm since 2006. 

 Hmmm, I must have done something wrong considering how knowledgeable and experienced you are on this, but I can't figure it out yet after looking at it again carefully. Am I doing an apples to oranges comparison? I thought you were looking at "Arctic sea ice area" in sq km. Is the source I used not looking at the same thing? Does it use a different method to measure area? Fwiw, its graph (see below) shows 2009, 2010, 2013 (highest since 2007 with 4.6 msk), 2014, and 2021 all above 4 million square km. It even says this about 2021: "In 2021, the Arctic minimum sea ice covered an area of 4.13 million square kilometers (1.6 million square miles)."

 Would you please provide a link to your source for annual Arctic minimum area as well as how current sea ice area compares to prior years for the same date?

 What do you have for 2012's minimum? This has ~2.9 million sq km:

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/5002
 

B4BCC016-CA1A-43DC-AA8F-DE35546F335B.thumb.jpeg.29fe63f540d9c27835f7a93c95898295.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, GaWx said:

 Hmmm, I must have done something wrong considering how knowledgeable and experienced you are on this, but I can't figure it out yet after looking at it again carefully. Am I doing an apples to oranges comparison? I thought you were looking at "Arctic sea ice area" in sq km. Is the source I used not looking at the same thing? Does it use a different method to measure area? Fwiw, its graph (see below) shows 2009, 2010, 2013 (highest since 2007 with 4.6 msk), 2014, and 2021 all above 4 million square km. It even says this about 2021: "In 2021, the Arctic minimum sea ice covered an area of 4.13 million square kilometers (1.6 million square miles)."

 Would you please provide a link to your source for annual Arctic minimum area as well as how current sea ice area compares to prior years for the same date?

 What do you have for 2012's minimum? This has ~2.9 million sq km:

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/5002
 

B4BCC016-CA1A-43DC-AA8F-DE35546F335B.thumb.jpeg.29fe63f540d9c27835f7a93c95898295.jpeg

I’m not sure how they are getting that data. Only issue I see is that graph is from NASA and not NSIDC….so maybe they are using a different algorithm. 
 

Here’s a dataset of NSIDC extent and area but it stops in late 2021….

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxhcmN0aXNjaGVwaW5ndWlufGd4OjU1OGIwZWI0NGI2ZDI5YTM


 

I’ve been using the below site for in-season area updates in 2022

https://cryospherecomputing.com
 

NSIDC has the area available somewhere on their site but it’s hard to find. The top of the first link’s data source explanation might be able to get us there but I haven’t taken the time to try and build my own spreadsheet yet based off it. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

I’m not sure how they are getting that data. Only issue I see is that graph is from NASA and not NSIDC….so maybe they are using a different algorithm. 
 

Here’s a dataset of NSIDC extent and area but it stops in late 2021….

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxhcmN0aXNjaGVwaW5ndWlufGd4OjU1OGIwZWI0NGI2ZDI5YTM


 

I’ve been using the below site for in-season area updates in 2022

https://cryospherecomputing.com
 

NSIDC has the area available somewhere on their site but it’s hard to find. The top of the first link’s data source explanation might be able to get us there but I haven’t taken the time to try and build my own spreadsheet yet based off it. 

 

Thanks for those links. From your 2nd link, I found this interesting graph of Arctic 2m temps N of 80N by decade:

1. Temps warm as one would expect due to GW from the 1960s (dark blue) to the 2010s (red) September-April with the winter having the most intense warming, especially JF.

2. I estimate JF to be a whopping 7C (13F) warmer in the 2010s vs the 1960s (-24C vs -31C).

3. It appears to still be warming steadily Sept-April. In JF, the 2010s are 3C (5F) warmer than the 2000s (-24C vs -27C).

4. The summers, which have much smaller variance (so one will need to look carefully to see this), have oddly enough done the reverse with the 1960s the warmest and the 2010s the coldest for late May through mid-August with the 2010s ~1 F colder than the 1960s. Does less sea ice mean slightly colder in summer? If so, why? 

 

Edit: I found this: "When ice melts or water evaporates, energy must be taken from the environment in order for the ice or liquid to move to a less ordered state. Energy is needed to weaken the individual hydrogen bonds between H20 molecules. When water (in any of the three phrases) moves from a higher to a lower ordered state, the air surrounding the H20 will have heat subtracted from it. The three processes that subtract heat from the surrounding air are evaporation, melting and sublimation (solid to gas)."

https://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints/19/

So, is it because the summers have had increased amounts of melting which then cools the surrounding air more than if there were less melting??

 

5. 2022 has been relatively cold since late April on most days after a relatively very warm winter as has been noted ITT. The summer of 2022 has averaged nearly 1C/2F colder than the 1960s. Perhaps that has been helping to slow the melt?

 

TempsNof80NByDecade.png.d55271d8cb07456abba2e9d1f8656184.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 

Thanks for those links. From your 2nd link, I found this interesting graph of Arctic 2m temps N of 80N by decade:

1. Temps warm as one would expect due to GW from the 1960s (dark blue) to the 2010s (red) September-April with the winter having the most intense warming, especially JF.

2. I estimate JF to be a whopping 7C (13F) warmer in the 2010s vs the 1960s (-24C vs -31C).

3. It appears to still be warming steadily Sept-April. In JF, the 2010s are 3C (5F) warmer than the 2000s (-24C vs -27C).

4. The summers, which have much smaller variance (so one will need to look carefully to see this), have oddly enough done the reverse with the 1960s the warmest and the 2010s the coldest for late May through mid-August with the 2010s ~1 F colder than the 1960s. Does less sea ice mean slightly colder in summer? If so, why? 

5. 2022 has been relatively cold since late April on most days after a relatively very warm winter as has been noted ITT. The summer of 2022 has averaged nearly 1C/2F colder than the 1960s. Perhaps that has been helping to slow the melt?

TempsNof80NByDecade.png.d55271d8cb07456abba2e9d1f8656184.png

 

 

Physics

Salt water in the arctic freezes at -1.8 Celsius. When the water is frozen the temperature warms up to near 0 Celsius. The water part freezes and the salt is pushed below the surface. If there is snowpack on the ice sheet this will also increase the temperature VS. there being open water at high latitudes. I would hypothesize if you use a statistical analysis of open water / snowpack VS. DMI 80 N temps you will find a correlation.

Some of the climate models do have a negative feedback showing Northern Greenland and areas of high latitude getting colder with climate change.

It gets even more confusing when you realize it takes less energy on a physical molecular level to freeze warm water than cold water.

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00735 

I am not even going to start with water having the same density at -38 C (supercooled) and 97 C at the same atmospheric conditions.

Screenshot-2022-07-14-124622.png

Water is incredible.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Weatherdude88 said:

Some of the climate models do have a negative feedback showing Northern Greenland and areas of high latitude getting colder with climate change.
 

Thank you for the detailed reply. I'll need to think through that some more to make sure I understand it.

 Regarding the line that I quoted from you, would that negative feedback (colder higher latitudes with climate change) eventually result in cooling the lower latitudes back down or at least slow or even stop the warming there? In other words, is GW self-limiting/does it have a ceiling because of this? If so, where is that ceiling?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, GaWx said:

Thank you for the detailed reply. I'll need to think through that some more to make sure I understand it.

 Regarding the line that I quoted from you, would that negative feedback (colder higher latitudes with climate change) eventually result in cooling the lower latitudes back down or at least slow or even stop the warming there? In other words, is GW self-limiting/does it have a ceiling because of this? If so, where is that ceiling?

 

The climate models predict a local cooling effect near Northern Greenland and the Central Arctic during summers later in the century. This may be related to a weakening AMOC. But the Northern Hemisphere land masses continue to warm. The provided link below has a very interesting recorded presentation on the topic. So the Arctic may still have some summer sea ice north of Greenland and the Canadian Archipelago later this century. 

https://ams.confex.com/ams/94Annual/webprogram/Paper235210.html

https://ams.confex.com/ams/94Annual/videogateway.cgi/id/25848?recordingid=25848

Tuesday, 4 February 2014: 11:30 AM
Room C101 (The Georgia World Congress Center )
Stephen J. Vavrus, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; and J. Francis
 
Climate models typically simulate enhanced heating and pronounced drying during summer over mid-latitude continental regions of the Northern Hemisphere under greenhouse forcing. Various plausible explanations have been offered for this response, including strengthened land-sea temperature contrasts, favorable SST patterns, and locally depleted soil moisture. Changes in the large-scale atmospheric circulation have also been proposed, but these have generally been regarded as secondary mechanisms originating in low and middle latitudes. 

Here we present an alternative perspective, by proposing that a major reason for the mid-latitude continental response is an atmospheric circulation change that is regulated by high-latitude processes. Based on an analysis of the RCP8.5 scenario in the Community Climate System Model (CCSM4), we find that the amplified heating ( > 7 K) and drying ( > 20%) of the U. S. Great Plains during summer stems from a shift toward locally weakened westerlies aloft and somewhat stronger northerlies. This circulation change is directly tied to enhanced ridging to the north of the region that is part of a nearly hemispheric-wide band of ridging in high latitudes extending from Eurasia across North America. This band of maximum geopotential height increases aloft is well correlated with the location of greatest summertime snow cover loss in northern Siberia and North America. The circulation pattern appears to be further modulated in high latitudes by residual sea ice coverage around the Canadian Archipelago and by a weakening of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation. Both of these changes promote troughing locally around northeastern Canada and thus a southward displacement over North America of the high-latitude ridging band to a location where its outflow favors drier and hotter conditions in the continental interior. The resulting circulation shift affects not only the mean summertime climate but also sets up very suitable synoptic conditions for extreme weather events in the form of droughts and heat waves.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...