By Steve Goddard
Over the last three years, Arctic Ice has gained significantly in thickness. The graph above was generated by image processing and analysis of PIPS maps, and shows the thickness histogram for June 1 of each year since 2007.
The blue line represents 2008, and the most abundant ice that year was less than 1.5 metres thick. That thin ice was famously described by NSIDC as “rotten ice.” In 2009 (red) the most common ice had increased to more than 2.0 metres, and by 2010 (orange) the most common ice had increased to in excess of 2.75 metres thick.
We have seen a steady year over year thickening of the ice since the 2007 melt season. Thinner ice is more likely to melt during the summer, so the prognosis for a big melt looks much less likely than either of the previous two summers. More than 70% of the ice this year is thicker than 2.25 metres thick. By contrast, more than half of the ice was thinner than 2.0 metres in 2008.
So why did 2008 start out with so little thick ice? Because during the summer of 2007 much of the ice melted or was compressed by the wind. During the winter of 2007-2008, much of the remaining thick ice blew out into the North Atlantic and melted. So by the time that summer 2008 arrived, there was very little ice left besides rotten, thin ice. Which led to Mark Serreze’ famous “ice free North Pole bet.”
Can we find another year with similar ice distribution as 2010? I can see Russian ice in my Windows. Note in the graph below that 2010 is very similar to 2006.
2006 on the left. 2010 on the right.
2006 had the highest minimum (and smallest maximum) in the DMI record. Like 2010, the ice was compressed and thick in 2006.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/icecover/icecover_2010.png
Conclusion : Should we expect a nice recovery this summer due to the thicker ice? You bet ya. Even if all the ice less than 2.5 metres thick melted this summer, we would still see a record high minimum in the DMI charts.
Mark Serreze has a different take for 2010:
“Could we break another record this year? I think it’s quite possible,” said Mark Serreze of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo.
Bookmark this post for reference in September.
———————————————————-
“The report of my death was an exaggeration”
– Mark Twain
==================================
Addendum By Steve Goddard 6/3/10:
Anyone betting on the minimum extent needs to recognize that summer weather can dramatically effect the behaviour of the ice. The fact that the ice is thicker now is no guarantee that it won’t shrink substantially if the summer turns out to be very warm, windy or sunny. Joe Bastardi believes that it will be a warm summer in the Arctic. I’m not a weather forecaster and won’t make any weather predictions.
richcar 1225 says:
June 2, 2010 at 2:27 pm
If the NAO goes negative the ice volume will build fast. This a warmists worst nightmare.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Winter-NAO-Index.svg
_________________________________________________________________________
Well guess what Richcar, NAO has gone negative in the last few months:
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/ENSO/verf/new.nao.shtml#current
that and the negative/neutral Arctic Oscillation
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/hgt.shtml
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/ao.sprd2.gif
And a negative/neutral Pacific-North American Pattern
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/pna.shtml
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/pna.sprd2.gif
These are a change from the long term (20-30 yr) mainly positive trend that accompanied the “melting” of the Arctic ice. I do not know what that is going to do to the weather patterns but given the recent strange patterns in my local weather, I think we are definitely looking at “climate change” in the Arctic this summer.
Well, R. Gates. . . the status quo is hardly ever overturned by the status quoants (and if I just made that word up, then, (TM)).
Of course, it isn’t often over turned at all on a percentage basis. But often enough to be worthwhile keeping at it when you think you’re right.
Every theory tested and found wanting is also a contribution. It’s nice when you can test them in the short term. I’m all about the power of iteration, which is right up there with compound interest in my book. . .
bubbagyro says:
June 2, 2010 at 3:05 pm
You and others have described the futility of ascribing the word “normal” to climate. When I see normal used to say whether we are in an ‘event” or not, it is to me like scraping of nails on a backboard.
Maybe I’m not normal?
_________________________________________________________________________
No you you are not normal, “normal” people do not have any understanding of statistics. That is why they can be lied to so easily.
How to Lie With Statistics
Do you, or have you considered, putting out press releases of your own? I am aware that the media prefer bad news but maybe maybe a couple of press releases like Tuvalu not sinking or Arctic ice expanding will undermine their tase for doom and gloom stories. I dont know how it went over in the press but I think the monkey business over the hurricane season was a bit of a hoot. It seems that if there is to be a war by press release in which the stooges in the main stream media are sucked in with a good beat up then maybe there needs to be a counter offensive?
That thin ice was famously described by NSIDC as “rotten ice.”
Yes it is famous. Trolls are still talking about it in rotten comments.
stevengoddard says:
June 2, 2010 at 4:17 pm
I have a supercomputer.
In a manner of speaking, yes you do.
But, you’re missing the magic ingredient: a Cold Fusion Graphics function that pumps out Red Hot Anomalies.
More than 70% of the ice this year is thicker than 2.25 metres thick
The trolls are saying “uh oh”. At least they’re thinking it. 😉
So wait… it isn’t rotten ice, it’s undead ice?
Vampire ice!
R. Gates says:
June 2, 2010 at 4:24 pm
Currently, every basin in the Arctic, from the Barants Sea to the Bering Sea is showing some level of negative anomaly,
If it is it’s not from melting.
