by Steve Goddard
In April, I pointed out that PIOMAS forecasts for the summer didn’t make much sense.
The computer model is predicting that 3+ year old ice (which is probably in excess of 10 feet thick) is going to melt by early August. That seems rather far fetched.
It is now early August. Let us see how they did. They expected most of the ice to be gone in the Beaufort Sea by now, and much of the remaining ice to be very thin.
The most recent NSIDC newsletter included this map, showing that the thick multi-year ice is still present in the Beaufort Sea. This is in stark contrast to the PIOMAS prediction of thin ice in that region.
The image below shows in red where PIOMAS mispredicted the ice edge vs. NSIDC August 6 map. Green indicates areas where they overestimated the amount of ice.
This discrepancy will get worse through the remainder of the month. PIOMAS extent/thickness predictions are way off the mark, and their volume calculations are much too low.
As I forecast last week, DMI now shows 2010 ice extent highest since 2006.
Ice thickness remains between 2009 and 2006, just as PIPS data indicated it should back in May.
JAXA shows that divergence from 2007 continues steadily, and is now in excess of 700,000 km².
The JAXA area graph show that ice melt has dropped off dramatically.
NSIDC maps show little ice loss so far this month. There has been nearly as much gain (green) as loss (red.)
NCEP forecasts generally below normal temperatures for the next two weeks in the Arctic.
DMI shows that summer is just about done north of 80N, and has been the coldest on record (for that dataset starting in 1958). Average temperatures have fallen below freezing there.
Conclusion : There will probably be minimal ice loss during August. The minimum is likely to be the highest since 2006, and possibly higher than 2005. So far, my forecast of 5.5 million km² is looking very conservative. Ice extent is higher than I predicted for early August.
Meanwhile, down south. Antarctica continues gaining ice at a record pace. NSIDC showed it the highest on record for July.
Bremen shows it likely headed for a new record.
In Greenland, we are bombarded with stories about “losing Manhattan sized chunks of ice.” The BBC made it one of their lead stories yesterday. Yet the ice isn’t lost and the Greenland ice sheet has been having an exceptionally cold summer, as seen in the NOAA anomaly animation below.
Perhaps “some scientists” might want to actually check the Greenland temperature data before talking to the press? Under any circumstances, how would “abnormally warm” temperatures cause a 700 foot thick block of ice to fracture? The concept doesn’t make much sense from from an engineering point of view. A few months of (imagined) warm temperatures might cause a little surface melt, but the thermal conductivity of ice is much too low to alter the temperature and material strength of ice more than a few feet below the surface. I had this same discussion with Ted Scambos at NSIDC a few years ago about Antarctic Peninsula ice shelves.
The whole story is a complete ruse.
We are bombarded with misinformation about the state of polar ice. People’s brains have been programmed to believe that the last few ppm of CO2 have made a huge difference in the behaviour of the ice, and that belief makes their thought process irrational. People will find what they expect to find. It is human nature.
The SST anomaly charts show that most of the open water in the Arctic Basin is well below normal temperatures.
My current estimate for Arctic sea ice extent, bases on JAXA data 2003-2010 inclusive is 4.79E+^ km^2 (standard deviation is 0.25E+6 km^2).
It looks like 2010 is going to track somewhere between 2009 and 2008 (the statistics to date suggest 2010 will be closer to 2008).
Zhang and Lindsay heve updated their forecast for August 2010 with an Arctic sea ice extent of 4.8E+6 km^2 (same as their July forcast);
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/zhang/IDAO/seasonal_outlook.html
R. Gates says:
August 10, 2010 at 7:43 am
All that yellow looks scary until you realize it stands for 0 to +1 degree anomaly. And since we’re comparing to 2007-2009, how do these anomalies compare to this year’s?
-Scott
R. Gates: August 10, 2010 at 9:16 am
Bill, to know how ice may behave this year compared to past years, you’d have to know how the sea surface temps compare to past years, and that’s why anomalies are so important. Looking only at temps doesn’t tell you how those temps are different from what the averages are. But either way you want to equivocate it— SST’s are generally higher than average across most of the Arctic right now.
To know how ice may behave this year compared to past years, you also have to take atmospheric circulation into effect, since the strength, temperature, and direction of the wind has as much to do with it as the water temperature — as graphically demonstrated in 2007.
