PIOMAS June 2016

Another month has passed and so here is the updated Arctic sea ice volume graph as calculated by the Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System (PIOMAS) at the Polar Science Center:

As of May 31st the 2016 trend line is lowest on the graph. A sea ice volume decrease of 3037 km3 during the month of May was enough to overtake 2011 and increase the lead over every other year in the 2007-2016 period, except for 2010 and 2012, which both recorded massive volume losses during May. 2016 has a very small lead now over 2011 (162 km3) and 2012 (270 km3). The gap with last year has grown to a whopping 2180 km3.

Here's how the differences with previous years have changed since last month:

Wipneus' version of the PIOMAS volume graph also shows how close the 2011, 2012 and 2016 trend lines are:

The trend line on the PIOMAS sea ice volume anomaly graph has now dipped well below the linear trend, moving towards the 2 standard deviation zone where it hasn't been since 2013:

As for thickness, I still can't use Cryosphere Today sea ice area data for my crude thickness calculation (PICT), as they haven't switched to the new SSMIS-based data yet (it's still in the calibration phase) and so I've decided to use reliable AMSR-2 based data as provided by JAXA (via ADS-NIPR). I divide PIOMAS volume by JAXA sea ice extent to get average thickness that I can then compare to previous years. I've decided to use a serious acronym this time: PIJAMAS.

Here's the graph:

One would intuitively guess that when volume is low, average thickness is low too. But when the ice cover is even lower - and JAXA SIE was much lower than previous years at the end of May - the volume gets spread out over a smaller area, and thus average sea ice thickness is now higher than other years from the post-2010 era.

The thickness plot from the Polar Science Center is showing the exact same thing:

Another interesting piece of information has been added to the PIOMAS website, a thickness anomaly map that shows where this year the ice is thicker/thinner compared to the 2000-2015 average:

This reminded me of the volume distribution comparison maps that Wipneus produces every month and shares on the Arctic Sea Ice Forum. Because this year is so close to 2011 and 2012, I decided to have a look at the differences with these two years (red means there is more ice now than there was then, blue the reverse):

As you can see, according to the PIOMAS model there is more ice this year mainly in the Central Arctic and in the East Siberian Sea, the difference being more pronounced in 2011. Sea ice volume is practically on a par with 2011 and 2012 as of the end of May. These are also the years that ended in the lowest September volume and extent numbers.

If we assume that volume in the Central Arctic doesn't matter for the September sea ice extent minimum (as it didn't melt in 2011 and 2012 when sea ice volume was lower there), this means that sea ice volume is lower outside of the Central Arctic, in the regions that do matter for the outcome of the melting season.

As eyeballing only gets you so far, I asked Chris Reynolds about this (be sure to check out his latest blog post on PIOMAS and other data) and he was so kind as to send me the PIOMAS volume numbers for the Central Arctic and the rest of the Arctic:

This year is on a par with 2011 both within and outside of the Central Arctic region, but looking again at Wipneus' thickness difference map, it's clear that the East Siberian Sea will play crucial role in the race between 2011 and 2016. This region is in the middle of a heatwave as we speak, and the ice surface is showing extensive melting, according to satellite images and other data (I'll have more on this next week).

As for 2012, this year there is 1000 km3 less sea ice volume in the regions outside of the Central Arctic. That's a lot of ice - almost 10% - that doesn't need to melt for this year to end on a par with 2012. Most of this difference is situated in the American-Pacific side of the Arctic, where the ice pack opened up at record speed this year and large stretches of open water are in the process of warming up, next to and within a large part of the ice pack that is looking increasingly patchy.

According to both PIOMAS and CryoSat the ice seems to be thicker in the currently warm East Siberian Sea than it was in 2012, but in contrast to 2011, there's also somewhat thicker ice on the Atlantic side of the Arctic. The Atlantic seems to be bringing warmer ocean currents to the Arctic this year, so it remains to be seen what will happen to that ice. All in all, 2016 looks to have a slight advantage over 2012, when it comes to potential melting in the regions outside of the Central Arctic.

