Arctic Ice Discussion. 2013 Melt Season

[4wd]

That's just Dana Nutticelli from SKS, an activist site which is chummy with The Guardian.

 

This for example.

Both articles also wrongly claimed that global warming has "paused" since 1997. In reality, global surface temperatures have warmed over the past 15 years, albeit more slowly than during the previous 15 years

 

The pause phrase has been used widely even by the Met Office because ther has been no statistically significant warming for more than 15 years.

It's highly likely there will be no statistically significant warming for at least 20 years too even if the next 2 or 3 years show some warming - the pause has gone on that long.

It's just as much cherry-picking to take a slightly longer period and claim the recent lack of warming has now disappeared.

It's not as though we were having a bit of warming then a cooler year or two - there simply is not any upward trend for a difficult to explain length of time now.

 

[Methuselah]

That's just Dana Nutticelli from SKS, an activist site which is chummy with The Guardian.However the Mail piece is naive to say the least.Fact remains that 'scientists' who should know better extrapolated a single unusually low year 2007 into 'no ice by 2013' - this was translated into scaremonger headlines by the BBC and others - who should also know better - and needless to say they now look foolish.AGW reporting is littered with overblown scaremongering claims like this, you could write a book and one day someone will. 

I think it was actually more like: maybe by 2016, plus or minus 3 years? But, whatever - it was never more than one person's opinion. The way in which idiot journalists interpret each-and-every study as fact, is what concerns me more...

[Gavin Hannah]

I can honestly say that I don't pay enough attention to the science regarding climate change, but I do know the Joe Bastardi is constantly tweeting Anti-AGW stuff. Citing various different resources etc and bashing the AGW subscribers. 

 

I feel this is a debate that will run and run for some time yet.  

[knocker]

The fact still remains that  Greenland is still a net loser of ice in 2013 despite relatively cool summer.

[Gavin Hannah]

The fact still remains that  Greenland is still a net loser of ice in 2013 despite relatively cool summer.

 

If Greenland lost it's ice sheets then that would be a disaster for sea levels if i'm not mistaken?  The arctic sea ice melting actually lowers sea levels i believe, whereas, if Greenland were to become ice free, sea levels would rise considerably.  

[knocker]

Yes it's glacier melt, smb loss in Antarctica and Greenland. plus thermal expansion that contributes to sea level rise. Fortunately I don't think we will lose the Greenland ice sheet any time soon.

[stewfox]

This for example.

Both articles also wrongly claimed that global warming has "paused" since 1997. In reality, global surface temperatures have warmed over the past 15 years, albeit more slowly than during the previous 15 years

 

The pause phrase has been used widely even by the Met Office because ther has been no statistically significant warming for more than 15 years.

It's highly likely there will be no statistically significant warming for at least 20 years too even if the next 2 or 3 years show some warming - the pause has gone on that long.

It's just as much cherry-picking to take a slightly longer period and claim the recent lack of warming has now disappeared.

It's not as though we were having a bit of warming then a cooler year or two - there simply is not any upward trend for a difficult to explain length of time now.

 

 

Of course the Daily Mail article was cherry picking ,even though it was factual. On the other side we have had 20 years of cherry picking and non facual

 

Comments in the response such as

 

"""""The Arctic has lost 75 per cent of its summer sea ice volume over the past three decades primarily due to human-caused global warming"""""

 

Glad that's all sorted we now know its all mans fault.

 

I bet none of the scientist's had a value above 4m see note below

 

""Around 80% of the ~100 scientists at the Bjerknes [Arctic climate science] conference thought that there would be MORE Arctic sea-ice in 2013, compared to 2012."

 

 

I guess they wonder why the Daily post such stuff with the """"rapid long-term Arctic sea ice death spiral"""". Who writes their stuff ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 9, 2013 by stewfox

[stewfox]

 

From the latest PIOMAS data updated since that graph and taking the last day 243 (Sept 1st) as the minimum (it's always actually been later than this)  there has indeed been a significant increase in volume over last year due mainly the second highest volume increase followed by a melt which was actually bang on the long term average.

Another freeze/melt cycle similar to the past 12 months would see the minimum above 2007 and equal to 2009. Continuing at this rate would see average volume return by 2016/7.

 

However, this has been the second highest year on year net ice volume gain on the record, the chance of it happening in consecutive years must be considered remote at best. The volume decline has been inexorable since the beginning of recording, not just in the past decade - 24 out of 34 years has seen a net loss. Only twice have there been back to back gains and never 3 years in a row.

Yearly minimum volume	Loss	Gain1980	-0.716	1981	-3.55	1982		0.8061983		1.6821984	-0.597	1985	-0.005	1986		1.461987	-0.759	1988	-0.323	1989	-0.204	1990	-0.97	1991	-0.203	1992		1.3881993	-2.63	1994		1.3771995	-2.426	1996		2.531997	-0.537	1998	-1.666	1999	-0.596	2000		0.0382001		1.2252002	-1.387	2003	-0.552	2004	-0.359	2005	-0.722	2006	-0.166	2007	-2.535	2008		0.6142009	-0.179	2010	-2.465	2011	-0.411	2012	-0.756	2013		1.816

 

We are still relatively at a very low volume so we cant compare historic figures. I expect another big increase in volume next year. It would be miles of the long term average but...

