After writing my earlier piece showing changes in the Arctic maximum since 2007, Willis requested the same image for the minimum. NSIDC does not archive extent images, but fortunately UIUC does archive sea ice concentration images. Below is the equivalent image for September 15, 2007/2009. Yellow represents areas of 30% concentration ice common to both images. Green represents 2009 ice that was not present in 2007. Red represents 2007 ice that was not present in 2009.
Note the disappearance of the Northwest Passage.
DMI measures extent as areas of greater than 30% concentration, so the graph below is a good representation of the ~33% gain in summer ice seen between 2007 and 2009.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/icecover/icecover_2010.png
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
OMG, hide the incline!
33% Sea Ice is a lot. They had to escort the 2 German Freighters through with 2 Russian nuclear-powered Ice Breakers in that <33% Northeast Passage.
Personally, I would like to visualize some Sunny *Dry* Warmth. I want my Global Warming, and I want it now.
The continuous cold rain blowing in off the Pacific continues. It feels like the highth of winter still… that is highs in the 40’s – 50’s, lows in the mid 30’s, rain almost every day. We are in our 5th month of El Nino Rains. Depending on who’s rain gauge you believe, we have had 3-6 ft of rain since Christmas 2009.
Just for an update: According the IJIS/Jaxa, the Arctic sea ice is now below where it was in 2003 on this date, April 11, and we’ve dropped over 450,000 sq. km since the peak on March 31.
I’d like to see some sunshine too, Jack. NW Calif. is water-logged and it has been raining heavy since last night. El Nino was supposed to be over.
The high country is buried in deep snow, and not a single storm has come in all season above 6,000′, so it’s all sitting up there ready for a flash flood.
But we dare not let the rains stop, or the Drought Mongers will be all over us with massive surcharges and special fees.
rbateman (19:26:13) :
33% Sea Ice is a lot. They had to escort the 2 German Freighters through with 2 Russian nuclear-powered Ice Breakers in that <33% Northeast Passage.
But a yacht sailed through in the opposite direction without an icebreaker.
It is deceptive to compare the images of September 2009 only with 2007. Go back in time and compare each earlier September 15 with 2009 at
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh
Although 2007 has the minimum area and 2008 is similar to 2009, all years before 2007 had more ice on September 15 than 2009. The difference gets larger as you go further back in time. The trend is clear. Arctic ice area at the summer minimum is decreasing over time.
R. Gates (20:13:25) :
So we’ve dropped over 450,000 km2 since Mar 31st.
Is there anything special about that?
Let’s look:
03,31,2010,14407344
04,11,2010,13947813
—————–
459531 has been lost compared to
03,31,2003,14428281
04,11,2003,13950938
—————–
477343 lost in the same time period in 2003
Hmm…. looks like we’ve lost sea ice at a slower rate than 2003.
Do your JAXA figures agree?
Nice work Willis and Anthony posting both – much appreciated! Lets get it all out on the table : )
R. Gates (20:13:25)…
…is already getting frantic about natural change:
“…we’ve dropped over 450,000 sq. km since the peak on March 31.”
Yikes!
But no one else is panicking, because we read the article, and it had this graph: click.
The peak was around April 1, and naturally northern sea ice begins to decline around then. Cherry-picking the peak – and then arm-waving over the normal and natural decline – is the same illogical, emotional tactic alarmists always use. It works on the pseudo-science blog realclimate, but not here. Why? Because we know better.
And before the obligatory chart showing a decline in Arctic ice is posted [while ignoring Antarctic ice], here’s a side-by-side comparison of the anomalies going back thirty years: click
The climate is well within its normal and natural long term parameters, including sea ice extent, so now the alarmist contingent has resorted to using future predictions instead of reality to support their arguments.
There is absolutely nothing abnormal occurring here. Nothing. Unless the ice extent goes below its extent during the MWP, or above the extent during the LIA, it’s only natural climate variability.
Jeff T (20:32:32),
Speaking of “deceptive,” you say:
“…all years before 2007 had more ice on September 15 than 2009.”
All years? Really? Are you talking global ice? Or are you cherry-picking only the Arctic?
Eyeballing the Arctic summer ice during June 2007, 2008 and 2009, it looks like there is about the same amount of ice in 2009 as in the preceding two years: click
If you want to be honest about the claims of declining ice cover, then you must also include the Antarctic: click
Because the debate is about global, not regional, warming/cooling.
R. Gates (20:13:25) :
Just for an update: According the IJIS/Jaxa, the Arctic sea ice is now below where it was in 2003 on this date, April 11, and we’ve dropped over 450,000 sq. km since the peak on March 31.
==============
I gotta give it to you, “R. Gates”, you’re hard to pin down.
Always keeping us sceptics honest.
We’ll win in the end!!
Jeff T (20:32:32) :
No, it’s not deceptive at all. The comparison is to show how much has been gained back since the minimum. What you are trying to do is to predict the future using a trend line. Suckers buy stocks late in the cycle based on sunny trends put forth by people who make money off the trades. Dot com. S&L. Housing. Only the savvy few who recognize the change in trend early are able to come out on top.
Trends change. Sheep walk out on the end of trends and fall off. The wise know better.
I’m looking forward to making the same image in September, 2010.
rbateman,
I hear ya, I noticed Shasta Dam was refilling very nicely, when I made my last run to Sacto from the Oregon Coast. Its under 20 feet from crest as of last update. Have you seen any official guesses on what the snow pack holds currently?
Jack
Jeff T,
Save your breath…they’d rather look at the only what’s happened since 2007. It’s their “convenient truth”…
rbateman
‘Trends that can’t continue, won’t.’ Herbert Stein’s Law
Global cooling is the future.
Jack:
Last I heard the Sierra snowpack was well over 100% of water content, and that was April 1st.
Very damn convenient as it turns out.
Don’t eat the yellow ice.
el gordo (21:40:09) :
The 4 billion year history of climate variation on Earth would bear that out.
Unfortunately, you can’t outlaw Sea Ice or sell Ice Credits.
Jack “In Oregon” Barnes (21:28:21)
Have you seen any official guesses on what the snow pack holds currently?
I stopped trusting those measurements five years
ago in California.
Drought means crisis—Crisis means money—Money
plus crisis equals agenda.
u.k.(us) said (21:03:16) :
“I gotta give it to you, “R. Gates”, you’re hard to pin down.
Always keeping us sceptics honest.
We’ll win in the end!!”
——–
This mentioning of the day by day blow of sea ice extent is meant as a poke at the absurdity of doing so…I hope everyone gets that! Once more, the longest term trend of reliable data is the best…i.e. five years is better than two, ten years is better than five, thirty is better than ten, and a hundred is better than thirty. March’s little “bump” upward is no more signficant than the fact that sea ice ice now below where it was in 2003 on this date, etc.
Here’s what I really care about in terms of sea ice– will we hit a new summer low by 2015? If we don’t, my own belief in the accuracy of AGW fall in an inverse proportion to the growth of summer arctic sea ice. But having said that, I believe we will see a new summer low by 2015, and probably as early as next summer. This summer I’m projecting a 4.5 million sq. km. summer minimum as measured and reported by IJIS/Jaxa. (just so we’re clear where the numbers I’ll use are coming from). My basis is simple:
1) Though we’ve had some growth in multi-year ice, it has not been a huge increase, and it is not exceptionally thick.
2) Much of the March “bump” upward is new ice between 4 and 12 inches thick. It will melt fast and really is meaningless.
3) We’ve had unseasonably warm temps over Greenland and N. Canada (i.e. Hudson Bay), and parts the central arctic. Most of these areas are already showing signs of below average ice, and yes Virginia, warmth really does melt ice…not just wind and currents carrying it away.
So while Steve Goddard et. al believe that the summer 2010 minimum will be above 2009 and in the 6 million sq. km. area, I think they overestimate how much the mulit-year ice will hold up under what will be a projected warm summer in the arctic…
Granted, recovering sea ice (and/or a change in trend) in the arctic is an interesting thorn in the side of the AGW beast, but to what degree does arctic ice serve as an indicator for warming or cooling? It seems to me that there have been some interesting points made about the speed of the currents under the ice, and that water’s temperature–that those factors drive ice formation much more than the mere air temperature anyway. Anyone have comments on that?
R. Gates – here’s an update to your update – arctic ice extent is lower than it was on this date (april 11) in 2003 but higher than it was on this date in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 ! thanks for making the increase obvious.
@Smokey,
The trend is less clear if you include Antarctic ice, but it’s still there.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
Check that chart and I think you’ll find that the sum of Arctic and Antarctic ice area on each September 15 prior to 2007 was larger than on that date in 2009.
@rbateman,
There are year-to-year fluctuations. You think we are late in the cycle and I think we’re early. If you are confident that years after 2009 will have greater ice area in the Arctic than 2009, would you like to make a wager about whether the average Arctic ice area for September 15th 2010-2012 exceeds the area for September 15th, 2009? If so, ask Anthony to send me your e-mail address and we’ll see whether we can write an enforceable contract.