Via press release.
Is the ice in the Arctic Ocean getting thinner and thinner? Research aircraft Polar 5 measures thickness of sea ice north of Greenland
Bremerhaven, 20th August 2010.
The extent of the sea ice in the Arctic will reach its annual minimum in September. Forecasts indicate that it will not be as low as in 2007, the year of the smallest area covered by sea ice since satellites started recording such data. Nevertheless, sea ice physicists at the Alfred Wegener Institute are concerned about the long-term equilibrium in the Arctic Ocean. They have indications that the mass of sea ice is dwindling because its thickness is declining. To substantiate this, they are currently measuring the ice thickness north and east of Greenland using the research aircraft Polar 5. The objective of the roughly one-week campaign is to determine the export of sea ice from the Arctic. Around a third to half of the freshwater export from the Arctic Ocean takes place in this way – a major drive factor in the global ocean current system.
The question of when the Arctic will be ice-free in the summer has been preoccupying the sea ice researchers headed by Prof. Dr. Rüdiger Gerdes from the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in the Helmholtz Association for a long time now. Satellites have been recording the extent of the Arctic ice for more than 30 years. In addition to the area covered, the thickness of the ice is a decisive factor in assessing how much sea ice there is.
However, the thickness can only be determined locally, for example by means of the so-called EM-Bird, an electromagnetic measuring device which helicopters or planes tow over the ice. For Gerdes this is a very special job because he usually models his forecasts on his home computer.
The campaign with the research aircraft Polar 5 of the Alfred Wegener Institute now takes him on an expedition in the Arctic for the first time. “I’m very keen on seeing the results of the sea ice thickness measurements,” says Gerdes. “Only when we know the distribution of ice of varying thickness, can we calculate how much freshwater is carried out of the Arctic Ocean via ice.”
About 3000 cubic kilometres of ice drift out of the Arctic Ocean every year, corresponding to around 2700 billion tons. The ice exports freshwater that reaches the Arctic Ocean via rivers and precipitation. This maintains its salt concentration, which has been constant over the long term. The temperature rise observed worldwide is especially pronounced in the Arctic latitudes.
Researchers have been observing that the ice is getting thinner and thinner for several years now. As a result, it stores and exports less freshwater and the salt concentration (also referred to as salinity) of the Arctic Ocean declines. On the one hand, this influences all living things that have adapted to the local conditions. On the other hand, changes in salinity also have an impact on current patterns of global ocean circulation and thus on meridional heat transport.
In the TIFAX (Thick Ice Feeding Arctic Export) measurement campaign the researchers are primarily interested in ice that is several years old, several metres thick and occurs predominantly on the northern coast of Greenland. “Taking off on the measurement flights from Station Nord here is a special adventure,” reports Gerdes from one of the northernmost measuring stations in the world. “Flying through virtually unsettled regions of the Arctic in the high-tech research aircraft is a stark contrast to my modelling work on the computer.”
Notes for editorial offices:
Your contact in the Communication and Media Department of the Alfred Wegener Institute is Folke Mehrtens (phone: ++49 471 4831-2007; e-mail: Folke.Mehrtens(at)awi.de).
The Alfred Wegener Institute conducts research in the Arctic, Antarctic and oceans of the high and mid latitudes. It coordinates polar research in Germany and provides major infrastructure to the international scientific community, such as the research icebreaker Polarstern and stations in the Arctic and Antarctic. The Alfred Wegener Institute is one of the sixteen research centres of the Helmholtz Association, the largest scientific organisation in Germany.
John F. Hultquist says:
August 20, 2010 at 12:33 pm
“- seems to me to be like looking through the keyhole of the front door of the Musee Du Louvre.”
Thus missing out on a close and detailed inspection of the Egyptian artifacts that date back millennia and marvelling at the multitude of skills and exquisite craftsmanship displayed before you. If you have never been, book a visit now – you will be astounded by a civilisation based upon and comfortable with, the rhythms of the Nile. Or they were until Akhenaten established a new priesthood for his new religion worshipping the false god Aten.
Perhaps we too should accept, understand and be comfortable with the rhythms of today. Or perhaps we too have invented a new religion with false gods………
The omens are however favourable. Akhenaten’s new religion was shunned upon his death; his new city, temples and priesthood abandoned as the people returned to the old ways and values and Akhenaten and all his works were erased from the records of ancient Egypt.
Hansen’s turn next?
This sounds to me like everyone is sure of the outcome and doing this research is a mere formality.
“This maintains its salt concentration, which has been constant over the long term.”
So basically no signal of any change.
“Researchers have been observing that the ice is getting thinner and thinner for several years now. As a result, it stores and exports less freshwater and the salt concentration (also referred to as salinity) of the Arctic Ocean declines.”
But you just said that there was no change!
Anyway, why would thinner ice export less freshwater. It is the surface that melts. Reducing the surface area could be perceived as reducing output but I don’t see the correlation with thinning. Besides, if it was thinning it must be melting and if its melting it must be increasing output, not decreasing!
Did Prof. Gerdes wife write this press release: or have my faculties deserted me?
The story:
“The ice exports freshwater that reaches the Arctic Ocean via rivers and precipitation. ”
glacierman:
“Ice is by construction fresh water, because it is the solid state of H2O , which in its liquid form is water. It is crystalline and there is no space for the salt molecule in the crystal. Pockets of brine are slowly rejected as the freezing advances. ”
Glacierman has it right and the story has it (mostly) wrong. For one thing, there’s darn little precipitation in the arctic in the ice forming season. The volume of ice lost from the arctic exceeds the flow of the rivers into the arctic. The vast majority of the arctic ice forms on salt water and increases the salinity of the water below it.
As I noted earlier in another thread, a reputable “Golden” book in 1958 noted that the average Arctic ice thickness was perhaps a bit more than two meters. On the basis, and from what we now read, little has changed, so we have passed along this book to our grandchildren as still worth a read.
bubbagyro says:
August 20, 2010 at 1:16 pm
Thats all I needed to hear. Good one! It’s 5:00 somewhere, and that somewhere is about to be where I am.
C James: August 20, 2010 at 12:30 pm
If the ice is getting thinner and less freshwater is stored and exported, how could the salinity of the Arctic Ocean DECLINE?
Never mind that — when will they ask Mann how to hide it?
Wouldn’t it be nice if some one started a research totally unbiased? Without any agenda? Just taking a good look and reporting what they find? I’ve always liked science because of its detached nature. I still do where it concerns pure physics but in the case of climate science I get terrible headaches; I just keep reading on and on to learn about the next point of view. Which figures because of the complexity of the object of research. Wence originate all these firm standpoints?
If I want to know about classical mechanisc or quantum physics I can just go and look up the state of affairs; any uncertainties are always plainly stated. In the case of the climate rhetorism appears to be the weapon of choice; not logic or observations.
“Researchers have been observing that the ice is getting thinner and thinner for several years now. “
ERRRrrr but it was thicker last year than the year before and this year it is thicker than last year…..
Am I missing something? Sounds like the ice is getting thicker not thinner.
The salinity of the oceans will depend on the amount of fresh water going in and the amount coming out. The amount that freezes and then thaws is irrelevant over the whole cycle if there is no nett gain or loss. If there is a nett loss the sea will become less saline because there will be a temporary release of fresh water. However this release will be infitessimal in the context of the northerly river flows out of Canada and Russia in a year. Overall the oceans will always become more saline because there is no obvious way that the small amount of dissolved salts in the rivers can be removed. They have been building up over billions of years and will not stop now.
If the sea ice did stop building it would change the cycle of salinity in the arctic ocean such that there would be more fresh water reaching the Pacific and Atlantic oceans in the winter and less in the summer. This may have an impact but it is not obvious what that would be.
Why are they not flying over the sea ice in the Antarctic. That has grown more than the Arctic has declined. Are they not worried about that?
Dave Stephens says:
August 20, 2010 at 12:50 pm
… and when the day comes when the poor horse explodes in a shower of gore, on that day they will begin to understand the true cost of their zealotry…
==========================================================
I see what you did there.
Once again the article doesn’t make sense: Around a third to half of the freshwater export from the Arctic Ocean takes place in this way… What way? Export of ice? If so, why are they measuring the thickness? Oh, because the ice bergs are-
a major drive factor in the global ocean current system. But it’s only- a third to half of the freshwater export How is THAT major? And what’s the other 50 to 66%? Deep currents? That are not dependent on ice flows. Thick, thin or no ice – water flows into the Arctic. It’s got to come OUT somewhere. How does an increase OR decrease in thickness of the ice change those flows?
And even MORE importantly- ….are concerned about the long-term equilibrium in the Arctic Ocean. What equilibrium? Just saying the word doesn’t define WHAT would be out of balance? Ice to temp? Temp to saltiness? Ice to current flows? So what if there is NO ice anywhere in the Arctic for a short period of time durning some future September? WHAT does Arctic ice do, for a short period of time in September that we are so worried about not happening?
Right. Just another plot to a grade B horror movie.
TGIF
Another hint of negative feedback loops stabilizing the Earth’s climate:
More old ice flows out of the Arctic taking “freshwater” away, leaving higher salinity of the Arctic Ocean behind—–which lowers the melting/freezing point of the water, presumably, leading to less ice at a given average temp.
