From NCAR an "unexpected new result" – "Arctic ice… likely to expand as it is to contract"

It seems that the Serreze “death spiral” might be on hold. From UCAR/NCAR:

Arctic ice melt could pause in near future, then resume again

BOULDER—Although Arctic sea ice appears fated to melt away as the climate continues to warm, the ice may temporarily stabilize or somewhat expand at times over the next few decades, new research indicates.

The computer modeling study, by scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, reinforces previous findings by other research teams that the level of Arctic sea ice loss observed in recent decades cannot be explained by natural causes alone, and that the ice will eventually disappear during summer if climate change continues.

But in an unexpected new result, the NCAR research team found that Arctic ice under current climate conditions is as likely to expand as it is to contract for periods of up to about a decade.

“One of the results that surprised us all was the number of computer simulations that indicated a temporary halt to the loss of the ice,” says NCAR scientist Jennifer Kay, the lead author. “The computer simulations suggest that we could see a 10-year period of stable ice or even a slight increase in the extent of the ice.  Even though the observed ice loss has accelerated over the last decade, the fate of sea ice over the next decade depends not only on human activity but also on climate variability that cannot be predicted.”

Kay explains that variations in atmospheric conditions such as wind patterns could, for example, temporarily halt the sea ice loss. Still, the ultimate fate of the ice in a warming world is clear.

“When you start looking at longer-term trends, 50 or 60 years, there’s no escaping the loss of ice in the summer,” Kay says.

Kay and her colleagues also ran computer simulations to answer a fundamental question: why did Arctic sea ice melt far more rapidly in the late 20th century than projected by computer models? By analyzing multiple realizations of the 20th century from a single climate model, they attribute approximately half the observed decline to human emissions of greenhouse gases, and the other half to climate variability.

These findings point to climate change and variability working together equally to accelerate the observed sea ice loss during the late 20th century.

The study appears this week in Geophysical Research Letters. It was funded by the National Science Foundation, NCAR’s sponsor.

Rapid melt

Since accurate satellite measurements became available in 1979, the extent of summertime Arctic sea ice has shrunk by about one third. The ice returns each winter, but the extent shrank to a record low in September 2007 and is again extremely low this year, already setting a monthly record low for July.  Whereas scientists warned just a few years ago that the Arctic could lose its summertime ice cover by the end of the century, some research has indicated that Arctic summers could be largely ice-free within the next several decades.

To simulate what is happening with the ice, the NCAR team used a newly updated version of one of the world’s most powerful computer climate models. The software, known as the Community Climate System Model, was developed at NCAR in collaboration with scientists at multiple organizations and with funding by NSF and the Department of Energy.

The research team first evaluated whether the model was a credible tool for the study.  By comparing the computer results with Arctic observations, they verified that, though the model has certain biases, it can capture observed late 20th century sea ice trends and the observed thickness and seasonal variations in the extent of the ice.

Kay and her colleagues then conducted a series of future simulations that looked at how Arctic sea ice was affected both by natural conditions and by the increased level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The computer studies indicated that the year-to-year and decade-to-decade trends in the extent of sea ice are likely to fluctuate increasingly as temperatures warm and the ice thins.

“Over periods up to a decade, both positive and negative trends become more pronounced in a warming world,” says NCAR scientist Marika Holland, a co-author of the study.

The simulations also indicated that Arctic sea ice is equally likely to expand or contract over short time periods under the climate conditions of the late 20th and early 21st century.

Although the Community Climate System Model simulations provide new insights, the paper cautions that more modeling studies and longer-term observations are needed to better understand the impacts of climate change and weather variability on Arctic ice.

The authors note that it is also difficult to disentangle the variability of weather systems and sea ice patterns from the ongoing impacts of human emissions of greenhouse gases.

“The changing Arctic climate is complicating matters,” Kay says. “We can’t measure natural variability now because, when temperatures warm and the ice thins, the ice variability changes and is not entirely natural.”

About the article

Title: Interannual to multidecadal Arctic sea ice extent trends in a warming world

Authors: Jennifer Kay, Marika Holland, and Alexandra Jahn

Publication: Geophysical Research Letters

Link to the paper is here

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
145 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David Schofield
August 11, 2011 3:48 pm

“R. Gates says:
August 11, 2011 at 3:37 pm
Well, since skeptics don’t believe the models anyway, it doesn’t matter what they say the ice will do.”
So you do admire our integrity in calling this model output bollocks as well? proves we don’t latch on to ANY poor science.

Gary Hladik
August 11, 2011 3:51 pm

Forget the virtual ice cover in their virtual model, forget the virtual winds, forget the virtual ocean currents! What I want to know is what happened in their model runs to those cute cuddly desperately endangered virtual polar bears???

