Forecasting The NSIDC News
By Steven Goddard and Anthony Watts
Barring an about face by nature or adjustments, it appears that for the first time since 2001, Arctic Sea ice will hit the “normal” line as defined by the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) for this time of year.
NSIDC puts out an article about once a month called the Sea Ice News. It generally highlights any bad news they can find about the disappearance of Arctic ice. Last month’s news led with this sentence.
In February, Arctic sea ice extent continued to track below the average, and near the levels observed for February 2007.
But March brought good news for the Polar Bears, and bad news for the Catlin Expedition and any others looking for bad news. Instead of ice extent declining through March like it usually does, it continued to increase through the month and is now at the high (so far) for the year.
If it keeps this trend unabated, in a day or two it will likely cross the “normal” line.
The Danish Meteorological Institute shows Arctic ice extent at the highest level in their six year record.
The Norwegians (NORSEX) show Arctic ice area above the 30 year mean.
And the NORSEX Ice Extent is not far behind, within 1 standard deviation, and similar to NSIDC’s presentation. Note that is hit normal last year, but later.
And JAXA, using the more advanced AMSR-E sensor platform on the AQUA satellite, shows a similar uptick now intersecting the 2003 data line.
Source: IARC-JAXA
WUWT asked NSIDC scientist Dr. Walt Meir about this event to which he responded via email:
It’s a good question about the last time we’ve been above average. It was May 2001. April-May is the period when you’re starting to get into the peak of the melt season for the regions outside of the Arctic Ocean (Bering Sea, Hudson Bay) and the extent tends to have lower variability compared to other parts of the year as that thinner ice tends to go about the same time of year due to the solar heating. Even last year, we came fairly close to the average in early May.
He also mused about a cause:
Basically, it is due primarily to a lot more ice in the Bering Sea, as is evident in the images. The Bering ice is controlled largely by local winds, temperatures are not as important (though of course it still need to be at or at least near freezing to have ice an area for any length of time). We’ve seen a lot of northerly winds this winter in the Bering, particularly the last couple of weeks.
As we’ve been saying on WUWT for quite some time, wind seems to be a more powerful factor in recent sea ice declines than temperature. Recent studies agree.
See: Winds are Dominant Cause of Greenland and West Antarctic Ice Sheet Losses and also NASA Sees Arctic Ocean Circulation Do an About-Face
You can watch wind patterns in this time lapse animation, note how the ice has been pushed by winds and flowing down the east coast of Greenland:

Dr. Meier also wrote:
This has very little implication for what will happen this summer, or for the long-term trends, since the Bering Sea ice is thin and will melt completely well before the peak summer season.
There’s certainly no reason to disagree with the idea that much of the Bering Sea ice will melt this summer, it happens every year and has for millenia. But with a strong negative Arctic Oscillation this year, and a change in the wind, it is yet to be determined if Arctic Sea ice minimum for 2010 is anomalously low, and/or delayed from the usual time.
In 2009, WUWT noted it on September 15th: Arctic sea ice melt appears to have turned the corner for 2009
Dr. Mark Serreze of NSIDC offered some hopeful commentary in a press release back on October 6th 2009, but still pushes that “ice free summer” meme:
“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.”
Remember this 2007 prediction from The Naval Postgraduate School?
Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’
|
By Jonathan Amos
Science reporter, BBC News, San Francisco |
![]()
|
Arctic summer melting in 2007 set new records
|
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.
Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss.
Summer melting this year reduced the ice cover to 4.13 million sq km, the smallest ever extent in modern times.
Remarkably, this stunning low point was not even incorporated into the model runs of Professor Maslowski and his team, which used data sets from 1979 to 2004 to constrain their future projections.
|
Professor Peter Wadhams
|
“Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007,” the researcher from the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, explained to the BBC.”So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of 2013 is already too conservative.”
========================================
Joe Romm wrote up a clever piece last year on this subject:
Exclusive: New NSIDC director Serreze explains the “death spiral” of Arctic ice, brushes off the “breathtaking ignorance” of blogs like WattsUpWithThat
June 5, 2009
I interviewed by email Dr. Mark Serreze, recently named director of The National Snow and Ice Data Center. Partly I wanted him to explain his “death spiral” metaphor for Arctic ice
So now that Arctic ice has returned to normal extent and area, we eagerly await the explanation from the experts about how that fits into the “death spiral” theory. Richard Feynman famously said “Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts.”
Time will tell. 2010 is looking promising for sea ice recovery again. After all, who wouldn’t want the Arctic Sea ice to recover? WUWT is predicting a recovery again this year, which we started mentioning as a prediction last fall.
So given what we know today, what will NSIDC highlight in their April Sea Ice News?
And even more importantly, will the MSM cover it like they do the ‘terrible’ minimums?
NOTE: The poll code got messed up, duplicating an entry, press REFRESH if you see a double entry. -A
Forecasting The NSIDC News
NSIDC puts out an article about once a month called the Sea Ice News. It generally highlights any bad news they can find about the disappearance of Arctic ice. Last month’s news led with this sentence.
In February, Arctic sea ice extent continued to track below the average, and near the levels observed for February 2007.
But March brought good news for the Polar Bears, and bad news for the Catlin Expedition and any others looking for bad news. Instead of ice extent declining through March like it usually does, it continued to increase through the month and is now at the high (so far) for the year.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png
The Danish Meteorological Institute shows Arctic ice extent at the highest level in their six year record.
The Norwegians (NORSEX) show Arctic ice area above the 30 year mean.
Joe Romm wrote up a clever piece last year on this subject:
Exclusive: New NSIDC director Serreze explains the “death spiral” of Arctic ice, brushes off the “breathtaking ignorance” of blogs like WattsUpWithThat
June 5, 2009
I interviewed by email Dr. Mark Serreze, recently named director of The National Snow and Ice Data Center. Partly I wanted him to explain his “death spiral” metaphor for Arctic ice
So now that Arctic ice has returned to normal extent and area, I eagerly await the explanation from the experts about how that fits into the “death spiral” theory. Richard Feynman famously said “Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts.”
So what will NSIDC highlight in their April Sea Ice News?
-
The increase in both ice extent and quantity of multi-year ice
-
The long-term downwards linear trend line
-
The lack of 4+ year old ice
Sponsored IT training links:
Get free resources including 642-972 tutorial and 1z0-048 dumps questions for guaranteed success in JN0-532 exam.






Steve Oregon (13:09:04) :
Here’s a humorous explanation.
http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/arctic-sea-ice-0330
JimP1 wrote:
“Ice is breaking-up and spreading out, not growing
What they measure is 15% ice coverage and therefore doesn’t account for ice spreading out. If you look at cryosphere today and play their movies you will see ice that is moving very fast out of the arctic. This is also confirmed by Catlin Arctic survey”
A pretty accurate one too.
As CT shows ice area has continued to fall since the max on March 7th, since then the strong outflow through the Fram and around Svalbard, currently up to ~20km/day, is what’s causing the increase in extent.
Trouble is most of that ice is from the big white blob in the central Arctic shown in this fig, so less MY ice.
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard/figures/seaice2009fig3.jpg
I wouldn’t be too sanguine about the chances of a continued ‘recovery’ this summer.
area vs volume?
Catlin: After careful study, the ice is “rotten” …”flippy floppy” … and “naughty natty”. Wire another 4B, and we’ll transmit a photograph….sorry, unable to continue…. -75f windchill…
Wishy washy. Tiddly Winky. Gooshy Wooshy. The new vocab for highly experienced scientists is way cool! Totally posty modernishy sciency!
This is the same rotten ice, prone to melting, that is sticking around longer than the older, thicker, multi-year ice that is not as prone to melting?
The loss of sea ice in 2007 was indeed precipitous. But the recovery in 2008 was equally steep.
I don’t get where they say this is “young ice”.
Go here where you can see the yearly maximum’s since 1978.
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/total-icearea-from-1978-2007
Let’s pick 1982 which had a high maximum compared to the past decade, and look at a comparison of March 31 – 1982 vs. today 2010 on Cryosphere Today shows ice concentrations by color density(maroon).
