By Steve Goddard
Arctic Ice (red line above) has dropped just below my June forecast (dashed line.) Over the last two weeks, strong southerly winds reminiscent of 2007 have compacted and melted significant amounts of ice. The modified NSIDC image below shows ice loss over the last week, in red.
The break in the weather can be easily seen in the DMI temperature graph, as a sharp upwards spike two weeks ago.
The NCEP forecast calls for colder and calmer weather during the next two weeks, so ice loss should drop off quickly.
The DMI 30% concentration graph has already flattened, and is running even with 2009.
The modified NSIDC image below shows ice gain over 2007 in green, and loss in red.
PIOMAS continues to overestimate (red) ice loss by a substantial margin. Green shows areas where they underestimated ice loss.
It continues to look like my June forecast will be close to correct, though as we have seen – this contest is a crap shoot. It all depends on the wind.
Julienne Strove from NSIDC asked last week what it would take to be convinced of man’s influence. I will respond with a question of my own. What does it take to prove that changes in the wind are driven by changes in CO2?
Extra bonus : Does anyone see a familiar pattern (below) in Greenland temperatures? What year did satellites monitoring the Arctic come on line?
Enquiring minds want to know.
John F. Hultquist says:
August 29, 2010 at 6:35 pm
Yes, some may infer that but I did indicate in my previous comment that the ship was grounded (as is ran aground). However having updated information on the ships location, I would consider that it is likely to be re-floated before any of this winters ice comes close.
Policyguy at 10:28pm August 29th said:
“You might also ask her why its so cold in the US in August?”
Where do you live? HPRCC shows an overwhelming majority of the US at above normal temps for the month of August to date. Roughly half the US has seen temps >2F above normal.
http://www.hprcc.unl.edu/products/maps/acis/MonthTDeptUS.png
What I see year after year in these plots is the rate of increase/decline is rather consistent, but the starting points very some as to the maximum and minimum. There should be no surprise that year to year variations happen, but if anyone is suggesting there is a doomsday signal in data begun in 1979, I just gotta say – STFU, that’s not nearly enough data over time.
Case in point: Nobody within this readership can say from one year to the next what the values should be. We can only conjecture on what the values are. We can’t even poo poo the trends because we honestly don’t know what the trends as of 2010 should be.
Playing “got your nose” with all this data is pointless – we are only gathering useful information for a time in the future when trending will be a viable use of our data. For now we should look at it and say “hnnn – whaddya know? It’s never done that before. I wonder if it’s important.” That can’t be answered because we haven’t gathered enough data yet.
Extent is up but area on Cryosphere is down so the winds Steve mentions definitely playing a big part now. The Low and High pressure areas have swapped positions recently.
Andy
Any sane person would look at Arctic Ocean temperatures thru the year – just rising above freezing in summer – and conclude that the NH is dangerously close to the next ice age.
Travis says:
August 29, 2010 at 10:46 pm
Policyguy at 10:28pm August 29th said:
“You might also ask her why its so cold in the US in August?”
Where do you live? HPRCC shows an overwhelming majority of the US at above normal temps for the month of August to date. Roughly half the US has seen temps >2F above normal.
—————
Travis
I’m in northern California. Normally we have a dozen or more plus 100 days.
This year we had about four. This last week end we went to soccer tournaments in blankets with morning temps in the low 60’s.
Where are you??
and yet, more than 100 years after it was first proposed, nobody has disproved AGW. What’s wrong with all you deniers?…it should be so easy….unless the theory is true of course, but surely that can’t be it…
I would expect more news about the Northwest passage and the Northern Sea route. Baltica, a ship carrying natural gas, has made it through, with the help of 3 nuclear icebreakers. Check it out at http://ecotretas.blogspot.com/2010/08/scf-baltica-and-northern-sea-route.html
Ecotretas
“Where do you live? HPRCC shows an overwhelming majority of the US at above normal temps for the month of August to date. Roughly half the US has seen temps >2F above normal. ”
I can’t speak for the US, but here in Canada we’ve had the furnace on for the last few days in what is supposed to be not just summer but one of the warmest summers since records began. It’s no surprise to me that people are rebelling against ‘global warming’ when their experience is so far from the scare stories the ‘scientists’ are telling them.
