« PIOMAS October 2016 | Main | PIOMAS November 2016 »

Comments

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

Davidappell

This is all based on the PIOMAS model....

So how good is this model?

What data verifies the PIOMAS model?

If PIOMAS says the monthly Arctic sea ice volume is W.XYZ Kkm3, what is the 95% confidence interval for this number? (Or 2-sigma?)

I think it's easy to forget that these numbers aren't real measurements, but come from a model.

Neven

David, here's a good paper on that: Comparison of Arctic Sea Ice Thickness from Satellites, Aircraft, and PIOMAS Data (PDF)

Or check out this poster by Zachary Labe: Making the most of Arctic sea ice observations (PDF)

Davidappell

Thanks Neven. I'll read.

John Christensen

Thank you very much for sharing Neven!

When reviewing the whole period, the intense volume breakdown starting in spring 1981 and lasting until summer of 1982 strikes me as exceptional given the different climate at the time.

Are you, or others, aware of a paper that has looked into this significant volume loss?

Aaron Lewis

We average weather for 30 years to get climate. Over a 30 year period, the difference between PIOMAS and Satellites does not matter.

Does anyone here doubt that in 20 years, the amount of residual sea ice will not matter?

Which is not to say that there will not be a lot of ice around the Arctic from Greenland glaciers. Look at the winds hitting Greenland from the (open) Greenland sea over the last 3 months. Those winds have carried more heat than the direct solar radiation absorbed by the ice.

Susan Anderson

Yet another post-tropical cyclone (Nicole) headed north between Greenland and Northern Europe (& Iceland, of course). (This appears to be the new normal.) Temperatures are high, and ice recovery is slowed. Looks like recordbreaking low extent in a day or so.

wayne

All of these commenters were spot on:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YcgtH15tjw

Nice to know them a little more, and they need to be listened to a whole lot. Loved the Goodbye waves shot :), sea ice is so artistic, from space to closer up always fascinating...

wayne

Today's JAXA milestone event, less sea ice extent today than same day 2012 along with a much slower accretion rate, strongly suggests a lamentable Arctic sea ice condition:

http://eh2r.blogspot.ca/2016/10/echoes-of-2016-sea-ice-minima-are.html

Claiming otherwise would stretch logic to an unrecognizable level.

Bill Fothergill

Wayne, much the same thing is playing out with the NSIDC daily values. The 2012 and 2016 numbers for Oct 16th were virtually identical, but the following day (17th) sees 2016 showing about 200k less extent than that on the same day in 2012.

The 5-day Charctic numbers still show 2012 "ahead", but, unless there is a monumental uptick, that will change with tomorrow's figures.

Other sources, such as Bremen, DMI and ROOS, are all showing roughly the same. (Albeit with some showing 2016 just below, and others with 2016 just above, the 2012 equivalent value.)

The annual averages for JAXA and NSIDC (both extent and area) are also showing 2016 in the basement.

I wonder how the "Arctic sea ice decline is showing a pause" debate is going over at the meeting place of the Flat-Earth Society?

wayne

Bill,

"Arctic sea ice decline is showing a pause"

It may look like so, at times when no deeper explanation is sought, but overall these terms of endeavor often used by contrarian fake skeptics, are laughable. But it ain't so funny because they have huge number of followers. Patience in explaining everything well, may gain the day...

viddaloo
The annual averages for JAXA and NSIDC (both extent and area) are also showing 2016 in the basement.

Our anthropocentric disintegration of Arctic sea ice carries on into winter:

Click here to see the full–size graph & read the whole blog post.

viddaloo

«The latest greater daily drop was October 20th 2007 with 4567 km² per day»

This is the most extreme slope in 9 years, Bill Fothergill. So rather than "in the basement", I would say 2016 just jumped out the window.

AnotherJourneybyTrain

Wayne, isn't the patient explanation simply that of 'the measurement problem'. Some of the so called flat earth society are simply holding statistics to account, are they not?

This is natural phenomena in my book as whilst a system may always win entropy still applies to man-made system !.... i.e. there is always room for (constant) improvement and such is recognised by the need/existence of a stated error value.

* Such are the ways of method, IMHO!

wayne

Hi Another,

"isn't the patient explanation simply that of 'the measurement problem'.

The measurement problem is a serious issue about how to express reality correctly. The finer scientific definition constraints designed for experts do not help. I am a proponent of the simplest expression possible, sea ice or no sea ice. A % value with respect to 100% ocean surface. There are too many definitions, easy fodder for the confusion experts. There is indeed a great need for improvement, but I don't see it coming , we are such a small group barely a candle in a storm of other issues, but yes man made entropy is messy.....