This is all fine and well, speculating is fun, but June was when 2012 laid the basis for its record breaking melt, due to almost perfect weather conditions for melting. June has been more modest this year so far, but there's three more weeks left to go. We'll know next month whether this year will have been able to keep up with 2012's breakneck pace.

Comments

[John Christensen]

A great update, thank you Neven!

- Sidebar note: I have tried living without your blog, I removed it from my favorites, and made sure not to check for updates..

However, it really didn't work out, so I am asking if you would kindly consider allowing me to post on the blog - I evidently already have - if I on the other hand will make sure to keep any utterances about the possible motivations of others away from this blog and just focus on the ice?

If so, then on the speculation of Sept ice extent and volume, I would have suggested that more volume in the Central Arctic Ocean would increase chances of higher minimum extent and volume by Sept, as we by the end of August will see melting of the central waters, while the melt of the exterior seas happen earlier in the season - 2013 seems to be the improbable exception to this.
However, this speculation would require low storm activity towards the end of the melting season, as the warm waters otherwise quickly would melt away the ice..

[Wayne Kernochan]

Hi Neven, thx as always :)

A naïve question: I note your observation that "volume is dipping down towards -2 std devs for the first time in a while" (paraphrase). It occurred to me that "decycleizing" the graph around the line might yield some interesting insights. That is, the volume "cycle" means that early in the year the volume is highest above the trend line, in September it's lowest. If one takes an average for the year (more or less) and adds/subtracts deviations from that average from each monthly result, the resulting "smoothed" volume should highlight volume trends more clearly, I would think.

Thoughts? - w

[Neven]

more volume in the Central Arctic Ocean would increase chances of higher minimum extent and volume by Sept

In principle, yes, but that in turn depends on the distribution of volume within the Central Arctic. As you can see on the comparison maps most of where there is more ice this year than in 2011 and 2012, is north of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, where it is expected that ice will hold out the longest in the long-term.

So, that's not really an obstacle per se for 2016 to go as low as 2011 and 2012.

If one takes an average for the year (more or less) and adds/subtracts deviations from that average from each monthly result, the resulting "smoothed" volume should highlight volume trends more clearly, I would think.

Thoughts?

You mean something like this on Wipneus' PIOMAS page?

[Artful Dodger]

Hi folks,

We are truly fortunate to have somebody like Neven to support and inform the amateur sea ice community of citizen scientists.

I have dabbled on other blogs or forums over the years, leaving some due to specious moderators, refusing to participate in others due to deliberate denial motivated by monetary gain.

Neven has struck the right balance on this blog between avocacy, information, and dissenting discussion.

I find the words that best describe Neven's service here as "authentic" (ie: true, correct, and exacting).

Thank-you, Brother.

Cheers,
Lodger

P.S. Oh, and n"ice" post). ;^)

[Lennartvdl]

Neven, you're in the Dutch newspaper Volkskrant:
http://www.volkskrant.nl/wetenschap/minder-zeeijs-op-noordpool-dan-ooit~a4310488/

[Neven]

Thanks, Lodger!

And thanks for the heads-up, Lennart. Too bad though that it is implied that I'm saying the Arctic will be ice-free this year, taking a quote from the first ASI update.

I've said this, also one of the themes of this PIOMAS update:

If you would write a scenario for how the first ice-free September comes about, it would look something like this. I don't think Arctic sea ice extent will dip below the 1 million km2 mark this year, simply because the ice in the Arctic's core is too thick to melt out.

Nevertheless, quite an honour to be quoted in the Volkskrant. Mom will be proud. ;-)

[Andy Lee Robinson]

Well done Neven, and a great post as usual!

Yup, ice-free this year is a remote but non-zero possibility, but I'm guessing a new record low is more likely than not.