jt says:
August 29, 2010 at 11:51 pm
and yet, more than 100 years after it was first proposed, nobody has disproved AGW. What’s wrong with all you deniers?…it should be so easy….unless the theory is true of course, but surely that can’t be it…
What theory? No-one has yet proven the theory of CO² v AGW. You need to read more. Proof means means that when they run their climate / weather model they don’t breakdown after 12 hours, Proof means that when they do a backcast and a forecast they are both correct to 0.1°C (20%), proof is that when they use their clilmate model to predict bar-b-q summers they actually happen, proof is that when they predict warm winters we don’t get buried in 6 feet of snow.
Lets get some (JAXA) numbers on Extent
Daily: ___________2007___ to___ 2010__&__(2009__2008)
Aug24-25_______ -27,967 _____ -36,093___(-44,375_121,562
Aug25-26_______ -29,218 _____ -40,438___(-35,781__71,354
Aug26-27_______ -44,532 _____ -78,437___(-14,219__44,688
Aug27-28_______ -49,062 _____ -53,125___(-23,437__15,146
Aug28-29_______ -60,000 _____ – ?__?___(-20,313__47,136
Aug29-30_______ -48,750 _____ – ?__?___(-46,250__26,094
Aug30-31_______ -_ 9,063 ____ – ?__?___(-40,468__60,156
Aug31-S1_______ -_5,156 ____ – ?__?___(-23,438 __72,188
2010 versus MINIMUMs (K=1,000) 2007= 985 K / 2009=_58 K / 2008=639 K
By contrast, the Bremen Graphs for this same satellite (AMSR-E) RARELY show any difference with 2008, though. 2008 slipped ahead with the 121 K melt. Then there are the SSMI-based sites. But for something NEW: The Topaz model (predicting the next week or so) shows BOTH AMSR-E and SSMI on the same chart (2nd line of Graphs from the top), the only place I’ve seen this: http://arctic-roos.org/forecasting-services/topaz/topaz-model-forecast Note the AMSR-E turned UP today but NOT SSMI (although on the Norsex Quartet, SSMI was up the previous 2.Part of this is the exceptionnal Scattering of the ICE, with so much near the 15% cutoff that it wildly swings Up & Down ).
… For the FUTURE, the only really important Map one is the PIPs2.0 ICE-DRIFT Map http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/pips2/idis.html – – and the prediction is: for the Basin to continue to Empty, depite the CLOUDS.
If my Sea Ice Outlook comes out in a few days: it was written on the 16th: I added a bunch of other possible Forecasts, all based on the Ratio of the EL NINO strengths: 2010 to 2007 = 1.8/1.1 – – – BUT I MISSED THE MOST IMPORTANT :
the Time-lag I forecasted = time for the La Nina to burn off all the Aerial Moisture left by the El Nino=Hot=WET=Clouds .
– – I make 2007’s lull about 40 days from Early May 2007; so as 2010’s Clouds began about June 29 thus add 40 days x 1.8/1.1 = 65.5 days = SUNNY any day without a big Storm, from September 2. But there’s a big storm — which, of course, will increase Ice Export. The REAL stunner to ME, was 2010’s recent 76 K loss – – Cloud Maps showed the whole Basin save near the Canadian Arctic Islands, just compleely COVERED. That melt included NO SUN at all ! The ESRL Map: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/images/fnl/mslp_01.fnl.html – – suggests Today’s Reverse Melt reflects a Real, if brief, BACKWARDS push – – part of the Canadian High moved EAST of Iceland & the backside of the Clockwise Flow pushed Ice back North. But WetterZentrale suggest the Dipole returns http://www.wetterzentrale.de/topkarten/tkecmnh.html
jt
let me give you a theory. There a people living on Mars. Prove it, go on! Sound familiar.