Andrew30
August 11, 2011 3:54 pm

“Now, one sobering forecast is that the Arctic Ocean will be seasonally ice free by the summer of 2013. This possibility is what drives environmentalists to identify ways to minimize the changes affecting this snowy land.”
David Suzuki
http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/natureofthings/2009/arcticmeltdown
P.S.
“Nevermind”
Gilda Radner (as Emily Litella on SNL)

August 11, 2011 3:54 pm

This sounds like a total CYA – no matter what happens with ice they will be right.

August 11, 2011 3:57 pm

Here’s a link for R Gates, and it’s not a model: click

August 11, 2011 4:02 pm

When you consider that eventually every airplane that flies either lands or crashes, can’t you describe every flight as a “death spiral”? I mean, if a plane starts going down, and then the pilot recovers control, he’s still going to end up on the ground at some point, so it’s technically a “death spiral”, even if he’s temporarily in a straight & level flight up until he enters the final approach. QED.

August 11, 2011 4:09 pm

Saith R. Gates August 11, 2011 at 3:37 pm in a bit of snippy tone:
Well, since skeptics don’t believe the models anyway, it doesn’t matter what they say the ice will do.

And since none of the Universe, the Galaxy, the Solar System, the Earth, or the “Artic” is (demonstrably, or provably) in any way a model, it also doesn’t matter what the models say, outside of their pernicious effect on public policy, insidious criminalization of normal behaviour, and my ever-loving taxes. So, pipe down, & keep it to yourself, Sparky, and maybe I’ll thank you one day for not nosing around in my living room, kitchen, bathroom, or bedroom*.
*I have lightbulbs in those, yes. Funny that.

LarryT
August 11, 2011 4:14 pm

I am looking at the 2007 picture. The thing i would like to know was there a persistent wind condition that could have compressed the ice. If that was true the ice extent would not at all been related to SST or air temperature

magnus
August 11, 2011 4:15 pm

“expand as it is to contract for periods of up to about a decade.”
So, even when they are wrong they are right. This now also goes for the whole arctic thing, which was the last one actually going along with the projections. Warmcold, droughtflood, snowrain, wetdry and now they bring you the all new…. freezemelt. Priceless. Really. These guys are selling sand in Sahara every day. Incredible.

observa
August 11, 2011 4:17 pm

You know how it is. Some mornings you get up and think- Don’t be so harsh on post-normal science,there might be something in it and then you click on WUWT for the latest and that settles it.
Still I might be persuaded to go in for Monckton’s comet bats suggestion if there’s a whopping big grant in it somewhere, unless there’s anything sexier than that going around?

Jack Simmons
August 11, 2011 4:34 pm

Sometimes it melts, and sometimes it freezes.
Next item on the agenda…

Theo Goodwin
August 11, 2011 4:36 pm

Lee from WA quotes and says:
August 11, 2011 at 12:56 pm
Even though the observed ice loss has accelerated over the last decade, the fate of sea ice over the next decade depends not only on human activity but also on climate variability that cannot be predicted.
“Isn’t that what a lot of us have been saying all along?”
Yes, for years, in the greatest detail and with the clearest explications. I would describe this as a “hopeful surrender.” They are surrendering but hoping we will permit them to hold onto some negotiable amount of anthropogenic influence.

Berényi Péter
August 11, 2011 4:45 pm

I would like to see a study describing conceivable future observations in detail which would be inconsistent with current cAGW theory. Preferably not on century scale, of course, but one that could be accomplished in several short years at most. That would be something.
But this? They are effectively saying that just about anything is consistent with model projections. Now, it is a well established fact of logic, that if a proposition is consistent with each element of a set of propositions containing mutually inconsistent ones, then its negation also has this property. That is, if models behaving this way say we are in trouble, they should also say we are not in trouble (at the same time).

b24clark
August 11, 2011 5:11 pm

For the last 20 to 30 years, AGW models have shown that there will be a dangerous, ever increasing average world temperature. This culminates in a year 2100 catastrophe… requiring an increase in taxes & payments to the UN now, today.
Now, because the world isn’t warming, AGW scientists have discovered new modeling techniques that predict that there’s a second order effect, say an influence of some sort of second derivative, that will cause a local minimum in warming. Ahhh… SCIENCE MARCHES ON!
If they couldn’t model an ever increasing rise in world temperature, what makes them think they can now convince us that they can model two reversals of temperature change on the way to 2100.
THEY MUST KNOW OR THINK SOME OF US ARE NUTS! LOL!

rbateman
August 11, 2011 5:16 pm

Moving the goalpost is one thing:
Rotating the field 180 degrees because things are not occuring in the direction predicted is quite another.
Now that they have a new model sword to hold over everyone’s heads, they think they can keep it there for the next 20 years. They admit they still have biases in the model, which means that the latest incarnation is only a bandaid remedy.

