Many of you watch sea ice as closely as some people follow the NFL, soccer, or NASCAR. So when something of interest happens, I’m not without an inbox full of notices.
Today it is encouraging to see the NANSEN is reporting that both Arctic Sea Ice area and extent are above the normal line. Usually we don’t see both in this mode. Here’s area:
And here is extent:
Source: http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/ice-area-and-extent-in-arctic
By itself, this is just a small thing, but it is just one more indication that there’s some improvement in the Arctic Ice situation again, and the indications are that we’ll have another summer extent that is higher than the previous year, for the third year in a row.
Of course our friends will argue that extent and area don’t matter now, that only volume and ice quality (the rotten ice meme) matters.
Interestingly, if you go back to the press releases on the record minimum extent in 2007 at NSIDC here:
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2007.html
And search the entire set of release for the word “volume”, you won’t find it used anywhere that year. The volume worry is a more recent talking point that first appeared in October 2008 when it became apparent that extent wasn’t continuing to decline. They couldn’t tout another record low extent, so volume became the next big thing:
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2008/
Arctic sea ice minimum press release
Please see the NSIDC press release, “Arctic Sea Ice Down to Second-Lowest Extent; Likely Record-Low Volume” for a detailed analysis of this year’s Arctic sea ice minimum and a synopsis of the 2008 melt season.
With nature still not cooperating with “death spiral predictions”, what will be the press release ice meme this year? Color? Texture? Cracks per square kilometer? It will be interesting to watch.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ivan reports:
““The polar bear is under threat … The reduction in the surface of the ice sheet, the melting of the ice, all this adds complications to the living conditions,” he said. Mr Putin also demanded a clean-up of waste dumped in the Arctic by the military and Soviet scientific expeditions. ”
“Vladimir Putin saves the Arctic polar bear in latest animal adventure”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article7112118.ece
That’s really bizarre because Cryosphere shows a big recent drop in the Arctic ice (from the moments when the anomaly was near zero), with the anomaly currently at -0.473 million squared km:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.recent.arctic.png
“what will be the press release ice meme this year? Color? Texture? Cracks per square kilometer? It will be interesting to watch.”
It’s only been touched on, but I think “soot” content will be the meme. Obviously, more soot means a poorer quality of ice. We’ll have more ice, but it will be the bad kind.
How’s S.H. sea ice extent/area looking?
One of the most bizarre ice stories was the “collapse”of some ice shelf in Antarctica, which was clearly a stress fracture – but was touted as “melting” by Ted Scambos and others at NSIDC. Despite the fact that there was no indication of melt anywhere in a 200 metre thick chunk of ice.
“With nature still not cooperating with “death spiral predictions”, what will be the press release ice meme this year? Color? Texture? Cracks per square kilometer? It will be interesting to watch.”
I know the answer: “Arctic is falling apart ” LOL
Is there a graph showing “rotten ice?” /sarc
Today it is encouraging to see the NANSEN is reporting that both Arctic Sea Ice area and extent are above the normal line
So were 2009… and its summer melt was large.
REPLY: Such a glass half empty view. 2009 ice improved over 2008, and 2008 improved over 2007. -A
Leif,
2009 extent never went above the mean.
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddw82wws_621fs5nw5gz
Hmmm. That 2010 graph line looks remarkably like a hockey stick.
BTW, the rotten ice meme only works for a year or two. Three years and it’s out.
“REPLY: Such a glass half empty view. 2009 ice improved over 2008, and 2008 improved over 2007. -A”
Not to nitpick, but I would use the term “increased” rather than “improved.” Improved implies going up is somehow “good.” It is not clear to me that anyone knows how much ice is ideal, so we really have no way of knowing whether more is an improvement or not. I guess in the narrow contest of pro/con AGW, increasing ice is an improvement from the con-AGW point of view, but that is another story.
James
“With nature still not cooperating with “death spiral predictions”, what will be the press release ice meme this year? Color? Texture? Cracks per square kilometer? It will be interesting to watch.”
I’m betting flavour. (Or flavor, if you spell it that way.)
REPLY: Ya know, I originally wrote flavor as an option, then decided it was too absurd. -A
That’s a WUWT anomaly! . BTW: What about a Sun related post?…just to observe how the “Watts effect” works this time.
No matter how much the sea ice extent improves this September over last year, the alarmists will still find a harbinger of doom in the results.
Ice melts in the summer? Crap, we are doomed!
OT, but….Beautiful example on how academia deals with, models and predicts reality.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/04/29/crunch-space-balloon-heavy-payload-break-free-overturn-suv-australia/
Color? Texture? Cracks per square kilometer?
Total carbon content increase (It’s another CO2 sink!) and the resulting complete loss of Helium 3.
“With nature still not cooperating with “death spiral predictions”, what will be the press release ice meme this year?”
Thats easy to answer; There will be no press release.
“what will be the press release ice meme this year? Color? Texture? Cracks per square kilometer?”
Stone – fathom – fortnights, per second squared.
Isn’t it ironic that the latest issue of the journal Nature reports “Less ice allows more heat in the Arctic”…
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=no&u=http://www.yr.no/nyheter/1.7102110
From the National Resources Defense Council’s website:
“Why are global warming specialists watching the Arctic so closely?”
“The Arctic is global warming’s canary in the coal mine. It’s a highly sensitive region, and it’s being profoundly affected by the changing climate. Most scientists view what’s happening now in the Arctic as a harbinger of things to come.”
…Based upon the above statement and recent trend in arctic ice levels – is an ice age coming? 😉
http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/qthinice.asp
It’s fun to watch them desperately grasp at straws like the volume now being important, not extent. Especially since the only reason volume might be important would be that it presumably means lower ice extent down the road, at some point. For ‘Larmists, it’s all about what will/maybe/might/could happen. But if it doesn’t, no problem, they just move the goal posts again, or cry about “ocean acidification”, or some other nonsense.
Lubos: I think well just have to trust ONLY the Scandinavians with the ice data from now on. They live close by anyway…CT just cannot allow NH ice to go above the untouchable line “average” (which is meaningless anyway). They would start losing jobs at Illinois LOL. . Would not be surprised if DMI is under pressure to “adjust” data. Fortunately you cannot pressure Scandinavians in that way. On the basis of past and current satellite temp data I would surmise that changes of <2C in either surface or lower troposphere data have no measurable/visible effect on weather or climate, ice, wind etc….
BTW… 500 "Climate Scientists" in Australia will have to be disposed of now that Rudd's decided its was a load of C*** anyway. hahaha
This lady could use you all’s help:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/28/climate-change-ipcc-noconsensus/?test=latestnews
A little bit more about it:
“Following a series of scandals that led to doubts about the accuracy of the United Nations’ most recent climate-change report, Donna Laframboise of NoConsensus.org gathered a group of citizens online and proved that the U.N. over-relied upon so-called “gray literature,” rather than using exclusively peer-reviewed scientific reports as the organization was supposed to do. Now Laframboise and her colleagues are taking the next step, FoxNews.com has learned. They are building an online database that will let everyone see exactly what the report claims — and precisely how it came to those conclusions. “There’s a pile of work that can and should be done on this report,” Laframboise told FoxNews.com. ”
Help her out, guys.