[iceman]

@ Wayne Kernochan
If I understand your suggestion correctly, that's just what OSweetMrMath did on the PIOMAS thread on the forum (post #914). His detrended anomaly graph is fascinating.
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,119.900.html

As for the conventional anomaly graph above, 2016 has tracked fairly parallel to 2014 so far. My guess is this will continue in June (i.e., anomaly falling but at slower rate).

[iceman]

Edit: Wayne, I see that Neven's response above is more on point to your question. The anomaly graph on Wipneus' PIOMAS page shows how volume differs from the historical average for each day of the year. This highlights the volume counterpart to the "June cliff", discussed elsewhere (more in reference to area or extent, iirc).
OSweetMrMath's is the next refinement - he gives a good explanation; I think of it as "How is daily volume different than it would be if the year were in line with both the seasonal cycle and the long-term trend?"

See also Tamino's similar treatment for ice extent:
https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/05/16/arctic-dive/

[Aaron Lewis]

You may also want to consider forecast potential rain/ latent heat coming ashore on southeast Greenland over the next few days. http://cci-reanalyzer.org/WeeklySummary/ suggests inches of rain. That much rain could easily disrupt the stability of the 'aquifer' (supercooled water in firn) sitting on top of the ice. When that aquifer starts leaking, it will release a good bit of potential energy, and possibly take the ice under it out to sea as it drains.

[iceBunny]

I divide PIOMAS volume by JAXA sea ice extent to get average thickness that I can then compare to previous years. I've decided to use a serious acronym this time: PIJAMAS

Continuing the serious outlook, if we see PIJAMAS dropping to the floor then we'll have a naked Arctic Ocean but even halfway down would result in an alarming exposure.

[Sarat]

Thank you great post Neven!

IceBunny technically you are correct, but we may also end up with a situation where extent is low but the volume is relatively high (as only the thickest ice remains). This would result in an above average raise in PIJAMAS come September.

[Cato Uticensis]

Hi everyone, here I'm back after a long time. Winter has not been exciting and... summer is not either (I don't get excited at watching ice disappear at this rate). The situation is clear and I cannot add anything to what has already been explained so professionally and commented by all of you. I have just one more additional comment, actually: the weather conditions in the Arctic have drastically changed recently. Low pressure conditions are prevailing and are forecast to persist for the following 7-10 days, based on the latest runs from ECMWF and GFS. I hope this will help slowing down the melting of ice and in particular the formation of melt ponds, a key factor in June as I've learnt from Neven ;) Cross fingers, I try to maintain an optimistic approach in spite of a quite worrying trend.

[Neven]

Continuing the serious outlook, if we see PIJAMAS dropping to the floor then we'll have a naked Arctic Ocean but even halfway down would result in an alarming exposure.

Not to worry, it will then soon be winter, 24/7 darkness. ;-)

[iceBunny]

@Sarat:

IceBunny technically you are correct...

That's good to know, although I must admit that, having enjoyed a chuckle at Neven's humour, I was aiming less for technical correctness than for smiles on faces. "Never let reality spoil a joke", is one of my mottos (although, in practice, it's best applied as the far less pithy "Don't worry too much if reality doesn't quite match the joke but avoid it if possible"). :-D

.. but we may also end up with a situation where extent is low but the volume is relatively high (as only the thickest ice remains). This would result in an above average raise in PIJAMAS come September.

Indeed, and the graph does show Neven's PIJAMAS occasionally attempting some modesty, pulling up slightly in September, before significantly drooping to about thigh level by the last week of October. Bottoming out, one might say. ;o)

The September rise must be extent falling more quickly than volume, at least in some years, but the plummet in October, which is post-minimum, is extent rising more quickly than volume, ie. new, thin ice. The major rise starting towards the end of October is presumably some balance point where the ice, especially the new ice, is thickening up more than further new ice is being created. It's interesting how linear that rise in PIJAMAS is from November to mid-May.

[Wayne Kernochan]

@iceman, @neven: thx for the pointers; omrsweetmath's graph is indeed what I'm looking for, although weekly or monthly might make it a little easier to visualize. All agree on long-term volume decreases; using the long-term average tends to mask that trend, while omrsweetmath's version gives some insight into possible "new cycles" and changes in trend after, say, 2012. thx much!

[Neven]

the weather conditions in the Arctic have drastically changed recently. Low pressure conditions are prevailing and are forecast to persist for the following 7-10 days, based on the latest runs from ECMWF and GFS. I hope this will help slowing down the melting of ice and in particular the formation of melt ponds, a key factor in June as I've learnt from Neven

Absolutely. 2016 has been running the show so far, going low on every possible level, all over the Arctic. But now it's 2012's turn to get in a few punches.

In fact, if the current forecast comes about (it's getting more inconsistent now that the weather gets more capricious as the Arctic warms, the further out you go) and things stay that way until the end of June, I may be tempted to say that a new record is going to be very difficult.

July would have to approach 2015 levels to turn things around. But we first have to see what happens exactly with regards to temperature, sea level pressure and melt pond distribution. Still, the first week of June, that crucial month, hasn't been good for melting, and thus good for the ice.

Naturally, this is what the next ASI update will be about.

[John Christensen]

Regarding the 2016 vs. 2012 race for first place:

At DMI's polarportal there is a nice graphic showing the Greenland accumulated surface mass balance (SMB), where you see that in 2012 the Greenland high pressure/heat dome by now was already getting in place, while we this year have seen a combination of early melting, but also considerably higher than average precipitation resulting in above average accumulated SMB:

http://polarportal.dk/en/groenlands-indlandsis/nbsp/isens-overflade/

[Colin Maycock]

Hi Neven,

While the JAXA numbers have been dropping slowly over the last week. There is a lot of blue on the Modis images and some of the areas previously covered by melt ponds in the East Siberian sea have already drained. The regional maps seem to be suggesting that a fair amount of ice has been transported back into areas of the AC and ESS that were previously cleared and have raised SST. So not really sure that it has been a "good" first week for sea ice in June.

[Neven]

Speaking of DMI. I don't know if it's your mail that did the trick, John Christensen, but the DMI SST anomaly map is back! I immediately made a comparison with previous years on the 2016 melting season thread over on the Forum.

So not really sure that it has been a "good" first week for sea ice in June.

Definitely, Colin. Like I say in this blog post that large patch of high-volume ice in the ESS is having it tough right now, and in days to come. The heat will then move to the Beaufort again, while the CAA continues to be bathed in a combination of clear skies and high temps. The snow is vanishing everywhere, and ice is being pushed towards warm Atlantic water.

But it's no first half of June 2012 (see here, for instance), the month with the largest volume drop in the PIOMAS record. I noticed some of the melting momentum effect in 2011, but it was really pronounced in 2012, although it took me a while to realize just how important preconditioning through melt pondings can be for the final outcome of a melting season.

Right now, there are many things going on at the same time, which makes it difficult to assess impacts on a deeper, largely invisible level, especially when compared to other years. But I'll try to analyse as best as I can when the month is over.

I'll have a melt pond May analysis next week, as soon as Dr Schröder sends me his (modelled) melt pond distribution maps. And there'll be some stuff in the next ASI update as well (hopefully a CAPIE replacement).

