PDA

View Full Version : Arctic ice 'is at tipping point'


Kassy
08-28-2008, 01:47 PM
Arctic sea ice has shrunk to the second smallest extent since satellite records began, US scientists have revealed.

The National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) says that the ice-covered area has fallen below its 2005 level, which was the second lowest on record.

Melting has occurred earlier in the year than usual, meaning that the iced area could become even smaller than last September, the lowest recorded.

Researchers say the Arctic is now at a climatic "tipping point".

"We could very well be in that quick slide downwards in terms of passing a tipping point," said Mark Serreze, a senior scientist at the Colorado-based NSIDC.

"It's tipping now. We're seeing it happen now," he told the Associated Press news agency.

Under covered

The area covered by ice on 26 August measured 5.26 million sq km (2.03 million sq miles), just below the 2005 low of 5.32 million sq km (2.05 million sq).

But the 2005 low came in late September; and with the 2008 graph pointing downwards, the NSIDC team believes last year's record could still be broken even though air temperatures, both in the Arctic and globally, have been lower than last year.

Last September, the ice covered just 4.13 million sq km (1.59 million sq miles), the smallest extent seen since satellite imaging began 30 years ago. The 1980 figure was 7.8 million sq km (3 million sq miles).

Most of the cover consists of relatively thin ice that formed within a single winter and melts more easily than ice that accumulated over many years.

Irrespective of whether the 2007 record falls in the next few weeks, the long-term trend is obvious, scientists said; the ice is declining more sharply than even a decade ago, and the Arctic region will progressively turn to open water in summers.

A few years ago, scientists were predicting ice-free Arctic summers by about 2080.

Then computer models started projecting earlier dates, around 2030 to 2050; and some researchers now believe it could happen within five years.

That will bring economic opportunities, including the chance to drill for oil and gas. Burning that oil and gas would increase levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere still further.

The absence of summer ice would have impacts locally and globally.

The iconography of polar bears unable to find ice is by now familiar; but other species, including seals, would also face drastic changes to their habitat, as would many Arctic peoples.

Globally, the Arctic melt will reinforce warming because open water absorbs more of the Sun's energy than ice does.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7585645.stm

Kassy
08-28-2008, 01:50 PM
http://www.socc.ca/seaice/seaice_current_e.cfm

site with update (from Arctic Watch on originl board)

graph (idem) ~ hattip BuilderBob.

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png

BuilderBob
08-28-2008, 02:56 PM
Keep your eye on it. Still at least three weeks of melt to go. Still more than three million square kilometres of ice to melt. Very little "baby ice" left. :wink:

BuilderBob
08-29-2008, 03:16 AM
Found this link below at Sea Ice Stretch Run #3 (http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3463) post #88.

Surprise soot from ship emissions (http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2008/jul/science/nl_soot.html)

Also suggestions that increased ice breaker activity is having some effect.

BuilderBob
08-30-2008, 05:28 AM
Here is a recent satellite picture of the Arctic from NASA. LINK (http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/single.php?2008242/crefl1_143.A2008242195501-2008242200000.4km.jpg)

The picture is rotated 90 degrees so the North Pole is top centre.

It is still melting, but there is just over 5 million square kilometres of ice there. It appears very unlikely that the ice at the pole itself will melt, never mind all of it.

To me it looks like the ice is dirty. In view of the reports of soot this might be the case.

Kassy
08-31-2008, 04:25 AM
News is from Independent on sunday but they have some server problems this morning so i translated a dutch piece.

North pole navigable for first time

For the first time in modern history it's possible to sail a ship around the north pole.

Molten

Above and around the Northern Icesea so much ice melted that for the first time in 125.000 years the northeast and northwest passage are navigable at the same time.

Reported by british newspaper The Independent on Sunday on basis of recent staellite images anylised by scientist.

Open

The northwest passage from the Atlantic ocean along Greenland and between Canadian islands to the Pacific ocean is open since past weekend. A few days later the last icetongue that blocked the northeast passage of Finland and Siberia to the Pacfic ocean collapsed.

Deadly spiral

According to prof. Mark Serreze from (NSIDC) it's a historic event and it might be a deadly spiral

Inverted

In 2005 the northeastern passage opened while the northwestern passage was covered in ice. Last years pattern was the reverse.

Noordpool voor het eerst omvaarbaar

Voor het eerst in de moderne geschiedenis is het mogelijk om met een schip rond de Noordpool te varen.


Gesmolten

Boven en rond de Noordelijke IJszee is zoveel ijs gesmolten dat voor het eerst in zeker 125.000 jaar de noordoostelijke en de noordwestelijke doorvaart tegelijk bevaarbaar zijn. Dat meldt de Britse krant The Independent on Sunday op basis van recente satellietbeelden die door wetenschappers zijn geanalyseerd.
Open

De noordwestpassage van de Atlantische Oceaan langs Groenland en tussen Canadese eilanden door naar de Stille Oceaan is sinds afgelopen weekeind open. Enkele dagen later viel de laatste ijstong uit elkaar die de noordoostpassage van Finland langs Rusland en Siberië naar de Stille Oceaan blokkeerde.

Dodelijke spiraal

Volgens prof. Mark Serreze, een drijfijsdeskundige van het Amerikaanse Nationale Sneeuw en IJs Data Centrum (NSIDC), is er sprake van een 'historische gebeurtenis'. Door de opwarming van de aarde is de ijskap van de Noordpool mogelijk in een 'dodelijke spiraal' terechtgekomen, zegt hij.
Omgekeerd

In 2005 ging de noordoostelijke doorvaart open terwijl de noordwestelijke in de greep van het ijs bleef. Vorig jaar was het juist omgekeerd.

http://www.rtl.nl/(/actueel/rtlnieuws/buitenland/articleview/)/components/actueel/rtlnieuws/2008/08_augustus/31/buitenland/0831_0730_noordpool_ligt_los.xml

Kassy
08-31-2008, 06:01 AM
NINE polar bears are lost in the Arctic Sea and face an impossible 640km swim back to shore because of global warming, scientists say.

The bears plunged into the sea after the ice floe where they lived melted, and although land was only 100km away, their homing instinct sent them north towards the ever-shrinking polar ice cap.

Scientists are now considering sending a ship in a bid to rescue them.

The bears were spotted in open ocean by US government oil survey scientists flying in a helicopter over Alaska's Chukchi Sea.

Experts with the World Wide Fund for Nature fear the bears won't make it to land on their own despite being strong swimmers.

In May, the US Department of the Interior listed polar bears as threatened under the Endangered Species Act because the Arctic ice they hunt on is melting so quickly.

"The Arctic is a vast ocean and to find nine bears swimming in one area is extremely worrying because it means that dozens more are probably in the same predicament," Margaret Williams, the director of WWF's Alaska office, said.

She said animal groups were considering asking the US government to send a Coast Guard ship to rescue some of the bears.

"As climate change continues to dramatically disrupt the Arctic, polar bears and their cubs are being forced to swim longer distances to find food and habitat," she said.

Arctic scientists said they feared the annual ice-melt had passed its tipping point where not enough freezes each winter to make up for what melted the previous summer.

Professor Richard Steiner, of the University of Alaska's Marine Advisory Program, said the bears' plight was a portent of what's to come.

"The bottom line here is that polar bears need sea ice, sea ice is decaying because of the greenhouse effect, and the bears are in very serious trouble," he said.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24270074-5006003,00.html

BuilderBob
08-31-2008, 09:31 AM
Gosh! Are the poor things still smimming? AP reported this HERE (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j9NGJ0_eVkxqgpEFC6RMHVlvT9qwD92N0NF02) on the 21st August.

Kassy
09-01-2008, 04:42 PM
Gosh! Are the poor things still smimming? AP reported this HERE (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j9NGJ0_eVkxqgpEFC6RMHVlvT9qwD92N0NF02) on the 21st August.

