UPDATE: Regular Sea Ice News now posted here:
Sea Ice News #25 – NSIDC says 2010 3rd lowest for Arctic sea ice
=======================================
Normally I have a Sea Ice News feature on Sundays.
I’m holding it a day, because I’m waiting for NSIDC to make an announcement, and I want to include it. Arctic Sea Ice is making a quick turnaround, the DMI 30% graph shows we are now at 2005 levels for 30% extent.
While waiting for NSIDC in the meantime, have a look at this interesting animation showing the quick turnaround in ice extent in September…
Steve Goddard writes:
Blink comparator showing ice growth over the past week. More than 5,000 Manhattans of new ice have formed – one new Manhattan of ice every two minutes.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/CT/animate.arctic.color.0.html
Also while waiting, don’t forget to check status at the WUWT Sea Ice Page.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well, the next line of warmista’s news will be Borge Ousland’s navigation of both NE and NW Arctic in one summer season. They are currently rounding the Southern tip of Greenland, heading for Oslo. It is quite a feat however, so hats off to them.
I reminded them on their blog to mention the open water at the North Pole …..in 1959.
Paul Richards says:
October 4, 2010 at 6:46 am
Well, the next line of warmista’s news will be Borge Ousland’s navigation of both NE and NW Arctic in one summer season. They are currently rounding the Southern tip of Greenland, heading for Oslo. It is quite a feat however, so hats off to them.
The Russian boat ‘Peter I’ is in a similar location having also cleared both passages this season.
This is probably an indication that the sea ice was just below the 15% value in many areas. At 14.9% it becomes zero in the data. However, as soon as a little cold temperatures cause some freezing, it jumps right back over 15% and looks like a big freeze.
@Geoff Sherrington
‘Strangely, the decimal currency values since 1966 have not taken on names like “dime ” or “quarter” in the USA or “quid” for the old pound sterling. Strange, because there are 6 coin values and 5 paper values, but not one has a colloquial name.’
I think much the same has happened to British decimal coinage. Quid, fiver and tenner were nicknames already and of hoary antiquity. They just carried on as before but I’m not aware of any nicknames for the actual decimal currency coins. They have little character and even the 1p coin is not called a penny much anymore – most people seem to simply call it a one pence or one pee (which tends to show they don’t even remember or know the actual meaning of ‘pence’ as a plural). A quaint little article halfway down this page on the issue:
http://www.darlingtonandstocktontimes.co.uk/columnists/countrymansdiary/8215583.Saint_helping_the_harvest_home/
As regards the years before the Nobel prize for IVF award – it was probably as well to wait until the kids had grown-up healthy in mind and body, just in case. E.g. they might want to check for any accidentaly induced gene-based, inheritable resistance to warmist concepts.
Useful calculator here …
http://www.simonkelk.co.uk/sizeofwales.html
Click the area button at the top for Wales/Texas/A N Other state calcs
Alan the Brit says: “As a Devonian I must protest at this predjudice. Why not measure things in “the size of Devon”
Don’t you know that Wales is an unofficial unit of measure while Devon gets an official Paleozoic Period assigned to it? The Devonian was nearly 57 million years. That’s almost as long as the entire Cenozoic! That’s a big number. No prejudice here, so let’s not get greedy about how our home turf is used as scientific yardsticks.
Arctic Sea Ice is making a quick turnaround,
Is this unprecedented? I hear that word so much that I was just wondering… really…
Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
October 4, 2010 at 5:55 am
Mike Jowsey says:
October 4, 2010 at 2:16 am
It is still only marginally above 2007 and 2008.
What is the 30-yr trend?
It depends on which 30 years you use. If you use 1947 to 1977 there was a growing trend. If you use 1977 to 2007 the was a decreasing trend. Arctic ice always goes through increasing and decreasing trends. It’s normal. If it didn’t change that is what would be unusual.
_____________________________________________________________
Source of your data trendlines?
Links?
Papers?
Blogs?
Anything will do.
My source;
Meier, Stroeve, Fetterer (2007), “Whither Arctic sea ice? A clear signal of decline regionally, seasonally and extending beyond the satellite record”, Annals of Glaciology, Volume 46, 2007, pp. 428-434.
See Figure 3, p. 432. Data 1953-2006 inclusive for sea ice extent.
“Mike Jowsey says:
October 4, 2010 at 2:16 am
It is still only marginally above 2007 and 2008.”
At the moment the extent is about 4.65 million sq km, in 2007 it was 3.53 mi sq km at the same time according to the above graph.
So: There is more than a million square kilometer more ice now than in 2007, that is about 31% more, or about 1.5 times the size of Texas.
Do not mess with Texas, Mike Jowsey. It is not “marginal”, not at all.
Alan the Brit says:
October 4, 2010 at 2:22 am
“As a Devonian I must protest at this predjudice. ”
#
But you’ve got a whole geologic period named after you, and an important one at that.
Poor Dr. Stroeve, she describes her current area of research as:
* Diagnosing the declining arctic sea ice cover
Given the direction of ice extent of the last few years, she is out of business.
Now a real scientiest, one who doesn’t entr intot he fray with preconceived ideas, one who keep an open mind, would list her research as:
Current Research [top]
* Diagnosing the arctic sea ice cover
But all the Warmistas telegraph their final conclusions by listing their biases up front.
http://nsidc.org/research/bios/stroeve.html#research
And globally the sea ice is a million and a half square kilometers in the red.
With antarctic sea ice statistically a tie with the long term mean.
“RichieP says:
October 4, 2010 at 7:23 am
They have little character and even the 1p coin is not called a penny much anymore – most people seem to simply call it a one pence or one pee (which tends to show they don’t even remember or know the actual meaning of ‘pence’ as a plural).”
At the time of the change they wanted to distinguish the old “penny” ( 1d= 1£/240) from the new one (which was not worth the same: 1p=1£/100), hence the latter was just called the “p”.
Bernie says: October 4, 2010 at 5:02 am “How about “cubits”? Wale’s Arizonas, Belgiums, etc. etc.”
These off-topic discussions have a very “end of term” feeling about them … it’s as if some people know we have already won but it’s not been officially announced – have I missed something?
What is it?
– the inevitable declaration of “a decade of cooling”.
– the expectation another cold winter?
– the domino effect after the Royal Society U turn?
– Another year past without the predicted disappearance of ice?
– growing evidence for non-CO2 causal contributors to global temperature?
– The realisation that the “scientists” have given up on bad temperature stations – they simply don’t have an answer (except saying nothing) for all those rubbish temperature station measurements?
Or what?
Richard Holle says: Oct 4, 2010, 455
Correct. That’s why Brits need to be investing in air conditioning. When the North Atlantic freezes down to the latitude of Liverpool this winter all that heat loss will waft over the Isles and render them positively tropical. Or not.
Hopefully the ice won’t grow by a Nunavut or an Ontario… That would be problematic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada
Even an NWT or a Yukon would be a problem — let alone a Quebec.
But rest assured that if it comes to pass we will do our best to direct the ice sheet south to Texas — so you can enjoy a cool beer while we freeze. …and on it’s way south the ice sheet is gonna push all them Northern Liberals south — so be prepared. 🙂
The engineering plans for “ice directors” are in the works — trust me!
Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
October 4, 2010 at 5:55 am
If you use 1947 to 1977 there was a growing trend. If you use 1977 to 2007 the was a decreasing trend. Arctic ice always goes through increasing and decreasing trends. It’s normal. If it didn’t change that is what would be unusual.
Wher did you get these figures from?
Geoff Sherrington says:
October 4, 2010 at 5:35 am
Too funny!
We also have the reference of something being “two axe handles and a pack of Mail Pouch wide”.
I created an animation for the folks at http://forums.accuweather.com/index.php?showtopic=23031.
Seems to fit here – hope you all agree.
http://forums.accuweather.com/uploads/post-22592-1285993139.gif
September (month end averages) NSIDC (sea ice extent)
30 yrs ago
1981 Southern Hemisphere = 18.9 million sq km
1981 Northern Hemisphere = 7.3 million sq km
Total = 26.2 million sq km
Record Arctic minimum extent year (Sept 2007- 4.28 Mkm2).
2007 Southern Hemisphere = 19.2 million sq km
2007 Northern Hemisphere = 4.3 million sq km
Total = 23.5 million sq km
Last yr.
2009 Southern Hemisphere = 19.1 million sq km
2009 Northern Hemisphere = 5.4 million sq km
Total = 24.5 million sq km
This yr.
2010 Southern Hemisphere = 19.2 million sq km
2010 Northern Hemisphere = 4.9 million sq km
Total = 24.1 million sq km
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu//DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/Sep/S_201009_extn.png
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu//DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/Sep/N_201009_extn.png
1979-2000 Southern Hemisphere September mean = 18.7 million sq km
1979-2000 Northern Hemisphere September mean = 7.0 million sq km
Total Sept mean = 25.7 million sq km
All plates may be examined here:
http://nsidc.org/cgi-bin/bist/bist.pl?annot=1&legend=1&scale=75&tab_cols=2&tab_rows=4&config=seaice_index&submit=Refresh&mo0=09&hemis0=N&img0=extn&mo1=09&hemis1=S&img1=extn&year0=1981&year1=2007&year2=2009&year3=2010
GK
Am I the only one that suspects that the folks at NSIDC give high fives and go out for beers whenever the sea ice news is bad?
Things are probably quite glum in Boulder at the moment.
Karen @ur momisugly 5:24
“Okay, I have a question: I was wondering if the Ice meets it’s land borders by the end of October, would it be wise to assume that it would start to grow thicker, since it’s the only thing it can do after it reaches the land borders.”
Ice is a good insulator. Once the surface has frozen to a sufficient depth the freezing will slow. Then wind and currents, and anything else that might help shatter the brittle ice, can break up and move the ice, exposing additional surface water which then freezes. Those same forces of breakup will move ice around and pile it up, making for the thicker ridges and ultimately the, so called, multi-year ice. At the fringes (“land borders”) there can be some pushing of the ice on to land. Mountain tarns can show the same processes and the jamming of ice against the shore, which will produce a ring of rocks around the parimenter. See this:
http://www.geography.vt.edu/worldlandscapes/readings2/preread/g331.JPG
Note to the warmists:
I’m guessing that Anthony raises short term changes like this in Arctic sea ice as a counterbalance to commments regularly made at NSIDC and other places.
If the scientists would avoid agenda driven, alarmist hyperbole in their official releases like “ice free summers in X years”, “death spiral”, “worse than we thought”, etc. etc., than a relatively rapid, early ice recovery in any single year would probably receive far less attention here.
D Caldwell,
My thoughts exactly.
Karen says:
October 4, 2010 at 5:24 am
Looks like the ice is shying away from Svalbard.
UHI? 🙂