« Sea ice extent update 25: the time is now | Main | Sea Surface Temperatures »


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

Kevin McKinney

I thought I was seeing some hints of this on CT, but this is very clear. Thanks!

I'm also interested to see what happens in the Western Arctic. There's a lot of area there where the concentrations have been visibly dropping for some time; and as I noted, some have already hit that magic 15% threshold and dropped off the concentration map (and out of the extent tally.) How much more of this low concentration ice will follow suit, I wonder?

Lord Soth

Another thing of note; is that we are getting quite the varriance in ice lost from day to day; but the morning corrections have been small.

I suspect that we are still having good melt with all that clear sky over the arctic; and the varriance in the daily numbers are just due to compaction/expansion of the ice pack; depending on which way the wind is blowing.

We are seeing this in tempertures north of 80 rebounding.



At last some real polar amplification!

Well, I don't know but there is a paper i Nature (if I recall correctly) claiming that Arctic amplification is taking place and it is due to reduction of sea ice primarily. As I understand this is happening much earlier than previously anticipated.

I can always dig up the reference if it is of interest.

Charles Wilson

I really need some comments on this idea:
>>> CUBES, not sheets of Ice:
— As all cracking in Ice is VERTICAL, the 30 foot thick Ice that "always" stuck to Greenland & Ellsmere, & SPREAD OUT THIS YEAR, did NOT make the remaining Ice 4, instead of 2, feet thick. Instead it STAYED 30 feet thick. Just in widely separated Chunks.
>> And it is VERY DIFFERENT:
1. CUBES Look very different in High Resolution Pics (as many have commented),
2. CUBES MELT SLOWER (5 to 10 TIMES). Less surface Area/per/Volume.
3. CUBES keep Ocean Temp down, even after all the rest of the ice in their vicinity has dissappeared e.g. the wispy “ghost” areas on some Maps: <http://www.iup.physik.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr/arctic_AMSRE_visual.png>
4. ICE VOLUME may have stopped shrinking much - - if at all - - WEEKS ago (if it, like PIOMAS says, was already below the 2007 minimum) The low air temps would be adding (thin) ice whilst effects #2 & #3 offset the lingering warm waters of the ” late ” EL NINO.
5. FUTURE YEARS — especially NEXT WINTER — may find the CUBES a fine foundation for BIG increases. Or
6. OR: the DIPOLE may FLUSH them all out
-- then there will be no "Cavalry to ride to the Rescue" in the Next Big Melt.

#1 The Satellites sense only Reflected Radiation & must be corrected with "algorithms" which is why the Ice sites differ so much - - and NONE are designed to interpret CUBES. = those WILD SWINGS & Big Differences we've seen, lately ?
#6: especially if the upcoming end-of-the-month Cyclones are just a blip in the general "Return of the Arctic Dipole"
... Wayne Davidson's Theory - - Dipole AFTER La Nina - - Predicted this (albeit the Fact the El Nino took 2 months longer than 2007's to dissipate, shifted the Cloudy "in-between Month" into the "Most Melting Month" (July) & made his ICE prediction look bad) -- so his Theory will be Proven in the next 2 months. Or Disproven.


Sorry, Charles, you have it wrong.

Most of the ice surface is submerged. Warm water melts ice much faster than air or sun. As you fragment ice you increase the surface area of edge exposed to water. Each fracture exposes 2 new surfaces to air and water.

The remaining 2010 ice is relatively thin. As I mentioned in another comment - loss of ice mass/volume amounts to loss of thermal capacity.

Much of the ice in Baffin Bay last winter was well over 30 feet thick. It is all gone. Collisions chip at edges, warm water melts the ice from below, meltpools and waves melt the ice from above, winds and currents carry ever smaller floes past obstacles and into warmer waters.

In the absence of entirely unforeseen factors I am confident that it will be possible next year for a ship to sail between Bering Strait and Fram Strait via the pole.

"The Satellites sense only Reflected Radiation & must be corrected with "algorithms" which is why the Ice sites differ so much - - and NONE are designed to interpret CUBES"
Which is why I prefer to examine the ice directly via near real-time satellite images.
The human eye is a marvelous instrument. Thus far we have no computer program to equal it. My eyes tell me the Arctic ice mass today is less than it has ever been in the entirety of recorded history. I have no doubt that it will soon vanish entirely unless we humans are collectively brave enough to face up to the fact of global warming.


Charles: I don't mean my words to appear as any form of personal attack. On re-reading my comment it seems to me that it may appear over-critical. That was certainly not my intention. I respect you views, even if I disagree.

Andrew Xnn

whoa logicman; Are you really predicting the opening of a north pole sea route for next year?

While it's clear enough that there is a strong trend towards less sea ice, for the polar sea route to open would take rather unusual conditions such as a sustained Arctic Dipole. Personally, I'd put something like that out about 3 years; 5 years max.

Charles Wilson

Logicman: Thanks for the FACTS.
I don't consider such a (personal) attack, but SCIENCE.
...Had I posted here before I put up a Sea Ice Outlook, I'd have been told that "Clouds" were all figured out by Wayne Davidson & then I'd have predicted Fast Melts Early & Fast Melts Late, but NOT in-between.
Or if Wayne had gotten enough criticism, he'd have known this El Nino was a "Modoki" and the following La Nina would be LATE as Modokis always fade Slow, He seems embarrassed.- - but he shouldn't be: though his Ice Forecast was too low, the Return of the Dipole Anomaly (well, if it stays) PROVES his Cloud theory CORRECT ! How often is a Major Theory proven ?
... Mostly I post on wattsupwiththat because they give me a Good Fight.
That's Traditional in Science.
WUWT is mostly Anti-warmer, and you the Opposite, so I need you both.
... Too many Other sites have been deleting posts that make "too good" an argument. Once at WUWT there was some nastiness & I posted "lets get back to hitting each other over the head with Graphs & Charts'. And they did. And so do you. Thanx.

The comments to this entry are closed.