[Tom Zupancic]

Just a short note as the 2016 Arctic Sea Ice melt gets going. Given that the scientists posting here know a lot more than me about how this complex system works, as the melt gets going I simply wanted to mention, as a curious bystander, some comments regarding the relevant processes that affect the melt. So, setting aside the historically extreme prelude to 2016, ie. the warm winter that affected the amount of starting ice and the extreme amount of heat currently present in the climate system, (obviousy, it is heat that melts ice). Clearly, moving the ice into warmer regions is also relevant. As well as moving heat into the arctic via ocean currents. I will ignor the albedo effects of soot and such, since nobody has any good data about that. But albedo effects in general would appear to be relevant/substantial. I will further ignore kinetic energy such as waves as well as latent heat. Whatever. As an outside observer, correct me if I am wrong, it appears that this year starts with less (a lot less?) ice than usual. A key part of that ice, the old part, got fragmented and exposed to melt early on (by a process that led to substantial solar irradiation). Meanwhile, it has been consistently 'warm' in the far north. Thus, It would appear that events have set up a potentially substantial melt of arctic sea ice this year. Perhaps even an unprecedented melt. So many factors that drive sea ice melting have been combining so far. Am I missing something?

[John Christensen]

Hi Tom,

I don't want to steal Neven's thunder for the next bi-weekly update, but while the factors leading into this melting season have been very negative (from an Arctic sea ice perspective), the weather in the critical weeks of high summer (right now) is still very critical.

In addition to the comparison on the Greenland ice sheet that I shared above you can see the recent development on extent here (From DMI, my local sponsor):

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php

Extent in this period in 2012 was dropping very hard.

Also see the slight difference in when high-north temps reached the critical 273K mark here (DMI 80N):

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

A key reason can be found in present weather conditions, see here:

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/weather/arcticweather_imagecontainer.php

And then read the great Best of Blog entry "On persistent cyclones" for more details on history, nature and possible consequences of these persistent summer lows.

[John Christensen]

Speaking of DMI. I don't know if it's your mail that did the trick, John Christensen, but the DMI SST anomaly map is back!

I wish that was true.. ;-)

It is still a bit funky with the required time-lapse back step, but great having it back.

[wayne]

A couple of things of interest John:

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/ao_index.html

With recent AO trending negative, how is it not reflecting -again- current Arctic Ocean dominance of persistent cyclones affecting compaction. Tisk tisk , I would drop that AO theory affecting sea ice, because as we all know AO covers too big an area.

Secundo, DMI 80 N temp model surface temperature calculation offers a good idea about warming, especially compared with previous years calculations. That is all.

The real precision is with buoy surface temperature measurements in a standard height configuration. Unfortunately very scarce, 2015f June 8 average temp of -1.0 is very significant. Water for sure is present. Recent years buoy surface data albeit further North had much colder surface temperatures -5 to -6 same day, while in 2012, the data is more like 2016, closely similar with 2016 being a day or so warmer. The presence of Cyclones sticking so early means a lot of open water as well. broken ice.
What matters then is reliable surface temperatures indicating much warmer conditions, the ice may melt in place, something we are familiar with but much harder to grasp or to analyze.

[Sarat]

@iceBunny

I'm decrying my word choice =), looks like my attempt to rift of your post flopped, a little... Perhaps if you replace "raise" in PIJAMAS with a word "bulge" it will suddenly become funny and less of an actual correction.

As to the graph itself, I think the less ice we have the more noise we will see in the July-October region, and if we were to get to the "ice free zone" I would expect a sharp increase in thickness, unless things are really, really bad and there is no multi-year ice left.

[Sarat]

An observation on extent slowing right now...

Currently cyclones shifted the wind patters from compacting the ice to spreading it, to me it looks like this is resulting in increase export as well as a thinner more fractured ice in the Arctic Basin. With the temperatures there forecast to remain above average, I wouldn't be surprised if we see a return to a much steeper decline in the coming weeks.

[MusicScienceGuy]

Concerning the sea ice extent decline slowing: I concur. To my eyes, the way the winds are currently pushing the ice around, plus the cloudiness of the big low over the central arctic may be creating nearly ideal camouflage for an extreme thinning of the ice. take a gander at the ice drift chart here: http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticicespddrfnowcast.gif

All of the ice is being spread out, even the ice in Hudson's Bay and around Baffin Island. It's amazingly consistent, and can't last. Large areas are getting very thin ...

[Werther]

MSG, I agree. Today's MODIS shows floe-minimizing lead formation even close to the NP.
Still, it could work out similar to '13. But on a worse parallel because of less 'winter power' and a generally warmer biosphere...

[Robert S]

These lows don't seem to be bringing anywhere near the cloud cover that would be expected... and meanwhile they are sucking a lot of heat into the arctic, especially on the Russian side. I'm not sure that they are slowing the rate of melt much, if at all.

[Susan Anderson]

I have no idea if this is relevant, or if there is anything on the correlations, but to my untutored eye we are due for a busy hurricane season in the Atlantic (US East). As a venting system for heat, does it relate? If this is irrelevant, don't bother answering. Just curious.

Interesting the last few remarks about the extent increase, thanks.

[D]

NOAA is forecasting an average Atlantic hurricane season. Part of their reasoning is that the tropical Atlantic has slipped into a low activity mode. There's a so called oscillation called the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation that some people think made a shift around 2013. In my opinion, and in the opinion of Prof. Kerry Emanuel (listen to him, not me) the apparent oscillation is an artifact of aerosol cooling of the Atlantic in the 70s and 80s that ended when pollution controls in Europe cut sulfate emissions.

Whatever, if you look at the unfiltered AMO index, you will see that it is about the same now as it was in 2005 when Atlantic hurricanes spun out of control.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/correlation/amon.us.data

Needless to say, I am forecasting an above normal Atlantic hurricane season. Levi Cowan at Tropicaltidbits.com has a nice video where he makes his forecast of an average hurricane season. I disagree with his conclusion but his reasoning is good.

I don't think the climate models used in his forecast have been working well for the past year. They have mishandled the currents and the mixing of mid-level water in the equatorial Atlantic. The fresh Amazon river water damps out the mixing of cool mid-ocean water but the models have failed to catch the effects of the river water layer on the surface.

-Fish

[John Christensen]

Hi wayne,

You said:

With recent AO trending negative, how is it not reflecting -again- current Arctic Ocean dominance of persistent cyclones affecting compaction. Tisk tisk , I would drop that AO theory affecting sea ice, because as we all know AO covers too big an area.

Since Chris R made the same correlation on a recent thread, please let me clarify, what I believe are two different factors that just some times happen to coincide:

1. AO as preconditioning in spring and fall months:

With negative AO index in April-June, it means we have a higher degree of clear skies in the northern hemispheric area covered in this metric.
That is all.
My argument then is that in this period, where the heat balance is positive in the sense that the NH atmosphere and surface receives more heat than it dispels, then the predominantly clear skies enhances the positive heat balance.
The increased heat input in the NH area will melt snow and ice earlier, providing access for sun radiation to the water and ground earlier, so that even more heat can be absorbed.
This, I believe will have an impact on the Arctic sea ice.

For fall months of Oct-Dec, the situation is obviously reversed in the sense that clear skies allow for more heat to escape quicker, thereby enhancing the negative heat balance.

2. Weather/geographic distribution of high and low pressure areas:

This factor also can have significant impact on the sea ice, such as:
- Shielding the sea ice from sun radiation (early summer of '13)
- High pressure to maximize sun radiation (summer) or local heat loss (winter)

However, it is more tricky to predetermine the impact of highs and lows, as the exact position of these related to the position of other highs and lows can cause heat from other areas to be moved across ice covered areas, thereby enhancing the melting of sea ice.

Also, although negative AO index indicates a prevalence of high pressure areas within the NH area, there is no guarantee that a negative AO index will result in a high pressure being situated centrally in the Arctic Ocean - which is the point you made above.

So in brief, my point is that we are dealing with two different factors, which both can impact sea ice, but may or may not coincide.

[John Christensen]

Regarding the cyclones you said:

"The presence of Cyclones sticking so early means a lot of open water as well. broken ice."