They're swimming the wrong way...

Didn't know they were that slow though. :beer:

BuilderBob
09-02-2008, 04:13 AM
I hope they weren't the ones that landed on Iceland. They were "promptly shot". Didn't note the link to that. So many stories about polar bears on the web. Even Sarah Palin, Senator John McCain’s running mate, has lots to say about polar bears.

One point to remember, polar bears have been on this planet longer than we have, and it sure looks like we aint going to last as long as they did. :beer:

Kassy
09-06-2008, 03:57 AM
Best go to the link for graphs:
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Sign up for the Arctic Sea Ice News RSS feed for automatic notification of analysis updates.


Following a record rate of ice loss through the month of August, Arctic sea ice extent already stands as the second-lowest on record, further reinforcing conclusions that the Arctic sea ice cover is in a long-term state of decline. With approximately two weeks left in the melt season, the possibility of setting a new record annual minimum in September remains open.

Overview of conditions

Arctic sea ice extent on September 3 was 4.85 million square kilometers (1.87 million square miles), a decline of 2.47 million square kilometers (950,000 square miles) since the beginning of August.

Extent is now within 370,000 square kilometers (140,000 square miles) of last year’s value on the same date and is 2.08 million square kilometers (800,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average.

Conditions in context

In a typical year, the daily rate of ice loss starts to slow in August as the Arctic begins to cool. By contrast, in August 2008, the daily decline rate remained steadily downward and strong.

The average daily ice loss rate for August 2008 was 78,000 square kilometers per day (30,000 square miles per day). This is the fastest rate of daily ice loss that scientists have ever observed during a single August. Losses were 15,000 square kilometers per day (5,800 square miles per day) faster than in August 2007, and 27,000 square kilometers per day (10,000 square miles per day) faster than average.

This August's rapid ice loss reflects a thin sea ice cover that needed very little additional energy to melt out.



Regional ice loss contributes to decline

What part of the Arctic contributed most strongly to the rapid August decline? Through spring and early summer, ice losses were largest in the Beaufort Sea. In August, the pattern of ice loss changed, with the greatest ice losses shifting to the Chukchi and East Siberian Seas.

The shift in location of maximum ice losses was fueled by a shift in atmospheric circulation. A pattern of high pressure set up over the Chukchi Sea, bringing warm southerly air into the region and pushing ice away from shore. August air temperatures in the Chukchi Sea (at 925 millibars pressure, roughly 750 meters [2,500 feet] in altitude) were 5 to 7 degrees Celsius (9 to 13 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than normal. Ice loss in the Chukchi and East Siberian Seas averaged 14,000 square kilometers (5,400 square miles) per day faster than in 2007.

Sea ice also experienced an unusual retreat north of Ellesmere Island during August. Partial collapse of ice shelves in the region attended this retreat. Visit the Trent University press release at: http://www.trentu.ca/newsevents/newsreleases_080903iceshelf.php.


Warm ocean temperatures

Mike Steele and Wendy Ermold from the University of Washington’s Applied Physics Laboratory Polar Science Center have been closely monitoring sea surface temperatures in the Arctic.

Positive sea surface temperature anomalies for August 2008 correspond with areas of ice retreat. When the ice melts, it exposes open water that absorbs solar energy; the warm ocean waters then favor further sea ice melt. An interesting phenomenon, in this regard, is that sea ice this August has been drifting into the Beaufort Sea only to melt when it encounters these warm ocean waters.

As autumn comes to the Arctic, the ocean will begin to lose its heat back to the atmosphere. This means that regions of high sea surface temperatures seen in August will be manifested as above-average air temperature in corresponding regions as autumn unfolds.



August 2008 average extent compared to past Augusts

Arctic sea ice extent averaged over the month of August was 6.03 million square kilometers (2.33 million square miles). This is 1.64 million square kilometers (633,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 August average,

However, August 2008 was still 670,000 square kilometers (260,000 square miles) above August 2007, despite the record-breaking rate of decline over the past month. Why would this be? The best explanation for this is that this summer did not experience the "perfect storm" of atmospheric conditions seen throughout the summer of 2007.

Even though August ice extent was above that of August 2007, the downward trend for August ice loss has now gone from -8.4% per decade to -8.7% per decade.

BuilderBob
09-09-2008, 01:59 PM
The last few weeks ice reduction has been amazing. Causing much concern in the blogosphere. One of the theories, not proveable of course, is the wind. Some severe gales in the Arctic during August have caused ice compaction. This exposes more sea surface and the satellites duly record ice loss.

Whatever. There are still some big lumps floating about freely. The Russians have set up a research station on one of these ice floes. They expect to be there for a year.

Russia’s new Arctic station (http://www.barentsobserver.com/russias-new-arctic-station.4506414.html)

The Russian Arctic research vessel ”Akademik Fyodorov” last week provided manpower and equipment for the North Pole-36 drifting Arctic research station. Eighteen researchers will spend up to 12 months on the ice floe.
The research mission will start on an ice floe located in the area between the Wrangel Island and the North Pole, Rossiiskaya Gazeta reports.

The researchers spent only two day on the finding of the appropriate ice flow for the mission, far less than last year’s North Pole-35 expedition. The ice floe has a diameter of 6 km and is up to 2,8 meter thick.

It is expected that the drifting ice floe in the end will bring the researchers into the Canadian part of the Arctic.

BuilderBob
09-14-2008, 03:39 PM
You know, people make jokes about watching paint dry, but watching for ice to stop melting takes the biscuit!

This site here (http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/plot.csv) has daily Arctic ice extent records from June 2002.
I've copied out data for just the month of September for 2006, 2007 and 2008.
It is interesting to see that the melt in 2006 was proceeding steadily, also for 2007.
But 2008 shows a small recovery on the 10th and a bit more on the 11th and then the melt continues
for the 12th and 13th. Looks like a deliberate windup! :D

It is still possible for the 2008 melt to exceed 2007 but I won't bet on it.

09,01,2006,5993438 09,01,2007,4610938 09,01,2008,4957656
09,02,2006,5977813 09,02,2007,4617031 09,02,2008,4924219
09,03,2006,5958125 09,03,2007,4580000 09,03,2008,4927031
09,04,2006,5935313 09,04,2007,4528125 09,04,2008,4868906
09,05,2006,5934531 09,05,2007,4484531 09,05,2008,4825625
09,06,2006,5918438 09,06,2007,4447031 09,06,2008,4808281
09,07,2006,5921875 09,07,2007,4436719 09,07,2008,4739844
09,08,2006,5935781 09,08,2007,4413438 09,08,2008,4715469
09,09,2006,5936094 09,09,2007,4399531 09,09,2008,4707813
09,10,2006,5926094 09,10,2007,4367188 09,10,2008,4729688
09,11,2006,5896719 09,11,2007,4343438 09,11,2008,4751563
09,12,2006,5864219 09,12,2007,4327969 09,12,2008,4745156
09,13,2006,5814063 09,13,2007,4323750 09,13,2008,4732344

southerncross
09-15-2008, 06:10 AM
Above and around the Northern Icesea so much ice melted that for the first time in 125.000 years the northeast and northwest passage are navigable at the same time.

The average daily ice loss rate for August 2008 was 78,000 square kilometers per day (30,000 square miles per day). This is the fastest rate of daily ice loss that scientists have ever observed during a single August. Losses were 15,000 square kilometers per day (5,800 square miles per day) faster than in August 2007, and 27,000 square kilometers per day (10,000 square miles per day) faster than average.


Don't forget that they have only been "observing" this natural phenomenon for the last thirty years how do they know that this is the first time in 125,000 yrs that the northeast/west passages have been navigable by ship? They have no real documented history to compare events like this against except for the last thirty years, so who is to say it's normal or not.