AGW is true, go on prove it. Sound familiar? You are clearly not a scientist. Perhaps a young greeny beeny?
jt says:
August 29, 2010 at 11:51 pm
“and yet, more than 100 years after it was first proposed, nobody has disproved AGW. What’s wrong with all you deniers?…it should be so easy….unless the theory is true of course, but surely that can’t be it…”
Simples…
From Dr Jones, UEA CRU – “No statistically significant global warming for the last 15 years…”
Mauna loa – CO2 increased from about 360 to 390 ppm over the last 15 years.
Therefore:-
1) CO2 has no effect on global temperature.
2) CO2 has an effect on temperature, but natural climate oscillations overwhelm this weak effect.
Just like in the 1970’s, when climate ‘scientists’ where certain we were heading for an ice age, today’s climatologists fear we are going to enter a hot-house. Both teams have been fooled by the vagaries of the deterministic chaos which drives our climate. They know that climate is a non-linear system, yet they continue to use meaningless linear trends. Turbulent systems are not predictable to any degree of accuracy sufficient to be useful for long-term planning.
MarkG says:
I can’t speak for the US, but here in Canada we’ve had the furnace on for the last few days in what is supposed to be not just summer but one of the warmest summers since records began.
Same in South Colorado, last three nights! Summer is over before it’s over.
Just to clarify: It made it through the Northeast passage.
Roger Knights says:
August 30, 2010 at 1:13 am
Just to clarify: It made it through the Northeast passage
Nowadays, the “Northeast passage” it’s called “Northern Sea route”. Please check it out at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Sea_Route. But you are right in the sense that it was not through the Northwest passage, as some might be led to believe.
Ecotretas
“HR says:
August 29, 2010 at 4:38 pm
Steve,
First you tell us it’s all down to wind then you show us a graph of temperature, which is it?”
The fact that arctic ice extend looks like a sine-curve, with 14 millions square km in April and 5 in September, is of course due to temperature. An anomalie in temperature therefore can influence the freezing/melting/breaking off. Since summer 2011 will be cooler than summer 2010, that indicates more ice next year.
But for short term changes (days and weeks) wind is more important.
These Arctic sea ice posts are always interesting but I still can’t see quite what all the fuss is about. If all the Arctic north of Iceland was frozen solid or if there was no ice in the Arctic at all, I would remain unconvinced that it hadn’t happened before and also unconvinced that mankind’s fairly trivial emissions of a useful trace gas was more responsible for ice levels in the Arctic than the activities of herds of elephants in Africa.
The warmists coming on here for an argument might like to answer my question.
At present in the UK we have around 3000 wind turbines which despoil the natural beauty of our landscape, shred large numbers of birds, adversely affect the quality of life of those who live near them. The electricity they produce is ridiculously expensive compared to fossil fuels or nuclear. It is also extremely variable and unreliable and requires not only hydro & pumped storage installations but a number of gas turbine generators to be kept on “spinning standby” to balance fluctuations in output to try to prevent the grid from being unbalanced leading to massive blackouts. The cost of this and the infrastructure needed to connect the wind turbines to the grid and the equipment needed to rectify the fluctuations in frequency is absolutely enormous. The output of all 3000 turbines contributed on average just 0.8% of the electricity needed in the UK between January and June 2010.
Note, all of this is fact and can easily be checked, it is all stuff which is well understood (which is more than can be said for the behavious of sea ice). There is no need to debate whether ice is old or new, thick or thin, rotten or whatever.
My question is, what would it take for me (and all the other sceptics – especially those in the UK who are paying for all this with hugely inflated electricity bills) to be convinced that it will be a sensible idea to build another 10,000 wind turbines as a matter of urgency to save the planet from some shroud waving doom scenario dreamed up by a bunch of rent seeking “scientists” using blatantly cherry picked & fiddled data and corrupt methods which they take good care to hide from those wishing to replicate their results?