And, anomaly or not, that water is still *cold* up there.
stevengoddard says:
August 10, 2010 at 9:36 am
The SST anomaly charts show that most of the open water in the Arctic Basin is well below normal temperatures.
Not according to JAXA:
http://sharaku.eorc.jaxa.jp/cgi-bin/amsr/polar_sst/polar_sst.cgi?lang=e
From: EFS_Junior on August 10, 2010 at 11:08 am
You’re getting confused by the permanent “Zhang and Lindsay” header on that page. The SEARCH September Sea Ice Outlook: July Report is clear.
From: Bill Tuttle on August 10, 2010 at 8:31 am
Hey, that’s cute. Compare it with the polar projection,
http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/sst/ophi/color_sst_NPS_ophi0.png
and you can see how the “ring around the pole” artifact looks when stretched out.
I wonder when they’re going to fix that.
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
August 10, 2010 at 4:08 pm
—…—…—
Well sir, you have only about 15 – 18 days left in this year’s melting season before Arctic air temperatures at 80 north go back below 0.0 C.
What is your explanation for the steady DECREASE in Arctic daily summer temperatures the DMI have measured at 80 North since 1958?
Bill Tuttle says:
August 10, 2010 at 1:39 am
R. Gates: August 9, 2010 at 7:44 pm
Diverged ice (ice that has spread) makes the extent decline appear to slow, but it doesn’t slow the melt, but if anything, actually increases the melt as there is more surface area of the ice in contact with the open water.
You have two ice cubes in a bowl, six inches apart. Now you move them six inches farther apart (you have a *large* bowl) and have therefore increased their divergence, but you have not increased their surface area in contact with the water.
—…—…—…—
Several CAGW proponents have cast aspersions on this analogy in various ways, but ALL have forgotten the real numbers involved. NONE have noted the real world values involved.
The ice is very, very shallow (almost never greater than 3 meters (10-11) feet thick, and most between 1.5 and 2.5 meters thick. The ice – even when broken up in to small platforms and separated by tens of thousands of varying width water “valleys” (or rivers ?) – is melting from below. Not from the +1 to +3 (max!) air temperature touching the ice mass upper surface.
Therefore, melt rate is strictly proportional to the exposed area of the ice to the water.
A 2 meter thick mass of ice 1000 meter x 1000 meter in area has 1.8 meter below water. Total area exposed to the water is 1000^2 + 4 x 1.8 m x 1000 m^2 = 1,007,200 m^2
Break that ice up into one hundred 100 meter x 100 meter sections. Note: Square ice blocks are unlikely, but easy to calculate. 8<) Each ice block has 100^2 m^2 + 4 x 100 x 1.8 m^2 = 10720 m^2 exposed to the water.
total area exposed for melting = 1,072,000 m^2
Net increase? A whooping, breathtaking 1.064 increase when the ice breaks up.
Rod Everson says:
August 8, 2010 at 11:07 am
The DMI page: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php has an interesting feature. You can quickly click from year to year and get graphs of the data for each year starting in 1958. I did that and noticed something I found interesting.j
If you start in 1958, looking only at the summer months when the temp is above 273 K, it’s interesting how little variation there is from the average temp for that day. Almost none for the first 20 years or so. (My understanding of this phenomenon is that the ice prevents the air temperature from rising, much like water in a glass of ice responds as long as there’s ice remaining, but my understanding might be incorrect.)
Now, if you keep clicking through the years, you’ll start to see a bit more variation. 21 of the remaining 33 years (1978-2010) I would characterize as varying quite a bit from the average, especially considering the behavior from 1958-77.
—…—…—
A WUWT reader (and far better programmer than I, who began with Fortran 80 character punch cards back in 1974 – “hoping” for a CRT with even dot-matrix green letters and a printer!) recently plotted ALL DMI daily temperature data for Latitude 80 north.
Net result?
1) Average Arctic Summer Temperatures (those in the dates when the average temperature at 80 degrees north latitude is above 0.0 C) have steadily declined from 1958 through 2009/2010.
2) Winter temperatures (those in Nov-Dec-Jan-Feb) have shown much, much higher standard deviations (much greater variability!) but have increased slightly since 1958.
3) Hansen’s GISS claims of +4 degree rise in Arctic (surface) Temperatures (extrapolated 1200 km across the Arctic Ocean from three land stations) is completely false.
