Yesterday I looked at JAXA data and ventured that:
“Arctic sea ice melt appears to have turned the corner for 2009”
The Sept 15th JAXA Arctic Sea Ice extent graph was published this evening about 8PM PST (and updated overnight which is the image now shown) and shows an increase in sea ice for the second day in a row. It seems clear that Arctic sea ice is now on the rise.
The Sept 14th value was: 5,276,563 km2
You can see this minimum and upturn clearly in the zoomed graph below.
I expect this JAXA value will increase again in about 4 hours once JAXA finishes QC and final data analysis. I’ll post an update when it happens (assuming it is not too late). (UPDATED 7:45AM PDT) 9/16)
Here’s the table of data:
| 9 | 1 | 2009 | 5423750 |
| 9 | 2 | 2009 | 5398281 |
| 9 | 3 | 2009 | 5379844 |
| 9 | 4 | 2009 | 5387969 |
| 9 | 5 | 2009 | 5363438 |
| 9 | 6 | 2009 | 5345156 |
| 9 | 7 | 2009 | 5328906 |
| 9 | 8 | 2009 | 5330469 |
| 9 | 9 | 2009 | 5315938 |
| 9 | 10 | 2009 | 5295313 |
| 9 | 11 | 2009 | 5278594 |
| 9 | 12 | 2009 | 5259375 |
| 9 | 13 | 2009 | 5249844 |
| 9 | 14 | 2009 | 5276563 |
| 9 | 15 | 2009 | 5301094 |
Barring an about face by Nature, the 2009 Arctic Sea Ice minimum occurred on Sept 13th with 5,249,844 km2
UPDATE: WUWT reader Bruce Richardson made a nice zoomed comparison graph, which he offered in comments, that I have added to this article.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Cross that green line, then the black and purple. Ice Age! Ice Age!
Roughly 2004 line looks like a not unreasonable extrapolation for next year right at the moment.
>The Sept 15th JAXA Arctic Sea Ice extent graph was published this evening about 8PM PST ……..
FYI, here in Japan the data is renewed daily at a bit around noon, 12:03~05.
Onward and upward.
One reason for the smaller values of Arctic sea ice extent for 2002-2009 seen in the IARC/JAXA graph as compared to the 1979-2000 average, may be that the 70s, where surface temp data was still fairly reliable, experienced lower temps globally and its consequence (relatively large sea ice extent) was operative in the 1979-2000 average, or?
That has always seemed highly likely to me, tokyoboy. The satellite record just happens to start at what is likely nearly the peak of the previous 30 years of Arctic ice extent. No great conspiracy –just the way it worked out.
It’s pretty clear Arctic ice trends are like a battleship –they don’t turn on a dime and zoom off in the other direction. They ebb and flow over decades.
Ice age! Sweet! Go!
Uh…I take that back. Global warming is kinda nice actually. Who cares if humans are to blame! Goodness.
Enjoy the warmth as it lasts. Winter is coming.
The Russians are gonna have to take out that satellite before Copenhagen.
These big numbers are so impersonal.
5 249 844 km^2 is considerably larger than the combined areas of all 27 states in the Eurpean Union (4 324 782 km^2).
So really quite a long way away from ice free.
It seems that there has been a dramatic fall in September Arctic temps this year.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
It seems that there has been multiple times over the past 30 years where the Arctic has two years of ice growth, only to eventually fall to a new minimum.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover_30y.uk.php
If next year is the third year in a row with ice extent recovery, then it will be a remarkable change.
RE: Michael (21:20:10) :
“It seems that there has been a dramatic fall in September Arctic temps this year.”
Temperature is tracking the average. What’s dramatic about that?
If anyone is interested in a zoomed in look at the Arctic Sea Ice Extent chart, I created one. It is a pdf file that can be accessed via a SendYourFiles link here:
http://syfsr.com/?e=B82BD71B-A482-48B3-B480-B0E68127F0F2
Looks on track to overtake 2005 this month.
