This is NSIDC’s report, and since I’m on a road trip, I’m unable to do an in-depth analysis. However, the WUWT Sea Ice page has more, and you can draw your own conclusions from the data presented there. Here’s one contributing factor, just have a look at 2 meter surface temperature, courtesy Dr. Ryan Maue:
Courtesy Ryan Maue, FSU – click to enlarge
Either global warming acts in blob fashion, or that’s what we call weather. Just remember, when NSIDC says “record low” it is for a 30 year satellite data set, not for the century, or millenium, or longer. Look for pronouncements from Dr. Mark “death spiral” Serreze and from others in the media soon. As a counterpoint to such pronouncements, I suggest reading this post from Willis on sea ice recover mechanisms that seems to be overlooked by the media.- Anthony
From NSIDC: February Arctic ice extent ties 2005 for record low; extensive snow cover persists
Arctic sea ice extent for February 2011 tied with February 2005 as the lowest recorded in the satellite record. Sea ice extent was particularly low in the Labrador Sea and Gulf of St. Lawrence. In contrast, winter snow cover remained extensive in many parts of the Northern Hemisphere.
Figure 1. Arctic sea ice extent for February 2011 was 14.36 million square kilometers (5.54 million square miles). The magenta line shows the 1979 to 2000 median extent for that month. The black cross indicates the geographic North Pole. Sea Ice Index data. About the data.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
Overview of conditions
Sea ice extent averaged over the month of February 2011 was 14.36 million square kilometers (5.54 million square miles). This was a tie with the previous record low for the month, set in 2005. February ice extent remained below normal in both the Atlantic and Pacific sectors, particularly in the Labrador Sea and the Gulf of St. Lawrence.
While ice extent has declined less in winter months than in summer, the downward winter trend is clear. The 1979 to 2000 average is 15.64 million square kilometers (6.04 million square miles). From 1979 through 2003, the February extent averaged 15.60 million square kilometers (6.02 million square miles). Every year since 2004 has had a mean February extent below 15 million square kilometers (5.79 million square miles).
Figure 2. The graph above shows daily Arctic sea ice extent as of February 28, 2011, along with daily ice extents for previous low-ice-extent years in the month of February. Light blue indicates 2011, green shows 2007, purple shows 2005 (the record low for the month was in 2005), and dark gray shows the 1979 to 2000 average. The gray area around the average line shows the two standard deviation range of the data. Sea Ice Index data.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
Conditions in context
While ice extent grew at average rates for February, the overall extent remained anomalously low. Air temperatures over most of the Arctic Ocean were between 2 and 4 degrees Celsius (4 and 7 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than normal. Over the East Greenland Sea and north towards the Pole, air temperatures were 5 to 7 degrees Celsius (9 to 13 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than normal. Colder conditions, 2 to 6 degrees Celsius (4 to 11 degrees Fahrenheit) below average persisted over western Eurasia, east-central Eurasia and some of the Canadian Arctic.
As air temperatures dropped in the eastern Canadian Arctic in February, parts of the Labrador Sea started to freeze over. However, the Gulf of St. Lawrence remained mostly free of ice. As during winter 2010, when Environment Canada reported that sea ice in the Gulf of St. Lawrence was at the lowest level on record, the lack of ice will make it difficult for harp seals to give birth to their pups on the sea ice, as they normally do in February and March.
Figure 3. Monthly February ice extent for 1979 to 2011 shows a decline of 3.0% per decade.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
February 2011 compared to past yearsFebruary 2011 tied February 2005 for the lowest ice extent for the month in the satellite record. Including 2011, the February trend is now at -3.0 percent per decade.
Through most of January, the Arctic Oscillation (AO) was generally in a strongly negative phase, similar to the pattern that dominated the winter of 2009 to 2010. This led to very warm temperatures over the eastern Arctic, helping to account for the low ice extents over the Labrador Sea and Gulf of Saint Lawrence. However, toward the end of January, the AO returned to a positive phase, and ice began to grow in the Labrador Sea and Gulf of St. Lawrence. For more information on current AO conditions, visit the NOAA Climate Prediction Center Web page.