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=03&fd=31&fy=1982&sm=03&sd=31&sy=2010
It is obvious that the ice concentration of today’s March 31st is more concentrated than ANY prior year. Plus in September 12th for any year and you can see what low concentrations look like. How can this be called rotten, young, 1st year ice?? Unless I am reading this wrong, we might be heading for a record high minimum!!!
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=03&fd=31&fy=1982&sm=03&sd=31&sy=2010
” Phil. (18:04:26) :
As CT shows ice area has continued to fall since the max on March 7th, since then the strong outflow through the Fram and around Svalbard, currently up to ~20km/day, is what’s causing the increase in extent.”
You would hate, HATE what Nansen shows. Do not, I repeat, do NOT look at their curve of ice area:
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/ice-area-and-extent-in-arctic
Phil. (18:04:26) : “since then the strong outflow through the Fram and around Svalbard, currently up to ~20km/day, is what’s causing the increase in extent.”
You mean that is just happening this year, and not in previous years? My BS meter is ticking…
Re: Phil. (Mar 31 18:04),
I noticed that NP-37 has hardly moved at all this winter so there hasn’t been much movement from the Pacific to the Atlantic side, certainly not like last year.
RockyRoad (15:34:10) :
Lovelock’s Uncertainty Principle?
“utterly uncertain” – “mankind was not aware it had “pulled the trigger””
Ok… Now let me get this straight. Here’s a guy who is “utterly uncertain”… meaning completly clueless and demonstrably demented, and he’s convinced mankind has “pulled the trigger”? The trigger to what? Add when and where was this “trigger” pulled?
============
What he is saying, I think, is that the Earth has pulled the trigger on global warming. A few years ago he was saying that global warming will cause the death of Billions of us, except for a lucky few that might take refuge in the Arctic. But more recently he said that in fact the Earth has decided to go into an ice age, and that AGW has been fortunately been delaying this – or something to that effect. In short, AGW has gone from being our worst enemy to being our only hope, or something like that. But maybe now he is saying something else. Of course, the man is totally demented, goes without saying.
Any press that picks up this story in a climatic sense will be confusing weather anomalies with climate trends – again.
But if they fail to report near-normal sea ice extent just as they failed to report the near-record minimum for the month of January 2010, they will at least be consistent. I think neither anomaly deserves much attention.
The link below compares sea ice from 3-30-1980 to today. Look closely at the sea ice concentrations near Sweden, Siberia and Nothern Canada. Look at the Gulf of Bothnia, between Sweden and Finland. Look at the White Sea near Murmansk. Look at the Obskaya Gulf in nothern Siberia.
And lastly, look at the ice in and around the northwest passage above Canada.
The the ice edges in 1980 were sort of fat and ill defined compared to the images from today which look crisp and thin.
So, does that mean that in 1980, the ice coverage was overestimated do to less resolution? Its my understanding that they count pixels to estimate sq km of coverage. So it stands to reason that fat, ill defined areas are going to add up to more coverage. (only looking at pink areas, not white)
Also, examine the extents. They look further today than in 1980.
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=03&fd=30&fy=1980&sm=03&sd=30&sy=2010
Re: Phil. (Mar 31 18:04),
I noticed that NP-37 has hardly moved at all this winter so there hasn’t been much movement from the Pacific to the Atlantic side, certainly not like last year.
Yeah this year they parked it in the gyre so it’s slowly drifting around in the center of the eddy. They should be able to stay there for quite a while as long as a polynya doesn’t open up under them. 😉
There’s plenty of those around this year.
http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/data/satellite/hrpt_dfo_ir_100.jpg
Phil.
We are only a few months away from easing your mind about the Arctic.
JT (19:59:47) :
The the ice edges in 1980 were sort of fat and ill defined compared to the images from today which look crisp and thin.
So, does that mean that in 1980, the ice coverage was overestimated do to less resolution? Its my understanding that they count pixels to estimate sq km of coverage. So it stands to reason that fat, ill defined areas are going to add up to more coverage. (only looking at pink areas, not white)
Different satellites, higher resolution these days, also you can’t rely on the colors on the comparator, recent images show more uniform purple (but not on the front page).
