Over the past few days, Arctic sea ice extent has braked dramatically in the daily loss rate and now has made a sharp right turn, which is rather unusual. Here’s the JAXA extent:
And here is a close up view, note the 2011 red line:
That turn is unique to the record since 2002. Note that in 2007, there was also a turn, though brief, and then melt accelerated.
It is also showing up in the NSIDC plot:
But what is really most interesting is the plot from DMI, which show not only a turn, but a reversal:
What does this mean? The short answer is, probably nothing. When we approach the minimum, and the ice pack becomes more fractured and scattered, it also becomes more susceptible to the vagaries of local and regional wind and weather.
WUWT regular and contributor “Just the facts” suggested in comments that:
One factor appears to be the Greenland Sea, where sea ice began to grow on July 15th and has been trending above average since then.
Source: ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02186/plots/r07_Greenland_Sea_ts.png
On the other hand, looking at the most recent comparison with 2007, the Arctic ice cover looks a bit more soupy in 2011:
Air temperature is above freezing throughout the Arctic….
…as is fairly normal for this time of year:
Clearly, at present, air temperature in the Arctic is not in any way climatologically abnormal, so the reasons for the current extent being low and making erratic turns must lie elsewhere. Wind, soot deposition/albedo, ocean currents, etc. all factor in.
So, while we may have temporarily avoided a new record minimum (as many in the “Serreze death spiral” camp said we are headed to) there’s still the possibility that the plots will turn to the left again, and resume or even accelerate. It all depends on the weather, and the outcome could go either way at this point. Historically, we have about 7 more weeks before the turn upwards as the Arctic begins the slow re-freeze.
Still, it makes for interesting observation and discussion. The WUWT sea ice page has all the latest stats, updated as soon as they are made available.
============================================================
UPDATE: Bill Illis runs his own database, and offers this interesting view in comments.
The last 21 days are the lowest melt since 1973 in my database over the same period. The total ice extent is still well-below average but there are very few periods in the record where the trend is so different than normal for an extended period of time like the current period is.
Matching up a few different datasets back to 1972.
UPDATE2: In the meantime, while extent loss slows, the NSIDC “death spiral team” tries to make a case for a record low average for July, while at the same time admitting that On July 31, 2011 Arctic sea ice extent was 6.79 million square kilometers (2.62 million square miles). This was slightly higher than the previous record low for the same day of the year, set in 2007.
Arctic sea ice at record low for July
Arctic sea ice extent averaged for July 2011 reached the lowest level for the month in the 1979 to 2011 satellite record, even though the pace of ice loss slowed substantially during the last two weeks of July. Shipping routes in the Arctic have less ice than usual for this time of year, and new data indicate that more of the Arctic’s store of its oldest ice disappeared.
Figure 1. Arctic sea ice extent for July 2011 was 7.92 million square kilometers (3.06 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 CenterHigh-resolution image
Overview of conditions
Average ice extent for July 2011 was 7.92 million square kilometers (3.06 million square miles). This is 210,000 square kilometers (81,000 square miles) below the previous record low for the month, set in July 2007, and 2.18 million square kilometers (842,000 square miles) below the average for 1979 to 2000.
On July 31, 2011 Arctic sea ice extent was 6.79 million square kilometers (2.62 million square miles). This was slightly higher than the previous record low for the same day of the year, set in 2007. Sea ice coverage remained below normal everywhere except the East Greenland Sea.
more here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I hate to toot my own horn, well really I don’t, and if I don’t who will? This is from last weekend.
Dave Wendt says:
July 30, 2011 at 3:44 pm
Brian says:
July 30, 2011 at 1:33 pm
It looks like 2011 could be headed for a record Artic melt:
http://news.yahoo.com/2011-headed-record-arctic-melt-214206330.html
The fact that CT’s Greenland Sea sub region graph is the only one of fourteen that has been showing a positive anomaly for more than a month now, suggests to me that whatever may be occurring with regard to Arctic Sea Ice is likely based once again on factors not related to AGW.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.5.html
BTW, I just scanned the graphs on the Sea Ice Reference Page and it would appear that most are showing this year’s decline curve flattening in relation to 2007, with some significantly above 2007 at this point. As the old song goes I guess we’ll “see you in September”.
