By David Shukman
Science and environment correspondent, BBC News
Half-way through their expedition to survey the Arctic sea-ice, British explorers have been jinxed by yet more technical problems and are resorting to old-fashioned techniques to carry out research.
On Day 44 of the trek, both a radar device meant to measure the ice thickness and a satellite communications unit to relay the data are still not working – despite being brought back to the UK for repairs and then delivered to the team last week.
As a result, the explorers are now drilling more sampling holes than planned, which means they are progressing more slowly than hoped.
It now looks much less likely that the team will reach its destination of the North Pole.
The radar system, known as Sprite and meant to be dragged over the ice making millions measurements, is now being carried on a sledge instead.
Pen Hadow, leading the Catlin Arctic Survey, describes losing the use of the equipment as frustrating but concedes that the hostile conditions have overwhelmed the technology.
“It’s never wise to imagine that either man or technology has the upper hand in the natural world,” he said. “It’s truly brutal at times out here on the Arctic Ocean and a constant reminder that Mother Nature always has the final say.”
The expedition was blighted in the first few weeks by temperatures well below minus 40 Celsius, the equivalent of minus 70 allowing for the wind chill.
The failures are blamed on problems with power supplies, either with batteries not working or with cables snapping in the cold.
The loss of the hi-tech equipment has focused attention on the data gathered by the tried-and-tested method of drilling through the ice by hand.
One-hundred-and-two holes have been dug so far and 1,100 measurements have been made of ice thickness, snow density and other features – data deemed vital by scientists evaluating the future of the Arctic sea-ice.
The latest findings show that virtually all the ice surveyed is what is called first-year ice, ice that only grew this past winter, as opposed to tougher multi-year ice which survives the warmth of summer.
Figures indicate an average ice thickness of 1.15-3.75m, much of which might be expected to melt between June and September.
Organisers in London insist the expedition’s data-gathering is still important for research – despite the setbacks – and describe reaching the Pole as “largely irrelevant”.
According to Simon Harris-Ward, operations director, “what matters most is gathering the maximum amount of data possible over a scientifically interesting route.”
Tom Woods,
The current arctic conditions have obviously influenced the GISS upward movement.
OT. Don’t know if anyone else has linked to this, but there’s a new film to be released on the alarmist claims about climate change http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHMOEVRysWE
It looks pretty clear and sunny up there…
http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/data/satellite/hrpt_dfo_ir_100.jpg
Sunny with showers… yep
There is a nice Russian Hotel that hosted all the marathon guests at the North Pole. Hot showers, helliocopter rides, snowmobiles, wedding facilities.
http://www.barneo.ru/2009e.htm
Mother Nature IS the biggest denier of all…
Anthony,
I saw the sea ice animation and I’ve seen the discussions. The most compelling arguments for me however are the ocean currents, PDO shifts, ENSO, AMO. It seems that if you want to predict the weather 3-6 months out, look at the state of the oceans, find an analog year, see what happened then and it will likely be happening again. (I’ve been following Joe D’Aleo’s predictions since his Dr. Dewpoint days.) This sea conditions and currents can explain why the Antarctic Peninsula is warm relative to the rest of the continent but are their Arctic ocean circulations models that explain whats happening to the North pole?
“ralph ellis (10:56:09) :
I still reckon a nuclear sub could measure the thickness of the entire Arctic ice cap in a couple of weeks”
Catlin:Science
“The Catlin Arctic Survey’s data will allow for the re-evaluation of satellite and submarine digitised observations of recent decades – and future ones – and thereby improve the accuracy and confidence of the modelled outputs.
… the findings coming out of the Survey data to help validate or modify the globally recognised projections made in the IPCC’s “Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis” ”
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/science
Pen and CO are there to collect data which will allow the re-evaluation of satellite and submarine digitised observations. So sending a submarine to measure the ice thickness is not good enough, it is much better having someone drilling holes into the ice. These holes will validate or modify IPCC’s “Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis” report.
B Kerr:
Umm…and what are they comparing these holes to? Is there a submarine following them so they can calibrate submarine observations? No.
Are they comparing to measurements from previous expeditions? No.
Do they have a proper siting metric to help calibrate (re-evaluate) satellite data? Very unlikely.
They are poking random holes and claiming this is data. Anecdata is the new term for this kind of thing.
There is ZERO, ZILCH, NADA, NO, scientific information being produced by this expedition, but they are learning through personal experience what materials not to use in Arctic cold.
Nasa Sun probes watch over Earth
Nasa have developed an early warning system to detect eruptions from the sun. Might be a few years before they can test it, given the current state of solar cycles!
I wish we had access to the data now so we can hold them to it. It’s a shame that they didn’t release it as they went.
Funny, but I don’t remember them reporting that the radar device was picked up. They’ve only had two re-supplies that I’ve read about so that means it had to have been picked up on the first one to have been delivered last week. Dueo the incredible cold and difficult conditions, they had made very little progress at the time of their first re-supply. In other words, the radar hasn’t worked for almost the entire length of their trip so far!
Amazing.
I still laugh when I imagine their response to being outed by WUWT regarding the fake biometric data. I’m quite confident they never expected anyone to notice that it was simply repeating canned data and wasn’t really “live from the ice” as claimed.
What a farce.
Pen Hadow’s statement: “a constant reminder that Mother Nature always has the final say” a marvelous perspective on climate change!
Update: It’s all water!
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/latestfromtheice
Catlin site just updated:
has been a pretty rough day as winds have been wild and stronger than any experienced to date. The ice team have frequently had to break and take shelter behind large ice boulders and ridges when possible. Despite this, they still managed to cover a respectable 11 kilometres.
The mobility of the ice underfoot is becoming more and more of a challenge for the ice team. Today Ann described how she was just about to take a step when the ice directly underfoot moved away. Able to keep her balance, Ann very narrowly missed a dip in the icy water. This was Ann’s second close call of the day. Earlier, whilst navigating across a rather precariously thin ice pan, she stumbled on some loose ice rubble and fell backwards, narrowly missing a sharp shard of ice. It looks as though Lady Luck was on Ann’s side today.
Martin, however, has been less fortunate. During their second sledging session, Martin’s right boot split across the top. Having already harnessed his sewing skills on his sledge suit, it’s now time to get stitching on his boot.
“Ice Report 14.4.09
Summary
The results collected in the first month of the Catlin Arctic Survey point to an unexpected lack of thicker Multiyear Ice.”
yep, the lack of thicker ice of whatever age is helping the expedition to become an instant success, far beyond what was hoped for at the start …
I would like to propose that everybody interested and knowledgeable in some area of the Catlin Ice survey take sufficient copies and notes of everything these guys are writing … proper archiving might not be their forte … and quoting some numbers from memory in the future might not be correct all the way …
this is becoming a giant disaster for all involved … instead of peddling to the North Pole, what they were thinking at the start of the expedition, they are NOWHERE near their goals …
“half way through their expedition …” ?
not even close to half way, whatever way you measure their progress …
ps … and keep them on the ice, please … no rescue whatsoever … every adult human being should be held responsible for what they are doing … “les erreurs se font et se paient” …
ice2020 (08:43:43) :
I read your translated article on the coronal holes. Wow, that is very interesting material I hope will be followed up here!
If the jolly was serious science it would not involve ego…
They would start at the pole, find out how thick was there and then move outward.
I have two questions, one serious, one, not so much.[1]
[1] Which is which is left as an exercise ……
of the ic
It is asserted in some quarters that all of the ice (key word “all”) melted or blew away or disappeared mysteriously. Let us take as given that it was all gone.
Why is it now necessary though heroics and reckless endangerment to prove that all of the ice there is “first year” ice?
Is there a fixed set of temperatures (at a given pressure and humidity, I suppose) where water stops evaporating; where water stops sublimating?
That last question assumes the following continuum–if that is wrong then the question is surely nonsense.
[At some high temperature] water is disassembled into a plasma
[At some lower temperature and down to 212 F] water is a gas
[Between 212 and 32] water is a liquid, but some of the water will evaporate (become a gas) if there is space above the liquid. (And some of that may condense once again to liquid)
[Below 32 and above some temperature (the heart of the question)] Water is a solid, but some of the water will sublimate (become a gas) if there is space around the solid. (And some of that may condense to become a liquid and refreeze (or “desublimate? and go directly from gas to solid?).)
[Presumably there is some temperature (above absolute zero?)] where sublimation stops and all water has become and stays a solid.
Well, OK, so their radar ice thickness stuff isn’t working, but great scientific data is being produced nevertheless. We now know that in the Arctic, we experience showers at -25C air temperature – a first. Please, esteemed leader, sample the precipitation so its chemistry can be determined.
We also now know that it is possible to hand drill more than 100 holes through ice several metres in thickness – all the while dragging sleds for 15 km a day. If I were measuring ice thickness, I’d measure over the ice edge of a new lead. No drilling required for the same data.
Where are they going?
13 april 2009: 84° 02′ 18″N 128° 42’ 16” W
14 april 2009: 84° 00′ 05″N 128° 16’ 38” W
South?
Aron (10:17:36) Here you go:
http://i41.tinypic.com/155tqtk.jpg
If satellites can be used to measure sea level to mm accuracy [which accuracy I doubt], why couldn’t those same satellites be used to measure the floating arctic ice thickness?
That is: if you can measure the arctic sea level, couldn’t the same satellite(s) measure the top of the ice to find the difference between the two values?
Is this already being done? If so, why the Catlin expedition except perhaps for political reasons?
This may be a stupid question, but how does first-year ice become second-year ice if it melts every summer?
And how does multi-year ice just melt away to nothing if even first-year ice doesn’t melt altogether?
I suffer with hypertension. I take my blood pressure twice daily. If I see one that is not looking too good I feel an aweful temptation to either not note it or fiddle it to a more reasonable reading. I don’t but the temptation is there.
Does the Catlin expedition have in place any procedures to prevent only recording selected, pro AGW, readings? If they do have procedures to prevent this bias, what are they, or do we just have to take their word for the accuracy of all readings?
Tom Woods (11:31:11) :
What? You did not know that IGSS are using the “shifting average” method? LOL
Re: Medic1532 (08:37:21) :
“So the only time they drilled iceholes was in nice flat areas the[y] did not drill in the areas covered by pressure ridges which were visibly taller than 10 feet (3 meters)”
Since about 5/6 of the ice thickness is below water a 10 feet tall pressure ridge is about 60 feet thick. I wouldn’t try drilling there either.
Incidentally I’m not impressed by the quality of their equipment. Battery problems and cables snapping in the cold? Having had some experience of testing military equipment at low temperatures I would say that about the two first things a designer would consider when specifying electronics for cold environments is ample battery capacity and using insulation that stays pliable.
I believe they are going to need the near disaster or daring rescue to rivet the world’s attention in order to get the most out of their speaking careers once this is over.