E Flesch (19:20:05) :
Phil. (18:04:26) : “since then the strong outflow through the Fram and around Svalbard, currently up to ~20km/day, is what’s causing the increase in extent.”
You mean that is just happening this year, and not in previous years? My BS meter is ticking…
It varies from year to year in strength and direction, this last few weeks it’s been pushing strongly around Svalbard hence the increased extent over the last few days.
Phil. (20:28:05) : “…this last few weeks it’s been pushing strongly around Svalbard hence the increased extent over the last few days.”
Or it’s gotten cold there. If you check the Svalbard daily news, http://www.icepeople.net, you’ll see they are having a real cold snap. The article leads:
“Minus 23°C? Bah! Temperatures consider brutal in most of the world are actually a secondary consideration when determining if it’s a crummy day in Svalbard. But at some point they have to, um, drop to the forefront.”
E Flesch (21:04:13) :
Phil. (20:28:05) : “…this last few weeks it’s been pushing strongly around Svalbard hence the increased extent over the last few days.”
Or it’s gotten cold there. If you check the Svalbard daily news, http://www.icepeople.net, you’ll see they are having a real cold snap. The article leads:
Take a look it’s not new ice it’s fragmented older ice:
http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/single.php?2010090/crefl1_143.A2010090135000-2010090135500.500m.jpg
E Flesch (21:04:13) said:
Oh no, I am sure you are wrong. If Phil. says that Arctic Ice will be gone in five years, then you can believe it. If Phil. says that this year will be like 2007, then you can believe it. Just wait until September. You will see.
The sea ice extent at a given point in time is meaningless. It is the time averaged integration of the course of the year thats important in comparing it with normal. From the data, it’s still well below “normal”. But is that 30 year average “normal”. I doubt it, we have no idea what normal is, or how much sea ice extent there was before satellites. Anecdotal evidence suggests the 1930’s may have been more ice free than today, not to mention the MWP.
R. Gates (13:50:54)
“I find it funny that AGW skeptics get all excited from a few weeks of upswing in the arctic sea ice, while all the while they’ll ignore nearly a decade of downswing…very revealing.”
================
Jimbo (15:43:23) :
“According to AGW climate scientists climate is 30 years +. In 2007 we had record loss of Arctic ice, caused mostly by wind and currents (since satellite data – 1979) and warmists were “excited” about the loss and it was trumpeted around the globe as a sign of global warming – ‘worse than we thought.'”
“Have you ever thought that the “downswing” might be part of natural variability which we have had since climate change began billions of years ago?”
=======================
No, Jimbo, ’cause folks like Wren Gates…..um….sorry about that…..R. Gates…already have their minds made up.
So any “downswing” must be “anthropogenic” in origin….even though “downswings” and “upswings” have been occurring quite often, for the past few billion years before homo sapiens have been on the scene.
So a decade is really a drop in a lake, no doubt….if that.
Hey his posts make for fun fodder, I will admit that.
Weak arguments though….are like….they are like…what my favorite species calls…..INJURED PREY.
Like a thrashing fish and there is blood in the water.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
What does the sunny days and low temperatures(very low) in Svalbard prove? It proves that arctic ice melt, and glacier melt, has more to do with the amount of sunlight than the temperature of the air, just like the European glacier studies correlated a few months ago.
http://www.physorg.com/news180024364.html
and…the article states that a period of less sunshine correlated with the glacier snouts growing.
For those of us who are colour challenged it’s a great relief to see the current line on the sea ice extent graph breaking into territory of its own. Talk about “hide the decline”. Scrambling all those coloured lines together is sure a neat trick on those of us who see every line as the same colour as at least two or three other lines. I’m sure I’m even happier about this icy increase than the polar bears are.
But this time last year Steven Goddard was getting all excited about it approaching the normal as well, go back and look at the posts! What happened after that, it sunk again to well below.
Up to about 1 month ago it was looking pretty low compared to recent years and nothing was mentioned, now you’re all over it like flies on dung 🙂
No doubt nothing will be heard when it drops again ….
Andy