This is quite alarming… has anyone extrapolated the increased artic sea ice coverage from 2007-2009 to see when it will reach down into the North Sea and bring trade to a screeching halt? Polar bears will be trotting down to the Meditteranean for a swim.
How does this two-year-increase rank against the “full” record of two-year increases? (It looks like #1 for AMSR-E, but how about the older satellites?)
It certainly doesn’t change the long-term trend. It does, however, place some doubt on the various theories that hysteresis means that minimum extents will be followed with other minimum extends, due to less older, thicker ice. At the least, while you certainly can’t call this a recovery to the previous trend yet, it is more than most climate researchers thought.
Daryl M (21:41:22) : …RE: Michael (21:20:10) :… Temperature is tracking the average. What’s dramatic about that?
The only drama one can detect is Michael whistling past the cemetery.
That’s a hard turn upward in JAXA today.
DMi—Danish Meteorological Institute— showed it earlier. It seems DMi is about one day ahead of JAXA.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php
Henrik Svensmark—also Danish—seems to be ahead of others too.
DANE POWER!!
Too bad I’m Bohemian! 🙁
Michael (21:20:10) :
Who knows Michael, maybe you are right. But at first you came across as an alarmists who is trying to explain away what is happening in Arctic (North Pole) ice.
Bulldust (22:00:47) :
What handwriting on the wall are you reading that lends you to suspect this?
I just chalk it up to Murphy that no sooner does the world decide to act than it finds out, too late, that it went the wrong way. I just hope they don’t do anything really stupid, like try to mass-modify the Earth’s climate.
We are not making a loud enough noise.
John Thacker (22:26:57) :
“It certainly doesn’t change the long-term trend. ”
I have been always wondering about the 109-year trend displayed on The Cryosphere Today site:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seasonal.extent.1900-2007.jpg
IIRC, the satellite observation started in 1978-79. How were the data for 1900-1978 in that graph acquired, and can one splice the older data with the satellite-era data without any problem? My eyeballing tells me that the older data are too constant to believe as it is, in view of the well-known fact (or anecdote?) that the Arctic sphere showed a significant warming from 1920s to 1940s, as (probably) supported by the temp data for Greenland observational sites.
Could someone teach me on this issue?
Just some thoughts:
That’s a lot of equatorial heat that escaped out the poles in 2007 and 2008.
The weather patterns slowed down, and that’s all it takes. They are still slow, persistent, stuck in Lodi, and it’s still blowing off Earth’s heat.
When the new equilibrium is reached, that’s when we will see the full effect of the lack of Solar Activity and increased GCR’s.
Until then, it’s a slow burn in the Land of Frozen.
Enjoy your Global Warming (or is it Global Heat Loss Pump) while it lasts.
Two years of (temporary) relatively much lower solar activity and Arctic sea ice is STILL below the 30 year average (which included 1998). Tell the commercial shipping companies that now find it profitable to use the North East passage that we are heading for an ice age.
Sorry, my dry cynicism is sometimes lost in text – I was wondering if anyone had done the fun exercise of extrapolating the increased sea ice coverage form the last three years data to the next few decades. After all… had the years been reversed the media would be all over the “ice free artic soon!” stories.
Of course this is only the minima data… not the maxima.
Re dennis ward (22:53:42) :
So, Mr Ward, looking at the DMI Polar Temperature chart, this year’s been tracking the 50 (Fifty) year average pretty well. If the air temperature hasn’t risen, why the difference in ice melt?
Also, if you dig back into the archives here & at “the Air Vent”, you’ll find an essay looking at the historical variations in Arctic ice extent, that shows strong evidence of marked swings on decadel, or shorter levels.
Also, looking at tAV, you’ll find (Also reproduced here) an animation of Polar Ice, showing that melting is but one componant of ice extent, wind, tides & currents also have a big effect, sweeping ice out into the open seas.
As for the commercial use of the NW Passage, having an Ice Breaker chug along infront of you, probably doesn’t make commercial sense, unless it’s a very valuable cargo.