NSIDC seems to be saying: It’s slightly less worse than we thought. For another view, see Dr. Tony Berry’s sea ice analysis on WUWT yesterday.
From a University of Colorado Press Release
Arctic sea ice recovers slightly in 2009, remains on downward trend, says U. of Colorado report
 |
||||
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
  IMAGE: This graphics show multi-year Arctic sea ice changes.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
||||
Despite a slight recovery in summer Arctic sea ice in 2009 from record-setting low years in 2007 and 2008, the sea ice extent remains significantly below previous years and remains on a trend leading toward ice-free Arctic summers, according to the University of Colorado at Boulder’s National Snow and Ice Data Center.
According to the CU-Boulder center, the 2009 minimum sea ice extent was the third lowest since satellite record-keeping began in 1979. The past five years have seen the five lowest Arctic sea ice extents ever recorded.
“It’s nice to see a little recovery over the past couple of years, but there’s no reason to think that we’re headed back to conditions seen in the 1970s,” said NSIDC Director Mark Serreze, also a professor in CU-Boulder’s geography department. “We still expect to see ice-free summers sometime in the next few decades.”
The average ice extent during September, a standard measurement for climate studies, was 2.07 million square miles (5.36 million square kilometers). This was 409,000 square miles (1.06 million square kilometers) greater than the record low for the month in 2007, and 266,000 square miles (690,000 square kilometers) greater than the second-lowest extent recorded in September 2008.
The 2009 Arctic sea ice extent was still 649,000 square miles (1.68 square kilometers) below the 1979-2000 September average, according to the report. Arctic sea ice in September is now declining at a rate of 11.2 percent per decade and in the winter months by about 3 percent per decade. The consensus of scientists is that the shrinking Arctic sea ice is tied to warming temperatures caused by an increase in human-produced greenhouse gases being pumped into Earth’s atmosphere, as reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Sea surface temperatures in the Arctic this season remained higher than normal, but slightly lower than the past two years, according to data from University of Washington Senior Oceanographer Mike Steele. The cooler conditions, which resulted largely from cloudy skies during late summer, slowed ice loss compared to the past two years. In addition, atmospheric patterns in August and September helped to spread out the ice pack, keeping extent higher.
The September 2009 ice cover remained thin, leaving it vulnerable to melt in coming summers, according to the CU-Boulder report. At the end of the summer, younger, thinner ice less than one year in age accounted for 49 percent of the ice cover. Second- year ice made up 32 percent of the ice cover, compared to 21 percent in 2007 and 9 percent in 2008.
Only 19 percent of the ice cover was over two years old — the least ever recorded in the satellite record and far below the 1981-2000 summer average of 48 percent, according to the CU-Boulder report. Measurements of sea ice thickness by satellites are used to determine the age of the ice.
Earlier this summer, NASA researcher Ron Kwok and colleagues from the University of Washington in Seattle published satellite data showing that ice thickness declined by 2.2 feet between 2004 and 2008.
“We’ve preserved a fair amount of first-year ice and second-year ice after this summer compared to the past couple of years,” said NSIDC scientist Walt Meier of CU-Boulder’s Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences. “If this ice remains in the Arctic thorough the winter, it will thicken, which gives some hope of stabilizing the ice cover over the next few years. However, the ice is still much younger and thinner than it was in the 1980s, leaving it vulnerable to melt during the summer.”
Arctic sea ice follows an annual cycle of melting through the warm summer months and refreezing in the winter. Sea ice reflects sunlight, keeping the Arctic region cool and moderating global climate temperatures.
While Arctic sea ice extent varies from year to year because of changing atmospheric conditions, ice extent has shown a dramatic overall decline over the past 30 years.
“A lot of people are going to look at the graph of ice extent and think that we’ve turned the corner on climate change,” said NSIDC Lead Scientist Ted Scambos of CU-Boulder’s CIRES. “But the underlying conditions are still very worrisome.”
NSIDC is part of CIRES and is funded primarily by NASA.