RACookPE1978 says:
August 10, 2010 at 6:29 pm
Bill Tuttle says:
August 10, 2010 at 1:39 am
R. Gates: August 9, 2010 at 7:44 pm
Diverged ice (ice that has spread) makes the extent decline appear to slow, but it doesn’t slow the melt, but if anything, actually increases the melt as there is more surface area of the ice in contact with the open water.
You have two ice cubes in a bowl, six inches apart. Now you move them six inches farther apart (you have a *large* bowl) and have therefore increased their divergence, but you have not increased their surface area in contact with the water.
—…—…—…—
Several CAGW proponents have cast aspersions on this analogy in various ways, but ALL have forgotten the real numbers involved. NONE have noted the real world values involved.
The ice is very, very shallow (almost never greater than 3 meters (10-11) feet thick, and most between 1.5 and 2.5 meters thick. The ice – even when broken up in to small platforms and separated by tens of thousands of varying width water “valleys” (or rivers ?) – is melting from below. Not from the +1 to +3 (max!) air temperature touching the ice mass upper surface.
Therefore, melt rate is strictly proportional to the exposed area of the ice to the water.
A 2 meter thick mass of ice 1000 meter x 1000 meter in area has 1.8 meter below water. Total area exposed to the water is 1000^2 + 4 x 1.8 m x 1000 m^2 = 1,007,200 m^2
Break that ice up into one hundred 100 meter x 100 meter sections. Note: Square ice blocks are unlikely, but easy to calculate. 8<) Each ice block has 100^2 m^2 + 4 x 100 x 1.8 m^2 = 10720 m^2 exposed to the water.
total area exposed for melting = 1,072,000 m^2
Net increase? A whooping, breathtaking 1.064 increase when the ice breaks up
___________
Very well done analysis, and while the increase in surface area (at least using square blocks) is only modest, there are two more important features that I pointed out:
1) The diverged ice moves over areas (such as the Kara sea) that has warmer waters than the waters it was previously in closer to the central Arctic. For example, look at his Kara Sea ice graph for the last few days, (when divergence has been happening):
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.7.html
If you were looking at only the extent as a measure of whether or not the melt had slowed, you'd say that it had pretty much stopped completely. But it is thermodynamically impossible for ice to stop melting under the conditions we see in the Kara sea. Ice has been diverging in the Kara Sea, making the extent drop stop, but the melt has not stopped. The Kara sea has otherwise shown anomalously low levels of ice all summer (hence why the water is anomalously warm).
So yes, divergence only increases surface area (with perfect cubes) modestly, but more importantly, it can send ice over warmer waters, causing the extent decline rate to slow, but the melt doesn't actually slow. Later on in September, the divergence is over, the waters begin to cool rapidly, the extent begins to increase once more and we come to the end of the melt season.
Phil. said on August 10, 2010 at 3:42 pm:
Ah good, we can have a game of “Map Duel!”
Here are the DMI Arctic Sea Surface Temperatures anomaly maps:
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/satellite/index.uk.php
Select Parameter: Sea Surface Temp. (anomalies)
You can see the band of -2 to 0°C anomaly water surrounding the ice. Yup, sure looks (relatively) cold. 😉
R. Gates: August 10, 2010 at 10:20 pm
So yes, divergence only increases surface area (with perfect cubes) modestly, but more importantly, it can send ice over warmer waters, causing the extent decline rate to slow, but the melt doesn’t actually slow.
Which is why I said that “you also have to take atmospheric circulation into effect, since the strength, temperature, and direction of the wind has as much to do with it as the water temperature” — it’s not just the currents that cause divergence.
Popcorn?
Just thought people might be interested in this analysis…
As we all know, current extent is a fairly poor predictor of September minimum (poor correlation). Using the 2002-2009 JAXA record, I get R^2 values of:
July 1 – 0.540
July 15 – 0.712
Aug 1 – 0.812
However, by Aug 10 the R^2 is at 0.914. The prediction currently sits at 5.08e6 +/- 4.74e6 km^2(95% confidence interval), very slightly favoring Steve over R. Gates. This method was indicating ~record lows at the start of July and has steadily increased in value, though it has leveled off the past 4 days or so.
