NOTE: Poll closes at 12PM PST, Thursday, July 5th.
First, in case you missed it over the weekend, the WUWT Sea Ice page has gone through an upgrade. A number of new graphs and data sources were added that should be helpful in this sea ice poll. Details here.
For now a look at the JAXA sea ice extent. The plot is below:
Here’s a different version, including trend lines for the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s Averages, as well as for the three years with the lowest minimums since 1979, 2007, 2011 and 2008:
Note the 2012 plot isn’t far from the 2011 and 2007 plots at this point.Bering Sea Ice Area reached a record high this year, and that extra ice may well come into play later in the melt season.
The NSIDC extent data is used as the reference for the ARCUS sea ice outlook minimum determination, so I suggest you use it to base your best guesses:
Last month reader poll figured 4.9 million square kilometers. This month I think a lower value might be more representative. My personal forecast is now 4.7 million sq kilometers. Here’s the poll, pick one value for the summer 2012 minimum extent, expected in late September:
Unfortunately, I have to go with less than 4 million. I would have voted for even less than that, but I don’t think it will be totally ice free, which was the next option.
Going by Gores extended global warming prediction, I’m going to be safe and say it’s going to be hot ice conditions, which we know will actually keep and even create icier packs, yea for the Polar Bear Club, so I say 5.0, my best Southeast prediction for 2012! LOL
I’ll go for 4.4 million sq km, I’m an AGW sheeple and that’s about bang on trend.
This positively panics me.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_concentration_hires.png
<4.0
4.2 and I’ve been wrong every guess.
Frederick Michael,
Relax. Lie down and take an aspirin. It’s summer. And all we have are records going back to the early ’70’s. There are about a trillion things that are more worrisome than Arctic ice.
The ice has just gone to the Southern Hemisphere. See? It will all be OK. Relax.
I’m am sticking with my earlier, and likely incorrect guess.
I am not going to say what it was, as I am going to eat enough crow, as it is.
The sinking line on the graph will need to make a drastic left turn to make me look wise.
I am counting on a heck of a lot of heaped-up pressure ridges disolving into flat areas of un-jumbled ice, but it is looking less and less likely such pressure ridges exist.
So, I’m likely wrong.
Not the first time, either.
See, Hansen? I didn’t die, saying that. It isn’t so hard to admit you are wrong, is it?
I’m in for 4.1, but as a prediction it’s probably worth every penny you’re paying for it.
I guessed 4.3 million. I would not be surprised if 2012 is lower than 2007 at the bottom. Nor would I be concerned. What I am worried about is food prices. A couple bad harvests due to drought and we run short of food.
If one chose the May 15 Arctic ice extent to be the official ice extent for each year, it looks like that there would be little variation over the years. . .
Re: Frederick Michael says:
July 3, 2012 at 6:02 pm
“This positively panics me.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_concentration_hires.png ”
Don’t panic. A lot of funny-business goes into determining “concentration,” and it is not something purely determined by satellite. The “human touch” is involved, and furthermore it is not always the best way to measure the actual amount of ice.
1.) Suppose a large area is dotted with 30% ice, and then a strong wind blows all that ice to a jumbled heap at one side. The map will show a large area of ice is “gone.”
2.) Suppose the ice-edge melts foreward to the jumbled heap of a pressure ridge, which then collapses and breaks apart and spreads out into an area of 30 % coverage. The map will show the retreating ice-edge has abruptly “advanced.”
3.) Suppose the surface of the ice thaws and turns to many pools of slush and melt-water. The veiw from space can only see what was ice is now water, and, even though the ice remains solid under the puddles, the map shows the area is now part ice and part open water.
4.) Check the “North Pole Camera” at the WUWT “Sea Ice Page” The camera is tilting slightly, but I think the tilt is due to a strong gale and not a slushy surface. There are not any signs of open water, yet, nor even signs of melt-water puddles, (which you usually see pretty soon.)
This is not to say I haven’t noted that the “concentration” looks like it is less, this year. However I don’t bother to “panic.” Instead, I raise an eyebrow, and watch carefully.
OK, the word “panic” was over the top. I only meant that I have no confidence that this year’s arctic sea ice minimum will exceed 2007’s — not that this is super important. Usually only the part that’s white or very light blue at the end of June survives the summer. Also, that big white chunk head out the Fram Strait right now is a serious loss.
Normally, the area around the Queen Elizabeth Islands stays almost totally white as the islands anchor it and so it doesn’t get caught up in the Beaufort Gyre and flushed out the Fram Strait. This is the area where it’s very difficult for all the sea ice to go away. But that area has really taken a hit and seems to have lost its structural integrity.
We’ll see how this plays out, but staying above 4 million sq. km. is far from assured.
The dipole anomaly may hold tough and strengthen or not. If it does, then the ice will flow strong out of the basin. ECMWF says yes, GFS says no.
###############
yup. if it holds tough and strengthens.. not pretty
M Courtney says:
“Sorry about picking oin a minor typo in the title”
chuckle !!
Thomas L says:
“A couple bad harvests due to drought and we run short of food.”
Does this harvest drop because of the drought include Bio-fuel corn or is Bio-fuel corn not counted ?
How much des bio-fuel corn affect the food supply ?
Given druthers, I’d druther the previous NAGW (Non-Anthropogenic Global Warming, utterly orthogonal to any human activity) continued, and that the Arctic had an ice-free month each summer. Times would be good!
@Frederick Michael
Yup. Even 2007 at this time looked a heckuva lot better.
Definitely < 4.0M Km2
Overall concentration looks significantly worse than 2007 even though extension is somehwat larger. I'm not an alarmist or AGW proponent, just objectively stating what I see in the carts.
Previous guess was 4.1 mil sq-km; revising downward to 3.9.
I’m saying 5.3. Random, yes, cause this isn’t really my expertise.
4.6 is the answer ….send money – need new shoes
My WAG = 4.2.
To make sure I get it right: 4.2 ±2.0.☺
5.1 is my uneducated guess.
4.13
5.3
The Arctic ice will continue to recover