Hurricane Nicole only bothered Bermuda and eventually Southeast Greenland. Onwards to nearing Greenland the Hurricane turned from tropical storm to post tropical storm. PTS Nicole did something interesting to the Jet stream, it bent and moved it Northwards. Something I have seen with PTS Pauline of last year. EX hurricane systems do something different than ordinary cyclones when entering the polar regions...

http://eh2r.blogspot.ca/2016/10/ex-hurricane-nicole-appears-to-have.html

Rob Dekker

Do I see this right ? IJIS reports that 2016 at this time has overtaken 2012 and is thus currently again (since July) the lowest on record for the day :
https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent

Rob Dekker

It really does not want to freeze up there in the high North, does it ?

viddaloo

That's right, Rob. 2016 is now lowest ever on satellite record for the date, and of course also lowest ever for Year–To–Date average extent, as has been the case for the first 294 days of the year 2016.


Big: http://i.imgur.com/xgEDReR.png

However, since about Wednesday, even 2012 has been under 10 million km² for the average. But as no longer lower than 2016 for daily extent, the gap down to 2016 will just keep getting bigger.

With that change I'll go out on a limb and call 2016 Arctic sea ice extent as lowest ever on satellite record. There's just no way 2012 can catch up, at this point.

wayne

With reference to my previous statement:

"PTS Pauline of last year" sorry was PTS Patricia...

AnotherJourneybyTrain

Rob,

The Antarctic maximums are relatively unstable.

The Arctic minimums seems to be heading for relative instability: can any conclusions be drawn from such a simplistic point of view?

AnotherJourneybyTrain

Exposure of surface area is the only common link, is it not?????

viddaloo

2016 Arctic sea ice making a truly dramatic October plunge into record low territory for annual average extent:


Click here to see the full–size graph & read the whole blog post.

Jeff Kuper

Hey Rob, you said: "It really does not want to freeze up there in the high North, does it ?"

Well, yes, it's been an interesting year but it is likely that in the next 10 days or so we will see 200+ km2 per day of ice growth as we go from 6 to 8 million km2 of extent.

Of course, the result of this "slow" refreeze will be that viddaloo's graph will continue the plunge and won't start flattening out for nearly 4 more weeks.

Anyway, I'll go back to lurking but I do appreciate all the commenters here as you have taught me a lot.

Rob Dekker

Jeff, thanks for your comment.
However, I have not seen ANY year freezing 200+ km2 per day between Oct 21 and Oct 31. The largest freeze over that period was 2007, which went from 6.55 to 8.12 (a 1.57 increase).
What makes you think that 2016 is going to go much faster than that ?

viddaloo
Of course, the result of this "slow" refreeze will be that viddaloo's graph will continue the plunge and won't start flattening out for nearly 4 more weeks.

Jeff, that graph was today featured in the Arctic News blog.... Does that mean I'm now officially 'alarmist'? :)

Clivepmitchell

<sarcasm>
All is well. The Arctic extent loss is balanced by the Antarctic gain.
</sarcasm>

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/

Antarctic extent currently second lowest.

John Christensen

viddaloo,

I think Jeff is merely pointing out that your plunge only is partly caused by freeze of these next few weeks.
Since the refreeze in 2015 was relatively strong for this period, then the plunge for the annual average would deepen further if 2016 freeze would be at the average level.

For the same reason we can also assume that the annual average extent will stop dropping or have very limited decrease from around Nov. 15, where the 2015 SIE increase went into a slow increase period.

Jeff Kuper

Hey Rob,

The reason that I thought we would see some 200+k freeze days was that eyeballing JAXA it appears that we just passed 6M km2 and we are likely to follow the same slope as 2012, 2011 and 2007 which means we are going to be hitting 8M km2 in early November. So roughly 2M km2 in roughly 10 days gives me the impression that there will be some 200_ kms2 days in the near future.

The other thing I would say is that in my limited time trying to understand arctic sea ice, I have observed some reversion to the mean over time. A decent example of that was that September saw a quick refreeze and the crowd over at WUWT went crazy. While it wasn't public I did expect to see a slow down after that and lo and behold we saw a slow down in the refreezing (and silence from WUWT). Since we slowed down quite a bit for a time there I would expect us to have a pretty decent spurt in the next few weeks.

Anyway, I'm an amateur and a relative newbie and so I readily admit I could be wrong but that is what I see upcoming.

Oh, and viddaloo, I'm definitely on the side that believes in science and so I tend not to put my fellow accepters in the alarmist camp. Not a particular fan of using the yearly average ice extent graphs but it is a good data point. I just think emphasizing it isn't my cup of tea. But thanks for all your input here as well.

AnotherJourneybyTrain

For what it is worth,.. I am also looking forward to seeing some 200k+ days AS IF THEY DON'T HAPPEN I SEE THE WORLD TURNING ON A DIME = YAY ME!

Good call Jeff!

--> The return to normality is a theme so it all makes sense to me!!

***You are playing the conservative science card and simply looking for pertubation(s): makes total sense !!! The world runs on pieces of paper they say....

wayne

I would be premature to expect great extent expansion without looking at the weather forecast. In fact there is a greater warming coming about, perhaps the first warm wave in darkness, one from the Atlantic and soon a huge Cyclone from the Pacific will visit the Arctic Ocean. This tops off the already warmer state, don't count on 2016 to catch up with 2012 soon...

viddaloo
Not a particular fan of using the yearly average ice extent graphs but it is a good data point.

Thanks, Jeff. It does counterbalance the massive chorus of compromised voices, like Sarah Knapton of Telegraph infamy, claiming recently that October 2016 sea ice was "now refreezing at a record pace", so as to make readers believe that October 2016 sea ice was refreezing at a record pace, in a pattern reminiscent of what many honest people would perhaps refer to as 'lying'.


Big: http://i.imgur.com/a5Wo6HM.png

Oil company lady be lying, is all I'm saying.

wayne

Viddaloo

Hence we need to explain the difference between refreezing rapidly and extraordinary dispersion event. It is a huge mistake to claim record freezing is equal to record extent gains when it was not even cold enough for this to happen. I feel bad for those who don't understand this. I feel angry at those who exploit this ignorance.

NeilT

It's a relatively simple message wayne. So long as temperatures fall rapidly in the Arctic in winter, then there will be a re-freeze.

The more open water there is, then the faster it will freeze at some point in the year. Namely when the cooler weather has extracted enough warmth or where the sea has not warmed sufficiently (just melted), to resist the cold temperatures. Or, where there is significant ice already in the open water.

However the planet is getting hotter and it has three heat sinks. Antarctica, the Arctic (including Greenland) and the land based Glaciers.

Those heat sinks are shrinking to cool the planet. This cannot go on forever as they are a "scarce resource" which takes thousands or millions of years to generate.

Just like the Oil we burn, we are burning our natural air conditioner.

However, the other side of the coin is this. Our planet is warming, it is driven by CO2 emissions by humans and, this year, we've left 30x ppm behind forever, as far as the next 100 generations of humans are concerned.

Because of that CO2 warming, the Arctic is warming up to 10 times faster than the rest of the planet.

This is not good news because this is our planet's air conditioner. Eventually it will reach the point where it no longer cools enough, in winter, to freeze the ice.

Of course humanity won't worry too much about that because whatever is left will be too busy surviving the wars that were fought over the diminishing food supplies, required by an ever increasing population.

It has all the makings of a Greek Tragedy and all the concern of Nero from the population at large.

wayne

HI NeilT

"The more open water there is, then the faster it will freeze at some point in the year."

Correct, but if the open water is mixed with pack ice, the refreeze should be faster, but that wasn't exactly the case this season, surface air temperatures of late attest to that. The question was whether circulation patterns giving compaction of sea ice was still a requirement for a greater melt, the answer was given: no. Warmer Arctic Ocean = less sea ice = more clouds = Cyclones living longer from this wider open water = warmer surface air temperatures... We are all observing this feedback system now.

Robert S

Neil: your Greek tragedy... I wish it were overstated... but I fear it may not be.

AnotherJourneybyTrain

I think the Europeans will kick up a stink before it gets too bad: how are the refugees going to stop coming if their homelands are forever being attacked by what comes down to a scorched earth policy from the west?

Population Growth obviously is a complicating factor but that can only mean the politics has to play out sooner rather than later IMHO!

My main bone of contention is that change is coming in a REAL-politik sense and we best all prepare for it by way of talking to our neighbours and stop reading mindless primary industry based propaganda that concentrates wealth and delivers not to the middle: "EXACTLY WHO SPENDS THE MONEY ON THIS MUDBALL, AGAIN??!!!??"

viddaloo

Sarah Knapton now tweets that she may in fact write an article on record *slow* October refreeze when all the data are in, as opposed to the article she wrote on the record *fast* October refreeze based on no October ice data whatsoever:

@klimapartiet I'm waiting to see final October figures then I probably will [write a new article about the record *slow* refreeze of sea ice in October according to JAXA, NSIDC etc]

My parenthesis. Moving on, here's the latest shocker of an [unintentionally] alarmist blog post on ice.

Our truly dramatic October plunge into record low territory for annual average extent continues, with no end in sight:

Click here to see the full–size graph & read the whole blog post.

Post contains an accuracy test for the dotted line + confidence interval.