If Greenland lost it's ice sheets then that would be a disaster for sea levels if i'm not mistaken?  The arctic sea ice melting actually lowers sea levels i believe, whereas, if Greenland were to become ice free, sea levels would rise considerably.  

 

Artic sea ice floats on the artic ocean. A total melt out wouldn't add or reduce sea levels.

[knocker]

Long-term trends in the Arctic

Edited September 9, 2013 by knocker

[keithlucky]

To early to talk about a recovery but signs are positive There has been a 60 per cent increase in the amount of ocean covered with ice compared to this time last year, they equivalent of almost a million square miles. In a rebound from 2012's record low an unbroken ice sheet more than half the size of Europe already stretches from the Canadian islands to Russia's northern shores, days before the annual re-freeze is even set to begin.'

[knocker]

Read the previous post. Why is one year sigificant whichever side of the fence one is on?

 

Monthly August ice extent for 1979 to 2013 shows a decline of 10.6% per decade.

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Nights King]

 

Read the previous post. Why is one year sigificant whichever side of the fence one is on?

 

Monthly August ice extent for 1979 to 2013 shows a decline of 10.6% per decade.

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

[*]

 

 

I agree it isn't significant but it is interesting none the less to see such a large jump after last year and will be interesting to see where we stand in 10 years time either way.

 

Where do we stand at the moment with this melt season anyway? Is the re-freeze underway yet?

[Methuselah]

I agree it isn't significant but it is interesting none the less to see such a large jump after last year and will be interesting to see where we stand in 10 years time either way.

 

Where do we stand at the moment with this melt season anyway? Is the re-freeze underway yet?

But, M83, we've had shouts of 'RECOVERY' every other year since I've posting on Net Weather!  It's a bit like James Madden's winter forecasts; if one keeps claiming the same thing for long enough, it's bound to happen in the end?

Edited September 10, 2013 by A Boy Named Sue

[VillagePlank]

But, M83, we've had shouts of 'RECOVERY' every other year since I've posting on Net Weather!  It's a bit like James Madden's winter forecasts; if one keeps claiming the same thing for long enough, it's bound to happen in the end?

 

Surely you are not suggesting that if enough sceptics shout 'recovery' the arctic ice will, actually, recover?

[Gavin Hannah]

Ice pack showing signs that the melt has 'bottomed out'?  While more snow across Russia and northern Canada.  

 

http://www.natice.noaa.gov/pub/ims/ims_gif/DATA/cursnow_asiaeurope.gif

[barrel1234]

Although I acknowledge that the basin is not doing very well (if your an iceophile) I do think that the ice that we have retained this year is in the right place to have a chance of resisting a melt out next year too.

 

  the Atlantic side is more likely to be exported south and lost so IMO its best to have the multi year ice more central or over the other side- that way at least its more likely to have to be melted rather than just being exported out.

 

   This is why I see this year as being much better in regards to ice retention than 2007 or more obviously 2012

[stewfox]

Ice pack showing signs that the melt has 'bottomed out'?  While more snow across Russia and northern Canada.  

 

http://www.natice.noaa.gov/pub/ims/ims_gif/DATA/cursnow_asiaeurope.gif

 

Yes a small increase today but a few more days before we know that we are at the min, then all eyes on the winter 'recovery'

 

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

[Gavin Hannah]

Arctic Ice sitting at  4,809,288 today.  Only 9288 from falling below 4.8Million SqKM

[knocker]

Ed Hawkins.

 

Following the Mail on Sunday article on 'growing' sea ice, some sea-ice facts | 2013 is close to linear trend |

 

 

[loafer]

And the significance of that is...?

[knocker]

The danger of taking one two years data, whichever side of the fence you are on, making out it's hugely significant and turning it into a headline grabber.

[Gray-Wolf]

Anyone care to enlighten me as to the impacts , over re-freeze, of extra ice cover? When we have record losses we get folk telling us how this will aid 're-freeze' so does the opposite now apply with surplus ice? Will it limit heat loss into the atmosphere? Will the cover of ice limit any basal growth via insulation? Are we facing a very low figure for ice growth this winter compared to the years that had a lot more open water to freeze over?

[fishthekiller500]

Anyone care to enlighten me as to the impacts , over re-freeze, of extra ice cover? When we have record losses we get folk telling us how this will aid 're-freeze' so does the opposite now apply with surplus ice? Will it limit heat loss into the atmosphere? Will the cover of ice limit any basal growth via insulation? Are we facing a very low figure for ice growth this winter compared to the years that had a lot more open water to freeze over?

I guess we will have to wait and see, otherwise it's possible that the ice may not have record increases in extent during the refreeze season. 

[knocker]

Is Arctic sea ice shrinking or expanding?

 

http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/is-arctic-sea-ice-shrinking-or-expanding/

Edited September 13, 2013 by knocker

[stewfox]

Is Arctic sea ice shrinking or expanding?

 

http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/is-arctic-sea-ice-shrinking-or-expanding/

 

You don't often see the comment  """"" They show a long-term trend of decline in sea ice extent, at an annual rate of more than 4% per decade"""" Fair play

 

10%/12% decline per decade sounds much better (although its referring to individual months)

 

'Death spiral' or recovery we shall see.

 

16k drop today, so still not at min , I expect to be in next few days.

 

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm