By Steve Goddard
I need help from the readers to determine if 2010 will finish ahead or below 2005 – the red line in the DMI graph.
2010 is currently tracking just below 2005, but note there was a downwards dip in mid-September, 2005. What caused this?
The PIPS video below shows what happened in September, 2005.
In mid-September, strong winds started blowing off the East Siberian and Laptev Seas, which compressed the ice towards the North Pole. This caused the dip seen in the DMI graph.
The images below show the current date in 2005 and 2010 respectively. Note that 2005 had a lot of thin/low concentration ice in the Laptev/Kara Seas which was vulnerable to being blown around by the wind in September. The ice is less extensive, but thicker in that region in 2010.
What do you think? Will 2010 beat 2005? Please explain your reasoning.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Where was the jetstream in sept. 2005, and how hot was moscow-lat russia?
With all that heat flowing around northern russia, prevailing winds there should drive toward the pole.
Also, qualitatively, I’ve been hearing a lot about how thick 2010 ice is, but these two images (comparing time for time) show broad expanses of thinner ice in 2010. I would look for those to shore up and thicken due to wind compaction on the russia side and for 2010 to clear 2005 slightly to the negative within 10 days.
Voting on what the weather is going to do eh? I suppose that’s a change from being asked to vote for politicians who claim they can improve the weather and the climate. I’m afraid I can’t vote, my piece of seaweed has gone missing.
Is this Based soley on the Danish Data?
If so, based on trends, I’d think 2010 would finish above.
If not, I’d say below.
Regardless, we all know whats upcoming 12 months from now….. 🙂 Lets see the warmists try to Hide that!
MODERATOR:
Someone added the words “Arctic Sea Ice” to the title.
Grammatically that is incorrect. Please change the title to “What Happened in 2005 to Arctic Sea Ice?”
[Fixed, thanks. ~dbs]
Buffoon
Where did you hear that the ice is thicker now than it was in 2005?
Buffoon
2010 is already “slightly to the negative ” of 2005.
By Steve Goddard
I need help from the readers to determine if 2010 will finish ahead or below 2005 – the red line in the DMI graph.
_____
On the DMI graph, 2010 will finish below 2005 and likely below 2009 as well, but we won’t know for a week or so…
Perhaps hydrothermal vents were more active, or an undersea volcano erupted in the area late August/early September in 2005?
It will beat 2005.
Here in Englandland, August is our warmest month, a time for buckets and spades on the beach, and the occasional dip in very cold water.
So here we are in our warm month, and as I take my Labrador Millie for her morning walk across the fields of Shropshire, it is already getting cold, so much so that the fields are covered with very heavy dew, enough to go through the hiking boots.
My guess, and it is a guess, is that winter will be worse than last year, because it will start early, and a good bet will be that the Highway Authorities will not yet have stocked up on enough salt.
It would be nice if I were wrong, I could really do with a bit more of that GW stuff, my old friend Arthur Rightis plays me up when it gets cold.
Pity really that The Met have stopped giving us all a laugh with their seasonal forecasts. After all, by the law of averages, eventually they’d have got one right, and they could have basked in our adulation.
Right now my vote is for it to not reach the 2005 extent. Although I’ve been impressed by the quality of your predictions thus far this year, I’m still worried about it clearing 2009. There are just too many unpredictable factors to say for sure.
My reasoning for this is purely statistical and relatively poor. I mentioned it in a recent comment in Sea Ice News #17…I’m using the JAXA extent records to predict the final minimum. I know this correlates poorly early in the season, but for 08/10 the R^2 value for the correlation is 0.914. Using 08/10 data, this method predicts 5.08e6 +/- 4.74 e6 km^2 (+/- 95% confidence interval). Yes, tons of uncertainty still. I’d like to improve my fitting methods by combining the JAXA data with other data sets…can I get the data (not graphs) for those somewhere online? I’d really like the 30% extent data or the area data, as those would make good multiparameter fits.
While I’d love to see it top 2005, I keep reminding myself that it’s only 1 year.
-Scott
As ice behavior in the Arctic is dependent on weather conditions, attempting to predict which way the wind will be blowing at various points around the Arctic is a task best left to Madam Sofia up the street.
I believe what one must do is look at probabilities and not attempt to put too fine a point on a prediction. At this point in time, as far as I would be willing to go is to say that I believe that 2010 will finish with more ice than 2009 and indications are good that it will be a 2005-ish year.
But a change in the weather can change all that in only a few days time.
Arctic air temperatures for 2010 are running well below 2005 temperatures. Therefore I predict that 2010 sea ice extent will exceed that of 2005.
Since 2007, that is some bodacious death spiral right thar! Not. But then the incredibly ignorant folks here at WUWT must be reading the graphs wrong. Now where did I put my AGW-colored glasses, and now that I think about it, it is time for my daily dose of red koolaid with a lemming chaser.
Always have your Kashmir sweater available when we have an Indian summer.
Hmm, looks like the JAXA record was modified overnight and for the 08/10/10 value. With the new value the correlation method is predicting 5.07e6 km^2.
-Scott
All the heat’s in Russia so it’s lacking at the pole. Jetstreams farther south this year and all… 2010 will have more arctic sea ice at the minimum than 2005. Simplistic logic i know but me no weatherman, just listening to some of them…
My guess would be close or over 2005, based on lower solar activity. You can clearly see the rising trend since 2007. But could you ask Piers Corbyn, he follows solar activity, ocean currents and high-atmosphere turbulence, resulting in pretty accurate weather-predictions.
2005 was a monster in terms of hurricane activity and looking at the track info
http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atlantic/2005H/index.html
shows that a lot of tropical heat went north that summer/fall. 2010 is analog for 2005 and 1998 so we might expect a similar result (other things being considered) if the season ramps up as quickly as Dr. Phil, Joe Bastardi and Mark Sudduth have explained.
What does the ice situation look like for those other years where hurricane activity was high in number and strength? Just proposing a piece of the puzzle.
I’m beginning to think that predicting the fate of Arctic sea ice is akin to predicting where the roulette ball will fall. Just looking at the DMI graph, you have 2010 tracking 2005 for the last few weeks. But for all of June 2010 showed the lowest extent while for the month of April 2010 it showed the highest extent. The within-year variability of the sea ice extent metric makes it extremely problematic to forecats based on which year it is currently tracking.
Looking at the PIPS images for 2005 and 2010 it seems to me that there is a significant difference in the arctic sea ice extent portrayed. Yet the extent as shown by DMI has 2005 and 2010 on par. Accordingly I would have a hard time interpreting anything from PIPS 2005 that could be applied to the 2010 DMI situation.
I do find the Arctic sea ice conditions an entertaining and compelling melodrama. There seem to be a broad range of expert and amateur predictions for the sea ice minimum this year, but I have my doubts that we will learn anything from the 2010 results. Most predictions will be wrong, and one or more will be close enough to the mark to be deemed prescient. No matter who gets that brass ring, our understanding of the dynamics of Arctic ice conditions will be no richer.
Regardless of the outcome, the CAGW alarmists will continue to refer to “dwindling Arctic sea ice”. The 2007 minimum will give years of dividends in ensuring a linear fit that matches the narrative. So 2010 will be spun as confirming the consensus. Accordingly the public understanding of Arctic sea ice conditions will continue to be an order of magnitude below our feeble scientific understanding. *sigh* /rantoff
N.Pole is cold the wind should go to the lowest pressure-where it is hot.
BTW-Check out Joe Bastardi’s comments.
http://www.accuweather.com/ukie/bastardi-europe-blog.asp
things are about to change…
Forecast! Why? Leave that to IPCC to get wrong. It is the area under the curve that matters. That will give a comparative measure of the amount of energy locked up by the latent heat of freezing. So far, looks like a record anyway.
Right now, the lack of ice going trough the Fram strait is remarkable. If this continues, significant recovery will result.
More Arctic sea ice freezes every winter than melts every summer. The loss through the Fram strait is what keeps it from building massively (plus a bit more through the Nares strait.) We didn’t lose much this year and that means significant future buildup.
Also, the Arctic has been quite cloudy recently and this is slowing the melting.
Does this mean we’ll beat 2005 this year? No; I’d be surprised if that happened.
But we should beat it next year.
…note there was a downwards dip in mid-September, 2005. What caused this?
It appears to be a dip because of the convex shape of the curve in the 1st half of Sept.
Compare the shape of those 2 weeks, to the 2 weeks in the other 4 years.
The mid-September 2005 was a one-time event. Temperatures in Siberia south of the Kara and Laptev Seas are below normal and the ice is relatively thick north of there. Current air temperatures on the ice are at or below freezing. Nothing bad is going to happen to that ice. I expect the 2010 ice to track right along the 2005 line until mid-September, then cross over to positive territory.
I predict 2005 finishing ahead of 2010 by 5 years =)
But seriously, all years finish about the same. I don’t know why this would be any different.