AnotherJourneybyTrain

Environment group named in WikiLeaks email release responds to attacks

--> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/24/australian-environment-group-wikileaks-democrat-email-release-responds-attacks

This article speaks of the ownership of democracy: the super economy from down under is wholly subsidised by the elite for the elite! Mexico has faster internet than us and we built China... (..tell me I'm wrong: you know you want to!)

AnotherJourneybyTrain

(from link above)

“They’re saying that we need to guard our sovereignty from environmental organisations, when the mining in Australia is 80% foreign-owned,” he said. “They put tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars into a massive public relations machine that is sustained and ongoing over time. They have incredible influence and revolving doors between the highest levels of politics and their lobby groups.

“And international foreign-owned mining companies dropped $20m into a campaign to prevent a new tax on their industry and, in doing so, destabilised a prime minister. And that is the big issue in terms of national sovereignty.”

John Christensen

AnotherJourney,

Your comments are quite interesting, but this blog is on Arctic sea ice and we aim to stay on topic, so that the blog stays relevant to readers of Arctic sea ice.

Bfraser

I agree with John Christensen, but also want to point out that what AnotherJourney is saying sounds like an excellent idea for a new thread on the Arctic Sea Ice Forum (see link at the top of this page).

Robert S

Current temperature at the north pole approx -2C. While there are -30C areas across the arctic, we're almost at November, and big chunks of the arctic continue to be marginal for significant ice thickening, even if there is a skiff, and therefore "extent". Strange times are here to stay!

John Christensen

Hi Robert,

DMI has about -10C at the Pole - where do you see -2C?

-10C still being quite warm compared to surrounding continents, a very interesting setup!

Robert S

John: -2C was for 11AM this morning on earth.nullschool.net. It's a broad look, hence the "approx."

viddaloo

Trying to assess the true state of Arctic sea ice at this very extreme point in time:

We're in the last week of October, and yet the temps are high and the storms still raging due to record levels of open water. And though extent was up 58 k km² yesterday for the entire Arctic, CAB area was down 39 k km², and according to JAXA & Wipneus, all–Arctic sea ice volume was down by 318 km³ to 3885, the lowest sea ice volume since October 15th. Thickness is also down 58 cm to 0.8 meters, the lowest in all of 2016, and, as far as I can see, since December 2012. Since 2014 the loss of volume has been at least 3700 km³ for October 26th, which is a tremendous loss of ice, whether current volume is 3885 km³ (JAXA) or closer to 5813 (PIOMAS).

I should add that from October 26th in 2012, the loss of thickness over the following month was 30.5 cm, which would take us all the way down to less than half a meter in 2016, so really dramatically thin ice cover in a winter season regularly visited by fierce storms in the Arctic Ocean.

0.5 meter ice means a winter storm could rip it all apart, and waves & swells can still work on the great Disintegration Project all through autumn & winter. Export through Fram, Nares Strait & the Canadian Arctic Archipelago can and will likely also carry on through winter.

All in all, this looks really catastrophic for ice. On the upside, winter will not be a bore for faithful watchers of Arctic sea ice.


Click here to see the full–size graph & read the whole blog post.

John Christensen

"the loss of thickness over the following month was 30.5 cm".. brilliant idea!

John Christensen

"would take us all the way down to less than half a meter in 2016"..

Yes, clearly - and imagine what wind would do with all of that ice being less than half a meter thick ;-)

viddaloo
brilliant idea!

Are you shouting the ball was out again, John? You know, it gets pretty boring with no progress whatsoever over time. Try a different angle, if you can.

BTW, yesterday lost 5.8 cm thickness, not 58 (typo, corrected in the blog).

Sarat

Viddaloo, "loss of thickness" is not a very good term as it can be taken out of context and twisted to mean that 2016 is loosing ice thickness during the refreeze season when you really mean the ice is less thick as compared to the historical record. Yes refreeze is extra slow and overall there has been less ice in the arctic this year, and yes if the current trajectory is maintained over the current winter it does not bode well for the next melting season. But winter in the arctic is long and things can change fast. Example 2013 was the lowest previous level on average from the graph you've been sharing, but it recovered significantly into 2014. Things look bad, but we hope for the best.

Sarat

The temp anomalies in the arctic continue to be very high this season is it right to speculate that this is due to heat released from open water? and does that mean that there is much more heat in the water around the arctic then in previews years?

John Christensen

Yes, as pointed out by Sarat also viddaloo, you cannot speak of "loss of thickness" during the freeze period, where ice thickness is increasing.

It's just the average thickness metric going down, which necessarily happens every single year - because a lot of thin new ice is created at the boundary of the pack.