In just a few days, this predictor will be doing far better in terms of uncertainty, as the Aug 15 R^2 value is 0.954 and the Aug 20 R^2 value is 0.974. For instance, input the value from Aug 17, 2009 and one gets 5.33e6 +/- 2.77e6 km^2…actual low was 5.25e6 (I know this isn’t a fair comparison given that 2009’s number is part of the regression too, but I wanted to demonstrate the improved uncertainty). On August 31, the R^2 value is 0.995, so we should have a pretty good idea by that point (which I believe agrees with what someone said months ago that the Aug 31 order equals the order of the minimum). 2009’s value for this day was predicting 5.19e6 +/- 0.88e6 km^2.
Also, does anyone know where I can get data (not graphs) of 30% ice concentration? I was wanting to see how well this correlates to final minimum (both 30% and 15%), as well as trying multiparameter regression on them.
-Scott
you may want to use the infrared bands and learn to distinguish thin clouds from ice:
Isn’t it amazing how a self-professed sceptic who constantly questions maps, models and graphs will categorically refuse to show his readers the satellite images that show a lot of what is actually going on in the Arctic? Are there too much unprecedented holes in the interior of the pack that need to remain hidden?
Bill Tuttle wrote:
Here’s a better one for that — it’s actually over the pole, and not in the middle of the Beaufort Gyre:
What Beaufort Gyre? The thing has stalled 6 weeks ago and even reversed at times. It is the main reason that 2010 will not be setting a new record. If highs would have continued dominating the Arctic, like they did in 2007, we’d all be asking Charles Wilson what he expects to happen next.
The fact that the 2010 extent is still below 2008 and 2009 after 6 weeks of cloudiness, low temperatures and northerly winds during the most important period of the melting season, is incredible in itself. If this would have happened in 2007 – when conditions remained consistent during the entire melt season – it would most probably have ended above 2005. Instead we saw a very strong Beaufort Gyre, with lots of ice transport through Fram and Nares Strait, lots of winds, lots of clear skies and high air and sea surface temperatures.
It’s just a matter of time before another season à la 2007 comes about and all the ultra-mobile ice gets pushed into oblivion. It will not even require the perfect storm we saw in 2007, as there is less and less thick ice.
There is simply no recovery to speak of. CryoSat-2 will put that one to rest for good.
Günther Kirschbaum says:
August 11, 2010 at 1:10 am
IIRC, R. Gates said the temperatures were well above normal during the melt session. If they were indeed low, how is this at all related to global warming. Also, why were they low during an El Nino year?
We’ll see how 2010 ends up compared to 2008/2009.
-Scott
IIRC, the DMI temperature graph that is featured prominently shows that temps have been below average. I don’t know about the rest of the Arctic, the area above 80N is much smaller than the total Arctic area above 66N. Temperatures were anomalously warm this winter. I don’t think they were this spring and summer, but I’m happy to stand corrected.
If they were indeed low, how is this at all related to global warming. Also, why were they low during an El Nino year?
All the extra warmth that is pumped out of the oceans isn’t distributed evenly across the globe. So if for instance the Arctic is dominated by low-pressure areas, high-pressure areas are sitting around it at lower latitudes. For instance over Moscow.
We’ll see how 2010 ends up compared to 2008/2009.
Those 6 weeks of atmospheric patterns that made sure the ice didn’t melt too fast, haven’t been enough to kill 2010 off yet. Perhaps if some extreme weather conditions come about the minimum extent will be set very early and some extra time will be bought to fool people into believing the Arctic sea ice is recovering. Other than that it will be quite plain to see the opposite is true.
Or you can have a look at the satellite images and all the things that are going on in the interior of the pack and for instance in the straits and channels of the Queen Elizabeth Islands now, and see already that the opposite is true. All that is needed is one season à la 2007 – like R. Gates says perhaps in the next El Niño year with increased solar activity to boot – and the Arctic will be practically ice-free.
http://www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/article/100810_Northwest_Passage_still_hard_to_navigate/
YESTERDAY August 10, 2010
Canadian icebreaker Admundsen takes several
tries to smash one ice ridge –
and it has dozens (which might constitute an ice arch
impeding flushing)more to go —
thereby opening the Northwest Passage and
encouraging FLUSHING–
Breaking these ridges and
Ice Arches was NOT possible 50 years
ago with the icebreakers and other
vessels then available (AND SO THE PASSAGE
WOULD THEREFOR have been CLOSED THEN
UNDER TODAY’S ICE CONDITIONS-
but we know the passage was open then)–
Heads up to Northwest Transit fans–
–the transit is NOT getting EASIER TODAY–
EVEN WITH hundreds of
IMPROVED AND MORE POWERFUL ICEBREAKERS
AND OTHER VESSELS(ALL ALL
subsidized by your tax money)
WITH
REINFORCED HULLS–research vessels
(Using explosives for seismic),
tourist ships(atomic powered and otherwise)
ferry services FERRIES, supply ships
and military ships,
—
all smashing away at the ice year round
(Except tourist boats and Canada icebreakers
which hole up during the winter)and encouraging
FLUSHING(YES man made FLUSHING!–THE BANE OF TRUE HOTTIES,
never to be acknowledged –look only at man made warming)
THe point is flushing–
without all these boats deliberately encouraging flushing
the arciic waters would today be frozen solid.
