From DARTMOUTH COLLEGE and the “Reports of the demise of Arctic Sea Ice are greatly exaggerated” department
HANOVER, N.H. – The melting of sea ice will significantly increase Arctic precipitation, creating a climate feedback comparable to doubling global carbon dioxide, a Dartmouth College-led study finds.
“The increases of precipitation and changes in the energy balance may create significant uncertainty in climate predictions,” says lead author Ben Kopec, a PhD candidate in Dartmouth’s Department of Earth Sciences.
The findings appear in the journalProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. A PDF is available on request.
Global climate is influenced by the Arctic water cycle, which is partly regulated by sea ice through its control on evaporation and precipitation. There is a growing consensus among scientists that a decrease in sea ice would increase Arctic precipitation because of increased evaporation. Direct measurement of precipitation is difficult in the Arctic because of its cold, windy environments, so the quantitative link between precipitation and sea ice is poorly understood.
In their study, the Dartmouth-led team quantified that link by measuring the hydrogen and oxygen isotopic compositions of precipitation from 1990 to 2012 at six sites across the Arctic. They then used these empirically established sensitivities of precipitation isotopes to sea ice change to project future precipitation changes and to evaluate impacts of these changes on the energy balance. Their approach is based on the premise that Arctic precipitation is composed mostly of water from two marine evaporation regions, or “moisture sources” – one subtropical and one local – and that the relative contributions of the two sources to the precipitation can be determined from the stable isotopic ratios of the precipitation.
They found that for a sea ice extent decrease of 100,000 km2 – or 38,610 square miles — the percentage of Arctic sourced moisture increases by 18.2 percent and 10.8 percent, respectively, in the Canadian Arctic and Greenland Sea regions. This corresponds to increases of 10.9 percent and 2.7 percent per degree Celsius of Arctic warming, respectively.
The researchers reached no conclusion on whether the increased precipitation will fall as snow or rain. If it falls as snow, it could potentially increase glacial mass and the number of days of high land surface reflectivity, thus having a cooling effect. But if the increased precipitation falls as rain, it would cause earlier spring melt and/or later onset of autumn snow coverage, a longer low reflectivity period and additional warming. In either case, the resulting radiative forcing likely has an order of magnitude similar to that of the forcing from doubling carbon dioxide, thus demonstrating that the sea ice feedback to radiation balance through the Arctic water cycle is potentially a major component of climate change.
“Sea ice is declining at an alarming rate, so it is important to understand the consequences of the climate feedbacks caused by these changes,” Kopec says. “We show that the loss of sea ice will likely increase precipitation, which will impact communities and ecosystems around the Arctic. The change of precipitation, depending on the seasonal distribution, may impact the energy balance on the same order of magnitude as the feedbacks associated with doubling carbon dioxide.”
###
from 1990 to 2012….They found that for a sea ice extent decrease of 100,000 km2
You mean in the past 25 years, no one went and took a look?…we went way past your measly 100,000 bozos
…it ain’t happening
“The melting of sea ice will significantly increase Arctic precipitation, creating a climate feedback comparable to doubling global carbon dioxide“.
How on Earth can you derive that from:
“The researchers reached no conclusion on whether the increased precipitation will fall as snow or rain. If it falls as snow, it could potentially increase glacial mass and the number of days of high land surface reflectivity, thus having a cooling effect. But if the increased precipitation falls as rain, it would cause earlier spring melt and/or later onset of autumn snow coverage, a longer low reflectivity period and additional warming.“.
Translation:
Comparable to the story of Jack and the Beanstalk.
Translation: We have no idea what we are talking about so! Let’s just use a bunch of essentially meaningless “sciency sounding” terms so no one will notice.
Translation: You won’t pin us down, this time!
(head shake) Now, just what is the average temperature in the Arctic again?
LOL.
Watch out, Santa!!! There are desperate, mentally unbalanced, characters on the loose in your neighborhood!
(sniff,… sniff…… oh, dear, oh, dear, oh, DEAR! — I’m really worried about Santa, now!!!)
#(:))
“Sea ice is declining at an alarming rate,…”
Not over at Steve’s house.
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/12/15/arctic-sea-ice-growth-continues-to-blow-away-all-records/
More of the “K” effect ? Kopec… Karl…
“Sea ice is declining at an alarming rate”: Failed.
The poor Ph.D. student ‘Genus’ author being at Dartmouth will get his coveted Ph.D. but end up a Manager at a Wall-Mart and with very heavy loan payments continuing into his 50s.
Ha ha
“The melting of sea ice will significantly increase Arctic precipitation, creating a climate feedback comparable to doubling global carbon dioxide“. And to be clear, a doubling of CO2 causes the following feedback….oh wait!
Page last updated at 23:08 GMT, Wednesday, 18 June 2008 00:08 UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7461707.stm
A few years ago, scientists were predicting that Arctic waters would be ice-free in summers by about 2080.Then computer models started projecting earlier dates, around 2030 to 2050.
Then came the 2007 summer that saw Arctic sea ice shrink to the smallest extent ever recorded, down to 4.2 million sq km from 7.8 million sq km in 1980.
By the end of last year, one research group was forecasting ice-free summers by 2013.
"I think we're going to beat last year's record melt, though I'd love to be wrong," said Dr Stroeve.
"If we do, then I don't think 2013 is far off any more. If what we think is going to happen does happen, then it'll be within a decade anyway.
Herman Alexander Hope he gets credit.
=================
Along with WUWT’s Sea Ice Page, Jo Nova has a great Arctic sea ice graphic…
http://joannenova.com.au/wp-content/arctic-sea-ice-dec-2015.gif
This article full of mere science puffery, coming on the heels of yesterday’s post about G. Schmidt, huffing and puffing his all-noise-and-no-measurable-effect sturm und drang about his “experiments” with aerosols (i.e., his ridiculous assertion that human emissions cause both global cooling and warming at the same time and yet it is STILL a “planetary emergency” (algore)), brought this to mind…..
(for, what is it, now, the 64th time, lol — oldie but a goodie)
The great Oz has spoken!
(youtube — Wizard of Oz)
“I’m a very good man, I’m just a bad {scientist}.”
Well? WELL, Mister Kopec? Which IS it? A. Incompetent or B. Bad ??
Page last updated at 10:40 GMT, Wednesday, 12 December 2007
Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7139797.stm
Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice.Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years
The Climate SOBs, (Sorry, but they are), desperately need to perpetually dream up conceptual scenarios which may, could or should increase precipitation and/or atmospheric water vapor because they know water is king. It reigns supreme and they need the king to produce their warming.
They cannot topple the king, make the king go missing, bribe the king or convince the king to cooperate.
All they got is dwindling hope and a weak lifeline of conceptualization.
By extension their secondary intent it to also invent the phony corresponding need to endlessly wait and see how their new theories pan out.
After all, what if they’re right. We have to wait and see before abandoning all concern. Do we not?
And every time the SOBs produce a report with may, should or could all of the David Appell and other climate minions add it to their heap of empirical scientific proof of AGW.
Seems to me that such a strong positive feedback would accelerate ice loss once it got started. Instead, we’ve seen the ice loss flat for nearly a decade. Simple observational evidence refutes the hypothesis.
Makes one wonder if any of these pseudo-scientists will ever learn how to spell AMO.
“’Sea ice is declining at an alarming rate….,’ Kopec says.”
Say what?
A good site to go to for real science about sea ice, polar precipitation, and much more, Dr. Ole Humlum’s Climate for You:
http://climate4you.com/
This is a picture of the climate in the high arctic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eureka,_Nunavut#Climate
Since it snows every month of the year, with a little rain for 4 months on average, what would be the chances of precipitation falling as rain versus snow? For Pete’s sake, the average annual temperature is -18.8 degrees C.
Is there an award for “Most prolific Commenter” that I’m unaware of?
Hypothetical:
CAGW theory wasn’t profitable, as wind energy was already cheap and universal thanks to some break through. There is no incentive to commit scientific fraud, as Democrat donors can’t embiggen their wealth from Big Wind.
The first polar orbit camera is launched 2011, and observes the level of ice extent increase seen from 2012 to 2015.
In this parallel world, how alarmed would scientists be? How far would they extrapolate ice cap growth of they had never observed a brief period of shrinkage?
The “this complicates things” seems to be the new modus operandi of the I’mtoostupidtoknowhowdumbIamcrowd …
Another facepalm moment for climate science. Add it to the giant collection already recorded.
Global sea ice area today is the same as it was in 1980.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
Whilst this year’s summer minimum Arctic sea ice was midway between the 2005 to 2014 trend, the recovery has been very sharp such that presently Arctic sea ice extent is above the last 10 year trend. See:
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/icecover/icecover_current.png
Who knows, may be the alarming rate of decline is bottoming out and may be a corner will be turned. Now that would be an Inconvenient Truth.
There could be a genuine ‘tipping point’ if Arctic sea ice falls off the edge of the earth and we suffer from catastrophic ice loss!
my2p
a lot of posters ridicule greens as idiotic, obsessed, etc.
The feeling of belonging to the rivers and the trees and all that is to be seen is intuitive feeling.
I understand some arithmetic and some consequences of actions and I generally support things that are seen to work.
I would love to see technology deliver the Santa Claus machine but I would still call myself a Green because I am just astounded at life and don’t think we should kill any of it until we figure out how to make it.