Guest post by Steven Goddard
In past years, NSIDC has referred to “declining multi-year ice” as the problem which the Arctic faces. Mark Serreze at NSIDC forecast a possible “Ice Free North Pole” in 2008, based on the fact that it had only first year ice. This year, multi-year ice has increased and NSIDC is now referring to declining “2+ year old” ice as the problem. Note the missing age group (2 year old ice) in the paragraph below from their latest press release .
First-year ice in particular is thinner and more prone to melting away than thicker, older, multi-year ice. This year, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10% of the ice cover at the end of February. From 1981 through 2000, such older ice made up an average of 30% of the total sea ice cover at this time of the year.
Due to the record minimum in 2007, it goes without saying that there isn’t a lot of three year old ice in 2009. Maybe next year they can raise the bar to 3+ year old ice, as the multi-year ice ages one more year?
Multi-year ice has increased from 2008, up to nearly 25%. Compare multi-year ice vs. last year’s map below – upper right corner.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2008/040708.html
The press has picked up on the 10% figure, based on the new higher standard NSIDC has set.
Ice older than two years once accounted for some 30 to 40 percent of the Arctic’s wintertime cover and made up 25 percent as recently as 2007.
But last year it represented only 14 percent of the maximum. This year the figure fell to 10 percent.
Note too that ice extent is nearly back to normal and has not declined significantly from the winter maximum.
Three submarines at the North Pole.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nuclear_Submarines_surfaced_at_the_North_Pole.jpg
It’s possibly phased to the PDO.
It’s definitely phased with the NPO, actually.
Three other subs at North Pole, open water, 1987.
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0866403.jpg
I can hardly see how being just halfway between the average and the lowest bound (record low) is “very close to normal”.
alphajuno (13:58:20) : “… At least the gulf is staying cooler longer which should help during hurricane season.
Sorry to disappoint you, but contrary to what the alarmists say, it could be that atlantic hurricanes (the ones that hit your gulf, I believe) are more associated with global cooling than with global warming. As it seems we are now in a PDO cooling phase, you may soon experience more hurricanes not less.
http://typhoon.atmos.colostate.edu/Forecasts/2008/aug2008/aug2008.pdf
“in the quarter-century period from 1945-1969 when the globe was undergoing a weak cooling trend, the Atlantic basin experienced 80 major (Cat 3-4-5) hurricanes and 201 major hurricane days. By contrast, in a similar 25-year period from 1970-1994 when the globe was undergoing a general warming trend, there were only 38 major hurricanes (48% as many) and 63 major hurricane days (31% as many)”
(Supported by interesting chart on page 34.)
But – from the same team :
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.89f94643ff57e11b42acfa11b92f8e26.d41&show_article=1
“Six hurricanes are expected to churn through the Atlantic this year, a Colorado State University forecast team said Tuesday as it lowered its estimates for the upcoming storm season.
If the predictions are accurate, 2009 would be much calmer than last year, which was one of the most active seasons on record with 16 tropical storms, including eight that became hurricanes.
Hurricanes Bertha in July, Gustav in August, Ike in September, Omar in October and Paloma in November were all intense storms that wreaked serious damage in the United States and the Caribbean.
Of 12 predicted tropical cyclones for 2009, six were forecast to become hurricanes, including two expected to develop into intense or major hurricanes Category Three or higher.
Earlier predictions from the group had called for 14 tropical cyclones — or what forecasters call “named storms” — this hurricane season, lasting between June 1 and December 30.
“We are calling for an average hurricane season this year — about as active as the average of the 1950-2000 seasons,” the team’s lead forecaster, Phil Klotzbach, said in a statement.
The University of Colorado team based its projections on the potential for a weak El Nino maritime temperature fluctuation, along with an unusual cooling of tropical Atlantic sea surface temperatures it observed in recent months.
Cooler water temperatures tend to make for a less active hurricane season in the region, the researchers noted. ”
Confused? Looks like they are. I am.
Multi-year ice has increased from 2008, up to nearly 25%.
1985 was 50% ,,,, 2009 looks good for 25% ,,,,2008 looks good for 20%
Arn Riewe (13:48:03) : where you see 30% ????
At current recovery of 5% per year
20% at 2007 that means in 6 years there will be 50% Multi-year old ice, 2013-2014.
WE shall see.
i am pretty shocked by this sort of calculations.
old sea ice will NOT grow back to former percentages, while sea ice extent remains significantly below the long term average. 2009 so far was NOT a year with much ice, neither was 2008.
it is just years with slightly more ice than 2007.
as long as the temperatures stay above the long term average, and extent stays below it, there will NOT be a regrowth of the old sea ice. that should be obvious!
Using D. Quist’s link
http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/data/anomnight.4.6.2009.gif
Aha, I posted on another thread a comment with regards to the lack of ice formation west of the Antarctic peninsula but a huge contrast just on the east side of the peninsula, the above graphic shows the warmest anomaly around the Antarctic in that west area! Near the Wilkin’s Ic shelf, something is stirring there!
There IS still a greater risk of further decline, as compared to the long-term average risk of decline. But the risk now is less than it was 2 years ago.
I think it’s reasonable to still see things cautiously, since another perfect melting season like 2007 could do real damage.
But a more balanced report would say: ‘The position now is more healthy than in 2007, but it will be a few years before a return to long-term norms is possible. Our long-term predictions on arctic ice will to a significant extent be impacted upon the next three annual cycles of freeze/melt. If recovery continues, we will see normal conditions returning. But a return to rapid thaw conditions may see our predictions of ice-free summer come significantly closer.’
Now how hard was that to say?
If an unqualified lay person can write it, either it’s nonsense or a professional could have written it too.
Why didn’t they?
Henry Phipps (15:55:21) :
Ron de Haan (14:28:02) :
“Who wants to be represented by a Government of liars, frauds and cheats.”
Maybe we always have, Ron, but in times past, the newspapers weren’t part of the government cabal. Now we have even more persuasive media formats, and a more ignorant electorate. No checks-and-balances, no pursuit of truth, and most of all, no more statesmen, just political hacks from any party.
I miss Everett Dirksen”.
Henry,
In regard to all the remarks you make about the state of your democracy I think the time has come to take individual action and responsibility. This always has been the basis of any democracy, one man, on vote.
Every individual counts, every individual takes responsibility.
As I see it you have come to the point of losing all your rights.
Missing Everett Dirksen won’t change anything.
A liar is a liar and any liar who holds a public office should be confronted without any exception. Especially if the subject they are lying about could result in such dire consequences like losing a countries economic future and the way of life of her inhabitants.
It sounds to me that you can’t afford to do nothing!
I notice that the nsidc have this statement in their latest analysis.
Overall, it was a fairly warm winter in the Arctic. Air temperatures over the Arctic Ocean were an average of 1 to 2 degrees Celsius (1.8 to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above normal, with notable regional variations.
I’m not surprised, given that it has been so cold in the US and Europe this winter. The winds must have been pushing the cold air mass from the Arctic southwards, and I assume this must have been replaced by warmer air from the South. This makes me wonder how much ice we would have had in the Arctic if these weather patterns had been different. If these winds have now stopped then I guess you might expect the sudden drop in Arctic temps that we now have, and that Catlin are enjoying. If so what’s the chance that the ice will now catch up with the ‘long term’ average?
I’m sorry, but I don’t get it. Do they mean to tell me that if I keep ice-cubes in my freezer for 2 or 3 years before I use them, that they will last longer in my drinks?
Could someone please explain to me just how newer ice melts faster than older ice? I honestly don’t see where the age of the ice can make any difference at all.
It is not unusual to have low levels of 1+ year ice in the arctic and recent proportions of old ice are high … look at this graph for Baffin Bay:
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/IceGraph/CwtClimChtSrvlt?region=cea12_00&nrmlsta=1971&nrmlend=2000&sizex=1230&sizey=780&lang=en&showwarn=false&plotnormal=true&plotmedian=false&plottrend=false&plothilite=false&plotwarn=false&plotscaled=false&cachelife=60&errorpage=/IceGraphDisplay-GraphdesGlacesDisplay.jsf&charttype=stac&ssnsta=1968&ssnend=2008&histdtsta=0514&histdtend=1015&format=csod
“what’s the chance that the ice will now catch up with the ‘long term’ average?”
Wouldn’t that be a hoot? I doubt NSIDC will issue a press release about that if it happens. Or, if they do, it will be full of spin.
I’ve been watching the horizontal tracing on the ice-extent chart for late March and early April; it looks as though this year’s melt-back may proceed more slowly than normal. This is what one would expect if winds are lower and if cooler water (than 2007) from the Pacific were entering the Arctic Ocean. Prof. Akasofu provided data in his paper that indicated that the latter is happening, “Two Natural Components of Recent Climate Change,” (a 50-Mb PDF), here: http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~sakasofu/little_ice_age.php
“A liar is a liar and any liar who holds a public office should be confronted without any exception. Especially if the subject they are lying about could result in such dire consequences like losing a countries economic future and the way of life of her inhabitants.
It sounds to me that you can’t afford to do nothing!”
When the liars have taken over Washington, when they control the arms, when they bail out the institutions that hold “their” retirement accounts with our money, when they now want to control and tax our means of livelihood and then tax even the air we breathe, what are we supposed to do?
Maybe there should be a referendum on shutting down D. C.
The only honest politician is Ron Paul.
Jeff (21:41:40)
Where is the link and what sea ice data did you find?
sod,
There is no calculation involved. The NSIDC graph shows 25% multiyear ice.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
No need to be shocked.
This is more evidence of the conspiracy at NSDIC to brainwash the public into believing there is such a thing as global warming. They are just doing it to get more funding and high salaries. I know, I’m a janitor there and have evesdropped on their conspiratorial meetings and have listened in on theor conversations when the ‘dumb’ janitor was mopping the floor and emptying the garbage.
I can testify that these guys are cooking the data. And that they always leave the breakroom in a mess and don’t clean out the microwave. How much sense does a person have to have to know to cover they damn food in the microwave? Does that take a Phd? I mean come on people!
Dill Weed
http://www.accuweather.com/ukie/bastardi-europe-blog.asp?partner=rss
ARCTIC SEA ICE TO MELT LESS THIS YEAR THAN LAST (HIGHER STARTING POINT NEXT YEAR).
The development of the strong positive AO the next 3-5 weeks combined with a solar constant that refuses to come up from its sunspot minimum means the arctic sea ice will undergo a summer of less melting than last year. An interesting article showing how the cold is making a comeback can be found here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/04/bad-news-for-catlin-expedition-satellite- data-shows-arctic-cooling-in-feb-march/
There was an article on our global warming website declaring the melting season had begun. Part of that is because the sea ice is at more extensive levels than it has been, so it can melt quicker, but part of that is because of what you see going on now across the states. The blocking that has occurred to force this issue means it is warmer in the arctic, as the cold air is underneath. However, UNLIKE LAST YEAR, WHEN MAY TURNED VERY WARM IN THE ARCTIC, we are going the opposite direction now. In fact the UKMET April-Jun forecast still shows over 60% of the Earth is colder than normal and more significantly the Arctic. My take is the long, cold, arctic winter next year will start with more ice than it started with this past year.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/world/seasonal/
The reporting on arctic sea ice is getting to be like the reporting on the ozone hole. Ever notice every now and then there are reports that the ozone is opening up? Well how does it open up if it doesn’t close? But you never hear about it closing. The AGW crowd is getting to be like an episode of the Simpsons when Homer was running around getting a law passed against anything he thought might cause a problem anywhere. So now we have a report on how scientists are worried about rapid melt of Arctic sea ice this season because 20 PERCENT OF THE ICE SHELF IS NEW ICE (AND CAN MELT FASTER). Well how the heck did it increase 20% in the first place to get there? And what if only 75% of the new ice melts this summer, doesn’t that leave you ahead to start next winter?
So stupidly, the reporter doesn’t even ask the question, well why is so much new in the first place?
The Arctic will be turning colder relative to normal by the end of the month, and when that happens we can get out of this pattern in the US (after the 15th) and into some relatively tranquil and much warmer weather nationwide than what we have now, and even for the next week or so. Of course as soon as it gets hot here, you will hear about it, but what they wont tell you is how cold it will be in the arctic at that time.
In any case its interesting to look at how much cold the model is seeing. Anyone here anyone in the UKMET office talking about how cold their model looks. When it looks warm, we certainly hear about it.
thanks for reading, ciao for now *****
Jeff (21:07:54) :
“Or maybe a combination of both? First year ice is thinner and therefore more easily moved around by winds than is old ice.”
I don’t disagree with you logic, but the NSIDC animation seems to show no particular preference for old or new as the ice pack streams out of the Arctic between Greenland and Iceland where it then meets the Gulf Stream:
http://nsidc.org/news/press/2007_seaiceminimum/images/20070822_oldice.gif
To me, it become obvious this is the dominant factor in ice decline, not melting within the Arctic basin.
Leave it to the Propheteers (or profiteers) of global warming to find some way to spin an increase in polar ice.
Well since the record low in 2007 (since satellites), there has been a net seasonally adjusted increase of about 2.5 million sq km.
To find the glass half empty instead of half full, the new criticism is that the majority of ice is only 1 or 2 years old. DUH. The polar ice has increased significantly the past 2 winters, so indeed , so they have to find some negative spin on the whole thing.
Ron de Haan (01:32:45) :
Thank you, Ron, for your thoughts and your concern. It’s comforting to find good people everywhere I venture. You’re right about the role of the citizen in a democracy. I’ve only experienced democracy twice that I can recall. Once, I saw a bar-room brawl. Truly democratic, with all the points you mentioned. The second was on DARPANET, where I first realized that one person’s thoughts counted, no matter what race, creed, color or rank. Even though my days of protest and confrontation are long past, old men like me can function to encourage others to question what they are being told. Sometimes all young people need is a nudge, like getting some kind of permission, to believe in their own ability to make judgments based on their own experiences. Our nation has little real democracy in this federal republic. A republic requires honest representatives with dedication to the will of the people. Not much of that in evidence these days. Perhaps there are no more Dirksens.
Or perhaps they are just reading and learning, awaiting encouragement to think for themselves.
Regards, Henry
@Steven Goddard
Thanks for the great posting. I went to sleep last night thinking about one sentence and realized that I had no clear perspective about it. “Due to the record minimum in 2007, it goes without saying that there isn’t a lot of three year old ice in 2009.” The ice extent minimum in 2007 was similar to the area of the Central and Pacific Time Zones of the continental USA added together, if my numbers aren’t wrong. Or put another way, about two-and-a-half times the size of Alaska. Granted, my math may be approximate, but that sounds like a lot of Slurpees to me. Any polar bear who can’t stand up on that is just singing Darwin’s lullaby.
Lets see.
We have NASA moving the goalposts on the solar cycle 24 forecast. Acutally, at least six times and counting.
We have NSIDC moving the focus from baby ice to pubescent ice, and moving the focus from ice extent to ice volume.
We have intense media focus on Arctic ice during its summer melt, and on Antarctic ice during its summer melt, but never a peep in the media about global sea ice.
We have NASA GISS adjusting historical temperature records every month as new temperature data comes in.
We have tropical storm naming thresholds reduced (tiny tim storms) to increase the annual storm counts.
We have NASA GISS broadening the error bands on GCM outputs to make sure they encompass the recent temperature trends at the surface and in the mid troposphere, such that GCM error bands on forecasts are getting worse over the past twenty years. At this rate, by 2100 GCM’s will provide an infinite amount of information and contain absolutely no knowledge.
It appears that news of Gaia’s death has been greatly exaggerated.
Flanagan (23:12:56) :
I can hardly see how being just halfway between the average and the lowest bound (record low) is “very close to normal”.
Recovering half-way from the record low to the mean in one year is kind of significant…Particularly when the Arctic has only just recently begun to participate in the cooling trend that began between 2003 and 2005.
From 1998 through 2007 NSIDC shows about an 8% decline in Northern Hemisphere sea ice extent (below the 1979-2000 mean) and then a recovery to about 4% below the mean in about one year…Nine years to lose 8%; one year to regain 4%…Even Hans Blix could find the significance in that recovery rate.
Optimally, one would have a full 60 year (both pos and neg legs) PDO cycle worth of data to compare with as a baseline.