Figure 4. Ice motion charts for December 2009 and December 2010 show mean sea ice drift, with the size and direction of the arrows indicating average speed and direction of ice motion. December 2010 saw stronger anticyclonic (clockwise) motion that transported ice towards the southern Beaufort and Chukchi seas.
—Credit: NSIDC courtesy James Maslanik and Chuck Fowler, CU Boulder
Ice motion
Typically during a negative AO phase, weather patterns favor the retention of thick ice in the central Arctic and Canada basin, where it can better survive the summer. The negative AO also typically leads to a stronger Beaufort Gyre, which helps move ice from the western to eastern Arctic. There the ice thickens, ridging and rafting against the Siberian coast.
Last winter, the AO was in its most negative phase since at least 1951. However, slight differences from the typical AO pattern in the location of the sea level pressure anomalies had a significant impact on how the ice moved within and out of the Arctic Basin. During winter 2009 to 2010 the peak pressure anomalies were shifted towards the Barents and Kara seas, which helped transport ice from the Canadian Arctic towards the southern Beaufort and Chukchi seas. Since some of the oldest and thickest ice in the Arctic is found north of the Canadian Archipelago, this atmospheric pattern ended up further depleting the Arctic of its store of old, thick ice as that old ice melted during summer in these southerly locations.
This winter also saw a relatively strong negative AO index during December and January. However, as we discussed in our January 5, 2011 post, the positive sea level pressure anomalies were centered near Iceland. This led to a more extensive anticyclonic (clockwise) transport pattern than last winter. This may help keep a more extensive distribution of multiyear ice cover as summer approaches.
Figure 5. The maps of January and February 2011 snow cover data show the extent of snow cover over the Northern Hemisphere (top), and the percent difference from average snow cover extent from 1966 to 2010 (bottom). Strong positive departures can be seen over the midwestern U.S., western China, and Mongolia.
—Credit: NSIDC courtesy Dave Robinson and Thomas Estilow, Rutgers UniversityHigh-resolution image
January and February Northern Hemisphere snow cover
Sea ice extent is only one of a number of data sets scientists use to understand how climate is changing. Rutgers University and NOAA have compiled a 45-year record of Northern Hemisphere snow cover extent from NOAA snow charts. These data show that much of northern North America, Scandinavia and northern Eurasia are snow covered between 90 and 100 percent of the time in January and February. High elevation plains and mountains at lower latitudes, such as the southern Rocky Mountains in the U.S. and Hindu Kush in Asia, also have extensive snow cover.
Over this record, in January, Northern Hemisphere snow cover averages 47 million square kilometers (18.1 million square miles), and in February it averages 46 million square kilometers (17.8 square miles)—approximately 45 to 46 percent of the land area in the region. While sea ice extent was below average for January 2011, this month had the sixth-largest snow cover extent since the record started in 1966, at 49 million square kilometers (18.9 million square miles). Snow was unusually widespread over the mid-western and eastern United States, eastern Europe, and western China. Snow cover in February remained above average at 47.4 million square kilometers (18.3 million square miles), with more snow than usual in the western and central U.S., eastern Europe, Tibet and northeastern China.
Reduced sea ice extent and extensive snow cover are not contradictory, and are both linked to a strong negative phase of the Arctic Oscillation (see our January 5, 2011 post). A strongly negative AO favors outbreaks of cold Arctic air over northern Europe and the U.S., as many people experienced first-hand these last two winters. Whether this is a trend, or in any way linked to ongoing climate warming in the Arctic, remains to be seen.
Further reading
Stroeve, J.C., J. Maslanik, M.C. Serreze, I. Rigor and W. Meier. 2010. Sea ice response to an extreme negative phase of the Arctic Oscillation during winter 2009/2010. Geophysical Research Letters, doi: 2010GL045662.
For previous analyses, please see the drop-down menu under Archives in the right navigation at the top of this page.
Which means that nothing has changed in the past 30 years…
…and normal starts when they were predicting the coming of the next ice age
Spell check troll!!! “Look”….there isn’t anything to “loot”up there.
why should anyone trust wuwt over actual experts at the nsidc. you guys have staked your flag on arctic sea ice “recovering” based on dubious wishful thinking. history will record you as being wrong.
Notice the wording:
“Typically during a negative AO phase, weather patterns favor the retention of thick ice in the central Arctic and Canada basin, where it can better survive the summer.”
Rather than “….tends to be more retention of thick ice in negative AO phase, ……thick ice then lasts through summer..”… Or something to that effect.
The subliminal suggestion here is the attribution of human emotion and a need to survive, yes, those beautiful and innocent thick ices, borne of virgin snow, gently, Mother Nature in her most precious and loving moments……B.S. We’re talking about the weather.
This drives me nuts. There’s always the inclusion of some subliminal or even not-so-subtle pulling of heartstrings with these papers, and it detracts from the purity of the science.
I expect this from DISNEY, not NSIDC.
Then, we go on to say that Rutgers and NOAA have compiled a 45yr record of snow cover? 45 years?? That’s a blip in the timeline, hardly worth more than noting its value as a data set for future scrutiny in, say, 90 years.
compair the deapth of rescent usgs
This is a key: ” This may help keep a more extensive distribution of multiyear ice cover as summer approaches…”
During solar minimums this is what probably happened. Colder temperatures for NA and Europe while not so cold in the Artic.
Why aren’t moving averages used, like for every other event, like stocks, oil, gold, etc.? Why isn’t there a 40 year, 30 year and 10 year moving average used in the reckoning, for example?
Unless ice melts, it is of no use to man nor critter. One cannot eat it, nor grow on it, nor permanently live on it. It is anti-life. But when it melts, it becomes another story.
“Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering ice sheet; to the last I grapple with thee; from hell’s heart I stab at thee; for hate’s sake I spit my last breath at thee.”
Captain Ahab GK
“Sea ice extent was particularly low in the Labrador Sea and Gulf of St. Lawrence. ”
When did the Gulf of St Lawrence become part of the Arctic?
It will no doubt be a very big surprise to residents of Quebec’ North Shore, New Brunswick & PEI that they are now part of Nunavut.
No decrease in Arctic sea ice extent since 2005 could also be the headline.
Meanwhile, here is an EPA administrator in charge of regulating CO2 emissions admitting to congress that she has no idea what the level of CO2 in the atmosphere is.
http://thetruthpeddler.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/epas-air-chief-admits-ignorance-about-carbon-dioxide-level/
Good news!! Less ice around Nfld, means less seal pups, meaning Cod stocks will increase!!! Win – Win for Nfld, lesss seals more Cod!
Lets see what this year’s minimum looks like. If you look at the data, you will see little to no correlation between a year’s minimum and its maximum.
What’s not to like about eliminating ice from the Arctic ocean? Better shipping, more biological activity, etc. Unfortunately, it seems the negative feedbacks result in a recovery a couple of years later. Oh, well.
Golly gee ! Can that be real, if you uncover the warmer sea water, so it can evaporate some more, you actually get snow on the surrounding land; and also on the remaining sea ice.
And as we all know, there is more land in the Arctic, than there is water, so covering the land with snow, is better for the albedo, than the sea ice is; it’s further south too, so reflects far more sunshine.
Seems impossible to me.
cthulhu says on March 3, 2011 at 8:24 am
Just like it records Holdren and his ilk as being wrong about the imminent ice age back in the ’70s, eh …
[note to all mods. content empty attacks on another commentor are 100% off limits ~ ctm]
03.03.2011
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/pips2/archive/retrievepic.html?filetype=Thickness&year=2011&month=3&day=3
03.03.2008
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/pips2/archive/retrievepic.html?filetype=Thickness&year=2008&month=3&day=3
What about the ice volume?
Calling on all the precipitations experts.
Ok, England does not get much snow or ice but it gets lots of rain. County of Oxfordshire, which is roughly in the mid-England, has detailed monthly rainfall records going back to 1853. If the rainfall is compared to the SSN no obvious correlation is perceptible, however there is an unusual 40+ year pattern. Most interesting bit about it that the periods 1920 -1960 and 1960-2000 match very closely (Rsq = 0.73). There is no correlation with the CETs or the AMO. Very odd ?!
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/ORR.htm (see graphs 2 & 3)
Any ideas ?
Worth looking into other globe’s regions, where the 1920- 2000 period rain records available, if the above pattern is repeated.
How about ice thickness? that is the area that will tell the tale this summer….
vukcevic says:
March 3, 2011 at 11:00 am
Vuk
Can you also overlay the CET (http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/) to give us a look at how these correlate (if at all). Oxford is just south of CET and it would be an interesting comparison.
Here is a history lesson:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2010.08.016
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AGUFMPP11A0203F
http://geology.geoscienceworld.org/cgi/content/abstract/21/3/227
What happened to the positive feedback loop amplification?
You’ll need tea and biscuits for this one.
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/historic-variation-in-arctic-ice-tony-b/
The color scheme is a bit confusing on the temp map. Can we not have white = zero anom; yellows to red, postive anom ascending; light blues to violets, negative anom, descending.
Thanks.
Note no mention of ice volume. Which anyone can see is more substantial than 2007. These people make me puke.
It was about this time last year that skeptics noted a late-season “bump up” in Arctic Sea Ice extent, and were certain that it was further proof that the Arctic was recovering. Skeptics noted at the time (and correctly so) that 2008 and 2009 has shown some recovery after the record summer low of 2007. Thus, when the March-April 2010 “bump up” in Arctic sea ice occurred, we saw the likes of Rush Limbaugh crowing about how it “proved” the greenies were wrong, and that the Arctic sea ice was recovering. Some skeptics were even predicting that the summer low extent would recover all the way back to 6.0 million sq. km. Of course, those of us with a bit more understanding of the dynamics involved knew that the short-term bump up in the spring of 2010 was in no way indicative of any long-term change to the general decline of the Arctic Sea ice. A few months of growth hardly can make up for mult-year declines, and the spring 2010 “bump up” was largely very thin ice that in fact melted very quickly when the real melt season kicked in and we saw some very steep rates of decline in late spring and early summer, leading to another very low summer minimum. So what of this spring and the forecast for this summer’s extent?
I’ll come out of the gate early as say that it looks like indications are that we’re headed for a summer low that will be very close to what we saw in 2007. Certainly, I completely reject the analysis given by Joe Bastardi that we’ll start to see some recovery to the Arctic Sea ice. Joe seems to base his idea of recovery on changes in the AMO and PDO, as these shift back their so-called cold cycle, and perhaps also the relatively quiet sun we’re having. I would not disagree that there could be some effects on Arctic Sea ice extent from these things, but what Joe et. al. seem to neglect are much more significant factors that are continuing to keep the year-to-year Arctic Sea heading ice in a downward direction. This winter, for example, especially early winter, we saw record warmth over Greenland while that cold air was pushed over Europe and other points south. These same areas saw very low sea ice. We saw a frequent Dipole Anomaly this winter, leading to the meridonal flow of air across the Arctic. This flow allowed the normally trapped cold air over the Arctic to be pushed south. Some have likened this to be “the freezer door being left open”, which is roughly accurate in terms of the effect. The net effect of this is that the Arctic has generally been above average in temps over the past several years. If we’d seen the Arctic colder than normal and the entire N. Hemipshere colder than normal than I might be pursuaded a bit more by Joe Bastardi et. al., but this hasn’t been the case.
But beyond the effects of this winter is the longer term higher temps that have been seen across the arctic for many years, and not just air temps, but the more important warmer temperuatures of deep ocean water moving into the Arctic. This large amount of energy is not reflected in the changes in surface temps as revealed things like the PDO or AMO. Recent studies have revealed a large warming of the deeper water moving into the Arctic:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110127141659.htm
But this deeper water warming is not just the Arctic, but in the Antarctic as well:
http://climatesignals.org/2010/10/deep-ocean-waters-warming/
Now of course, some skeptics will want to discount these kinds of studies, but the continued decline in Arctic sea ice, as well as melting of permafrost, etc. indicate continued warmth in the Arctic. This years continued low summer Arctic sea ice extent (despite whatever the PDO or AMO or solar cycle are doing) will be strong indication that the 40% rise in CO2 since the industrial revolution is playing a bigger role in the climate than these other natural variations.