Those of you who have, perhaps quite sensibly, been studiously avoiding reading my comments, be aware of the font of nearly infinite wisdom you have been denying yourself access too.
Sorta sarc I guess…maybe
Ladies and gents, I think you’re all being awfully un-scientific about this whole left-turn/right-turn thing, and the whole UK/USA thingy…
Anthony has got it right because the JAXA graph shows only the Northern Hemisphere ice and as we all know, Coriolis effect means that moving objects (ie the line) are deflected to the right in the NH. Had the graph been displaying Antarctic ice, the same graph would be described as a left-turn because of Coriolis. Simples!
ps:
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
August 3, 2011 at 2:39 pm
[“Also, with that normal body orientation, the left arm is normally used for defensive motions, the shield arm.”]
Nah, that’s just the USA citizens being defensive! In the UK, we prefer to be more offensive, hence we would have our sword (as opposed to shield) arm ready for use in case we need to scythe down unsuspecting warmists or chavs… Actually, it would more likely be a case of making rude gestures easily without having to lean across the missus!
🙂
Arfur
I would have to agree with R Gates that the area of “soupier” ice looks set for a big area decline as minimum approaches. But to what extent is any of this due to AGW? We know from various scientific papers (eg. http://climateresearchnews.com/2008/10/winds-are-dominant-cause-of-greenland-and-west-antarctic-ice-sheet-losses/ “wind-induced circulation changes in the ocean as the dominant cause“, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2007/10/03/nh-sea-ice-loss-its-the-wind-says-nasa/ “wind patterns that compressed the sea ice.. and then sped its flow out of the Arctic.. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted“) that the main factors affecting ice loss are winds and ocean currents. We know that the predicted AGW warming is now not detected in the upper parts of the ocean (top 700m??), so it isn’t combining with ocean currents to melt ice. The only reasonable conclusion, it seems to me, is that whatever the Arctic ice does this year, it isn’t due to AGW.
And I think Smokey was in fact right when he pointed to Antarctica and its failure to lose sea ice as being significant. When Bystander quoted NASA “The Antarctic is in some ways the precise opposite of the Arctic.“, there doesn’t appear to be any suggestion in the NASA item that AGW would not affect Antarctica in the same way as the Arctic over a period of years, ie. after allowing enough time to override “noise”. Sea Ice in Antarctica is also affected mainly by ocean currents and winds, and AGW would AFAIK have the same sort of effect in Antarctica as it would in the Arctic. The fact that Antarctica has performed so differently to the Arctic throughout the satellite age surely suggests strongly that AGW is not the major influence, and that something quite different is happening. It could be worth revisiting Henrik Svensmark’s explanation – http://www.space.dtu.dk/English/Research/Research_divisions/Sun_Climate.aspx – “Evidence that the Earth’s climate really responds to variations in cloud cover comes from Antarctica. When the rest of the world warms up, the southern continent tends to cool down, and vice versa (diagram 2). This contrary behaviour is predictable, because clouds have an unusual warming effect over Antarctica.“.
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
August 3, 2011 at 2:39 pm
*Right-side driving is more correct for practical and scientific reasons.*
If I might be so bold as to disagree, using your own arguments.
The most critical thing in driving is vehicle control, which is primarily through steering control. In a right hand drive vehicle most of the ancilliary controls are operated with the left hand, meaning that the right hand (the strongest and most dexterous hand) rarely or never leaves the steering wheel. Maximum control is maintained. To use the best hand for the minor actions and the weaker hand for the most critical is not sensible.
Knuts says:
August 3, 2011 at 10:52 am
The ‘rest’ does include India, Australia, Japan, Malaysia, much of southern Africa, Ireland, some of South America, and many, many others……;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-_and_left-hand_traffic#Jurisdictions_with_left-hand_traffic
When looking at this graph from Bill, the only similar u-turn (swing right) occurred with the highest minimum recorded (1980) and the least decline after during the entire data set.