Old ice is not like old growth forests. Sea ice recycles completely. You won’t be able to get sea ice cores that go back more than a few years (IE 5 to 6 at the most). In addition, sea ice gets jumbled up against itself or land edges. Take a core there and you will get very confused results. The summer melt is a combination of a steeper angle to the Sun and wind. Under the right conditions (primarily a nice strong wind breaking up and directing ice out of the Arctic basin into the Atlantic), the ice melts rapidly as it moves South. It has very little to do with air-born CO2. In a phrase, summer ice melt is not climate-related, it is weather-related. The climate in summer and winter is cold enough for ice to stay. Why doesn’t then? Weather.
Abstract of a study pointing to the weather-related phenomenon of sea ice age variance. The Arctic Oscillation encompasses these weather-related changes.
http://seaice.apl.washington.edu/IceAge&Extent/
philincalifornia (15:42:38) :
Alan Bates (13:55:14) :
3 more years and we WILL have ice -free summers: Al Gore said so in Berlin, underneath the dinosaur. I seem to remember him holding up 4 fingers and saying something on the lines of : 4 years – 4 – count them
—————–
It was actually 5. I have it etched into my memory, as my comment at the time became the quote of the week.
And was what he actually said etched into your memory too? He didn’t say ‘WILL’.
If we think the unthinkable and pretend that Serreze (no, that is really unthinkable; make that Meier) changes his mind. How would he describe what he now regards is a recovery ?
“Considering that there is a lot of thin first year ice the growth is quite encouraging ?”
” Phil. (06:54:16) :
‘philincalifornia (15:42:38) :
Alan Bates (13:55:14) :
3 more years and we WILL have ice -free summers: Al Gore said so in Berlin’
And was what he actually said etched into your memory too? He didn’t say ‘WILL’.”
What he says on that video: “The period of 5 during which IT IS EXPECTED to now disappear.”
Peter Jones:
“Please see the new story about Loveland Ski Area is announcing its earliest opening day in 40 years. Apparently they have an 18″ base.”
Ever heard of artificial snowmaking equipment? I hiked up to 11,700 feet a little southeast of there on Saturday without encountering any snow.
Bill Tuttle:
“Boulder was hit with a snowstorm on the last day of summer.”
Snowstorms in Colorado in September are hardly rare. How much snow did Boulder get?
Alexej Buergin:
“If this is so, then why were the scientists that actually measured the ice thickness (Polar 5 flyover) surprised by the “thicker than expected” ice they found?”
According to the paper referenced in the NSIDC press release (yes, I read the entire article), the average thickness of the arctic sea ice decreased by more than half a meter between 2003 and 2008.
The ice melt is to some degree controlled by the AMO, which has been in its warm phase. If the AMO could be trusted to work like clock-work, (which it doesn’t,) it would be seven to nine years before the AMO’s warm phase shifted back to its cold phase. Therefore we should expect ice extent to remain below average.
My understanding is that it is the water beneath the ice, (and not sunshine or air temperatures,) which melts the ice most efficiently. Once the ice has been reduced to a slush of chunks and bergs, it can be flushed out into the Atlantic, if the winds are from the right direction. The winds did a very good job of this in 2007, but haven’t been as favorable for “flushing,” the past two summers.
Perhaps the most significant line in the above report is, “Sea surface temperatures in the Arctic this season remained higher than normal, but slightly lower than the past two years, according to data from University of Washington Senior Oceanographer Mike Steele.”
I imagine that, once the AMO shifts into its cold phase, the ice extent will not only increase, but the icecap will become more rigid, and therefore less likely to be broken into a slush of chunks and bergs, and far harder to flush out of the arctic.
Until that happens, Alarmists can cross their fingers, and hope the winds blow the right way, which might allow the 2007 levels to be matched. Such an outcome wouldn’t mean anything in the long run, but it would make for great press-releases.
Solomon Green
“The 2009 picture shows that, while the cover is greater than in 2008, much of the “old ice” has been replaced by one to two year old ice. Where has the older ice gone? Has it melted into the sea below (where it is not covering land), has it been infiltrated by the newer layers (and if so how) or is it lurking below the one to two year old layer? Would someone please explain.”
There weren’t enough billions in the budget to have a birthday party for the ice in question, so it has been held back… I hope this helps… 🙂
RE: “And today while looking out over the ocean from the bluff we saw about twenty gray whales migrating south. I have never seen them this early.”
Now this is a portent of doom, but not the type of doom that believers in “Thermageddon” (hat tip to the Register for that one!) have in mind.
I agree that the behaviour of birds, fish, mammals, etc is a good portent of what is coning. The humingbirds left here (Toronto, Canada) Sept 10th. They usually leave at the end of Sept. Plants were still flowering but the hummingbirds left. The Canada geese left on Sept 19th. They usually leave in October. Most of the chipmunks have started their hibernation and they don’t usually go to bed until after the first snow. We have not had snow yet but it got cold early this year. The squirrels have their winter coats on and the resident blue jays are as fat as turkeys. All the migrating birds have left. It makes me wish I could also.
*****NEWS BULLETIN******
“The 2009 melt season ended on Sept. 12th and saw the largest yearly increase in Arctic ice in history! As a matter of fact, the last 2 years rank 1st and 2nd respectively for amount of square kilometers in a single year in Arctic ice increase since records have been kept. 2008 saw a respectable increase of 400,000 KM2 but ranks far behind the record increase of over 600,000 km2 for 2009. Scientists at the Climate Analysis center of the National Climate Center were stunned at the size of the increase and had no explanation for the huge increases despite rising CO2 levels”………………… developing
philincalifornia (15:42:38)
Thank you for the correction!
Pamela Gray (06:35:40) :
Old ice is not like old growth forests. Sea ice recycles completely. You won’t be able to get sea ice cores that go back more than a few years (IE 5 to 6 at the most). In addition, sea ice gets jumbled up against itself or land edges. Take a core there and you will get very confused results. The summer melt is a combination of a steeper angle to the Sun and wind. Under the right conditions (primarily a nice strong wind breaking up and directing ice out of the Arctic basin into the Atlantic), the ice melts rapidly as it moves South. It has very little to do with air-born CO2. In a phrase, summer ice melt is not climate-related, it is weather-related. The climate in summer and winter is cold enough for ice to stay. Why doesn’t then? Weather.
—…—…—…—
Let’s look at this based on “What has happened to actual sea ice extents” rather than the more typical AGW “Let me tell you what will happen based on my simple theory of ‘The world is getting hotter and everything will melt unless we reduce CO2 levels.'”
Following is based on simply looking at the AMSRE Sea Ice extents plot in today’s WUWT, and a “real analysis” needs to create a 2 month daily average of max sea ice extents and a minimum sea extents – since almost every year, the max extent is really a jagged up-and-down peak, with different years crossing each other several times. (Just taking the single max or min number isn’t accurate enough either.)
Max Sea Ice Extent, from largest to smallest maximum area since 2003. (2002 = ?)
2003
2008
2009 (March & April 2009 set new records, 2008 was a little higher in Feb.)
2004
2005
2007
2006
Minimum Sea Ice Extent, since 2002, from largest to smallest area
2003
2006
2004
2002
2005
2009
2008
2007
Note that global temperatures have been declining slightly through the period, but have changed very little with respect to each year.
Note that the AGW “crisisologists” have NOT defined any specific relationship between global temperature and sea ice extents (either minimum or maximum) that allows any comparision between any particular global climate (assumed or modelled) temperature and sea ice extents. We have only been told that “Everything will melt.” and that “We will see ice-free Arctic Sea’s in xxx year unless more money is paid to the UN/IPCC/third world dictators.”
(Determining that equation might be a useful test of these predictions.)
—
Looking at this list, we notice that 2003 was at the top of sea ice maximum extent, and the top of the minimum sea ice extents list.
2007 was near the bottom of the maximum sea ice list, and at the bottom of the minimum sea ice extents.
But 2008 and 2009 set the next highest maximum points, and then came down set the next two lowest sea ice extents.
2005 was relatively high for sea ice maximum, and relatively low for sea ice minimum.
2006 set the lowest sea ice maximum point, but then was near the highest of sea ice minimum extents.
Conclusion?
There is NO consistent observed relation between sea minimum extents one year, and the next year’s sea maximum extent.
