2016 Arctic Sea Ice Thread

[CapelDodger]

Possibly ignorant question: the 'retreat' of the ice seems uneven, much greater at some locations than others.

To what extent is it understood why there is such a difference?

Local geography makes a difference; compare the Canadian Archipelago with the relatively smooth Arctic coast of Russia, for instance. Then there's the gap between Greenland and Norway. I'm not up on the details but one can see how this would cause variation in different theatres of operation, so to speak. And then there's the weather.

 

[CapelDodger]

Slight derail; The very low levels in the north combined with slightly below average levels in the south mean the Global sea ice is also at a record low.

I doubt anybody thinks that's a meaningful measure at the moment. Most of us never did, of course.

 

[CapelDodger]

Likewise, any local downturn is used by climate activists to claim that the Arctic is in a death spiral and will be ice-free typically in 3-4 years. As we've already seen.

What are these "local downturns" you refer to? The Artic sea-ice death-spiral is clearly visible in the whole.

Both of these are hysterically unscientific, although notably your blinkers only allow you to see one of them. C'est la vie.

The boldest scientific prediction I'm aware of is about ten years old and suggests an ice-free Arctic in 2016 +/- three years. That has four more summers to run.

 

[BenBurch]

Possibly ignorant question: the 'retreat' of the ice seems uneven, much greater at some locations than others.

To what extent is it understood why there is such a difference?

Mostly (in my opinion) it is the exposure to other waters. The Bering Strait is a small gap and not that much warmer Pacific water can come in compared to the huge exposure to the North Atlantic to the east of Greenland. Some of the effect is also weather patterns as influenced by the uneven distribution of continental land masses around the Arctic Ocean.

 

[Warmer1]

Peter Wadhams?



Hopefully he is back at Cambridge studying the Arctic again after his brief foray into believing that nefarious fossil fuel companies were bumping off his colleagues using lightning. In credibility terms, Wadhams is about on a par with Piers Corbyn.

Please provide evidence to support your claim above.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Wadhams

Peter Wadhams ScD (born 14 May 1948), is professor of Ocean Physics, and Head of the Polar Ocean Physics Group in the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge. He is best known for his work on sea ice.

He is the president of the International Association for the Physical Sciences of the Oceans Commission on Sea Ice and Coordinator for the International Programme for Antarctic Buoys.

Wadhams has been the leader of 40 polar field expeditions.[1]

Wadhams advocates for the use of climate engineering to mitigate climate change.[2]

He has received the Polar Medal.


This is a science forum and you are not posting any science. Your drivel is so boring.

 

[Warmer1]

Possibly ignorant question: the 'retreat' of the ice seems uneven, much greater at some locations than others.

To what extent is it understood why there is such a difference?

Good question so I looked into it briefly.

https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/seaice/processes/circulation.html

Since humans first ventured into the ice-covered oceans, they knew that sea ice motion occurred on small scales, such as a few kilometers (a couple of miles). But it wasn't until the voyage of the Fram to the Arctic that scientists finally confirmed that sea ice also moves across large-scale regions, primarily from the wind.

The wind-driven Arctic ice circulation pattern has two primary components. First, the Beaufort Gyre is a clockwise circulation (looking from above the North Pole) in the Beaufort Sea, north of Alaska. This circulation results from an average high-pressure system that spawns winds over the region. A second component is the Transpolar Drift Stream, where ice moves from the Siberian coast of Russia across the Arctic basin, exiting into the North Atlantic off the east coast of Greenland.

And here is an animation of the sea ice loss and some of the movement from 1987 to 2013. Notice the ice getting pushed out the Fram straight beside Greenland.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-BbPBg3vj8

I believe that warm water entering the Barents sea also plays a role. Melt ponds forming on the ice for long periods also hastens the melting.

 

[hgus]

Please provide evidence to support your claim above.

I assume he is refering to this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ED-astonishing-claim-Cambridge-professor.html

 

[Warmer1]

I assume he is refering to this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ED-astonishing-claim-Cambridge-professor.html

.

Thanks for that.

Prof. Wadhams has now spoken:

Complaint made to IPSO (Independent Press Standards Office) by Dr. Wadhams:

The writer of this article, Ben Webster, phoned me up cold in my office at Cambridge University on Thursday 23 July, saying that he was writing a piece on the retreat of sea ice in the Arctic, and whether it was increasing or not. We discussed the scientific data, then he asked who else was working in this field in the UK, in order to contact them. I mentioned that there are not many others in this field, since three of the leading figures died within a short space of time in accidents in 2013. He asked for further details.

I asked that this be completely off the record because of
(a) the sensibilities of relatives of the deceased (Prof Laxon's partner was particularly upset by the subsequent publication),
(b) my own scientific reputation (I did not want to be made out to be a crazy person),
(c) the fact that these deaths were investigated and were very clearly simply an extraordinary coincidence.

He raised the question of whether they were murdered. I agreed that for a short time I thought that they were, since I had had the experience of being run off the road at the same time by a lorry, but that it was very clear afterwards that the three deaths were individually explainable accidents.