John Christensen

Reaching an average ice thickness of a ½ meter (or less) this year would require a simultaneous volume low record combined with a sea ice extent higher than the average extent of the 1980s, so we probably need to wait a few years for that to happen.

wayne

Sarat,

"is it right to speculate that this is due to heat released from open water? and does the freeze period"

Observation wise, with warmer sea water it takes -11 C surface air to start the freezing process with next to no winds. So the answer is no, but there is a warming right above the colder air doing the freezing, so I suggest looking at 850 or 900 mb air temperatures, the latent heat release is sudden and very quick at refreeze, it rises and causes an inversion. Once frozen the inversion weakens considerably. The key temperature is at the surface, there is also very little stations measuring sea ice upper air profiles over the Arctic ocean, these are equally worth studying, those stations at the coast are better than nothing, ideally an ice island observation platform would be preferable.

wayne

Viddaloo is referring to less accretion, and he has evidence to prove it, saying that sea ice is going to get thicker during the dark season is silly.

wayne

The warmer surface temperatures over the Arctic Ocean, a key feature of 2016 autumn, is a the result from many contributing factors, the greatest one was that the minima was likely the smallest ever- officially not measured accurately-, of which a great dispersion event occurred, from 2 main reasons. Even if this dispersion suggested a rapid refreeze, which did not happen, the open sea water to badly broken up sea ice mix was a source of heat, which encouraged the further persistence of Cyclones, which slowed the start of winter over this ocean considerably. The presence of steady cyclones fostered extensive cloudiness which slowed cooling in ever increasing darkness, Thus the surface temperature anomaly.

The logic that its warmer because there is more open water freezing from a significantly allegedly greater sea ice minima than 2012 does not compute.

viddaloo
Viddaloo, "loss of thickness" is not a very good term as it can be taken out of context and twisted to mean that 2016 is loosing ice thickness during the refreeze season when you really mean the ice is less thick as compared to the historical record.

And conversely, if I really mean the ice is less thick, then "loss of thickness" is a very good term. Assuming I don't mean what I write is a very bad idea, IMO.

Source for autumn 2016 loss of sea ice thickness: https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/data/jaxa-sit.txt

viddaloo
The temp anomalies in the arctic continue to be very high this season is it right to speculate that this is due to heat released from open water?

I'll just have to trust that no–one will take my words out of context and twist them to mean that, Sarat :)

viddaloo
Reaching an average ice thickness of a ½ meter (or less) this year would require a simultaneous volume low record combined with a sea ice extent higher than the average extent of the 1980s

Reaching an average ice thickness of a ½ meter (or less) this year requires a drop of only 30 cm.

2012 as pointed out in my blog, dropped 30.5 cm from Oct 26th.
2013 dropped 41.7 cm.
2014 dropped 33.6 cm.
2015 dropped 30.5 cm.

Conclusion: in 4 out of 4 years — 100% of the cases — average SIT drops more than required between Oct 26th and SIT minimum.

Sarat

Wayne you posted earlier:

"Warmer Arctic Ocean = less sea ice = more clouds = Cyclones living longer from this wider open water = warmer surface air temperatures... We are all observing this feedback system now."

I guess I'm still not understanding the fault in my speculation earlier.


John Christensen

I see where you are coming from viddaloo, when you are looking at these average thickness numbers.

However, you need to step back and test against the natural/physical boundaries.

Minimum average thickness is typically reached during the last week of October, ie. with current conditions.

0.5 meters average thickness with about 6.000km3 ice volume requires an extent of about 12M km2, but in fact the extent is below 7M km2. 1980s average extent (JAXA) for this day is 9.6M km2..

Therefore, since we have record low extent it is physically impossible also to have a very low average thickness, as it is the growth of new sea ice that causes the low thickness number during the fall season.

In fact with warming Arctic waters we should expect the average thickness to drop less in the fall season, simply because ice extent will increase at a slower pace in the warmer waters - as we are currently observing.

Neven's PIJAMAS graph shows how 2007 and 2008 saw much larger drops in avg. thickness than in recent years for this reason.

viddaloo
0.5 meters average thickness with about 6.000km3 ice volume requires an extent of about 12M km2, but in fact the extent is below 7M km2. 1980s average extent (JAXA) for this day is 9.6M km2..

True. But remember I wrote in my blog: "I should add that from October 26th in 2012, the loss of thickness over the following month was 30.5 cm, which would take us all the way down to less than half a meter in 2016".

What's implied by this is that a month *after* October 26th, if a similar drop as 2012 had during *its* month after October 26th, 2016 will have ½ meter average SIT. So in other words we're not talking about *today*.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see on this one, eh? I for sure wouldn't gamble that super–exceptional 2016 would be the first year this decade to lose *less* than 30 cm from here on out.