There is NO consistent observed relation between between a low sea ice minimum point one year, and the subsequent maximum sea ice point six months later.
The long-proclaimed “albedo effect” of open water heatinig up the world to melt even more ice next year is false.
Pamela Gray (18:59:05) :
The analysis is juvenile at best. Someone is looking at pixels and making statements based on a flat computer screen. The Arctic area is complex and is rightly divided into at least 14 areas, and so reported. In addition, floating summer ice is affected mostly by wind in a purely mechanical sense. Blown one way, it melts, blown the other way and it piles up. But on a flat screen, the extent looks like it has receded. When overlayed by wind patterns and thought of in 3-dimensions, one begins to understand how new first year ice can thicken to multi-year thickness in one season.
This is what I see when I think of this complex system in 3 dimensions. The wind vortex has shifted (likely a result of a changing PDO/AMO) to prevent ice escape from Fram Strait after the 2007 melt year. If this wind pattern continues (moving summer ice mainly inward towards the Arctic pole) over a period of years, ice thickness will rebound rapidly, which will result in an eventual increase in extent and area. When the wind pattern returns to its summer direction out of Fram Strait, we will once again here Chicken Little calling out a warning of thinning ice, no ice, the Arctic is burning, and the bears are dying. And in some cases of over-abundant weed consumption, the penguins are dying.
Gawdamighty, all of these ivory tower groups need a runofthemill weather guy/gal to knock some sense into their heads.
Hey Pamela how about you stop pushing this nonsense that you can’t back up. Your notion of the ice not leaving via the Fram Strait and instead piling up at the pole is fiction. Here’s one of many daily records showing the ice sailing out of the Fram earlier this year:
http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn107/Sprintstar400/Drift.png
Currently this year’s North Pole Environmental Observatory is drifting out the Fram at about 0.4º/day.
Good one Phil. Your drift graphic is Feb to Mar ice drift. Extent was still growing. I would say that not much ice was leaving Fram Strait at that time, since ice extent was BUILDING, not receding. Try again. Find a better drift picture comparing 2007 melt season with 2009 melt season. To be sure, this isn’t an either/or issue. It is a relative issue. Fram Strait doesn’t shut down like a trap door. Most people here would get that. Why you thought I meant that NO ice gets through Fram Strait I don’t know. However, don’t take my word for it. Spend some time reading reports at NSIDC. While they drink the coolaid, there are some very good analysis of wind patterns and subsequent spatial distribution of ice, especially during the melt season.
Phil. (06:54:16) :
philincalifornia (15:42:38) :
Alan Bates (13:55:14) :
And was what he actually said etched into your memory too? He didn’t say ‘WILL’.
_____________________________
It was the 5 years that was etched in my memory (correctly, I might add).
Go on then, what did he say ? “Might”, “It’s plausible”, “possibly”, “I’m not a scientist, but …”, “count these fingers ..”, “I once got a chemistry set for Christmas, so therefore … “
Here is another really good article on weather-related influences on ice flow through Fram Strait.
http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/20020807seaice.html
Pamela Gray (21:00:06) :
Good one Phil. Your drift graphic is Feb to Mar ice drift. Extent was still growing. I would say that not much ice was leaving Fram Strait at that time, since ice extent was BUILDING, not receding. Try again. Find a better drift picture comparing 2007 melt season with 2009 melt season. To be sure, this isn’t an either/or issue. It is a relative issue. Fram Strait doesn’t shut down like a trap door. Most people here would get that. Why you thought I meant that NO ice gets through Fram Strait I don’t know. However, don’t take my word for it. Spend some time reading reports at NSIDC. While they drink the coolaid, there are some very good analysis of wind patterns and subsequent spatial distribution of ice, especially during the melt season.
You really don’t have a clue do you?
Here are some more items showing that winds are important factors in Arctic ice loss.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2007/10/03/nh-sea-ice-loss-its-the-wind-says-nasa/
Arctic Sea ice loss – “it’s the wind” says NASA
(2007)
“Unusual atmospheric conditions set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic,” said Son Nghiem of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and leader of the study.
http://www.frontier.iarc.uaf.edu:8080/~igor/research/ice/index.php
Long-term ice variability in arctic marginal seas
(2003)
…Polyakov and Johnson (2000) and Holloway and Sou (2002) using coupled ice-ocean models showed that most ice loss in the recent decades was due to wind forced ice export from the central Arctic.
…Previous studies showed that at time scales of up to decades sea-ice conditions are controlled by changes in the atmospheric circulation pattern. Our study extends this result, suggesting that even at interdecadal time scales winds remain the major contributor to ice-extent variation in the Siberian marginal-ice zone. …dynamical factors (wind or surface currents) are at least of the same order of importance as thermodynamical factors in the Laptev, East Siberian, and Chukchi seas … winds over the Chukchi Sea cannot contribute much to northward advection of ice into the Arctic Ocean … However, northward surface currents fed by Pacific waters entering the Chukchi Sea through Bering Strait provide an effective mechanism of ice transport to the Beaufort Sea.
http://www.frontier.iarc.uaf.edu:8080/~igor/research/50yr/index.php
Arctic decadal and interdecadal variability
(2003(?))
The resemblance between variability of the ice thickness (Figure 3b) and the vortivity index ( Figure 3a) is striking, attesting to a close connection between large-scale atmospheric circulation pattern and arctic ice conditions.
http://www.asp.ucar.edu/colloquium/2000/Lectures/holland.html
Variability in Arctic Sea Ice: Causes and Effects
(2001(?))
The ice motion field is primarily wind-driven and causes the removal of ice from the Siberian coast and the transport of ice from the Arctic to the Greenland Sea via Fram Strait. This results in an average net transport of approximately 2800 km3 per year (Aagaard and Carmack, 1989) into the northern North Atlantic.
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/report07/ocean.html
Arctic Report Card 2007 (NOAA)
The circulation of the sea ice cover and ocean surface layer are closely coupled and are primarily wind-driven (Proshutinsky and Johnson, 1997). Data from satellites and drifting buoys indicate that the entire period of 2000-2006 has been characterized by an anticyclonic (clockwise) circulation regime due to a higher sea level atmospheric pressure over the region north of Alaska, relative to the 1948-2005 mean, and the prevalence of anticyclonic winds (Figure O1). Under these conditions, the clockwise circulation pattern in the Beaufort Sea region (the Beaufort Gyre) tends to be relatively strong. Conversely, in the cyclonic regime the clockwise circulation pattern in the Beaufort Sea region weakens, and the flow across the basin, from the Siberian and Russian coasts to Fram Strait (the Transpolar Drift), shifts poleward. The cyclonic pattern dominated during 1989-1996; the anticyclonic pattern has prevailed since 1997. The dominance of the anticyclonic regime during last decade of 1997-2006 is consistent with the Arctic Oscillation (AO) index (Figure A1) which fluctuated about zero indicating a relatively low level of influence from the Atlantic on these Arctic processes (Rigor et al., 2002).
Phil. (22:27:18) :
“You really don’t have a clue do you?”
This is exactly the type of response I’d expect from someone who doesn’t have a clue. Pure projection. Most people, when they actually know something, provide support for their opinions.
Richard M (09:19:19) :
Phil. (22:27:18) :
“You really don’t have a clue do you?”
This is exactly the type of response I’d expect from someone who doesn’t have a clue. Pure projection. Most people, when they actually know something, provide support for their opinions.
I did and the ‘clueless one’ indicated by her response that she didn’t understand it! I have better things to do with my time than lead someone through the data when they clearly don’t want to understand.
I love that pot hole commercial.
“But I’m just a pot hole….ssooooooo…..okay By!”
Phil. (13:49:53) :
I have better things to do with my time than lead someone through the data when they clearly don’t want to understand.
————————————
Highly reminiscent of Tamino’s response to having his snip wiped by Steve McIntyre (along with some other responses on here).
The bad news Pamela is that they’re currently only at stage one. Six more to go:
1. SHOCK & DENIAL-
You will probably react to learning of the loss with numbed disbelief. You may deny the reality of the loss at some level, in order to avoid the pain. Shock provides emotional protection from being overwhelmed all at once. This may last for weeks.