Flushing is encouraged by the following vessels year round–
that is correct–
year round most of these vessels plow the arctic smashing
ice and ice arches and encourage flushing,
open water and “rotten ice”–
NUCLEAR ICEBREAKERS–
http://www.barentsobserver.com/next-generation-nuclear-icebreakers-gets-funding.4582270-116320.html
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russia_Tests_Nuclear_Icebreaker_On_Open_Sea_999.html
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=346&page=112
http://www.quarkexpeditions.com/our-fleet/kapitan-khlebnikov
http://www.vancouvermaritimemuseum.com/modules/vmmuseum/treasures/?artifactid=86
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=346&page=81#25960
etc
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/09/pictures-tell-story.html
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/09/turd-eaters.html
In 2004, $4.5 billion dollars worth
of orders were placed for the construction of ice class tankers.
Additionally, the ice class tanker fleet will grow by 18 million
deadweight tons (dwt) by 2008; 262 ice class ships are presently
in service and another 234 are on order (ABS, 2005).”
Full document on this site:-
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11753&page=31
the 220 ice armored hull metre scow
(700 feet)named “Arctic”
http://www.wellandcanal.ca/salties/a/arctic/arctic.htm
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/14/north_eastern_passage/
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=346&page=109#29638
http://www.smhi.se/oceanografi/istjanst/produkter/sstcolor.pdf
http://yle.fi/uutiset/news/2010/03/ice_still_hampering_baltic_ferry_traffic_1509929.html
http://www.athropolis.com/arctic-facts/fact-st-roch.htm
http://www.athropolis.com/library-cat.htm#boats
http://www.athropolis.com/arctic-facts/fact-manhattan.htm
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=globalwarming&thread=346&page=98#28425
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=346&page=112
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cutterhealy/page2/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cutterhealy/page5/
http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=anguteq+ittuk&d=4587562012184154&mkt=en-CA&setlang=en-US&w=5be99496,ce919f4b
http://www.royalarcticline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=51&Itemid=60
http://129.35.38.254/PGM/sejlphvcl.pgm?1+NRQ
http://129.35.38.254/PGM/sejlphvcl.pgm?1+QAQ
http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=anguteq+ittuk&d=4666713965135471&mkt=en-CA&setlang=en-US&w=d06deca,2bf1c93
http://www.royalarcticline.com/images/stories/pdf/2010Sejlplaner/master/masterplan%202010%2C%20version%2020jan2010%20%2810-11dages%20rotation%29.pdf
http://www.randburg.com/gr/royalarc.html
http://www.randburg.com/ca/internav.html
http://sermitsiaq.gl/indland/article108384.ece?lang=EN
http://www.thelocal.se/25364/20100305/
http://yle.fi/uutiset/news/2010/03/ferries_collide_near_sweden_passengers_safe_1504779.html
http://yle.fi/uutiset/news/2010/03/three_ships_caught_in_ice_near_stockholm_1499137.html
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=976&page=11
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=globalwarming&thread=346&page=117#30583
http://www.rosatom.ru/en/armada/
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf34.html
http://www.springerlink.com/content/q55123171232r164/
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=591&page=3#19857
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=346&page=123#31541
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/weather/big_freeze.shtml
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=1179&page=85
http://earthsciences.dal.ca/research/facility/ftl/ftl-nares.html
http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/collection_2007/nrcan-rncan/M44-2002-E11E.pdf
track MAP of icebreaker Louis S. St-Laurent
http://epic.awi.de/Publications/Polarforsch2004_1-3_1.pdf
http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_109/nn_335066/sid_CB86F27798F1B23EF3C9248BD7F01460/EN/Themen/MeerPolar/Meeresforschung/Projekte__und__Beitraege/Nares__Strait/mcs__naresstrait__en.html?__nnn=true
http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_109/nn_328884/EN/Themen/MeerPolar/Meeresforschung/Projekte__und__Beitraege/Nares__Strait/Nares__Strait__en.html
http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_109/nn_322956/SiteGlobals/Forms/Suche/serviceSucheForm,templateId=processForm.html?resourceId=337598&input_=&pageLocale=de&searchEngineQueryString=Nares&sortString=-score&language=ALL&maxResults=1000&x=11&y=11
http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_109/nn_328884/EN/Themen/MeerPolar/Meeresforschung/Projekte__und__Beitraege/Nares__Strait/mcs__naresstrait__en.html
http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_109/nn_328884/EN/Themen/MeerPolar/Meeresforschung/Projekte__und__Beitraege/Nares__Strait/mcs__kane__hall__en.html
http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_109/nn_328884/DE/Themen/MeerPolar/Meeresforschung/Projekte__und__Beitraege/Nares__Strait/Nares__Strait.html
http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_109/nn_336668/EN/Themen/MeerPolar/Meeresforschung/Projekte__und__Beitraege/projekte__node__en.html?__nnn=true
http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_109/nn_328884/EN/Themen/MeerPolar/Meeresforschung/Projekte__und__Beitraege/Nares__Strait/Nares__Strait__en.html
http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_109/nn_335066/sid_CB86F27798F1B23EF3C9248BD7F01460/EN/Themen/MeerPolar/Polarforschung/Arktis/Expeditionen/expeditionen__inhalt__en.html?__nnn=true
expeditions to nares elsemere
1997 1998 2001 2003 2004
http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_109/nn_335066/sid_CB86F27798F1B23EF3C9248BD7F01460/EN/Themen/MeerPolar/Polarforschung/Arktis/Expeditionen/expeditionen__inhalt__en.html?__nnn=true
http://www.canadiangeographic.ca/magazine/ma06/indepth/people.asp
http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=2db7c461-4252-44f4-8c7a-ceac2af1469d
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2009/08/27/arctic-icebreakers.html
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2006/10/02/icebreakers-new.html
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2008/08/28/new-icebreaker.html
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/debs-arctic-shipping-operations-icebreaker-422.htm
http://www.carc.org/pubs/v14no4/5.htm
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/578384
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/187468
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=b49e29f5-ed50-443f-86a9-6c62a9b46c06
http://pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?category=1&id=2251
http://www.carc.org/pubs/v14no4/index.html
http://www.casr.ca/ft-harper1-2.htm
http://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/text-texte.asp?id=101701
http://www.lloydslist.com/ll/news/articleSearch.htm;jsessionid=018F1922206D945311B65CF12E101673.5fa4e8cc80be35e2653c9f87d8b8be45bf6ba69a
St. Laurent, classed a heavy Arctic icebreake
Sir Wilfred Laurier
Sir Wilfred Grenfell
Ann Harvey
duke
Polarbjorn
Polar Pevek
Smit Sakhalin
Vladimir Ignatyuk
Ary Rongel
Talagy
Terry Fox
Sampo
Smit Sibu
Royal Greenland
polar viking
Nordica
Vidar Viking
Stena Forth
Stena Don
http://sermitsiaq.ag/erhverv/article120900.ece
http://english.sina.com/china/p/2010/0210/304031.html
http://www.liaoning-gateway.com/gateway/349/3439349.shtml
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20090421/121232033.html
http://www.interferry.com/node/1908
http://www.lloydslist.com/ll/news/a-week-navigating-through-arctic-ice/1267707454734.htm?highlight=true&containingAll=icebreaker&containingPhrase=&containingAnyWords=
http://www.lloydslist.com/ll/news/lloyds-list-arctic-adventure/1267468683548.htm?highlight=true&containingAll=icebreaker&containingPhrase=&containingAnyWords=
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2010-01/14/content_12810731.htm
http://english.sina.com/china/p/2010/0210/304031.html
http://www.liaoning-gateway.com/gateway/349/3439349.shtml
http://www.sikunews.com/art.html?catid=12&artid=7250
http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=967a7bcf-53f6-4963-99af-4be36121ef0b
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Sealing_ships_trapped_in_ice_off_coast_of_Newfoundland
http://www.sikunews.com/art.html?catid=2&artid=7437
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/climate-change-catastrophe-worst-ice-year-on-record-leads-to-harp-seals-demise-89105962.html
http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/03/26/5708245.html
http://www.archive.org/details/arcticproblemnar00heil
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/30197/30197-h/30197-h.htm
http://www.archive.org/details/farthestnorthbei02nansuoft
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=globalwarming&thread=976&page=36#46836
http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/06/10/9558839.html
http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/06/10/9558839.html
http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/06/05/9175021.html
http://en.rian.ru/infographics/20100524/159136732.html
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=globalwarming&thread=1179&page=63#50837
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=1179&page=85
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=globalwarming&thread=1270&page=3#50814
CRUISE REPORTS
Bering Strait 2000 – RV Alpha Helix – HX235
Bering Strait 2001 – RV Alpha Helix – HX250
Bering Strait 2002 – RV Alpha Helix – HX260
Bering Strait 2003 – RV Alpha Helix – HX274
Bering Strait 2004 – RV Alpha Helix – HX290
Bering Strait 2005 – CCGS Sir Wilfrid Laurier – SWL2005
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/HX235cruisereport00.pdf
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/HX250cruisereport01.pdf
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/HX260cruisereport02.pdf
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/AH2003/AlphaHelix2003.html
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/AH2004/AlphaHelix2004.html
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/SWL2005/SWLBeringStrait2005.html
Khromov 2009 (Aug/Sept)
Lavrentiev 2008 (Oct)
Sever 2007 (Aug/Sept)
Sir Wilfrid Laurier 2006 (July)
Sir Wilfrid Laurier 2005 (July)
Alpha Helix 2004 (Aug/Sept)
Alpha Helix 2003 (July)
Alpha Helix 2002 (June)
Alpha Helix 2001 (Sept)
Alpha Helix 2000 (Aug/Sept)
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/Khromov2009Cruise.html
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/UWmooringreportLAVRENTIEV2008Oct.pdf
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/UWmooringreportSEVER2007Aug.pdf
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/SWL2006/SWLBeringStrait2006.html
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/SWL2005/SWLBeringStrait2005.html
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/AH2004/AlphaHelix2004.html
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/AH2003/AlphaHelix2003.html
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/HX260cruisereport02.pdf
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/HX250cruisereport01.pdf
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/HX235cruisereport00.pdf
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/Khromov2009Cruise.html
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/UWmooringreportSEVER2007Aug.pdf
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/UWmooringreportLAVRENTIEV2008Oct.pdf
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/IPYbstrait.html#A_HIGH_RESOLUTION_MOORING_ARRAY_FOR_IPY
http://sailwx.info/shiptrack/shipposition.phtml?call=VCLM
military vessels–
clssified–
contact the military of the country
you wish information about–good luck.
In fact, today, if icebreakers were
not being used in very expensive efforts
to shatter ice bridges and ice dams
to support profit making shipping industries
and mineral oil exploration industries,
the arctic
shipping season would
shorten by several months
(or be eliminated totally)
and many cargo vessels would remain stranded in the arctic–
-And the NW transit is NOT getting EASIER TODAY-
Despite the billions of dollars squandered
on this moronic fantasy activity-
(not to mention the millions of barrels of diesel bunker fuel
burned and wasted on this nonsense plus environmental damage-
-the destitute eskimos could be
using some of that fuel for warmth
and to improve their lives in their
concentration camps).
Günther Kirschbaum says:
August 11, 2010 at 6:10 am
And how do those images compare to those of other years? Do you have an “image anomaly” to back up your claim that this picture represents a dying Arctic? Seems to me like both sides pick and choose when they want to use data vs. anecdotal evidence…
-Scott
Günther Kirschbaum: August 11, 2010 at 1:10 am
“Bill Tuttle wrote:
Here’s a better one for that — it’s actually over the pole, and not in the middle of the Beaufort Gyre:”
What Beaufort Gyre?
Good point.
I *should* have written, “…and not in the middle of an empty patch of the Beaufort Sea where the Beaufort Gyre normally forms (but isn’t home at the moment) , because this shot allows you a frame of reference in order to interpret the different colors appearing in the IR shot, thereby enhancing your ability to differentiate between land, water, ice, and clouds, because there’s no frikkin’ legend associated with the Terra 369 color use and all of us aren’t as used to false-color IR imagery-interpretation as Günther is.”