I did not make any of the statements enclosed in quotation marks by the reporter. Webster promised that this was in confidence and that if he wanted to use it he would contact me first. The next thing I saw was the article plastered over Saturday's "Times". He had clearly done some research in procuring photographs, but did not bother to contact me, and broke his promise of confidentiality.

The publication, subsequently picked up by the Sunday Telegraph and Mail on Sunday, has substantially damaged my reputation for scientific integrity, and I believe that this was the deliberate intention.

 

[JeanTate]

Good question so I looked into it briefly.

https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/seaice/processes/circulation.html

Since humans first ventured into the ice-covered oceans, they knew that sea ice motion occurred on small scales, such as a few kilometers (a couple of miles). But it wasn't until the voyage of the Fram to the Arctic that scientists finally confirmed that sea ice also moves across large-scale regions, primarily from the wind.

The wind-driven Arctic ice circulation pattern has two primary components. First, the Beaufort Gyre is a clockwise circulation (looking from above the North Pole) in the Beaufort Sea, north of Alaska. This circulation results from an average high-pressure system that spawns winds over the region. A second component is the Transpolar Drift Stream, where ice moves from the Siberian coast of Russia across the Arctic basin, exiting into the North Atlantic off the east coast of Greenland.

And here is an animation of the sea ice loss and some of the movement from 1987 to 2013. Notice the ice getting pushed out the Fram straight beside Greenland.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-BbPBg3vj8

I believe that warm water entering the Barents sea also plays a role. Melt ponds forming on the ice for long periods also hastens the melting.

Thanks Warmer1, CapelDodger, and BenBurch.

I wonder to what extent the Beaufort Gyre and Transpolar Drift Stream depend upon the sea ice; or asking this the other way, if the sea ice were to disappear (at least in summer), would these two weaken? strengthen? be unaffected?

Not to be daunted by one possibly too simple question, here's another: how thick can sea ice get, during a single winter? Not a 'record breaking' value, but some sort of typical/average.

Another one: how do icebergs from polar glaciers affect sea ice?

AFAIK, only Greenland has glaciers which produce lots of icebergs^, so I guess they'd affect only a small part of the Arctic sea ice anyway.

^I'm sure there are glaciers in northern Canada and Alaska (facing the Arctic Ocean), but they're minnows compared with Greenland's, right? Also, when the large Siberian rivers melt, during summer, do they release a lot of ice into the Arctic Ocean?

 

[icerat]

.

Thanks for that.

Prof. Wadhams has now spoken:

Complaint made to IPSO (Independent Press Standards Office) by Dr. Wadhams:

To be fair IPSO has also made it's findings, and after hearing a full recording of the interview rejected Wadham's complaint.

I don't think it really matters, just shows he's human. Who wouldn't be a bit nervous initially in the face of such a cluster? And he rejected his initial thesis after getting more information, like a good scientist should.

 

[Warmer1]

To be fair IPSO has also made it's findings, and after hearing a full recording of the interview rejected Wadham's complaint.

I don't think it really matters, just shows he's human. Who wouldn't be a bit nervous initially in the face of such a cluster? And he rejected his initial thesis after getting more information, like a good scientist should.

Thanks for the link and that does discredit Peter Wadhams to some degree

"Who wouldn't be a bit nervous initially in the face of such a cluster?" Add to that the death threats that Micheal Mann faced.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/mar/03/michael-mann-climate-change-deniers

There is a lot of money at stake which may create war, let alone bumping off a few scientists.

"Texas' Hunt Oil Co. and Kurdistan's regional government said they have signed a production-sharing contract for petroleum exploration in the Kurdistan region of northern Iraq," [snip]
"Hunt, who is also on the board of Halliburton, has been a key fundraiser for President George W. Bush, who named him to the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board."

Pretty sad commentary for a science forum but there were no WMD's and the shenanigans continue to this day as Ted Cruz can still get away with presenting bogus science to Congress.

From Climate Crocks Dr Carl Mears, head of the Remote Sensing Systems response to Ted Cruz cherry picking the RSS data.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVMsYXzmUYk

Here is Arctic researcher Dr Natalia Shakhova stating that she is having trouble getting here Arctic research accepted because it conflicts with the mainstream view.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVi1lotRLRU

It is sad that Arctic scientists feel threatened and dismissed as a result of their efforts.

 

[Warmer1]

Thanks Warmer1, CapelDodger, and BenBurch.

I wonder to what extent the Beaufort Gyre and Transpolar Drift Stream depend upon the sea ice; or asking this the other way, if the sea ice were to disappear (at least in summer), would these two weaken? strengthen? be unaffected?

This is not a direct response to your question but a bigger picture analysis of what happens to the Jet Stream when Arctic sea ice disappears which is far more concerning.

Dr. Jennifer Francis form Rutgers University on the loss of Arctic sea ice and blocking wind patterns that are lengthening the bad weather spells as well as the good weather spells.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAiA-_iQjdU

Thanks for asking

 

[Warmer1]

Thanks Warmer1, CapelDodger, and BenBurch.

I wonder to what extent the Beaufort Gyre and Transpolar Drift Stream depend upon the sea ice; or asking this the other way, if the sea ice were to disappear (at least in summer), would these two weaken? strengthen? be unaffected?

Not to be daunted by one possibly too simple question, here's another: how thick can sea ice get, during a single winter? Not a 'record breaking' value, but some sort of typical/average.

Another one: how do icebergs from polar glaciers affect sea ice?

AFAIK, only Greenland has glaciers which produce lots of icebergs^, so I guess they'd affect only a small part of the Arctic sea ice anyway.

^I'm sure there are glaciers in northern Canada and Alaska (facing the Arctic Ocean), but they're minnows compared with Greenland's, right? Also, when the large Siberian rivers melt, during summer, do they release a lot of ice into the Arctic Ocean?

You have a lot of specific questions which is great and I wonder if you have already had a chance to take in a larger overview of the science? If not then a lot of Arctic climate science is covered in Peter Wadham's presentation mentioned in post #24 and again the link is below. This is a very good overview of the processes and changes happening in the Arctic and it conveys a lot of the most relevant Arctic climate science that the researchers are focused on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-qdbICw2f8

There are a lot of feedback processes that are accelerating the Arctic warming which are also presented by David Wasdell.

"Arctic Feedback Dynamics Presentation by David Wasdell (Part 1)"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjZaFjXfLec
"Arctic Feedback Dynamics: Implications & Consequences (Part 2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUBZi3t4ZTo

I may be off track in my response to your questions.

 

[BenBurch]

Extent has been nearly flat since the almost beginning of the month now.

It is just barely possible that the seasonal maximum has already been seen.

I find this to be quite alarming.

 

[macdoc]

but not surprising...

(A record warm world in January shows extreme Arctic heat. NASA’s global temperature anomaly map above hints that tropical heat — spiked by a record El Nino — traveled northward and into the Arctic through weaknesses in the Jet Stream over Western North America and Western Europe. Image source — NASA GISS.)

http://robertscribbler.com/2016/02/...016-nasa-marks-hottest-january-ever-recorded/

Those numbers are just astonishing and as the polar vortex spills air out to the south off and on there is no chance for deep cold to settle in.
That made for some interesting action on the Great Lakes with flash freezes.

http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2016/02/frozen-lake-superior/

interesting ice dynamics....you have to think similar fragile surface freezes go on in the Arctic compounding measurements.

 

[Warmer1]

Extent has been nearly flat since the almost beginning of the month now.

It is just barely possible that the seasonal maximum has already been seen.

I find this to be quite alarming.

And for those that have just started looking at Arctic conditions

- large areas of dark open ocean will absorb much more heat energy

- melt ponds will likely form on the sea ice earlier in warm conditions also lowering the albedo and strength of the ice

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-ponds-artic-sea-ice-rapidly.html

- huge areas in western Canada have no snow cover left already very early in the season which means

- the dark ground is absorbing much more heat than reflective snow
- rain will fall instead of snow so rivers flowing into the Arctic will be warmer
- the air is still much warmer and that heat can get shifted into the Arctic or affect the Jet Stream
- more permafrost will melt potentially releasing methane that was frozen under small lakes and along Arctic shoreline areas that erode away

It's not just the shocking new low record of ice in January that occurred when the ice should be thickening and expanding which is alarming.

 

[lomiller]

Just to be clear. The Arctic has been ice free many times in the past. Almost certainly most of the year during the PETM. Very likely ice-free in summer during the Eemian.

Just making that up isn’t a valid argument form. Genetic studies of aquatic animals of the North Atlantic and North Pacific have separate for ~7 million years. If the arctic were ice free these populations would have intermingled and the separation would be much more recent.

Also even if it were warm enough 120 000 years ago for an ice free arctic does it really make sense for you to suggest that makes it ok? At that time sea levels were high enough that if we see them again most of the world’s major coastal cities would be decimated. The economic damage would be enormous.

 

[lomiller]

When I first started following the climate change issue at the turn of the century, most estimates of when the Arctic would become ice free in summer were around 2080. They've certainly come down since, the last time I checked around 2040 seemed the most common estimate.

Of course it's possible, if circumstances conspire to produce the right conditions, that we might get a year with a dip to zero considerably sooner, maybe even in the next decade, but it would be a one off. It could be another decade or more to the next one, and it will probably be at least a century before the Arctic is ice free in summer more often than it isn't.

Yeah CS is jus t showing his inability to understand statistics again. Models that predict 50% chance of an ice free arctic by 2040 will see occasional periods of a mostly ice free arctic well before that. These correspond to the earliest possible date for an ice free arctic, not a prediction of an ice free arctic, but his understanding of statistics is too limited to know the difference.

There is probably a very small chance of a mostly ice free arctic summer already, but it would be an extreme event not something likely to be a regular occurrence for decades to come.

 

[BenBurch]

Extent has been nearly flat since the almost beginning of the month now.

It is just barely possible that the seasonal maximum has already been seen.

I find this to be quite alarming.

From this morning;

 

[George 152]

The day that ice breakers are not required during winter in the High Arctic is still some centuries away if ever