For myself, I have to confess that the total disappearance of sea ice in the Arctic wouldn’t even come close.
The “war against global warming” is actually a “war against the poor”.
I keep saying- the theory of the greenhouse effect violates the laws of thermodynamics so that in itself disproves AGW.
“Julienne Strove from NSIDC asked last week what it would take to be convinced of man’s influence.”
Julienne,
I’m sure most people here, as well as the IPCC, would welcome seeing any form of evidence of AGW.
“Julienne Strove from NSIDC asked last week what it would take to be convinced of man’s influence. I will respond with a question of my own. What does it take to prove that changes in the wind are driven by changes in CO2?”
Well under my hypothesis changes in CO2 should indeed effect a miniscule change in the latitudinal positioning of all the air circulation systems by speeding up the hydrological cycle to negate the effects of the CO2.
However natural variability is so huge in comparison due to the constantly varying rate of energy release by the oceans and by the variations in solar activity apparently affecting the intensity of the polar oscillations that the CO2 effect would be unmeasurable.
Thus IF the CO2 effect were significant then one could indeed (in theory) see greater frequency of warm air flows into the Arctic.
However one often sees more warm air flowing into the Arctic anyway when the polar high pressure cells migrate equatorwards because that very migration leaves room near the poles for low pressure to develop.
So also under my hypothesis what one gets with a quiet sun is significantly colder mid latitudes as the enhanced polar high pressure cells move over them but more warm air flowing into the Arctic. One could therefore logically argue that even the 2007 melt was a result of overall global cooling during the recent period of solar inactivity. The faster flow of warmth into the Arctic Circle actually enhances the rate of energy loss to space and increases any cooling trend. The sun is too low in the Arctic even during summer for open water to absorb more energy as the AGW lobby proposes. Instead open water in the Arctic is a gaping vent for energy leaving to space. The simple cooling effect of increased evaporation under cold dry air is enough to swamp any extra solar input.
Incidentally I saw recently that even while the northern continents were in the grip of the LIA the ice cover in the Arctic Circle was not much different to what we see now. Not really surprising since most of the energy in the Arctic Ocean is provided by warm water flowing in past Spitzbergen and I see no claims that the Gulf Stream declined significantly during the LIA. All that happened was that the blocking polar highs prevented oceanic air from entering the continental interiors so regularly and provoked more longitudinal flows of air just as we have seen recently with Russia’s heat wave and the enhanced Pakistan rainfall.
All such observations appear to be confirming the general gist of my New Climate Model. Indeed it was constructed with just such observations in mind.
This one is for Julienne
http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/icrutem3_hadsst2_0-360E_70-90N_na.png
Except regular cyclical pattern, where exactly is the sign of human influence? And is it me, or Arctic temps are going downhill for future decades again?
Gothab Nuuk looks strange, but it is not far from the Greenland average:
http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/icrutem3_300-340E_55-85N_na.png
I cannot understand why anyone should get excited even if ice extent falls to new lows.
During the winter the ice extent was above average and now it is maybe a bit below average. So over the year the average is – well pretty average!
Yo Travis, dont try to bs this Or. peach grower about temperature. We will be up to two weeks late picking this year because of low temperatures during our August ripening. That is if the rains hold off long enough that we dont lose the late peaches.
Unbelievable…You’all are too smart for your own good & have more fun theorizing & trying to out duel each other than stating & commenting on real time facts…The Headline & discussion should be about the RISE in extent posted by JAXA…!! Real Time weather Data seems to escape most of you. Looking at the long Range GFS back on the 23rd & commented on by myself still looks to be panning out as Forcasted..I said that it looks like a leveling out by the end of the month & then down to a drip after the 6th but that was a wild guess & I am looking for more expert opinion on F-casted & real time Data!!..I do enjoy your comments but lets get back to the Basics sometimes…Thank you very much….