Then, less ice forms and less freshwater can flow out of the Arctic, and the salinity of the Arctic ocean rises—–which raises the melting/freezing point, and now more ice can form at a similar temp. Thus, stabilization of sea ice volume ensues, oscillating around relatively narrow values, as it is perturbed by various stressors such as the large oceanic oscillations.
A negative feedback system. Maybe this one is minor with respect to the whole climate, but the Earth’s eco-system seems replete with negative feedback loops, hence its remarkable stability over billions of years.
BS meter alert.
1. Ice is getting thinner for several years (ignoring the veracity of this). That would imply that MORE ice is melting each year.
2. It exports less freshwater? Surely that would be MORE freshwater, not LESS?
3. salinity of the Arctic Ocean declines. Surely that would be because of MORE freshwater, not LESS?
Maybe I’m reading it all wrong, but that set of logical deductions (ignoring veracity) all seem to contradict with each other, which is quite an achievement with just three statements!
Being an expert on ice – or more accurately scotch – I am confused as to how you can measure ice thickness year after year (in a meaningful way of comparison). At the peak there is about 15 million cubic kilometers of ice in the Arctic and 5 million at the minimum. This means 2/3 of the ice melts entirely in a “normal” year. Then the ice blows around so that the multi-year ice isn’t in the same place year after year. Do they place markers on the multi-year ice so that they can monitor its thickness year after year or do they just refly over the same area?
For those interested this institute have published thickness data comparing 2007 and 2009. The paper struck me as balanced and easy to follow so it’s well worth a read.
http://epic.awi.de/Publications/Haa2010b.pdf
Enjoy!
John F. Hultquist says:
“seems to me to be like looking through the keyhole of the front door of the Musee Du Louvre.”
I’m sure if you want to fund a full arctic survey the Dr would be happy to recieve an email from you. In the mean time we have to do the best with what data can be generated from limited resourses. My understanding is these sort of surveys will be used over the next few years to help validate the Cryosat2 data.
You guys can sling your derisive comments at the Polar 5 group all you want (and rightly so IMO), but it still makes a lot more sense than the Catlan group.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/26/catlin-team-averaging-1-7-miles-per-day-only-295-miles-left-to-go/
Dave Wendt says:
August 20, 2010 at 11:30 am
As I pointed out in a comment here more than a week ago it appears to me that the flow of sea ice out through the Fram mostly halted nearly a month ago.
Well it’s flowing out now (Aug 10-19):
http://neven1.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f03a1e37970b01348653397b970c-pi
Thanks for the link HR.
I confused extent and thickness in my earlier post.
Seems they re-fly the same area year after year.
Thankfully ice doesn’t move, otherwise their data would be useless.
It’s almost certainly thinner than it was 500, 1000, 2000, 5000, 10000, and ~22000 yrs ago, too.
Last year the WI ice survey over the whole arctic found the ice to be much thicker than expected. They appear to have replaced last years crew with a new guy who has never been to the Arctic and who will be conducting a survey over only 10% of the previous survey area. Oh and he will be doing his anaysis on his home computer wheras other govt climate institutions have wall-to-wall $200 million computers to play with. This is what happens when you report thicker ice when you are funded by the world’s most committed AGW govt. Other posters didn’t miss the pre-conclusions of the press release.
Oh and HR, if budget for this more limited survey was the limiting factor, what does that say about the importance of the work for the planet? Actually if they already know the outcome, putting a few survey lines down can be. Just window dressing – that darn Catlin exhibition has set a precedent. (I hate it when I get this way but we’ve lost more trust than ice in the arctic).
SSam says:
August 20, 2010 at 5:59 pm
> You guys can sling your derisive comments at the Polar 5 group all you want (and rightly so IMO), but it still makes a lot more sense than the Catlan group.
Quite right! Most of the comments are about salinity changes in a press release. Any derision I might have (the point has been made folks, let’s go find something else to laugh at) would be directed toward the PR folks. Actually, I’m more interested in why they aren’t noting the 2009 ice was a bit thicker than 2008. Perhaps they’ve only observed thinning for “several” (their word) years instead of “all” of them.
I don’t have time to contact them – anyone want to take on that task?
paulhan says:
August 20, 2010 at 12:02 pm
Wait a minute, didn’t this same plane fly over parts of the Arctic last year and they were surprised to find ice thicknesses much thicker than expected. Why are they now talking as if the Arctic is about to collapse?
When I heard of the first study I thought, ok, these scientists are genuinely trying to get information. That blurb makes it sound like they’ve already made up their minds.
They needed funding – they are far less likely to get funding for a flight proving that there was no problem.
Besides their silly deductive assumptions as others have pointed out on here, their concluding statement…
“The Alfred Wegener Institute conducts research in the Arctic, Antarctic and oceans of the high and mid latitudes.”
…reminds me of something else…although not as bad…as the following:
“NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.”
Yawn.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA