The good news is that the 2013 trend line is showing an uptick. The difference with 2012 and 2011 is now 751 km3 and 722 km3 respectively, which is much better than the 1000 km3 at the start of the year. Given the fact that I take PIOMAS very seriously since the previous melting season, I hope that the trend line gets closer to the ones just above it before the melting season starts.
Here is Wipneus'
version with the calculated "expected" 2013 values (dotted
lines), based on the same date values of 1979-2011 and an exponential
A caveat from Wipneus: "Note that the statistical error bars are quite large."
Last month I wrote:
I think the trend line on the PIOMAS anomaly graph has about reached its peak - on the condition that it will have the same shape as the 2010 and 2011 anomalies - just below the 1 STD zone.
It looks like it has and unlike the two previous years, it didn't quite make the 1 STD:
Remember, I crudely calculate the ice pack's average thickness by dividing PIOMAS (PI) volume numbers with Cryosphere Today (CT) sea ice area numbers. As volume has gone up in January compared to the two previous years, I guess that the larger difference in average thickness must be due to sea ice area numbers. In other words, the volume is spread out over more area. I don't know if that negates the uptick of the volume trend line. Which ice pack is better armed for the melting season, the 1 million square km ice pack of 2 metres thick or the 2 million square km ice pack of 1 metres thick?
Average thickness for January 31st (in m):
- 2005: 1.70
- 2006: 1.69
- 2007: 1.53
- 2008: 1.55
- 2009: 1.58
- 2010: 1.51
- 2011: 1.41
- 2012: 1.41
- 2013: 1.31
However, the thickness graph from the Polar Science Center isn't showing the bigger difference between this year and 2011/2012:
I know it is important that we respect our legends, but somebody at the PSC better get that thing out of the way before the next update is due!