PS: Also, it's not just a black–and–white all or nothing case of extent increase leading to autumn loss of average SIT. It's also a real de–facto thinning of ice from below. So a combination of the two, with of course the first part of autumn having the larger element of actual thinning.

viddaloo

BTW, from Wipneus I get:

2012 thickness minimum: Nov 28 @ 0.729 meter
2013 thickness minimum: Dec 02 @ 1.008 meter
2014 thickness minimum: Dec 03 @ 0.902 meter
2015 thickness minimum: Nov 23 @ 0.832 meter

and thus your statement seems inaccurate:

Minimum average thickness is typically reached during the last week of October, ie. with current conditions.

Please explain where you get the impression that average SIT bottoms out in October.

D-Penquin

0.5 meters average thickness with about 6.000km3 ice volume requires an extent of about 12M km2, but in fact the extent is below 7M km2. 1980s average extent (JAXA) for this day is 9.6M km2..

Volume divided by thickness will give 'area' and not 'extent'...or am I missing something here?

wayne

Hi Sarat

No fault at all, I just described the complexities of the matter at hand, especially addressing latent heat of fusion released when sea ice freezes.

In fact your statement was perfect.

TenneyNaumer

I don't know how accurate Climate Reanalyzer is, but it has been showing rain somewhere in the Arctic, every day for the past three weeks. Two days ago, it showed rain over Kara Island, the Siberian coast, western Alaska, Svalbard, Iceland and western Greenland. In late October.

John Christensen

viddaloo and D,

Sea ice thickness can be calculated in different ways, such as:

1. PIJAMAS (Neven's invention I believe): PIOMAS volume divided by Jaxa extent.
(See the monthly PIOMAS updates on this blog).
This metric should provide a low average thickness, as it divides by extent, which means some of the ice cover is non-existing, and therefore the actual average thickness should be higher.

2. PIOMAS thickness ( http://psc.apl.uw.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/Bpiomas_plot_daily_heff.2sst.png ):
PIOMAS divide the volume by the domain, where the sea ice is at least 15 cm thick, but I have not verified if this is area or extent.
Due to the minimum thickness required, the PIOMAS average thickness should be a bit higher than PIJAMAS.

Both metrics have in common that they reach minimum average thickness by end of October.

I cannot find definitions on Wipneus' thickness metric for comparison.

viddaloo
Both metrics have in common that they reach minimum average thickness by end of October.

Thank you, John!

The ½ meter thickness talked about above relates to the JAXA thickness already sourced. Using the calculator app, we can see thickness is derived by dividing volume by 'dry.extent', ie non–melting / wet ice extent.

It's also worth mentioning that JAXA volume has been more or less flat–lining at 4000 km³ since Mid–July (!) and going down for last half week or so. With such a low (and of course record low) ice volume ½ meter seems rather certain during fall, don't you think?


Full graph

PS: Does anyone know if Wipneus has actually introduced these data somewhere publicly?

John Christensen

Hi viddaloo,

Jaxa does not produce reliable volume numbers, as you can see from the very high up and down ticks.

PIOMAS is normally recognized as the most reliable option, so you should use that volume.

wayne

PIOMAS is reporting more sea ice volume than JAXA when there is less extent, the wonders of uncritical fixated minds astound.

viddaloo

Hi, John,

Jaxa does not produce reliable volume numbers, as you can see from the very high up and down ticks.

It's certainly not perfect (only dry extent constitutes a factor, not wet or melting extent), but if PIOMAS really is off by a factor of 40–50% (showing way too much ice volume), then something needs to happen with PIOMAS (adjustment, perchance?) or folks will just start using JAXA.

I'm staying with PIOMAS for historical record reasons.

John Christensen

Jaxa 2014 volume increased from about 4.000km3 to 11.000km3 during the month of August.

With such erratic movement, it is not useful for metrics.

John Christensen

wayne, you think PIOMAS is for the uncritical fixated minds, while the erratic noise of Jaxa volume is for the insightful?

May peace reach your mind.

wayne

I think John doesn't see that both of them have problems with volume, but JAXA has it a little better.

viddaloo

A fair point, John. It's known from CrySat spring & summer are particularly hard for satellites to assess, yet now we're in late October. Less melt ponds, at least.

But I really hope we can either get Wipneus to talk about these figures, or find some blog or forum post were he's already done so. Help? Neven?

viddaloo

BTW, CryoSat usually releases 4 — four! — numbers per year, usually filtered through pro–industrialist corporate media, for Arctic sea ice volume. And these numbers are not even fixated accurately in time OR space. It's like one number for 'October/November', which is pretty useless. Talk about public money 'well' spent.

Does anyone know if the tabloids have released CryoSat's 2016 fall numbers yet?

Neven
Help? Neven?

I believe Wipneus has said there is little documentation that explains how JAXA thickness maps are created. And I believe he said it somewhere in his Home-brew AMSR2 thread.

As for CryoSat-2 data, the CPOM website isn't the only source of data for us amateurs. There is also the Meereisportal website, which I wrote about back in April.