BuilderBob
09-15-2008, 09:52 AM
Here is an example of where it has been open;

http://www.ucalgary.ca/arcticexpedition/larsenexpeditions

FROM VANCOUVER TO HALIFAX, 1940-42

The Northwest Passage, a series of channels which wind their way through the Arctic Archipelago, has long been the object of attention for Arctic explorers. From Henry Hudson in 1611 to the doomed Franklin party in 1845-48, the promise of prestige and discovery - not to mention large prizes from the British Admiralty - drew men to venture across the frozen Arctic waters. The first successful transit was made between 1903 and 1906 by the Norwegian Roald Amundsen in the 47 ton herring Boat Gjøa.

Commanded by Corporal Henry Larsen, the RCMP vessel St. Roch was the first Canadian vessel to make the transit, the first ship to make the passage from west to east (1940-2) and the first vessel to complete the trip in only one season (1944).

<map and more on the link>

BuilderBob
09-17-2008, 02:05 PM
Seems like the Arctic melt is "officially" over.

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

I enjoyed this sentence:
...the natural variability of the climate system has frequently been known to trick human efforts at forecasting the future. :D

Fiddlerdave
09-18-2008, 06:28 AM
Your sentence in context:
A word of caution on calling the minimum

Determining with certainty when the minimum has occurred is difficult until the melt season has decisively ended. For example, in 2005, the time series began to level out in early September, prompting speculation that we had reached the minimum. However, the sea ice contracted later in the season, again reducing sea ice extent and causing a further drop in the absolute minimum.

We mention this now because the natural variability of the climate system has frequently been known to trick human efforts at forecasting the future. It is still possible that ice extent could fall again, slightly, because of either further melting or a contraction in the area of the pack due to the motion of the ice. However, we have now seen five days of gains in extent. Because of the variability of sea ice at this time of year, the National Snow and Ice Data Center determines the minimum using a five-day running mean value.

And a further note:

Despite overall cooler summer temperatures, the 2008 minimum extent is only 390,000 square kilometers (150,000 square miles), or 9.4%, more than the record-setting 2007 minimum. The 2008 minimum extent is 15.0% less than the next-lowest minimum extent set in 2005 and 33.1% less than the average minimum extent from 1979 to 2000.

This season further reinforces the long-term downward trend of sea ice extent.

cpeterka
09-18-2008, 12:23 PM
OK, I know... it's not a trend,
But comparing yesterday's ( Sept 16th, 2008 ) to Today's ( Sept 17th, 2008 ) charts at http://www.nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_extent_hires.png

It looks like it's halting the melting and starting to move back to growth.

I guess we'll have to wait for 2009 for it to disappear.

BuilderBob
09-19-2008, 01:51 PM
Your sentence in context:


And a further note:

Thanks for making the point and posting the extended details. You have done us all a favour.

The NSIDC have posted a very grudging admission that they just might have got it a little bit wrong. I went back to the CE.COM site to look up the thread Arctic Watch and check the links to the NSIDC posted there. Sadly all the links showed current data so I was unable to post any of the past predictions, mainly the one about "ice free North Pole this year". Also I was unable to find any archive of their ice condition summaries. Ah well!

We now have an archive of an NSIDC claim that:
This season further reinforces the long-term downward trend of sea ice extent.
I have no problem with this claim. We will just have to wait and see. If you check out this site (http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/plot.csv) you will see that the "ice extent" has not quite finished decreasing if we look for a five day running average, so the figure of 9.4% could decrease. I'm betting on a bigger ice increase this winter than last.
By the way, NASA will be hosting a conference on the web on the 23rd September to discuss the current behavior of the sun.

And now I find the thread Arctic Watch no longer shows on the CE.COM site. jeeze!!

southerncross
09-22-2008, 11:08 AM
I have no problem with this claim. We will just have to wait and see. If you check out this site you will see that the "ice extent" has not quite finished decreasing if we look for a five day running average, so the figure of 9.4% could decrease. I'm betting on a bigger ice increase this winter than last.
By the way, NASA will be hosting a conference on the web on the 23rd September to discuss the current behavior of the sun.

And now I find the thread Arctic Watch no longer shows on the CE.COM site. jeeze!!
Reply With Quote

All this discussion on Ice cap melt is redundant, there is only 30yr's of research to base things on. 30yr's compared to hundred of thousand's or million's of Yr's of possible variance's. Where is the benchmark for research???

Kassy
09-22-2008, 04:17 PM
Thanks for making the point and posting the extended details. You have done us all a favour.

The NSIDC have posted a very grudging admission that they just might have got it a little bit wrong. I went back to the CE.COM site to look up the thread Arctic Watch and check the links to the NSIDC posted there. Sadly all the links showed current data so I was unable to post any of the past predictions, mainly the one about "ice free North Pole this year". Also I was unable to find any archive of their ice condition summaries. Ah well!

We now have an archive of an NSIDC claim that:

I have no problem with this claim. We will just have to wait and see. If you check out this site (http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/plot.csv) you will see that the "ice extent" has not quite finished decreasing if we look for a five day running average, so the figure of 9.4% could decrease. I'm betting on a bigger ice increase this winter than last.
By the way, NASA will be hosting a conference on the web on the 23rd September to discuss the current behavior of the sun.

And now I find the thread Arctic Watch no longer shows on the CE.COM site. jeeze!!

Sorry - i missed the last part the last time i checked but i see it now in Southerncross' reply.

It's just the Display options.

Scroll down in the Room itself and the lowest Display option is the time (set to a month, or a couple of month depends on room & traffic.

For your convenience:
http://www.curevents.com/vb/showthread.php?t=95016

:beer:

BuilderBob
09-23-2008, 08:32 AM
Thanks Kassy. Your link works fine. How did you find it?

If I click on Weather Center to see other threads all that shows now is Greenland Watch. :confused:


Ahh.. gottit! You need to know roughly how old the thread is. If you don't know select longest option. Ta. :beer:

BuilderBob
10-01-2008, 04:14 AM
If anyone is still watching the Arctic ice drama here are some figures for ice extent (http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/plot.csv) during the month of September. For comparison I have included the numbers for 2006 and 2007, again only for September. To make it easier to read I have highlighted figures that show an increase. (I must learn how to make a graph of this stuff.)
My reason for posting this is the rate of increase compared to the previous two years.

Could be a record recovery of Arctic ice this year. (maybe the polar bears won't go deaf now! :re: )

-----2006-----2007-----2008--
01..5993438..4610938..4957656
02..5977813..4617031..4924219
03..5958125..4580000..4927031
04..5935313..4528125..4868906
05..5934531..4484531..4825625
06..5918438..4447031..4808281
07..5921875..4436719..4739844
08..5935781..4413438..4715469
09..5936094..4399531..4707813
10..5926094..4367188..4729688
11..5896719..4343438..4751563
12..5864219..4327969..4745156
13..5814063..4323750..4732344
14..5781719..4291250..4747188
15..5794063..4267813..4731875
16..5806094..4267656..4726250
17..5828281..4268750..4718594
18..5874063..4281406..4736406
19..5892500..4296250..4745000
20..5846875..4310313..4752500
21..5847656..4284531..4773750
22..5851406..4276719..4809219
23..5883281..4267344..4873125
24..5972188..4254531..4878750
25..6036719..4265000..4873750
26..6039844..4297813..4945313
27..6016094..4372188..5003906
28..5973906..4441719..5036406
29..5959219..4499688..5095156
30..5981719..4592969..5162344

southerncross
10-05-2008, 11:28 AM
A quick question for Kassy and Builder Bob, do you guy's reckon that the ice loss is due to Us(mankind) or of a more natural occurrence? I would be interested in your opinions in the thread http://curevents.org/showthread.php?p=25496#post25496 .
You guy's have an interest in the Ice coverage in the North pole and the cause and effects that matter there, I would appreciate your input in the above thread. I hope you will make your opinion known.

BuilderBob
10-08-2008, 02:13 AM
These people make nice graphs so needn't bother. :D

caonacl
10-08-2008, 05:34 PM
Arctic ocean covered by thin ice
Wednesday, 8 October 2008 Michael Reilly
Discovery News

Recent measurements of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean have found that it has melted to its lowest volume in recorded history.

Although the area of Arctic sea ice is greater than at the corresponding period in 2007 - the lowest coverage ever - experts are concerned that it may be much thinner.

Dr Walt Meier of US National Snow and Ice Data Center and colleagues say the overall ice volume in the Arctic Ocean is at least as low as 2007, and may even have dwindled more by as far as 10%.

Meier says this makes the ice more prone to melting than ever before.

Steady decline
The area of ocean that sea ice covers can vary dramatically from year to year, so scientists look at ice volume as a long-term indicator of the "health" of the ice.

Since satellite measurements began 30 years ago, it has been in steady decline. "The long term trends in ice volume show a clear trend toward warming temperatures," says Meier. "The health of the ice is at the same state or worse than it was last year."

The latest drop in volume is likely due to a strong wind pattern last year that blew large amounts of thick, multi -year ice south past the east coast of Greenland, and out of the Arctic Ocean. During the following winter, thin new ice formed in its place.

But given the ever-warming waters and air temperatures, Dr Jay Zwally of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center says the new ice has little chance of making a long term recovery.

"The reason volume is so important is new ice can't get thick enough in the winter to survive next summer's melting," he says. "It takes seven to eight years for sea ice to reach its equilibrium thickness of around four to five meters."

Last December, Zwally predicted that the Arctic Ocean could be seasonally ice free by the end of the summer of 2013, five years from now.

Shielding effect
It would be more than just a symbolic milestone of the warming Earth.

Pack ice reflects sunlight, which protects the water below from warming. As the ice dwindles so does its shielding effect. This means the less ice there is, the more quickly the ocean warms.

This factor, called the ice-albedo feedback, can exacerbate the effects of global warming.

The latest measurements are preliminary, though they seem to confirm Zwally's suspicions.

He says scientists will have a better handle on the situation later this year, once the data are in from the ICE

Sat satellite, which is currently taking readings of ice thickness from orbit.
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200810/r300681_1303633.jpg (http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200810/r300681_1303636.jpg)
The Arctic ice shelf could be seasonally ice free within five years, says one researcher (Source: Reuters/Ho New)

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2008/10/08/2385195.htm?site=science&topic=latest

Longrodz
10-08-2008, 07:58 PM
Arctic ocean covered by thin ice
Wednesday, 8 October 2008 Michael Reilly
Discovery News

Recent measurements of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean have found that it has melted to its lowest volume in recorded history.

Although the area of Arctic sea ice is greater than at the corresponding period in 2007 - the lowest coverage ever - experts are concerned that it may be much thinner.

Dr Walt Meier of US National Snow and Ice Data Center and colleagues say the overall ice volume in the Arctic Ocean is at least as low as 2007, and may even have dwindled more by as far as 10%.

Meier says this makes the ice more prone to melting than ever before.

Steady decline
The area of ocean that sea ice covers can vary dramatically from year to year, so scientists look at ice volume as a long-term indicator of the "health" of the ice.

Since satellite measurements began 30 years ago, it has been in steady decline. "The long term trends in ice volume show a clear trend toward warming temperatures," says Meier. "The health of the ice is at the same state or worse than it was last year."

The latest drop in volume is likely due to a strong wind pattern last year that blew large amounts of thick, multi -year ice south past the east coast of Greenland, and out of the Arctic Ocean. During the following winter, thin new ice formed in its place.

But given the ever-warming waters and air temperatures, Dr Jay Zwally of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center says the new ice has little chance of making a long term recovery.

"The reason volume is so important is new ice can't get thick enough in the winter to survive next summer's melting," he says. "It takes seven to eight years for sea ice to reach its equilibrium thickness of around four to five meters."

Last December, Zwally predicted that the Arctic Ocean could be seasonally ice free by the end of the summer of 2013, five years from now.

Shielding effect
It would be more than just a symbolic milestone of the warming Earth.

Pack ice reflects sunlight, which protects the water below from warming. As the ice dwindles so does its shielding effect. This means the less ice there is, the more quickly the ocean warms.

This factor, called the ice-albedo feedback, can exacerbate the effects of global warming.

The latest measurements are preliminary, though they seem to confirm Zwally's suspicions.

He says scientists will have a better handle on the situation later this year, once the data are in from the ICE

Sat satellite, which is currently taking readings of ice thickness from orbit.
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200810/r300681_1303633.jpg (http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200810/r300681_1303636.jpg)
The Arctic ice shelf could be seasonally ice free within five years, says one researcher (Source: Reuters/Ho New)

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2008/10/08/2385195.htm?site=science&topic=latest


So first they focused upon the surface area coverage of Arctic ice when that seemed to support their diatribe, and when that failed them they switched to an argument concerning ice volume before the data had been collected? Oh, I'm convinced. Yeah, sure. You betcha. :rolleyes:

Flint
10-08-2008, 09:29 PM
So first they focused upon the surface area coverage of Arctic ice when that seemed to support their diatribe, and when that failed them they switched to an argument concerning ice volume before the data had been collected? Oh, I'm convinced. Yeah, sure. You betcha.Your zeal has overwhelmed your clarity. Are you mocking the notion that there is less ice, or are you mocking the notion that anyone understands WHY there is less ice? Or are you just mocking at random because this makes you feel superior?

ltow
10-09-2008, 12:18 AM
will there be more clouds with less ice?

Longrodz
10-09-2008, 12:36 PM
Your zeal has overwhelmed your clarity. Are you mocking the notion that there is less ice, or are you mocking the notion that anyone understands WHY there is less ice? Or are you just mocking at random because this makes you feel superior?

Did you read the article? The last line of the article reveals that this years ice volume data is not yet available. The chart so kindly provided by BuilderBob (in post #25 above) reveals that this years reduction in ice surface area coverage due to the seasonal melt is less than last years. The ice volume data could very well reveal a similar trend (or not), but my point is that the responsible thing to do is to wait until they have the data in hand before they issue any statements of concern. They are putting the cart before the horse. That is what I am mocking. You might want to lay off the ad hominem's, Flint. They make you appear to be less intelligent than you are.

BuilderBob
10-09-2008, 02:50 PM
The following quote is from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/) which does not seem to support the report posted by caonacl in #26 above. My highlight.

High retention of first-year ice

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the 2008 melt season was the higher-than-average retention of first-year sea ice (see earlier entries, including April 7). Relatively thin first-year ice is more prone to melting out completely than older, thicker ice. However, more of this year’s first-year ice survived the melt season than is typical. Sea ice age maps from Sheldon Drobot, our colleague at the University of Colorado at Boulder, show that much more first-year ice survived in 2008 than in 2007. This is one of the reasons that 2008 did not break last year's record-low minimum.
One cause of the high first-year ice survival rate was that this summer was cooler than in 2007. Lower temperatures slowed the melt rate in the early part of the season. While conditions in August favored rapid ice loss, they were not enough to make up for this early-season "cushion." Furthermore, much of this year's first-year ice was located at higher latitudes than in 2007, covering even the geographic North Pole. Regions that are far north have lower melt rates because they receive less solar energy than more southerly regions.

Dispersive sea ice motion

Sea ice motion also helps determine how the ice will fare each melt season. In 2007, a strong northward sea ice motion at the end of the melt season pushed ice floes together, compacting the ice. The tightly packed ice and high temperatures worked together to create a record-low extent.

This year, the wind patterns were different, leading to a less compacted ice cover. This, paired with slower summer melt, helped keep the overall extent larger.