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/5461/nhsie72aug211.png
Not suggesting we will have highest minimum of course (5.0-5.1), but if this repeats could have one of the least declines in Arctic ice over the next several weeks. To balance this up there seems large areas with 60 percent or less ice cover compared with 2007, so if this were to quickly disappear (who knows, not impossible, but unlikely) then dramatic melt in ice could yet still occur.
What happened during 1980 that made this trend unlike any other at least so far?
The AO dominated positive around this period after with frequent low pressures around the north pole and very cold air at times for the time of year demonstrated below.
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/archive/ra/1980/Rrea00119800825.gif
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/archive/ra/1980/Rrea00219800825.gif
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/archive/ra/1980/Rrea00119800905.gif
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/archive/ra/1980/Rrea00219800905.gif
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/archive/ra/1980/Rrea00119800915.gif
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/archive/ra/1980/Rrea00219800915.gif
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/archive/ra/1980/Rrea00119800922.gif
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/archive/ra/1980/Rrea00219800922.gif
This prevented very little further melt in the Arctic above 75N+.
Here is an alternative Arctic temperature map that may be of interest.
http://www.uni-koeln.de/math-nat-fak/geomet/meteo/winfos/synNNWWarctis.gif
I suspect we are seeing the effects of ash from the eruptions in Iceland to a certain extent. They have some interesting stuff coming out about the thickness of ash vs melt.. plus atmospheric variables that go with any eruption. But the fat lady has not sung, so who knows how short or long term the trend would be. I think it would be rather interesting if it continued to the right.. but it really wont matter, even if it completely froze over months early,, that too would be “climate change”. You just cant win, because the climate is always changing.
I have been following the sea ice discussions the past few years but have not really delved into the issue in depth. As I understand it, the satellite record seems to be the primary benchmark, but that only extends from 1979. Do we actually have any solid data of Arctic sea ice extents over say the past 200 years? Or is it merely anecdotal? Given that from what I’ve read the 70s were apparently a time of increasing ice extent in the Arctic, what evidence is that this was not an unusually positive anomaly? How is it known that the current sea ice extent is worse than the norm for the past 200 years? Apologies if this has already been covered and I’ve missed it.
If the flow of warm water into the arctic from the Atlantic has shut down, it may be a repeat of 1980-the increased ice off the east coast of Greenland toward the source of this warm water shows that the warm water is shutting down in its flow toward the arctic. The melt for this year may be about finished and it may flatline till freeze-up. As far as Cryosphere Now indicating it being soupy-the Canadian map contradicts it and shows a 90 percent concentration of sea ice where the Cryosphere Now chart shows only 60 percent concentration. Side with the Canadian being more accurate, and the slowdown in the melt seems to verify this. Also the Crosphere Now chart shows much more ice this year than 2007-we are nowhere near 2007 right now-do not believe the figures on some of these charts that show us neck and neck with 2007-there is some fudging going on.
I never really “got” this Arctic sea ice obsession thing. To me it’s a lot like watching ice melt. I have better things to d– Oh, look, “The Day After Tomorrow” is on the comedy channel!
From Richard of NZ on August 3, 2011 at 4:09 pm (referencing my previous post):
Feel free. It would be unscientific to refuse a reasoned rebuttal.
These days power steering is the standard, at least in the US, so strong/weak hand considerations are less critical. Ideally you’re supposed to have both hands on the wheel anyway. Also, as revealed by new research (for those who didn’t realize it from mere common sense), distracted driving is a major cause of accidents. So the best thing is to do quickly whatever control fiddling is needed so you can sooner return your attention to the road and get both hands back on the wheel. This is best accomplished with your most dexterous hand, which is normally a person’s right hand. So right side of the road driving remains more correct.
Additional food for thought care of the US Naval Research Laboratory (NRL). They provide “real-time nowcast/forecast results from the 1/12° Arctic Cap Nowcast/Forecast System (ACNFS). ACNFS is a coupled sea ice and ocean model that nowcasts and forecasts conditions in all sea ice covered areas in the northern hemisphere (poleward of 40° N).”
Ice Concentration:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticicennowcast.gif
Ice Concentration 30 Day Animation:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticice_nowcast_anim30d.gif
Ice Concentration 365 Day Animation:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticice_nowcast_anim365d.gif
Ice Thickness:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictnnowcast.gif
Ice Thickness 30 Day Animation:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictn_nowcast_anim30d.gif
Ice Thickness 365 Day Animation:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictn_nowcast_anim365d.gif
Ice Thickness and Drift:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictvelnowcast.gif
Ice Thickness and Drift 30 Day Animation:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictvel_nowcast_anim30d.gif
Ice Thickness and Drift 365 Day Animation:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictvel_nowcast_anim365d.gif
Ice Speed and Drift:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticicespddrfnowcast.gif
Ice Speed and Drift 30 Day Animation:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticicespddrf_nowcast_anim30d.gif
Ice Speed and Drift 365 Day Animation:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticicespddrf_nowcast_anim365d.gif
Sea Surface Temperature:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticsstnowcast.gif
Sea Surface Temperature 30 Day Animation:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticsst_nowcast_anim30d.gif
Sea Surface Temperature 365 Day Animation:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticsst_nowcast_anim365d.gif
Source Page:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/arctic.html
Background on the Arctic Cap Nowcast/Forecast System (ACNFS):
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/prologue.html
I’m still a 5.1er.
@ur momisugly Richard of NZ
I might also add that if you are driving a RHD car it is easier to use your right hand to make appropriate gestures to other drivers.
I think these temporary blips cause people to overstate their case no matter which side they are on and this is no exception. I would look for a rather rapid decline sometime soon followed by a slow upturn shortly after that and then a more rapid upturn by November. See, you all got that info for free and I bet it proves correct 🙂
As I recall Pamela called this last week. Well done, Pam!
The extent graph is subject to significant fluctuations due to ice getting packed together or scattered by the wind.The area graph is more stable and may be a better predictor of the future:
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Area.png
The upturn there, while much less dramatic, is more encouraging to me.
RACookPE1978 says:
August 3, 2011 at 11:22 am
“… if the view is from the direction of the progress of the line, then one would have to conclude that the line is curving left and Anthony’s critics are dead right!”
Of course Mr. Cook, but why be so literal? On a graph of this nature, one might see a left turn as one that would favour the leftist expectation, and a right turn … well, you get the idea.
BTW, I appreciate your dissertation on centripetal gravity. Now I understand why I often feel as though I’m hanging by my fingernails.
Just a satellite anomaly, we should have it corrected shortly. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programs.
One tries. 8<) (One is trying?)
Still, 'tis interesting to consider that the web is so sadly lacking in such basic things as to whether one drives on the right or wrong side of the road in the Falklands, and just it emphasizes just how few of the streets of the Falklands actually have two lanes upon which to drive? (Should the late war have gone the other way, would the Argentines been forced to convert their tanks? What would the Germans have done if their invasion had begun back in '40? Got lost at the first wrong-way round-a-bout?)
Little bit of ice shifts around, so what. This is just blowing smoke up my ice.
kadaka, Arfur has the right of it!
In countries with a bit of history you would pass the rider coming toward you on the left so that your sword was between you and him (very few habitually carried shields). To do otherwise is just to succumb to a consensus of convenience.
This looks like a decline in the rate of decline to me. Watch out that Tricky Mike doesn’t try to hide it.
From Phil’s Dad on August 3, 2011 at 8:31 pm:
There’s the problem right there, thinking about swords when assuming a proactive defensive stance (weapons drawn). This is the modern age. In a car or truck, in America, the right-handed would be pulling out a handgun and holding it with their right hand. It’s tough to get the hand next to the door into a proper shooting position, often involving having the arm sticking through the open window, outside the vehicle where it’s more exposed. With a right-handed driver, being seated on the left makes it easier to get off a clean shot through the open window of the driver’s door while using the better hand and while keeping all of your body inside the relative protection of the vehicle.
Also, to mention it, semi-automatic handguns normally eject the spent cases towards the right (looking from the rear of the weapon). Assuming one is holding with the hand nearer the center of the vehicle, a driver seated on the left would have the cases flying towards the windshield. If seated on the right, the hot brass would be flung towards their face.
Again, driving on the right side of the road just makes more sense.