My guess is the first data will be displayed when the month is over (around mid-November or so).

wayne

Now we can observe how badly messed up the densest Arctic pack ice is:

http://eh2r.blogspot.ca/2016/10/big-lead-story-it-is-not-there-instead.html

It is so loose, signs of the big lead have vanished. Not at all like 2012. The dispersion event that not so many people write about, left its mark, quite impressive worse sea ice condition ever.

TenneyNaumer

Anomalous heat projected to be 6C in the Arctic this next week, posted on twitter by meteorologist Zack Labe:

https://twitter.com/ZLabe/status/792019418821779458

TenneyNaumer

Sorry, Zack is studying atmospheric science:

https://twitter.com/ZLabe/status/782972414774775809

TenneyNaumer

JAXA SIE:

https://twitter.com/capitalweather/status/791732653053603841

TenneyNaumer

Another graph animated JAXA SIE from Zack (ok, I'm done for the night):

https://twitter.com/ZLabe/status/791415399581560832

Rob Dekker

Extent is exceptionally low for the date, according to Jaxa:
https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent

On the other hand, winter DID kick in at places in the Arctic.
Obuoy 14 registers (in the CAA) -25 C :
http://obuoy.datatransport.org/monitor#buoy14/weather

Rob Dekker

Neven, in the Arctic Sea Ice Graphs, many graphs are sourced from Crosphere Today, which still (after almost 9 months now) uses a disfunctional data source.

May it be time to eliminate these graphs for the time being ?

Neven

I'll ask Bill Chapman if they plan on updating those graphs, and if they don't (and my guess is they won't), I'll remove them by the end of the year, along with some other graphs.

And I still have to write that piece about the Walsh paper. Sorry for still not having done that. I'm a bit spent at the moment (lots of building and working).

viddaloo
Extent is exceptionally low for the date, according to Jaxa

Indeed, Rob, and it has been exceptionally and record low for the year. However, as of yesterday, another year managed to go below 10 million for the year–to–date average; 2007. That means it, 2011, 2012 & 2016 are under 10, the latter two will stay below till the end:


Click for full size.

viddaloo

There will be an announcement.

I believe Wipneus has said there is little documentation that explains how JAXA thickness maps are created. And I believe he said it somewhere in his Home-brew AMSR2 thread.

Thanks, Neven. In June there I find this quote from JAXA:

This product has the effectiveness in the relative dry freezing seasons such as autumn, winter and spring (September – May), but cannot provide the accurate sea ice thickness in melting wet season (June - August) because the sea ice surface is covered by melt ponds.

So, back to John's comment:

Jaxa 2014 volume increased from about 4.000km3 to 11.000km3 during the month of August.

With such erratic movement, it is not useful for metrics.

Your example is from August 2014, within the "melting wet season (June - August)" according to JAXA, where "sea ice surface is covered by melt ponds". They advice their product "has the effectiveness in the relative dry freezing seasons such as autumn, winter and spring (September – May)".

In other words October is pretty accurate.

wayne

The poor state of sea ice, especially the densest pack area. has already participated in significantly impacting weather well further South. Especially noticeable weather patterns making Hallowing 'hollow' cold wise. As long as the making of winter, not the 21 December winter, the real darkness winter, has been seriously impaired, we should see a reduction of warmth in some areas and some abnormal narrow areas cooling in others, but Southwards "Arctic dome" what they call "blasts" will be reduced in size. and mobility.

Aside from that, the worlds attention goes elsewhere especially with the more violent or silly scandals. I noticed, outside of summer period, when its much warmer than usual down South, in the temperate world, people enjoy it and go about life pleasantly, they never really are amazed by it. The only time when people get really excited is when there is a serious cold event, then complaints fly all over the place, and the fake skeptics drum up their stupid "new ice age" ideas. There would be no argument about Anthropogenic Global Warming if people in the mid-latitudes would compare their memories when winter was winter with today. However, the younger generations are more aware of AGW than their parents, how strange.

Susan Anderson

Tenney, those links are tremendous. Very nice graphics. Thanks.

AnotherJourneybyTrain

Wayne: the older generation know exactly how serious global warming is they are just trying to pretend they conveniently forgot the truth ala ye olde Winston Churchill quote!

(Panic stations are afoot I tells ya!!!)

wayne

Hi Another,

No memory grander than Halloween whence a child , cold to the bone, door to door, and now almost summer at end of October, less to wear al lot more to think about.

viddaloo

Trying to assess the true state of Arctic sea ice at this very extreme point in time

We're in the last week of October, and yet the temps are high and the storms still raging due to record levels of open water. And though extent was up 32 k km² yesterday for the entire Arctic, CAB area was down 17 k km², and according to JAXA & Wipneus, all–Arctic sea ice volume was down by 112 km³ since Oct 26 to 3773, about the same volume as in Mid–September. Thickness is also down 6.1 cm to 0.74 meters, the lowest in all of 2016, and, as far as I can see, since 28 November 2012, with only 12 mm left down to that all–time low. Since 2014 the loss of (PIOMAS) volume has been at least 3700 km³ for October 29th, which is a tremendous loss of ice, whether current volume is 3773 km³ (JAXA) or closer to 5823 (PIOMAS).

I should add that from October 29th in 2012, the loss of thickness over the following month was 29.4 cm, which would take us all the way down to less than half a meter in 2016, so really dramatically thin ice cover in a winter season regularly visited by fierce storms in the Arctic Ocean.

½ meter ice means a winter storm could rip it all apart, and waves & swells can still work on the great Disintegration Project all through autumn & winter. Export through Fram, Nares Strait & the Canadian Arctic Archipelago can and will likely also carry on through winter.

All in all, this looks really catastrophic for ice. On the upside, winter will not be a bore for faithful watchers of Arctic sea ice.


Click here to see the full–size graph & read the whole blog post.

wayne

Viddaloo

"Though extent was up 32 k km² yesterday for"

Remarkable given a large strong High smack in the middle of the North Pole and conversely deepest darkness. We should not underestimate 3 things, sea water warmer temperatures, advection from encroaching Cyclones and the poor sorry state of sea ice which requires a deeper analysis by higher Resolution Radarsat. Perhaps an institute has a Radarsat shot of the whole Arctic Ocean at minima extent,.... Don't keep it to yourselves,,,, let us see please!

viddaloo

It seems very quiet in here for the very dramatic phase we are in. Several voices elsewhere stating this situation is way more dramatic than the start of September minimum, yet here it's like the grave....

I wonder how come? This October Plunge may be more important for our global climate than the election in America.

Sarat

That extent is almost flat today... I keep waiting for the slope of the extent line to spike up, but nothing in the forecast to suggest it will... it's definitely dramatic.
Looking forward to some end of the month summaries.

jdallen_wa

It seems very quiet in here for the very dramatic phase we are in.

'Tis cause it's the forums and the right place for the discussion ;)

For those of you wondering what Vidd is alluding to, here's a link to a post in one of the forums where discussion is on-going:

http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1611.msg92652.html#msg92652

viddaloo

JD,

I noticed someone said the October Plunge was due to albedo related heat on there: «Right now there is a whole bunch of albedo related heat overwhelming the freezing power of the Arctic winter.»

But that wasn't you, I guess. You said:

I think we're in free fall, bouncing off the walls on the way to the bottom.

This would be enough to feel the boot back in my days. Global warming is real? No way!

But would you chance a guess albedo related heat was the culprit even for the Great Plunge of 2007 & 2012?


Click for full size.

jdallen_wa

Hey Vidd;

Not sure I'd call it a number 1 suspect, but I certainly wouldn't dismiss it having an impact. We'd have to quantify it over time as a derivative function of decreasing insolation as we approached and passed the equinox. I'm not quite certain where to start there, but that'd be a bunch of number crunching.

What strikes me as a side effect of lower ice coverage (and lower albedo) is the effect it had on atmospheric circulation. Combined with the El Nino heat, I'd imagine open water (providing energy to storms locally) supporting circulation which would transfer of heat from lower latitudes.

We'll be studying this year's weather for quite a while, I think.

Neven
It seems very quiet in here for the very dramatic phase we are in. Several voices elsewhere stating this situation is way more dramatic than the start of September minimum, yet here it's like the grave....

I wonder how come?

I'm quiet because I'm taking a break. I want to be able to juggle all the balls in my life, but I'm going to have to put a few back on the table.

viddaloo
We'll be studying this year's weather for quite a while, I think.

No doubt, JD. Here's to hoping there will be ice left to study!

Neven, quite understandable. And yet: I took a break from ice in September. See how that turned out.

Colorado Bob

Before the Flood - Full Movie | National Geographic

Published on Oct 30, 2016
Join Leonardo DiCaprio as he explores the topic of climate change, and discovers what must be done today to prevent catastrophic disruption of life on our planet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90CkXVF-Q8M

NeilT

I was doing some checking on the NOAA site for CO2 trends.

It looks like the 2014 to 2016 CO2 rise will be in the region of 5.8 to 6.5ppm. We won't know till mid December but looking back over the years it looks like that.

Annual for 2015 was 2.97 and 2016 has been consistently higher than that.

Essentially more than 3 years of CO2 rise in two years, based on the decadal average for the 2000's. The 2010's average will be higher again but we're only just over half way there.

Has to have an impact.

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

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)