NASA Sees Arctic Ocean Circulation Do an About-Face

NOTE: You may recall a story I posted some months ago titled: “NASA: It’s the wind” regarding Arctic wind circulation patterns and the way it drove sea ice further south into melt zones. Commenter Paul Marek brought this story to attention recently, and given the sea ice trend this summer, I thought it was worth bringing to light again. Then and now, “The results suggest not all the large changes seen in Arctic climate in recent years are a result of long-term trends associated with global warming. ” Given our less than predicted catastrophic sea ice loss this year, coupled with this study, it looks like Arctic ice could be on the mend. – Anthony

Scientists used measurements from Arctic Bottom Pressure Recorders

Click for Larger image

This shows contours of the trend in ocean bottom pressure from 2002 to 2006 as measured by GRACE along with hypothetical trends that would apply at the circles if ocean salinity reverted from 1990s values to climatological conditions over the same period.

NASA Sees Arctic Ocean Circulation Do an About-Face

November 13, 2007

PASADENA, Calif. – A team of NASA and university scientists has detected an ongoing reversal in Arctic Ocean circulation triggered by atmospheric circulation changes that vary on decade-long time scales. The results suggest not all the large changes seen in Arctic climate in recent years are a result of long-term trends associated with global warming.

The team, led by James Morison of the University of Washington’s Polar Science Center Applied Physics Laboratory, Seattle, used data from an Earth-observing satellite and from deep-sea pressure gauges to monitor Arctic Ocean circulation from 2002 to 2006. They measured changes in the weight of columns of Arctic Ocean water, from the surface to the ocean bottom. That weight is influenced by factors such as the height of the ocean’s surface, and its salinity. A saltier ocean is heavier and circulates differently than one with less salt.

The very precise deep-sea gauges were developed with help from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; the satellite is NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (Grace). The team of scientists found a 10-millibar decrease in water pressure at the bottom of the ocean at the North Pole between 2002 and 2006, equal to removing the weight of 10 centimeters (four inches) of water from the ocean. The distribution and size of the decrease suggest that Arctic Ocean circulation changed from the counterclockwise pattern it exhibited in the 1990s to the clockwise pattern that was dominant prior to 1990.

Reporting in Geophysical Research Letters, the authors attribute the reversal to a weakened Arctic Oscillation, a major atmospheric circulation pattern in the northern hemisphere. The weakening reduced the salinity of the upper ocean near the North Pole, decreasing its weight and changing its circulation.

“Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean circulation in the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by global warming,” said Morison.

“While some 1990s climate trends, such as declines in Arctic sea ice extent, have continued, these results suggest at least for the ‘wet’ part of the Arctic — the Arctic Ocean — circulation reverted to conditions like those prevalent before the 1990s,” he added.

The Arctic Oscillation was fairly stable until about 1970, but then varied on more or less decadal time scales, with signs of an underlying upward trend, until the late 1990s, when it again stabilized. During its strong counterclockwise phase in the 1990s, the Arctic environment changed markedly, with the upper Arctic Ocean undergoing major changes that persisted into this century. Many scientists viewed the changes as evidence of an ongoing climate shift, raising concerns about the effects of global warming on the Arctic.

Morison said data gathered by Grace and the bottom pressure gauges since publication of the paper earlier this year highlight how short-lived the ocean circulation changes can be. The newer data indicate the bottom pressure has increased back toward its 2002 level. “The winter of 2006-2007 was another high Arctic Oscillation year and summer sea ice extent reached a new minimum,” he said. “It is too early to say, but it looks as though the Arctic Ocean is ready to start swinging back to the counterclockwise circulation pattern of the 1990s again.”

Morison cautioned that while the recent decadal-scale changes in the circulation of the Arctic Ocean may not appear to be directly tied to global warming, most climate models predict the Arctic Oscillation will become even more strongly counterclockwise in the future. “The events of the 1990s may well be a preview of how the Arctic will respond over longer periods of time in a warming world,” he said.

Grace monitors tiny month-to-month changes in Earth’s gravity field caused primarily by the movement of water in Earth’s land, ocean, ice and atmosphere reservoirs. As such it can infer changes in the weight of columns of ocean water. In contrast, the pressure gauges installed on the sea floor in 2005-2006 directly measured water pressure at the bottom of the ocean. Gauge data were remotely recovered during the first year of the study.

“The close agreement between the North Pole pressure gauges and Grace data demonstrates Grace’s potential for tracking world ocean circulation,” said study co-author John Wahr of the University of Colorado, Boulder.

“Satellite altimeters, such as NASA’s Jason, are ideal for studying ocean circulation but can’t be used at Earth’s poles due to ice cover,” said study co-author Ron Kwok of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. “Our results show Grace can be a powerful tool for tracking changes in the distribution of mass in the Arctic Ocean, as well as its circulation.”

Grace is a partnership between NASA and the German Aerospace Center (DLR). The University of Texas Center for Space Research, Austin, has overall mission responsibility. JPL developed the twin satellites. DLR provided the launch, and GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam, Germany, operates Grace. For more on Grace: http://www.csr.utexas.edu/grace/ .

The study was funded by the National Science Foundation.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
80 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Frank L/Denmark
August 14, 2008 11:53 pm


Of course the difference in measuring method are important to know, but one more time, and this time please try to relate to the point (!!) – which by the way is getting clearer and clearer EVERY DAY now, here 14/8 comparisation between 2008 and 2005 :
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=08&fd=14&fy=2005&sm=08&sd=14&sy=2008
I write one more time:

The ice extend in 2008 is back to 2005 level. This was recently by alarmist said to be 100% impossible. But non the less.
So the ice extend is NOT decreasing this year and so the so called “scientists” should not say so in ANY way. Should not manipulate readers to think so. it stinks!

Phil try to look very careful at the link i gave.
1) Does it look as though the north pole has less ice in 2008 than 2005?
2) Does it actually look as though 2008 has more solid ice around the north pole than in 2005
3) Is it not interesting that this “back to 2005” happends EVEN THOUGH the ice was thin 1 year ice?
4) Is it then fair in any article to claim that we now in 2008 has exeptionally big chance of an ice free north pole??
Phil:
We have globally colder temperatures than last year, and we have more ice than last year and the sun has gone sleeping. So, Phil, please understand that some of us finds it misleading with these “ICE-FREE NORTH POLE” articles. If you dont understand it, i guarantee, many others will.

August 15, 2008 6:54 pm

Frank L/Denmark (23:53:12) :

Of course the difference in measuring method are important to know, but one more time, and this time please try to relate to the point (!!)

It’s not a difference in method, it’s different quantity altogether and the one which represents the amount of ice is ‘area’, ‘extent’ just tells you how it’s spread out!
– which by the way is getting clearer and clearer EVERY DAY now, here 14/8 comparisation between 2008 and 2005 :
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=08&fd=14&fy=2005&sm=08&sd=14&sy=2008

I write one more time:

The ice extend in 2008 is back to 2005 level. This was recently by alarmist said to be 100% impossible. But non the less.

Your saying it a second time doesn’t make it correct.
So the ice extend is NOT decreasing this year and so the so called “scientists” should not say so in ANY way. Should not manipulate readers to think so. it stinks!
Again not the relevant parameter, whether it’s more or less than last year depends on the wind as much as anything else. Ice area is very close to last year and could finish either way, with the amount of fragmented ice still there a record is still possible.

Phil try to look very careful at the link i gave.
1) Does it look as though the north pole has less ice in 2008 than 2005?

Whether it does or not depends on someone’s photoshopping, there’s no data at the Pole, see the black dot in the actual image, no data!
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/NEWIMAGES/arctic.seaice.some.000.png
2) Does it actually look as though 2008 has more solid ice around the north pole than in 2005
No
3) Is it not interesting that this “back to 2005″ happends EVEN THOUGH the ice was thin 1 year ice?
It’s surpassed 2005, already 2008 has less ice than the minimum in 2005, despite starting with 1 million sq km more area this spring!
4) Is it then fair in any article to claim that we now in 2008 has exeptionally big chance of an ice free north pole??
No one said ‘exceptionally big chance’, Serreze for example said 50/50, check out the fractured region at ~135ºE.
Phil:
We have globally colder temperatures than last year,

Global temperatures aren’t particularly relevant to the fate of Arctic ice, even NH is of limited applicability, we’ve had 26ºC in the Canadian Arctic this summer. But those temperatures aren’t included in your ‘global’ statistics.
and we have more ice than last year
As pointed out above it’s a wash at present.
and the sun has gone sleeping.
Really how much has the TSI dropped this year?
So, Phil, please understand that some of us finds it misleading with these “ICE-FREE NORTH POLE” articles. If you dont understand it, i guarantee, many others will.
I suggest that you inform yourself on the situation then.
Yesterday’s AMSR-E image from JAXA is a good start:
http://iup.physik.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsredata/asi_daygrid_swath/l1a/n6250/2008/aug/asi180-n6250-20080814_nic.png

August 28, 2008 6:35 pm

As I’m seeing it:
Still “almost but not quite” where we were last year in terms of total sea-ice area in the arctic. Though its worth noting that the bizzare occurance of a record peak of Antarctic sea Ice area happened at this date last year. Its well down on that now in the antarctic.
So Global sea ice area has smashed the previous record low.
If anyone wants to take a boat between the atlantic and pacific, the NW and NE passages are now wide open and ice free for near a week.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/tafb/atl_anom.gif
Shows that the arctic surface meltpuddle of lower salinity water is certainly reducing heat transmission on the gulfstream current to the arctic this year compared to its effect on the last few years nthrn summers. Despite which the Ice volume is at a record low 1 mth out from expected min. And the ice area is well below 2006 and even 2005(the previous to 07record low ), still darn close to 2007 at this date. Worth noting that data over the last 3 decades shows rebound behaviour, with low ice events usually followed by quite high ice area the following year. There was a significant rebound in winter from over 3 million sqkm below 1979-2000 mean in late oct 2007 to 0.3mil below mean in mar-apr 2008. So the difference between winter 08 and now is record number 3 mentioned in this post.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.jpg
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.anom.jpg
Don’t stress. Change forces evolutionary growth. The last simular magnitude enviromental shock was the Toba supervolcano 78000 years ago. Wiping out 99.9% of humans then caused the rational brain to evolve.
Lets learn from our mistakes with this opportunity. 😉

August 28, 2008 6:57 pm

I found that black spot hidding the area around the nth pole very annoying too. Click on “old (ssmi)” above the image to get the same colour mapping and full picture as previous years. The new image processing hides a lot. And it is curious that the “black spot” appeared on Nasa feeds right after the plughole subduction event was visible. A very scary phenomina if it becomes more common.
My opinion from my experience is that the spin on PR, and sometimes the data provided by Nasa can be influenced by big business interests. Always be skeptical.
My take on the raving about current circulation direction:
When there is a significant ice cap the entry of the gulf current tends to force clockwise surface circulation.
A fractured and broken cap makes it inevitable that winds drive surface current circulation in anticlockwise mode.
Don’t agree with “just a normal cycle” PR on the circulation direction. Mis-direction for the masses and “blue pills” for the people who desperately want to keep believing that humans can do what ever they like with no big consequences IMO.
Big money pays lots for blue pills like those. The red pill of reality requires you to research the mechanisms, data and discard what beliefs are just easy and pleasant, rather than supported. A matrix connundrum.