Gneiss says:
June 2, 2010 at 11:57 am
I’m impressed by how unequivocally and often WUWT has committed to the proposition that Arctic sea ice is recovering, in disagreement with most Arctic researchers. As you say, these will be pages to bookmark.
There are many? Would you list these Arctic researchers and tell what they are saying?
Or did you make that up and will be unable to list them?
Gneiss says:
June 2, 2010 at 11:57 am
I’m impressed by how unequivocally and often WUWT has committed to the proposition that Arctic sea ice is recovering
Your propaganda about it not recovering is unimpressive.
Rob says:
June 2, 2010 at 11:59 am
i do have a slight issue – and excuse me for being a layman – but how can climate progress and WUWT be looking at ‘real’ data and come with equal and opposite views for the current state of ice in the arctic, let alone future predictions ??
Glass half empty, glass half full.
jakers says:
June 2, 2010 at 12:12 pm
WUWT is really hanging it’s hat on the Arctic ice recovery. Will be interesting in August.
There’s a whole lot of folks on both sides, probably almost all, paying close attention to Arctic (North Pole) ice. It’s not just WUWT. Welcome to the boat. Sit back and have some popcorn.
Murray Carpenter
June 2, 2010 at 1:26 pm
The ice looks thinker too in 2010. And there’s more snow on the ground in the surrounding area of Canada, Alaska, and Russia in 2010.
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=06&fd=01&fy=1990&sm=06&sd=01&sy=2010
mjk:
June 2, 2010 at 2:24 pm
You fell in the rabbit hole too mjk.
R. Gates says:
June 2, 2010 at 4:24 pm
“…
The first 4 months of 2010 were the warmest on instrument record:
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2010/05/17/NOAA-January-April-2010-warmest-on-record/UPI-74281274125050/”
Did you read the little chestnuts in that link? My head still hurts from all of the qualifiers:
“That’s 2.1 percent below the 1979-2000 average extent and the 15th smallest April extent since records began in 1979.”
Let’s see, 2010-1979=32 years including the end years. 15th smallest out of 32. Um, isn’t that pretty close to the median (16th)?
“It was, however, the 18th largest April Arctic sea ice extent since 2001.”
Wha? Does that mean 18th largest in the 79-’10 period but after 2001? I not read goodly.
“The North American snow cover extent for the fourth month was the smallest on record.”
And yet:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/13/october-through-march-was-the-snowiest-on-record-in-the-northern-hemisphere/
Good thing they picked April…
Now I think Steve is awfully brave to be predicting a big rebound in minimum ice extent this year for the simple fact that I don’t think we’ve got a collective clue of the evolution of polar ice on this planet, but I also think he’s got a better grasp on the climate sensitivity than most of the hysterical greens that seem to be nearly running the show. So, good luck, Steve.
Smokey says:
June 2, 2010 at 4:51 pm
And what about the really basic question: how is CO2 causing a decline in Arctic ice, and an increase in Antarctic ice?
Of course CO2 applies its heating effect on an “as-needed” basis Smokey. Apparently it is needed more in the Arctic than the Antarctic.
A lot of credible-looking sources are saying that sea ice extent and thickness are declining dramatically.
Here we have a blog post that is saying the exact opposite, that arctic sea ice is recovering.
What are we to believe? How can this ‘cognitive dissonance’ be resolved?
See – owe to Rich says:
June 2, 2010 at 2:45 pm
2010 melt was already interesting. Now it seems we’ve got record May ice loss,
It is not all ‘loss’. Very little is melt.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/27/shear-ice-decline/
Zombie ice!
Orkneygal says:
June 2, 2010 at 4:16 pm
You are right. The example is precise now – I forgot that part of first year statistics. But the SD did double in my example.
Now, can you do that for the ice anomalies? On the PIOMAS anomaly graph, take the SD given in the graph for May, e.g., and subtract the point from the SD of the mean of the comparator period (1979-2009 moving average) and give a real value for the SD at that point? The PIOMAS anomaly graph only gives the fixed SD. That is what I am getting at. Are we within one SD of the true mean for May this year?
The Orkneysians(?) know statistics, I guess. What I am getting at is to get a true trend analysis based on the Polar Ice site data that incorporates the true variance for each month, reflective of the measurement error for each season or month.
Sort of like Bollinger bands.
Mr. Bastardi did comment on what he surmised the ice extent would be. He stated it seemed likely to be lower than last summer and the summer before, but not as low as 2007. Most of the ice-loss would be on the Atlantic side, due to the warm AMO. However he also stated quite firmly the recovery next winter would more than make up for the ice-loss. In the long term he expects increasing ice and cooling, and describes the current melting as “one step back before two steps forward.”
In my opinion his videos are well worth the 29 cents a day I pay to view the Accuweather professional site.
RoHa says:
Zombie ice!
You’re right! What was I thinking?! ☹
I am clearly not up to speed on the undead.
Steve —
Ibrahim @June 2, 2010 at 12:14 pm mentioned the Mercator site, interesting. Those maps would prove an easy extraction by image decomposition, concentration and depth, join the two for volume… though I’m not sure of the source of their data. You might take a look for a seconary source.