James of the West
August 11, 2011 5:24 pm

If the expansion period ends with arctic ice at a simlar or greater extent to what was observed in 1979 then surely the AGW theory of ice melt will be debunked. Until then nobody can really say that AGW has no role to play, the reality is that we just dont know for sure how small the anthropogenic role is – yet.

observa
August 11, 2011 5:31 pm

The appropriate term is ‘Pythonesque!’
Consumer: Look, this here Anthropogenic Global Warming thingy you sold me last week is dead.
Supplier: No it’s not it’s merely sleeping.
Consumer: Sleeping!!!……

Some European
August 11, 2011 5:46 pm

Nice to see you embrace the results of a computer model simulation, Anthony!

Editor
August 11, 2011 5:50 pm

R. Gates says: August 11, 2011 at 3:37 pm
As it is, we’ve got no sign of expansion
I don’t know about that. For some reason, Greenland Sea Ice has been trending above average this season;
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02186/plots/r07_Greenland_Sea_ts.png
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.5.html
and it appears that the most significant driver of Arctic Sea Ice Volume is the amount of multi-year sea ice that is transported through the Fram Strait to the Greenland Sea each summer, i.e.
“The most important thing about this paper is that it foretells this summer’s record minimum ice extent in the Arctic,” Rigor, a research scientist and co-author on the paper, says. “While the total area of ice cover in recent winters has remained about the same, during the past two years an increased amount of older, thicker perennial sea ice was swept by winds out of the Arctic Ocean into the Greenland Sea. What grew in its place in the winters between 2005 and 2007 was a thin veneer of first-year sea ice, which simply has less mass to survive the summer melt.”
“perennial sea ice covering the Arctic Ocean decreased by 23 percent during the past two winters as strong winds swept more Arctic ice than usual out Fram Strait near Greenland. The study relied on 50 years of data from the International Arctic Buoy Program, currently directed by Ignatius Rigor of the UW’s Applied Physics Laboratory, and eight years of data from NASA’s QuikScat satellite, a review of which was led by Son Nghiem of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory.”
http://www.washington.edu/news/archive/id/37009
In the last week ice transport has picked up, so we will have to see how things unfold, but if there is a regime change in Arctic wind patterns and multi-year sea ice transport through the Fram Strait decreases, then an expansion in Arctic sea ice would be a natural corollary.
Neven has been maintaining an animation of this season’s sea ice transport through the Fram Strait:
http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2011/07/2011-fram-strait-animation.html
I find it amusing how excited Neven seems about increased sea ice transport, e.g.:
“Update August 8th: Added images from the previous three days. Some serious ice transport going on there. If this keeps up…
Update August 11th: Added images from the previous two days, and removed images from July. Transport is steaming full speed ahead.”
These animations of Arctic Sea Ice Concentration animation;
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticice_nowcast_anim30d.gif
and Arctic Sea Ice Thickness;
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticict_nowcast_anim30d.gif
show the same phenomenon with less cheerleading…

Bill Illis
August 11, 2011 5:57 pm

The models are reasonably accurate in predictions (and +/- 60% is reasonable in this science).
CO2 is at its highest level in 25 million years and the ice has never been lower (if we don’t count all the times when it was lower which is also reasonable in this science).

Latitude
August 11, 2011 6:22 pm

Smokey says:
August 11, 2011 at 3:57 pm
Here’s a link for R Gates, and it’s not a model: click
===================================================
It amazes me that anyone can look at that……..and not see the obvious

David Falkner
August 11, 2011 6:58 pm

Seems like they are admitting they don’t know what is going on. Just as likely to do one or the other means we could do coin flips with the same accuracy. The dollars that could be saved in this arena are now mathematically quantifiable. Let X give the dollars spent on models. Assuming we used a half-dollar, the equation would look like this:
X-(X-.5)=.5
Solve for X.

u.k.(us)
August 11, 2011 7:09 pm

R. Gates says:
August 11, 2011 at 3:37 pm
Well, since skeptics don’t believe the models anyway, it doesn’t matter what they say the ice will do.
As it is, we’ve got no sign of expansion and the arctic will be ice free in the summer sometime this century, probably eariler than later. No models needed to see that…
=============
Please enumerate the consequences of this unfolding tragedy, so that we may inform the unwashed masses, lest they miss the chance to forestall their doom, whilst saving their grandchildren, otherwise the gold will be well defended.

Brian H
August 11, 2011 7:18 pm

Smokey says:
August 11, 2011 at 3:57 pm
Here’s a link for R Gates, and it’s not a model: click

Smokey, the graph title at the top says temps from May 2008 to June 2011. but the actual graph contains none of those data, just temps up to early 2008. I think you got your “includes” and “excludes” mixed up.

bubbagyro
August 11, 2011 7:27 pm

Mark my words, the warm-earthers will switch their focus to the Antarctic as the Arctic ice builds, which seems odds-on for the next two decades. They will still cry “catastrophic ice loss” again, just switching poles. Next decade the well-known “see-saw” phenomenon that oscillates between the poles will see the Arctic ice grow and the Antarctic wane. This will happen, as it has done forever during average sun cycles. Unless we get a Maunder type minimum, as some scientists are forecasting, when both ice packs will grow.