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.
phil
The NSIDC newsletter includes this graph, which seems to hint at a near record low in 2010.
http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20100804_Figure2.png
How would you reconcile your ideas with the NSIDC graph ;^)
Tom in Texas says:
August 11, 2010 at 12:21 pm
It appears to be a dip because of the convex shape of the curve in the 1st half of Sept.
==========================================================
Agree, I don’t see a dip at all.
I am thinking it will dip below 2005. Possibly even lower, and match 2009 give or take a bit. Why you ask? Well, first off, Joe Bastardi said it would likely be lower this year than last, and the good folks governing us will see that it is at least reported as being so low as to cause a death spiral of overheated polar bears and water chest deep in the Sierra’s.
Actually, my bet is it will dip below zero much earlier this year, thus slowing the melting, but probably be much windier so who knows… I’ll go with Bastardi.
I’ll put my vote in for exceeding the 2005 extent based on that whanking big ice slab that blocking the outflow of ice.
I don’t know what it’s going to be THERE.
But I know that HERE in Germany, all signs are indicating an early, COLD, long, harsh winter.
Mark my words.
I shall return.
WordPress seems to dislike when I use Joe Bastardi’s name twice!
lol
Tom in Texas,
HAHAHA…Good one, wish I had said that! 🙂
I don’t know about beating 2005 but I am of the opinion that current weather parameter oscillations predict continued ice behavior that points to a possible recovery. So my guess is less melt than last year.
Question, I’ve noticed that my comments are being delayed for moderation by nearly an hour. Is there something wrong?
[Moderator shortage today. Sorry.]
It will beat 2005.
The trajectory is coming from further back and is rising towards 2005. By late August it will be past 2005 in extent by a small margin.
“It’s the jet stream stupid”!!! 🙂
My inspired guess would be between ’05 and ’06. Rationale: weak solar activity for three years, La Nina evolving, reversal of the PDO, possible continued negative NAO, and low daily mean temperatures north of 80 degrees (now below freezing).
Steve,
I think we might be missing the big old ice munching anomaly (+5deg) in the Bering Straits of 2005.
http://sharaku.eorc.jaxa.jp/cgi-bin/amsr/polar_sst/polar_sst.cgi?lang=e
I appears to tamed itself to Sep-Oct 2005 levels (two months early).
Can I vote for a tie?
I believe 2010 will come in just a hair above 2005. How far depends on a couple of factors. The main factor will be wind direction. In September 2005 it appears the winds began to do two things. First, it looks to me that a lot of ice was pushed out to sea off the east coast of Greenland. That loss of ice allowed for added compaction which was caused by those same winds. Right now the winds are very much different than they were this date in 2005. If that continues, there should be considerably less compaction for the remainder of the melt season and less of a push out to sea; Sea ice extent and area should not take the dip seen in 2005. Second, the temperature is below normal. I don’t know what the temperature was for this date in 2005, but I do know that it is (from what we can tell) below normal in the arctic right now. If that trend continues, there should be less melt and an earlier start to the refreeze. Again, sea ice extent and area should not take the dip seen in 2005.
All that said, if the winds take a sudden shift (something similar to what Bastardi seems to indicate in his updated hurricane prediction), the thinness of the ice could cause a dip to 2009 levels or lower.
On another note, I was surprised by the different reactions I had to the graphics. In the DMI graph, sea ice extent looks very much in step with 2005. However, when I looked at the PIPS images, it appears that there is a lot less ice than in 2005. Sure, there are a few small areas where the ice is thicker this year, but overall, the ice appears to have been .5 to 1 meter or more thicker in a large chunk of the image. Also, by yet another simple eyeball guesstimate, that slightly thicker ice appears to have covered a larger area. I know you can’t measure extent with the PIPS map, but it looks a little different than what I would have guessed.
Daily totals are still well above 50sk loss a day. Until I see a slowdown of the melt, it projects as beating only 2007.
Steve,
Looking at the DMI Graph, most of the historic lows occurred in the first 2 weeks of September. Except 2005, when the historic low was in the last 2 weeks of September.
So to answer your query, ” determine if 2010 will finish ahead or below 2005 “. My prediction is: 2010 will be below 2005 in the first 2 weeks of September, but above 2005 in the second two weeks. But the low-low will be about the same, just at different times.
the dmi arctic temperatures are going slightly further below freezing tonight and are much lower than they were in 2005 at this time.I would be pleased if 2010 finished above 2009 in arctic ice extent but we will have to wait until the ice melt is over before we can be certain of that.
No whiskey added on september?
Frederick Michael said:
“Also, the Arctic has been quite cloudy recently and this is slowing the melting.”
_______
This time of year, the cloudiness is not necessarily a factor in keeping temperatures down. Certain type of cloud cover actually keep temperatures warmer by increasing downwelling LW radiation. Clear skies can allow more heat to escape.
I think it will be higher than 2005.
This is based on a gut feeling… sometimes it’s all we have in this damed science.
simpleseekeraftertruth says:
August 11, 2010 at 12:14 pm 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.
That’s good physics! Knowing the equations of motion for the problem at hand is required to understand! It is amusing to observe the complete lack of understanding by most “experts”, IPCC, New Scientists and New York Times:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/globalwarming/index.html
Arctic Melt Unnerves the Experts
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Scientists are unnerved by this summer’s massive polar ice melt, its implications and their ability to predict it.
My vote is that it will beat 2005 because of an ealier freeze up.
Comparing the temp north of 80th parallel of 2005 and 2010, the temp for 2010 has already crossed the freezing line. 2005 follows the average curve, and does not cross the freezing line for another several days.
IF this trend in temp continues, I’d speculate that your gonig to see the extent and area lines begin to flatten out, and maybe even begin grow a tad, making the assumption that lower tems and below freezing temps leads to ice formation, and by default, a halt in ice melt.
Steve,
Quick question – when it comes to the end of the melt season, which source will be used to determine who was closest to the ‘minimum ice extent.’ NSIDC, JAXA, DMI? I feel there needs to be some sort of standard metric for this, else people will claim to use the one that most closely matches their prediction (I fear its already too late to do this… should have been done long ago).
R. Gates
In order for clouds to produce downwelling LW radiation, they had to have been first warmed by upwelling LW radiation. Not much of that over the ice, is there?
Based on the historical data for the last several years, I’d have to posit the theory that 2010 will end up slightly above 2005. The warmest months are coming to an end, and by the end of December I could see a small uptick just enough to nudge it ahead of 2005. The 2007 line shows a major reduction during August to October, moreso than any other line on the graph. November and December are big gain months for sea ice, and based on the similarities to 2005 I’d say 2010 will end up slightly to very slightly above once the final tally is finished, based on the recovery of the 2007 line during those months.