Flint
10-09-2008, 08:54 PM
The last line of the article reveals that this years ice volume data is not yet available.It says the satellite data isn't available. But ice thickness and coverage data have been monitored continuously for some time now by other means. They're not completely in the dark for this season.

this years reduction in ice surface area coverage due to the seasonal melt is less than last years.Yes, this is so.

my point is that the responsible thing to do is to wait until they have the data in hand before they issue any statements of concern.There's really no such thing as "complete data". There IS such a thing as "all the data we're currently positioned to collect" and most of that is in. There will be a bit more. But there is alreadly ample data available to be cause for concern.

They are putting the cart before the horse.No they aren't. They are speaking the basis of sufficient but incomplete data. If new data say something different, that will also be reported.

That is what I am mocking.Please understand that what you are mocking, doesn't happen to be the case. This condition makes it difficult to understand what you THINK you are mocking.

Builder Bob:

I appreciate the difficult of trying to extract long-range trends from short-term data implying a large number of independent variables, whose interaction isn't fully understood. We need a longer baseline, and more data. Always more data. The long range trends are at best slow and fitful. And the attempts to politicize global warming have been necessarily clumsy - people don't understand climate trends, complex modeling, higher math. People understand stranded polar bears. But the problem with oversimplifying for public consumption is, the trend might not play out the same way every year, next year polar bears may be just fine, and some people will say "See! It was a fraud all along!"

BuilderBob
10-10-2008, 04:12 AM
Builder Bob:

I appreciate the difficult of trying to extract long-range trends from short-term data implying a large number of independent variables, whose interaction isn't fully understood. We need a longer baseline, and more data. Always more data. The long range trends are at best slow and fitful. And the attempts to politicize global warming have been necessarily clumsy - people don't understand climate trends, complex modeling, higher math. People understand stranded polar bears. But the problem with oversimplifying for public consumption is, the trend might not play out the same way every year, next year polar bears may be just fine, and some people will say "See! It was a fraud all along!"

I fully agree. I made no claim that current Arctic ice recovery is a new trend. My interest is that it has not followed predictions. But on the subject of trends, there seems to be something called the "Gleissberg cycle" of which I read reports (via google) this can be extended back into the past. On the basis of this there are predictions of a future cooler period, possibly as deep and as extensive as the Maunder Minimum. My personal feelings are that if there is the slightest possibility of this happening over the next two decades the effects will be more catastrophic than global warming of 1C over the next century.

southerncross
10-10-2008, 09:59 AM
Any real research in regards to Iceshelf , Ice flow, Glaciers, advance , retreat, thickness or thinness is only as old as the data, And that data is not a real base line for any relevant research. The oldest reliable data is only thirty yrs at the most. and there is no real reliable data before that. How can you base an overall finding from such a small and static amount of data?

BuilderBob
10-10-2008, 03:03 PM
How can you base an overall finding from such a small and static amount of data?

Sorry, you lost me there. I suggested above to google "Gleissberg cycles". There is far too much for me to summarise, but they talk about data that is derived from hundreds of years past.

southerncross
10-13-2008, 10:56 AM
G'day BuilderBob, Kassy and others.
BuilderBob my point is that while the Gleissberg cycle, The Maunder Minimum, and other Notable and Plausible theories that guesstimate things such as Ice building and melting and future Climate, the only reliable and proven data we have is that of Satellite photo's to show us what has actually happened during our observation up to date. All the rest is speculation and unreliable unproven Data, or theoretical prediction based on past observation's that are unable to be verified by other means.
The Data of the Satellite photos is undeniable and verifiable, but it only goes back thirty years, a minute amount of time compared to the Planets history, and nowhere near a baseline to start assuming what is or not natural or out of kilter within "normal" climate change.
Geology shows us irrefutable evidence for widespread Glacial action time and time again over much of the area now inhabited by the Cities and farmland of mankind and only in the blink of an eye compared to the total history of the Earth.

My personal feelings are that if there is the slightest possibility of this happening over the next two decades the effects will be more catastrophic than global warming of 1C over the next century.

I totally agree Bob. A kilometer of ice on top of your local area would create just a bit more of a problem than having to turn up the aircon a notch or two, even ten meters would play havoc with getting the Kids to school.
But you couldn't blame AGW for that could you?..... Or could you???

Just as an aside Bob have a look at what happens to Co2 in the historical record just after the peak of an Ice age, got any idea of where it all go's?

Potemkin
10-13-2008, 01:33 PM
At least container ships will move from Asia to the Eastern US and Europe fast and hence cheaper using the Northwest Passage.

When you have lemons and all of that.

BuilderBob
10-13-2008, 04:24 PM
Pote, I think the Northwest Passage is a bit iced up now. Over the last three weeks Arctic ice has recovered two million square kilometers of extent. Be at least August next year before it becomes useable, assuming IPCC predictions are on target. Remember the "ice free North Pole this year" prediction? That was from one of those computer climate models.

See here for latest ice extent: http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

southerncross, I agree satelite data has more validity than proxy data and, as you say, time scales are too short to make any trend judgments. Very interesting that the satelite data shows a slight current global cooling and the IPCC announce global warming is on hold until 2015. Why 2015? Never mind, the Argo sea bouys project is also recording reducing ocean temperatures, but they have only been in operation for three or four years.

There are many cyclic events that effect climate, not least NAO and PDO which have both moved to "negative" phase which may produce more La Ninas.

I think the real question is: what triggers an ice age? I don't think there is any valid answer to that yet, even if it is claimed another ice age is due. No one can really predict when or why it will start.

Where does the CO2 go during an ice age? My readings on the subject lead me to think it works like this; sea levels are much reduced exposing more land on the continental shelves than is actually covered by the glaciers, even if they do cover New York and Swansea. :) The tropics will still be warm and humid. Vegetation will be really rampant because of high CO2 levels. This will be one carbon sink, another will be the cold oceans. This will encourage an increase in photosynthesising life in the oceans (adding to the sink) which will lead to expansion of all other sea life. As James Lovelock points out, Planet Earth has a far more healthy biosphere during ice ages.

Longrodz
10-13-2008, 10:54 PM
Where does the CO2 go during an ice age? My readings on the subject lead me to think it works like this; sea levels are much reduced exposing more land on the continental shelves than is actually covered by the glaciers, even if they do cover New York and Swansea. :) The tropics will still be warm and humid. Vegetation will be really rampant because of high CO2 levels. This will be one carbon sink, another will be the cold oceans. This will encourage an increase in photosynthesising life in the oceans (adding to the sink) which will lead to expansion of all other sea life. As James Lovelock points out, Planet Earth has a far more healthy biosphere during ice ages.

Builder, my readings on the subject lead me to think it works like this; CO2 is highly soluble in water, with the solubility being temperature dependent (see link: http://jcbmac.chem.brown.edu/myl/hen/carbondioxideHenry.html); colder water/greater solubility, warmer water/lesser solubility. This is the physics. Exactly how the details of this operates at the planetary scale has not yet been resolved (for example, see link: http://cdiac.ornl.gov/oceans/co2rprt.html#co2sysinsea). When our planet's ocean cools, it absorbs a greater amount of CO2 from the atmosphere. When it warms, it releases CO2. It is the major CO2 "sink" on our planet (not "carbon-sink"; an important distinction, too often overlooked). Increased atmospheric CO2 is the result of global (oceanic) warming, not the cause. Our planet's ocean has been warming. This has resulted in increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Why is our ocean warming? No one knows, but there are many theories.

You mentioned the ice ages. I've learned from my reading that when our planet cooled and plunged into the most recent glacial period (the Wisconsin Glacial Episode), the southern hemisphere of our planet cooled first. When this episode ended, and our planet re-warmed, it warmed in the southern hemisphere first. No one knows why. (no link: see William Burroughs. "Climate Change in Prehistory". 2005. University Press Cambridge.)

For my money, I pay attention to the Antarctic sea-ice measurements/estimations when it comes to guesstimating any kind of global trends. I'm not convinced, that in the greater scheme of things, that Arctic ice is relevant as any kind of global "canary in the coalmine".

ltow
10-13-2008, 11:17 PM
how much co2 is washed out of the air by rain?

mold and fungus - are they any kind of a carbon trap?

BuilderBob
10-15-2008, 04:37 PM
how much co2 is washed out of the air by rain?

mold and fungus - are they any kind of a carbon trap?

No luck finding an answer surprisingly. Did a google on "chemicals in rainwater" and came across this PDF report from Greenpeace:

Hazardous Chemicals in Precipitation (http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/hazardous-chemicals-in-precipi.pdf).

Quite a number of chemicals in the study but no mention of carbonate acid or any CO2 products. I suppose they are non-hazardous.

Would expect rainwater to absorb some level of atmospheric CO2 and produce a mild acid rain that assists in erosion of surface rocks. Guess not enough is absorbed to qualify as a "sink" and deserve any mention in research data.

caonacl
10-15-2008, 10:53 PM
New understanding of Arctic ice

2008-10-15
http://web3.custompublish.com/getfile.php/725646.623.buqaetasbp/280x0/4518953_725646.jpg Arctic icefront (Photo: Amund Beitnes)

The break-up of a 35,000 square kilometre ice floe northeast of Greenland this summer could give new information about Arctic ecosystems, researchers from the Norwegian Polar Institute say. Norway is now establishing a new Centre on Ice and Climate in a bid to enhance knowledge about Arctic ice.


The break-up the huge ice floe was observed during a research expedition to the Northwest Passage this September. The case could give new information about how the Arctic ecosystem reacts on rapid changes in the ice layers, the Polar Institute reports in a press release (http://npweb.npolar.no/Artikler/2008/1223844355.6).
The increasing interest in Arctic ice studies is now materialising in new Norwegian research.

In its 2009 budget (http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/md/pressesenter/pressemeldinger/2008/krafttak-for-klima-i-statsbudsjettet.html?id=531030), the Norwegian government allocates 22 million NOK for the establishment of a new Centre on Ice and Climate, to become a branch unit of the Polar Institute in Tromsø, northern Norway.

“The centre is to improve knowledge about problems connected with melting ice, and contribute to enhanced understanding of the importance of reducing climate gas emissions”, the Polar Institute informs.
With the new centre, the northern city of Tromsø strengthens its position as the leading Norwegian site for Arctic and climate studies

http://www.barentsobserver.com/new-understanding-of-arctic-ice.4518953-16176.html

Kassy
10-26-2008, 05:58 AM
Arctic is melting even in winter
The polar icecap is retreating and thinning at a record rate


The Arctic icecap is now shrinking at record rates in the winter as well as summer, adding to evidence of disastrous melting near the North Pole, according to research by British scientists.

They have found that the widely reported summer shrinkage, which this year resulted in the opening of the Northwest Passage, is continuing in the winter months with the thickness of sea ice decreasing by a record 19% last winter.

Usually the Arctic icecap recedes in summer and then grows back in winter. These findings suggest the period in which the ice renews itself has become much shorter.

Dr Katharine Giles, who led the study and is based at the Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling at University College London (UCL), said the thickness of Arctic sea ice had shown a slow downward trend during the previous five winters but then accelerated.

She said: “After the summer 2007 record melting, the thickness of the winter ice also nose-dived. What is concerning is that sea ice is not just receding but it is also thinning.”

The cause of the thinning is, however, potentially even more alarming. Giles found that the winter air temperatures in 2007 were cold enough that they could not have been the cause.

This suggests some other, longer-term change, such as a rise in water temperature or a change in ocean circulation that has brought warmer water under the ice.

If confirmed, this could mean that the Arctic is likely to melt much faster than had been thought. Some researchers say that the summer icecap could vanish within a decade.

The research, reported in Geophysical Research Letters, showed that last winter the average thickness of sea ice over the whole Arctic was 26cm (10%) less than the average thickness of the previous five winters.

However, sea ice in the western Arctic lost about 49cm of thickness. This region saw the Northwest Passage become ice-free and open to shipping for the first time in 30 years during the summer of 2007.

The UCL researchers used satellites to measure sea-ice thickness from 2002 to 2008. Winter sea ice in the Arctic is about 8ft thick on average.

The team is the first to measure ice thickness throughout the winter, from October to March, over more than half of the Arctic, using the European Space Agency’s Envisat satellite.

Giles’s findings confirm the more detailed work of Peter Wadhams, professor of ocean physics at Cambridge University, who has undertaken six voyages under the icecap in Royal Navy nuclear submarines since 1976 and has gathered data from six more voyages.

The vessels use an upward-looking echo-sounder to measure the thickness of sea ice above the vessel. The data gathered can then be compared with previous years to find changes in thickness.

Wadhams published his first paper in 1990, showing that the Arctic ice had grown 15% thinner between 1976 and 1987.

In March 2007 he went under the Arctic again in HMS Tireless and found that the winter ice had been thinning even more quickly; it was now 50% of the 1976 thickness.

“This enormous ice retreat in the last two summers is the culmination of a thinning process that has been going on for decades, and now the ice is just collapsing,” Wadhams said.

The scale of the ice loss has also been shown by other satellite-based observations that are used to measure the area of the Arctic icecap as it grows and shrinks with the seasons.

In winter it normally reaches about 5.8m square miles before receding to about 2.7m square miles in summer.

In 2007, however, the sun shone for many more days than normal, raising water temperatures to 4.3C above the average. By September the Arctic icecap had lost an extra 1.1m square miles, equivalent to more than 12 times the area of Britain.

That reduced the area of summer ice to 1.6m square miles, 43% smaller than it was in 1979, when satellite observations began.

At the heart of the melting in the Arctic is a simple piece of science. Ice is white, so most of the sunlight hitting it is reflected back into space. When it melts, however, it leaves open ocean, which, being darker, absorbs light and so gets warmer. This helps to melt more ice. It also makes it harder for ice to form again in winter. The process accelerates until there is no more ice to melt.

Wadhams said: “This is one of the most serious problems the world has ever faced.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article5014744.ece

Kassy
10-26-2008, 06:01 AM
The Arctic ice is melting, Greenland’s ice too

Ice in the Arctic summer sea has been melting at almost record levels amid general temperature increases, according to an expert report from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA,) which warned that continued warming there shows the dramatic effects of climate change even more than other regions. Autumn air temperatures were a record five degrees Celsius above normal due to the amount of sea ice lost in recent years, according to the report. “Changes in the arctic show a domino effect from multiple causes more clearly than in other regions,” James Overland, oceanographer at the NOAA’s Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and lead author of the report, told journalists.
The arctic is “a sensitive system and often reflects changes in relatively fast and dramatic ways,” he added. The loss of sea ice itself leads to further warming of the ocean, which together with rising air temperatures, affects land and marine life, the report said. The year 2007 had been the warmest recorded since the trend of warming in the Arctic had begun in the mid-1960s. Surface ice in Greenland has also been melting at higher rates this year, compared to 2007, prompting the NOAA to raise its warning from “yellow” to “red” in its annual report card on the effects of warming in the Arctic.

http://www.neurope.eu/articles/90206.php

mordan
10-26-2008, 06:13 AM
Someone is in for a surprise.

BuilderBob
10-26-2008, 09:50 AM
Weird! NSIDC reports that current Arctic ice extent is above 8.3 million square kilometres and growing.

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png

The mass balance reports show the ice is mostly more than 3 metres thick.

http://www.crrel.usace.army.mil/sid/IMB/buoysum.htm

Temperatures are pretty cool at around -16C.

http://www.crrel.usace.army.mil/sid/IMB/newdata.htm

Pablo Escobar
10-26-2008, 10:00 AM
Reports of glaciers are growing again abound.

Funny thing about glaciers.

They can grow faster than they can melt, if they want too.

They just haven't wanted to bad enough, lately.

Oric
10-26-2008, 10:22 AM
This has been the warmest october upto date for Turkey. I hope things get cooler

Kassy
10-27-2008, 04:42 PM
Weird! NSIDC reports that current Arctic ice extent is above 8.3 million square kilometres and growing.

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png


It's a different dataset.

The graph show the Arctic Sea Ice Extent being below the long year average but it's better then last year. It also seems to play catch up (it's going up quicker then the other two curves). But this is the seasonal pattern.

It'll hold up until it breaks down.

(It would be interesting to have all the yearly patterns stuck next to eachother...should be some apperant downward trend allegedly.)

It's not at odds with the longer range pattern:

The UCL researchers used satellites to measure sea-ice thickness from 2002 to 2008. Winter sea ice in the Arctic is about 8ft thick on average.

The team is the first to measure ice thickness throughout the winter, from October to March, over more than half of the Arctic, using the European Space Agency’s Envisat satellite.


and


Giles’s findings confirm the more detailed work of Peter Wadhams, professor of ocean physics at Cambridge University, who has undertaken six voyages under the icecap in Royal Navy nuclear submarines since 1976 and has gathered data from six more voyages.

The vessels use an upward-looking echo-sounder to measure the thickness of sea ice above the vessel. The data gathered can then be compared with previous years to find changes in thickness.

Wadhams published his first paper in 1990, showing that the Arctic ice had grown 15% thinner between 1976 and 1987.

In March 2007 he went under the Arctic again in HMS Tireless and found that the winter ice had been thinning even more quickly; it was now 50% of the 1976 thickness.


It freezes every winter but there's less and less every year.

The mass balance reports show the ice is mostly more than 3 metres thick.

http://www.crrel.usace.army.mil/sid/IMB/buoysum.htm


3 out of 8 isn't mostly more then 3m/300cm

BTW: the odd one out is the buoy with 191 cm...location: North Pole Area.

I'll go with the satellites. ;)

BuilderBob
10-28-2008, 03:08 AM
Nicely put Kassy. :D

Giles’s findings confirm the more detailed work of Peter Wadhams, professor of ocean physics at Cambridge University, who has undertaken six voyages under the icecap in Royal Navy nuclear submarines since 1976 and has gathered data from six more voyages.

The vessels use an upward-looking echo-sounder to measure the thickness of sea ice above the vessel. The data gathered can then be compared with previous years to find changes in thickness.

Wadhams published his first paper in 1990, showing that the Arctic ice had grown 15% thinner between 1976 and 1987.

In March 2007 he went under the Arctic again in HMS Tireless and found that the winter ice had been thinning even more quickly; it was now 50% of the 1976 thickness.

Just goes to show it is the sea that melts the ice from underneath, not hot air from too much CO2.

But don't you worry yourself, both the PDO and the AMO have changed to their negative cooling phase (nobody seems to be able to say what made the change) and the sun is staying quiet so average global temperatures are not rising (as the satellites are still reporting) and the Argos bouys still report declining global sea temperatures.

I have prepared for a very cold winter this year. BBC weather forcasts SNOW for North Wales tomorrow! And it is not November yet.

Keep warm. :beer:

Oric
10-28-2008, 03:16 AM
it is almost november and night temperatures have not gone below 12C yet, and you hope us to expect a cold winter Bob ! :)

BuilderBob
10-28-2008, 07:16 AM
Don't know about Turkey, nearest I ever got was chasing Col. Grivas around Mount Troodos in Cyprus. Never caught him. :D

But there might be a business oportunity here. I live by a busy sea port and can get containers cheap. How about I ship you some ice when I got some spare? Payment in advance of course. :yes:

Oric
10-28-2008, 07:40 AM
Don't know about Turkey, nearest I ever got was chasing Col. Grivas around Mount Troodos in Cyprus. Never caught him. :D

But there might be a business oportunity here. I live by a busy sea port and can get containers cheap. How about I ship you some ice when I got some spare? Payment in advance of course. :yes:

I will payback in warm sand ....

Fattail
10-28-2008, 09:14 AM
The data is skewed. The mid 70's were a cooler than normal period and to use the sea ice measurement then as a base line for comparison is going to skew it. That's the problem with drawing conclusions from 30 years of data on a planet that is 6000 years old like the Bible says. The data set only represents .5% of the total.

For you non-believers the 30 years of data would be taken against a planet 4,540,000,000 years old. Or represent 0.0000007% of the total age.

southerncross
10-28-2008, 09:51 AM
The data is skewed. The mid 70's were a cooler than normal period and to use the sea ice measurement then as a base line for comparison is going to skew it. That's the problem with drawing conclusions from 30 years of data on a planet that is 6000 years old like the Bible says. The data set only represents .5% of the total.

For you non-believers the 30 years of data would be taken against a planet 4,540,000,000 years old. Or represent 0.0000007% of the total age.

I was never any good at math's Fattail, but I am a non believer and just wish I could put the 0.0000007% into words that people out there would actually understand and that they could relate to their own life span. I guess i would have more chance hunting down the Man Bear Pig than that tho.

BuilderBob
10-28-2008, 10:06 AM
I will payback in warm sand ....

Right! New business. Will aproach the local council and let them know I have access to warm dry sand for the roads when they run out of grit. Don't call me, I'll call you... :D

Fattail, some of us won't see out that 0.5% so we gota have our fun now. :beer:

For those of you still interested in the Arctic ice saga seeScientists Counter Latest Arctic 'Record' Warmth Claims as 'Pseudoscience’ – (http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Scientists_Counter_Latest_Arctic.pdf).

This is a 13 page PDF file. Haven't read it all yet, but some interesting links there.

southerncross
10-28-2008, 10:16 AM
The last word in that Link is enough of a read for me Bob, No doubt tho there will be enough doubt in the report to keep the argument going tho.

BuilderBob
10-28-2008, 03:03 PM
The last word in that Link is enough of a read for me Bob, No doubt tho there will be enough doubt in the report to keep the argument going tho.

Quite right. :D It's just a bunch of stuff put together, plenty to argue about.

Anyway, have you seen The Skeptics Handbook (http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming/)?

Kassy
10-28-2008, 04:54 PM
Nicely put Kassy. :D



Just goes to show it is the sea that melts the ice from underneath, not hot air from too much CO2.

But don't you worry yourself, both the PDO and the AMO have changed to their negative cooling phase (nobody seems to be able to say what made the change) and the sun is staying quiet so average global temperatures are not rising (as the satellites are still reporting) and the Argos bouys still report declining global sea temperatures.

I have prepared for a very cold winter this year. BBC weather forcasts SNOW for North Wales tomorrow! And it is not November yet.

Keep warm. :beer:

You can't be serious, right?

You should know CO2 doesn't heat up the air, it reflects more radiation back down which warms the surface...warmer oceans are no surprise since most surface is actually water.

We'll see about the influence of AMO (do you have a link for it entering a negative phase?...would be rather too soon) or the PDO. As you point out they're not completely sure how it all works so what it means for your winter is rather unclear.

But better safe then sorry...not enjoying the weather here either. :beer:

BuilderBob
10-29-2008, 03:53 AM
You should know CO2 doesn't heat up the air,

CO2 molecules intercept a certain wavelength of infrared from the surface and warm up (energy state increased), This energy is reradiated in all directions, the bit coming down, termed "backradiation", is what all the excitement is about. Either way, you have a parcel of air with higher energy molecules of CO2, this energy is shared, and assists in heating the air.

Temperature here at 6:00am was 0C. I have given up and turned my house heating on. LNG not electric. :beer:

Pacific Decadal Oscillation (http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/)

Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Multidecadal_Oscillation)

BuilderBob
10-31-2008, 11:53 AM
Excellent map on this site here (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200811/map-arctic) showing expected new sea shipping routes through the arctic.

Not that I expect it to happen, but you do have to admire the effort made in producing this stuff.
No shortage of money if you chant the right magic words. :bow:

Kassy
10-31-2008, 04:26 PM
Bob, AMO is orange.

Orange is positive.

Check the earlier patterns.
They also have sharp peaks and thus sharp downward trends. Occasionally they even hit the blue...don't know if this one will.

BuilderBob
11-04-2008, 05:34 AM
I went looking and found:

The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation should not be confused with the North Atlantic Oscillation

Doh! so I look further and find I now need to know about
El Nino-Southern Oscillation, Pacific Decadal Oscillation, North Atlantic Oscillation and Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation.

I am going back to just watching the ice. :D

Notice how the rate of increase has dropped off lately? My guess is because most ice is now against the land at Alaska and Siberia. No more room to grow that way. Now the growth must battle the warm Gulf Stream around Svaalbard. Still five months freezing time left. :beer:

Fiddlerdave
11-04-2008, 02:50 PM
Excellent map on this site here (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200811/map-arctic) showing expected new sea shipping routes through the arctic.

Not that I expect it to happen, but you do have to admire the effort made in producing this stuff.
No shortage of money if you chant the right magic words. :bow:Which magic words do you mean?

Oric
11-05-2008, 02:52 AM
Still warm days / warm nights ...

Kassy
11-16-2008, 07:23 AM
Arctic Sea Ice Decline Shakes Up Ocean Ecosystems
by Kathryn Hansen
Stanford CA (SPX) Nov 10, 2008


Uncertain as to how phytoplankton -- microscopic marine plants on which much of ocean life depends -- would respond to Arctic sea ice decline, researchers took advantage of NASA satellite images to show that the microscopic floating plants are teeming in regions of recent ice melt.

The explosion in phytoplankton populations is the result of new open-water habitat and, more significantly, an extended ice-free growing season, biological oceanographer Kevin Arrigo and colleagues from Stanford University in Stanford, Calif., reported last month in the American Geophysical Union's Geophysical Research Letters.

Since phytoplankton cycle carbon dioxide into organic compounds and also form the base of the marine food web, the researchers believe the booming populations could have complex ecological consequences.

"Arrigo and colleagues have brought together the effects of air-sea interaction, warming water, and decreasing sea ice extent," said Paula Bontempi, a program scientist at NASA Headquarters in Washington. "You start to look at all of these interlocking pieces and think: there has got to be an impact on phytoplankton and the ecology of the system."

Phytoplankton, like any plant, require nutrients to survive. However, Arctic Ocean surface waters usually have a limited supply of nutrients, which has led some researchers to assume that new areas of open water would not necessarily promote additional phytoplankton growth.

To find out how phytoplankton respond to diminished sea ice cover, the team calculated changes in the sea ice extent and phytoplankton growth from ten years of chlorophyll measurements -- which are used to estimate phytoplankton abundance -- collected by the Sea-viewing Wide Field of View Sensor (SeaWiFS) instrument on the GeoEye satellite.

The team also collected measurements of sea surface temperature and ice extent from other satellite instruments such as NASA's Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA's Aqua and Terra satellites.

The researchers were most interested by what happened between 2006 and 2007, when the summertime minimum sea ice extent made its sharpest annual reduction since satellite measurements began in 1979.

By comparing maps of new ice free areas in 2007 with maps of increasing phytoplankton abundance since 2006, the team could deduce how much of that phytoplankton growth was due to newly ice free regions. In a similar way, the team could compare the maps of ice-free regions with maps that show the magnitude of an extended melt season, to deduce how much phytoplankton growth resulted from the longer season.

The team found that 30 percent of the increase in phytoplankton between 2006 and 2007 was due to large new areas of open water exposed by the extensive melting of sea ice. The other 70 percent of the increase could be attributed to a longer growing season, which in some Arctic regions was extended in 2007 by as much as 100 days, compared to 2006.

"We expected a big phytoplankton increase in the areas that were historically covered by sea ice because the plants now have sunlight." Arrigo said. "But the longer growing season is ultimately what allowed most phytoplankton to grow and increase productivity."

Phytoplankton and all plants naturally remove carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, from the atmosphere. Newly open water in the Arctic could therefore act as a new "sink" for carbon dioxide if marine plants and their carbon sink out of the surface waters to the deep ocean.

Still, the magnitude of such a carbon sink remains to be seen because further growth could eventually be limited by the supply of surface nutrients. Scientists also wonder if the uptake of carbon into the Arctic Ocean will be temporary or long lasting.

Whales, seals, marine birds, zooplankton, and other marine animals all depend either directly or indirectly on phytoplankton for food. Researchers are uncertain what effect a boost in plant growth will have on the ecosystem, particularly migratory species that depend on the timing of sea ice melt and food availability.

"The Arctic is undergoing so many changes already," Arrigo said. "Nobody knows how this will play out."

http://www.spacemart.com/reports/Arctic_Sea_Ice_Decline_Shakes_Up_Ocean_Ecosystems_ 999.html

Kassy
12-18-2008, 06:07 PM
Changes 'amplify Arctic warming'
By Jonathan Amos
Science reporter, BBC News

Scientists say they now have unambiguous evidence that the warming in the Arctic is accelerating.

Computer models have long predicted that decreasing sea ice should amplify temperature changes in the northern polar region.

Julienne Stroeve, from the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, told a meeting of the American Geophysical Union that this process was under way.

Arctic ice cover in summer has seen rapid retreat in recent years.

The minimum extents reached in 2007 and 2008 were the smallest recorded in the satellite age.

"The sea ice is entering a new state where the ice cover has become so thin that no matter what happens during the summer in terms of temperature or circulation patterns, you're still going to have very low ice conditions," she told the meeting.

Autumn return

Theory predicts that as ice is lost in the Arctic, more of the ocean's surface will be exposed to solar radiation and will warm up.

When the autumn comes and the Sun goes down on the Arctic, that warmth should be released back into the atmosphere, delaying the fall in air temperatures.

Ultimately, this feedback process should result in Arctic temperatures rising faster than the global mean.

Dr Stroeve and colleagues have now analysed Arctic autumn (September, October, November) air temperatures for the period 2004-2008 and compared them to the long term average (1979 to 2008).

The results, they believe, are evidence of the predicted amplification effect.

"You see this large warming over the Arctic ocean of around 3C in these last four years compared to the long-term mean," explained Dr Stroeve.

"You see some smaller areas where you have temperature warming of maybe 5C; and this warming is directly located over those areas where we've lost all the ice."

Wider changes

If this process continues, it will extend the melting season for Arctic ice, delaying the onset of winter freezing and weakening further the whole system.

These warming effects are not just restricted to the ocean, Dr Stroeve said. Circulation patterns could then move the warmth over land areas, she added.

"The Arctic is really the air conditioner of the Northern Hemisphere, and as you lose that sea ice you change that air conditioner; and the rest of the system has to respond.

"You start affecting the temperature gradient between the Arctic and equator which affects atmospheric patterns and precipitation patterns.

"Exactly how this is going to play out, we really don't know yet. Our research is in its infancy."

The study reported by Dr Stroeve will be published in the journal Cryosphere shortly.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/sci/tech/7786910.stm


© BBC MMVIII

Key
12-18-2008, 07:50 PM
This site here (http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/plot.csv) has daily Arctic ice extent records from June 2002.


Dec. 17, 2006 = 11,348,750

Dec. 17, 2007 = 11,403,750

Dec. 17, 2008 = 11,703,594

The trend seems to be an increase instead of decrease. Imagine that..

Potemkin
12-18-2008, 08:52 PM
Well, shipping stuff from China to the eastern US, UK or Europe will be cheaper with the Northwest Passage open.