NASA says Arctic sea ice 'Unlikely To Break Records' in 2013

A video animation follows. Note also that Dr. Walt Meier is now with NASA Goddard, after leaving NSIDC at the end of July. This is his first report from NASA. – Anthony

Arctic Sea Ice Update: Unlikely To Break Records, But Continuing Downward Trend

The melting of sea ice in the Arctic is well on its way toward its annual “minimum,” that time when the floating ice cap covers less of the Arctic Ocean than at any other period during the year. While the ice will continue to shrink until around mid-September, it is unlikely that this year’s summer low will break a new record. Still, this year’s melt rates are in line with the sustained decline of the Arctic ice cover observed by NASA and other satellites over the last several decades.

“Even if this year ends up being the sixth- or seventh-lowest extent, what matters is that the 10 lowest extents recorded have happened during the last 10 years,” said Walt Meier, a glaciologist with NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. “The long-term trend is strongly downward.” 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiSuUe8dhZ0

The icy cover of the Arctic Ocean was measured at 2.25 million square miles (5.83 million square kilometers) on Aug. 21. For comparison, the smallest Arctic sea ice extent on record for this date, recorded in 2012, was 1.67 million square miles (4.34 million square kilometers), and the largest recorded for this date was in 1996, when ice covered 3.16 millions square miles (8.2 million square kilometers) of the Arctic Ocean.

Watching the summertime dynamics of the Arctic ice cap has gained considerable attention in recent years as the size of the minimum extent has been diminishing – rapidly. On Sept.16, 2012, Arctic sea ice reached its smallest extent ever recorded by satellites at 1.32 million square miles (3.41 million square kilometers). That is about half the size of the average extent from 1979 to 2010.

Sea ice extent is a measurement of the area of the Arctic Ocean where ice covers at least 15 percent of the ocean surface. For additional information about the evolution of the sea ice cover, scientists also study the sea ice “area,” which discards regions of open water among ice floes and only takes into account the parts of the Arctic Ocean completely covered by ice. On Aug. 21, 2013, the Arctic sea ice area was 1.98 million square miles (5.12 million square kilometers).

This year’s melting season included a fast retreat of the sea ice during the first half of July. But low atmospheric pressures and clouds over the central Arctic kept temperatures up north cooler than average, slowing down the plunge.

With about three weeks of melting left, the summer minimum in 2013 is unlikely to be a record low, said Joey Comiso, senior scientist at Goddard and coordinating lead author of the Cryosphere Observations chapter of the upcoming report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

“But average temperatures in the Arctic fluctuate from one week to another, and the occurrence of a powerful storm in August, as happened in 2012, could cause the current rate of decline to change significantly,” Comiso said.

This year, the Arctic has witnessed a few summer storms, but none of them as intense as the cyclone that took place in August 2012.

“Last year’s storm went across an area of open water and mixed the smaller pieces of ice with the relatively warm water, so it melted very rapidly,” Meier said. “This year, the storms hit in an area of more consolidated ice. The storms this year were more typical summer storms; last year’s was the unusual one.”

The Arctic sea ice cap has significantly thinned over the past decade and is now very vulnerable to melt, Comiso said. The multiyear ice cover, consisting of thicker sea ice that has survived at least two summers, has declined at an even faster rate than younger, thinner ice.

Meier said that a thinner, seasonal ice cover might behave more erratically in the summer than multiyear ice.

“First-year ice has a thickness that is borderline: It can melt or not depending on how warm the summer temperatures are, the prevailing winds, etcetera,” Meier said. “This year’s conditions weren’t super-favorable for losing ice throughout spring and summer; last year they were. Whereas with multiyear ice, it takes unusual warm conditions to melt it, which is what we’ve seen in the most recent years.”

On the opposite side of the planet, Antarctic sea ice, which is in the midst of its yearly growing cycle, is heading toward the largest extent on record, having reached 7.45 million square miles (19.3 million square kilometers) on Aug. 21. In 2012, the extent of Antarctic sea ice for the same date was 7.08 million square miles (18.33 million square kilometers). The phenomenon, which appears counter-intuitive but reflects the differences in environment and climate between the Arctic and Antarctica, is currently the subject of many research studies. Still, the rate at which the Arctic is losing sea ice surpasses the speed at which Antarctic sea ice is expanding.

The sea ice minimum extent analysis produced at Goddard – one of many satellite-based scientific analyses of sea ice cover – is compiled from passive microwave data from NASA’s Nimbus-7 satellite, which operated from late October 1978 to August 1987, and the U.S. Department of Defense’s Defense Meteorological Satellite Program, which has been used to extend the Nimbus 7 sea ice record onwards from August 1987. The record, which began in November 1978, shows an overall downward trend of 14.1 percent per decade in the size of the minimum summer extent, a decline that accelerated after 2007.

Related Link

› Arctic sea ice multimedia resources from NASA Goddard’s Scientific Visualization Studio

Maria-José Viñas

NASA’s Earth Science News Team

Source: http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/arctic-sea-ice-update-unlikely-to-break-records-but-continuing-downward-trend/

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

112 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 23, 2013 7:45 am

So sea ice isn’t correlated with global temperatures and we are suppose to conclude the opposite.
ie. Low sea ice does not mean high global temperatures. it hasn’t been a good predictor over the last 20 years.
So what’s happening at the other end of the earth?

Richard M
August 23, 2013 7:47 am

So, with 35 years of data the most recent 10 have the least amount of ice. The recent 10 years are also warmer due to the prevalence of El Nino events which occur when the PDO is positive and occurred just after the AMO cycle moved into positive anomalies.
Sounds like what has occurred is what would be expected given the situation.

Latitude
August 23, 2013 7:50 am

Still, the rate at which the Arctic is losing sea ice surpasses the speed at which Antarctic sea ice is expanding.
===
uh no…………
http://suyts.wordpress.com/2013/08/20/shock-news-global-warming-has-caused-exactly-the-same-amount-of-global-sea-ice/

Luther Wu
August 23, 2013 7:50 am

Arctic ice suddenly began a rapid decline, several days ago. I suspect a storm, smaller than last August’s “Great Cyclone of 2012” is in progress. Would NOAA or NASA withhold that information, just to maintain the Climate Change meme? Sadly, we have seen them act in similar fashion, too many times.

Jim Cripwell
August 23, 2013 7:56 am

Walt Meier writes ““The long-term trend is strongly downward.””
Where on God’s Green Acre does this come from? Unless we have something like Newton’s Laws of Motion, which permit us to predict the timimg and locations of future eclipses, what has happened in the past cannot be used to predict what is going to happen in the future. I have had this discussion with other warmists, and what they say makes absolutely no sense scientifically whatsoever.
It is perfectly legitimate to say that the trend WAS strongly downward. But is is just plain wrong to say that the trend IS strongly downward.

KevinM
August 23, 2013 7:56 am

“Still, the rate at which the Arctic is losing sea ice surpasses the speed at which Antarctic sea ice is expanding.”
Then why is my global sea ice chart right on the 1979-2008 average? The author’s use of the words “long term” has gone humpty-dumpty, and means what it means when he said it but only just then.
Not even a CYA disclaimer like “nobody knows whether this represents a pause in the trend”.

GaryP
August 23, 2013 7:58 am

Well, it’s good to know that things only continue to get worse. It would be tragic if the Arctic ice pack changes were the anomaly. However, it is reassuring to know that the Antarctic ice pack changes are the exception that proves the rule (WE ARE MELTING!). (Sarcasm for those that can’t spot it)
You would almost think that our fearless leader doesn’t want us to have second thoughts about CAGW, judging from the official pronouncements intended to ensure that we continue to shove our society off the cliff of green delusions despite the abject failure of the past predictions of the adverse effects of trace amounts in the atmosphere of the basic building block of (virtually) all life on earth.
Democracy does have one clear virtue. It provides clear proof that the majority of society deserves the awful fate that their elected leaders work so hard to craft.

GeologyJim
August 23, 2013 8:01 am

Conveniently missing in this report is the fact that Arctic temperatures (DMI) have been consistently below average all through the melt season and are already below 0C, so not much further melting likely.
Barring a big storm that disperses the ice or a storm that draws warm water into the Arctic, seasonal minimum may have already been achieved.

Jimbo
August 23, 2013 8:06 am

Unlikely! But I was told by Paul Beckwith, a part time professor and PHD student in paleoclimatology and climatology, that there would be no sea ice this summer! I’ve also been informed that this would be unprecedented.Two mistakes in one sentence? We’ll know in 3 weeks.

Sierra Club Canada – 23 March 2013
“Why Arctic sea ice will vanish in 2013”
“For the record—I do not think that any sea ice will survive this summer. An event unprecedented in human history is today, this very moment, transpiring in the Arctic Ocean…….
Humans have benefited greatly from a stable climate for the last 11,000 years….”
[Paul Beckwith – PhD student paleoclimatology and climatology – part-time professor]
http://www.sierraclub.ca/en/AdultDiscussionPlease

Here is an ice free Arctic Ocean in human history, going back less than 10,000 years.
Here is evidence of Holocene climate extremes and instability.

Jimbo
August 23, 2013 8:08 am

Typo:
We’ll know in 3 weeks.”

BBould
August 23, 2013 8:12 am

Trends change.

IanE
August 23, 2013 8:22 am

As they say on the stockmarket, the trend is your friend – till it ends with a bend.

Resourceguy
August 23, 2013 8:22 am

……..and the readers are instructed not to look around the curtain at the AMO pattern over the same recent decades! Nor are they instructed to look at the recent break in that upward pattern from the AMO’s multidecadal cycle.

August 23, 2013 8:22 am

It doesn’t matter how low the ice gets in September, it does not negatively affect polar bears.
As far as polar bears and sea ice are concerned, September is the least important month of the year. They can wring their hands all they like over the next few weeks but the evidence is in.
The attempted correlation between ice levels in September and harm to polar bears has proven to be false – by the work of polar bear biologists themselves.
See my summary of the evidence: http://polarbearscience.com/2013/08/18/polar-bears-have-not-been-harmed-by-sea-ice-declines-in-summer-the-evidence/

JPS
August 23, 2013 8:24 am

“Even if this year ends up being the sixth- or seventh-lowest extent, what matters is that the 10 lowest extents recorded have happened during the last 10 years.”
Funny – what mattered last year was the trend. Even if the ice hadn’t all melted out, as some had predicted, we had surely embarked on the Arctic Ice Death Spiral.
A point related to Richard M’s: If the temperature rose steeply for about three decades, then leveled off for a decade and a half, we would expect a lot of record low arctic ice extents to occur during that decade and a half. That the CAGW theorists seize on continued low Arctic ice extent to tell the public that the world is still getting warmer – just look at the shrinking ice cap! – strikes me as obtuse, perhaps willfully so.

Steve Oregon
August 23, 2013 8:30 am

Does Walt have to embellish and misplace significance to keep his job?
Others have already mentioned some big problems with his opinion.
Here’s mine.
….”what matters is that the 10 lowest extents recorded have happened during the last 10 years,” said Walt Meier, ”
Ok Walt, so if what “matters” is the “last ten years” why not apply the same test of to Antarctica?
Have the 10 highest extents (or near highest) recorded in Antarctica happened over the last 10 years?
Walt excludes any mention of what Antarctica sea ice has looked like over the last 10 years, where it is headed or what trend has been occurring ever.
As an apparent excuse for that omission Walt says “it’s different and is currently the subject of many research studies.”
So I guess we are to conclude that the sea ice experts can only certain of what is happening with sea ice loss while sea ice gain is a mystery needing more research.
How conveniently AGW of them.
If I had my way all sea ice research would be suspended for 5 yrs. And only be assessed every 5 years.
All of the money spent monitoring the freezing and melting of ice is robbing genuinely needed research of funding.
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/08/the_sequester_is_starving_amer.html

August 23, 2013 8:31 am

It doesn’t matter how low the ice gets in September, it doesn’t matter to polar bears.
The attempted correlation between low ice levels in September and harm to polar bears has been proven false – by polar bear biologists themselves. As far as polar bears are concerned, September is the least important month of the year.
Check out my summary of the evidence to date: http://polarbearscience.com/2013/08/18/polar-bears-have-not-been-harmed-by-sea-ice-declines-in-summer-the-evidence/

August 23, 2013 8:32 am

Sorry for the double post….

Brendy
August 23, 2013 8:34 am

Not much mention by NSIDC of Greenland surface ice melt which received so much play last year as a harbinger of the coming loss of the ice sheet due to climate change. Interestingly, the last update analysis on the NSIDC web site is June 21, though the seasonal and daily graphs now reflect almost no melt and levels far below the 30 year average.

Andy Wilkins
August 23, 2013 8:38 am

“This year’s conditions weren’t super-favorable for losing ice throughout spring and summer; last year they were. ”
Any one reading that sentence and seeing the words ‘super favourable’ would think he wanted the ice to melt!
Warmists pretend they want to stop the supposed ‘death spiral’, but that’s a complete lie – if the spiral stopped they’d have nothing to wail about and the grants would dry up.

RC Saumarez
August 23, 2013 8:39 am

Give it 30 years

Latitude
August 23, 2013 8:51 am

, and the occurrence of a powerful storm in August, as happened in 2012, could cause the current rate of decline to change significantly,” Comiso said.
========================
One month ago, NSIDC announced this :
Back when the sea was thick and lasted for years, cyclones tended to spread the ice out and actually increase its extent, said Julienne Stroeve of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo. Now, when ice gets spread out, it simply breaks up and disappears.
“As our ice cover has thinned, some of our old rules are changing,” said Stroeve.
=============
The end of July storm caused a significant increase in ice area, the exact opposite of what NSIDC claimed.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/gaia-announces-a-new-set-of-rules-for-climate-alarmists/

Pamela Gray
August 23, 2013 8:51 am

Walt must be referring to the straight line to straight line graph of yearly Arctic ice. If the herky jerky dot-to-dot line pauses below the average and stays in the knee, as it has these last 10 years, it is still below the climatological average (as they describe it). Therefore in their posts they will continue to say it is consistent with a downward trend.
This is why I prefer the metrics of the oceanic/atmospheric oscillation bar graphs using running averages (of either standard or just seasonal months). Arctic ice area, extent, thickness, and volume should be portrayed in the same way. And possibly divided up by sub-area much the way the equatorial Pacific is.

Alec, aka Daffy Duck
August 23, 2013 8:54 am

Record? Will it be the LARGEST GAIN in ice extent from the year prior????

1 2 3 5