« SIE 2011 update 12: fumbling in the dark | Main | NSIDC Arctic sea ice news mid-July 2011 »


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

Al Rodger

The two graphs do give roughly similar numbers if you work them into common units (sq km *10^6) although Maslanik does plot a significantly lower decline.
Year 2007 2002 1992 1892
Maslanik 2.8 3.7 4.1 4.5
Nghiem 2.6 4.2 4.5 5.0

Chris Reynolds

Thanks Neven,

I didn't expect this much attention. ;)

If anyone wants to discuss over here I'll make sure I'm around. Being on UK time though I'll have to leave it till tomorrow night.

In my 'In Flux' post I made an embarrasing error due to late night posting. Ice thickness feedback is far more due to open water at the end of the season and the release of heat due to the latent heat of fusion than due to thinner sea ice. Serreze et al in "The emergence of surface-based Arctic amplification." imply that energy loss due to thinner ice is a small factor.
"...This indicates that most of the increase in mean annual (and autumn) SAT over the Arctic associated with ice loss is due to the ice extent change and not changes in thickness."

The comments to this entry are closed.