NSIDC’s Dr. Walt Meier on Catlin and Ice Survey Techniques

19 04 2009

Walt sent me this essay unsolicited, and I think it is very useful for establishing some baseline techniques. There’s more useful information on techniques here than in the entire Catlin Arctic Survey website. UPDATE, a response has been posted at the end of the article. – Anthony

Dr. Walt Meier

Dr. Walt Meier

There have been several recent posts on sea ice thickness, particularly in regards to the Catlin expedition. I don’t have any direct connection to Catlin and in my research focus, I don’t anticipate using the Catlin data. I’m not responding to defend them or their methods. Thus, I can’t address details of their operation. However, from reading the posts and comments it seems like some basics on how sea ice thickness is estimated might be of interest.

Sea ice floats in the ocean. Because sea ice is a lower density than unfrozen water, it floats and a portion (~10-15% depending on density) rises above the water line, while most of the ice (~85-90%) is below the surface. The part of the ice cover above the water line is called the “freeboard”; the portion below is called the “draft”. The sum of the freeboard and the draft is the total ice thickness. There may or may not be snow on top of the ice which can add to the “snow+ice freeboard” and the “snow+ice thickness”.

A variety of techniques have been developed to obtain information about sea ice thickness. Most of these methods don’t actually directly measure thickness but estimate thickness from a related measurement. Here are some examples: Read the rest of this entry »





Catlin Arctic Ice Survey first report offers no original drilling data, but anecdotally confirms satellite measurement

19 04 2009
Pen Hadow extracts drill from an ice hole in this undated photo. Souce: Catlin expedition first report

Pen Hadow extracts drill from an ice hole in this undated photo. Source: Catlin expedition first report

Note: One of the many integrity issues with Catlin is that none of their photos can be dated. Even embedded EXIF information (including date/time done by most digital cameras in use today) has been removed from gallery photos on the website. For all we know this photo above they included in their just released report could have been taken during training. The high photographic angle suggests the photographer was standing on something, but what? Further, no raw data is offered in their first report, we are expected to take it on faith I suppose. Given their admittedly fraudulent biometric readings, and lack of candor on their ice radar, how can we trust anything they publish? So far for a “science” mission I remain unimpressed with the effort or the transparency. – Anthony


Guest post by Steven Goddard

Catlin Report Confirms that Satellite Data is Accurate

Catlin just came out with their first ice report (PDF)

The ice thickness measurements that Pen and the team have been able to phone in imply that they are travelling over predominantly thick first‐year ice. Satellite imagery of the area, especially passive microwave imagery (e.g. AMSR and QuikScat data), indicates the area is indeed covered primarily with first‐year ice and a scattering of multi‐year ice floes.

The report summary is :

The results collected in the first month of the Catlin Arctic Survey point to an unexpected lack of thicker Multiyear Ice. Read the rest of this entry »





Quote of the week #4

19 04 2009
qotw_cropped

Image from WUWT reader “Boudu”

This QOTW is from Pen Hadow, leader of the now farcical Catlin Arctic Ice Survey:

“It’s never wise to imagine that either man or technology has the upper hand in the natural world.”

That’s probably the only true statement  published from the expedition. Read the rest of this entry »