Well, Serreze and Barrett (Copied from 'On persistent cyclones') are saying:

"Results from the present study suggest that, at least in part, the summer cyclone pattern owes its existence to differential atmospheric heating between the Arctic Ocean and snowfree land."

So you really don't need open water for the cyclones to form, but rather the reverse: The difference in temperature between heated land surface and relatively cold ice surface has a tendency to keep the cyclone in place.

And yes, the DMI80N is a rough, inaccurate measure, but still allows us to identify the difference in conditions between 2012 and 2016 on one side, and 2013 and 2014 with entirely different conditions in June.
I am just saying that the conditions at this exact point in 2012 seem to have been slightly worse than this year for the same time.
That can change again easily, of course.

[Colorado Bob]

The new Greenland paper as some real nuggets -

“The number of melt days in the north eastern, western and north western regions, was up to 30-40 days above the 1981-2010 average and setting new records for melt water production and runoff in the north western region.”

Link

It’s thought that by lessening the temperature difference between polar latitudes and more temperate regions, climate change can slow down the jet stream, and this slowdown could give the jet stream enough wiggle room to let it bend far more northward than it usually does. In fact, the study reveals the northernmost record of the jet stream ever observed.

Link

Wobbly Jet Stream Is Sending the Melting Arctic into ‘Uncharted Territory’

A shift in weather patterns created a month of extreme melting, prompting scientists’ concern about the impact on long-term climate models.

Extraordinary melting in Greenland’s ice sheet last summer was linked to warm air delivered by the wandering jet stream, a phenomenon that scientists have increasingly tied to global warming.

This interplay of climate phenomena, described in a new study in the journal Nature Communications, is more evidence of the complex ways in which the Arctic’s climate is heading for “uncharted territory,” said the study’s lead author, Marco Tedesco.

The study adds to an emerging theory on the effects of the pronounced warming of the Arctic, where temperatures are rising faster than in more temperate zones, as models have long predicted. Known as “Arctic amplification,” this moderates the normal temperature incline that drives the jet stream. If it makes the jet stream wobble, as some scientists suspect, it would suck warm air up into the Arctic—as was observed in Greenland last year.

Link

[wayne]

John

"Results from the present study suggest that, at least in part, the summer cyclone pattern owes its existence to differential atmospheric heating between the Arctic Ocean and snowfree land."

Yes , currently partly true, not so for the Canadian High Arctic still loaded with snow, these current cyclones are a response to the lack of differential temperatures when sea ice and land temperatures have equalized, more open water helped the process. Its a transition burst, eventually when the bromide event fog and low clouds bursts settle, the cooler places will stand out again and Anticyclones will reappear. I have noted very early on, when Beaufort Sea first opened, a mini cyclone settled there over its newly exposed water despite a very strong nearby High pressure. It was a self explaining natural reaction.

[John Christensen]

wayne,

Yes, I agree there can be more local weather phenomena, where the moisture escaping open water areas creates a local low pressure for a period of time.

[wayne]

Susan and D

" I have no idea if this is relevant, or if there is anything on the correlations, but to my untutored eye we are due for a busy hurricane season in the Atlantic (US East). As a venting system for heat, does it relate? If this is irrelevant, don't bother answering. Just curious."

These Hurricanes (Tropical Cyclones) always vent heat, its the larger holistic pattern which dictates where they go. So D is right
they will appear more frequent, but because the over all global circulation patterns, caused by La-Nina and others lIke a High Pressure Covering the larger North Atlantic, make them return to your coast. Its like funnelling the energy in a narrower area rather distributing the heat more widely, no one cares about a hurricane only rolling along an Ocean path.

[John Christensen]

On the wobbly jet stream:

"Extraordinary melting in Greenland’s ice sheet last summer was linked to warm air delivered by the wandering jet stream"

Yes: The AO index for July 2015 was -1,108, which was the second strongest negative AO index for July on record.

Negative AO slows down the jet stream and makes it wobbly, so what happened in July 2015 fits the general AO/jet stream theory that was initially conceived by the great Edward Lorenz, who came up with the chaos theory, as he was running data in weather forecasting models.

[Susan Anderson]

Thanks from Boston. I think there will be some relief from the extraordinary cyclonic excess in the Pacific, but as you say, if they are funneled along my coast that is less towards anywhere else but possibly southern Greenland, but it will affect our politics (if we have to have 'em, that's not a bad thing imho). Sandy helped Obama's first landslide.

I should learn to embed these things, but here's an overview, big cyclonic thing my meteorologist friend says was like Iceland today:
http://mp1.met.psu.edu/~fxg1/SAT_NHEM/animw.html

Looks to me like busy stuff coming from Africa, a bit early. Wunderground people are talking about it.

But as to the Arctic, I was more interested in if the heat our way is relieved, does it end up further north. Too much stuff in the way, I'd guess, but I am such an amateur!

[Hans Gunnstaddar]

Looks like one of the extent maps dated 6/10 has 2016 matching 2012, but if ESS ice continues current fast melt that could change quickly.

[D]

Susan, everything it tied together. Remember Sandy's weird track? The lack of sea ice on the Atlantic side of the Arctic may have had something to do with that weird track and the huge high pressure area over Greenland. Jet stream patterns interact with the heat in the oceans.

This June's ocean heat patterns are very strange with a warm PDO pattern, large amounts of heat globally just off the equator and warm water pushing into the Arctic from the Atlantic.

2004 and 2005 are 2 of the most analogous years but the PDO was negative then. Levi Cowan of Tropicaltidbits.com has a good discussion of the SST patterns in his hurricane season forecast for 2016.

[wayne]

Pretend you are on sea ice near the Pole, here is what happens when temperatures are near 0 C for the first time. Just prior, ice somewhat steady but moving, the sky somewhat grey but bluing, then its like Iceland outside geothermal pool in the middle of winter, what appears to be steam is in fact a wild mix of fog and organic chemicals, unleashed by myriad leads opening. Sea ice moves more fluidly, this fog stabilizes the warming to a flat trend, it also opposes the formation of Anticyclones over a wider area. Once most chemicals have photo reacted, this fog will diminish, remaining sea ice will form a cooling zone favoring Anticyclones. The North Pole Arctic Ocean is currently in this transition phase, its the final sea ice area to do so. I would expect the return of Anticyclones more or less near the North Pole within about 2 weeks, especially because the open water over Beaufort Sea will favor Cyclones.

[Hans Gunnstaddar]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/06/10/greenland-witnessed-its-highest-june-temperature-ever-recorded-on-thursday/

75F/24C in Greenland sets new high temp. record for June!

[John Christensen]

wayne said:

"Once most chemicals have photo reacted, this fog will diminish, remaining sea ice will form a cooling zone favoring Anticyclones. The North Pole Arctic Ocean is currently in this transition phase, its the final sea ice area to do so. I would expect the return of Anticyclones more or less near the North Pole within about 2 weeks,"

Interesting, it seems to contradict the findings by Serreze and Barrett, but something will need to move the current low eventually, so let's see, thanks wayne.

[Bill Fothergill]

RE: Washington Post article concerning record June temps in Greenland

Hans,
Did you read the comments section following the article you posted? If not, select the "oldest first" option, and spend a few minutes browsing through the collected pearls of wisdom.

It would be fucking hilarious, were it not for one chilling fact: those comments come from the self-same people who get to determine who becomes the next POTUS.

Bloody hell, the idealistic concept of the universal franchise has some serious drawbacks. (Or, it this case, some serious throw-backs.)

:-(

[D]

Bill, the willful ignorance of a vast swath of Americans is very disturbing given the power of the U.S. The good news is that the millennial generation is not fooled at all by the liars and deniers who try to fool them about climate change. The jerks posting climate nonsense on the internet are not representative of most Americans, especially younger Americans who will have to deal with the impacts of climate change,