« New and improved NWP animation | Main | NSIDC Arctic sea ice news June 2010 »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Andrew Xnn

Appreciate the horse race analogy, but I'm tring to understand the relative gains and losses of the anamoly. Has the Arctic oscillation consistently correlated very well or might it be just a coincidence this time? Looks like last year the Arctic basin took a series of saw teeth steps towards a bottom that occured in mid september.

When we talk about an ice free Arctic, I think what we are really talking about is a negative anomaly of about 3 Mkm^2 in the main basis. Right now we are at about - 0.5 Mkm^2, which is about 0.5 Mkm^2 ahead of last year. So, this year we might see - 1.0 Mkm^2 by Sept if the saw tooth step pattern repeats itself.

Off topic; I'm a big fan of the Tour de France. Looked like over million fans are out watching it in the Netherlands/Belgium. Wow!

Neven

Andrew, I think I'll need a few more weeks (probably more) before I have a bit of a grasp of the interplay of all the factors that influence the Arctic sea ice melt and growth. Maybe someone else can give a better answer, and you can also read John Cook's piece I've linked to under TIPS.

I believe there is a correlation between the Arctic Oscillation and the Beaufort Gyre, according to this paper I have just read and have to read 2-3 more times before understanding it. And in the past decades it has become an increasingly regular feature during Arctic summer for the Beaufort Gyre to stall or reverse.

It is the only reason I can think of at the moment for the slower melt rate, because it coincides so well. We'll see if the AO becomes more positive and the Beaufort Gyre starts turning clockwise again whether the melt rate goes up again. If it doesn't the ice in the Arctic Basin must be really thick like some people maintain.

But for now, I'll stand by what I've said from the start: If weather conditions approach that of 2007 there will be a new record low sea ice extent. I'm not sure if 2007 saw the weather conditions we are seeing now, and if it did, for how long. I don't think it did, as I recall it the 2007 summer was dominated by clear skies and a constant southern wind.

Evilreductionist.blogspot.com

Neven,

The fact that 2010 is still two days ahead of 2007 after the amazing run of 119688, 112968,143282, 162031, 201875 and 130937 is to me an indication that 2010 still has a pretty good chance of beating 2007 to the record. While there are certainly some big days to come for 2007 and some nice runs, all that 2010 needs to do is to average 75,000 a day for the next 60 days and that is the record. This is obviously still a tough thing to do, but it is well within reach.

Neven

I agree, Evilreductionist, but I have to spice up these updates, you know? :-)

Lord Soth

2007 will be taking a break with no century breaks for five days. This may allow 2010 to maintain or widen its lead, depending on the weather.

Evilreductionist.blogspot.com

A century break is the provisional figure for today: 111,563. Based on recent revisions, this is unlikely to remain a century break, however.

Kevin McKinney

You scooped me, "evil!"

I'll go with the theory that 2010 is "due" a small or even downward revision this time, and predict that this century break will hold up.

No reason whatsoever--hey, it's a horserace, metaphorically at least, and it's more fun if you cheer sometimes.

BTW, I read on CBC.ca today a denialist comment that "there is no sign of the Arctic sea ice doing anything unusual so far." (As best as I can recall to paraphrase.)

Yeah, right. . . . needless to say, I demurred forcefully. But I thought the idea might amuse. . .

Artful Dodger

ER said: "2010 needs to average 75,000 a day for the next 60 days and that is the record"

The 30-day running avg "delta-extent" is currently -77,732 km^2 / day. The 60 Day running average is -70,097 so we do indeed have a horse race.

Unfortunately the Jockey fell off the horse back in the '70s.

Evilreductionist.blogspot.com

In fact, I miscalculated - 70,000 per day for 60 days would be sufficient. However, the 60 days takes us to early September now, and those early September days will struggle to get close to 70,000. But the average overall is the key, of course.

Neven

11,563 isn't bad, but let's wait and see what the revision does to it.

Account Deleted

There are some hot temps in the east Sib and Laptev sea regions - close to 30 degrees C according to the Uni Cologne site http://www.meteo.uni-koeln.de/meteo.php?show=En_We_We

Also PIPS is suggesting ice export into the Greenland and Ckuckchi seas - so we should see 2010 picking up again

Lord Soth

I have been looking at the Canadian Southern arctic archepello and there is a lot of ice fog, which forms this time of year. That ice fog is masking the open water between the ice pans. I wonder if this is artificially bringing down the numbers.

andrewt

The port of Tiksi apparently recorded a max of 27 today - as Uni Cologne suggested - should be some surface melt around the New Siberian islands.

Andrew Borst

SST arctic anomalies. Select anomaly and loop thru the last few weeks. +5C anomalies show up and grow (like 2007 from what I have read).

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/satellite/index.uk.php

fredt34

There was such a big rebounce in 2007, too, see http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/sea.ice.anomaly.timeseries.jpg ... but it was much later in the season.

Lord Soth

After revision we got a 99.5K melt for July 5. Since IJIS does two day averaging also, it was technically a century melt, before it got averaged down.

Gas Glo

The 7 day average is now just 65937, lower than 2003 and 2005 onwards.

There are 70 days left to 15 September 2010. Assuming a linear reduction in extent as seems to consistently happen per my graphs then the reduction in extent will be
.5 * 70 * 65937 = 2,307,795 km^2

Current extent 8,446,094 - 2,307,795 = 6,138,299 km^2

When are you alarmists going to realise the ice is recovering?

Err, no, I don't really think that either. I do think this area of a triangle makes more sense for suggesting rate needed to reach minimum extent x rather than the above constant rate of extent reduction. Anyway, that was just the lead up to asking:

What do you think the peak rate of extent reduction will be and when will it occur?

Neven

Hmmm, Uni Bremen's daily AMSR-E sea ice maps page seems to be down.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment