After all of the news about a minimum record ice extent last month, this is interesting. As we know when water loses its ice cover, it allows a lot of heat to radiate into space as LWIR. many predictied that as a result of the extra open ocean surface, we see a very fast refreeze in the Arctic. It appears they were right. In fact, this is the fastest monthly scale refreeze rate in the NSIDC satellite record going back to 1979.
Here’s JAXA data plotted to show what has happened:
From the blog sunshine hours, here’s an analysis using NSIDC data:
=============================================================
Today is day 291 in the Arctic. The minimum in 2012 was on day 260 – 31 days ago.
If you calculate the percentage of ice gained (the refreeze) 31 days after minimum, then 2012 is the fastest refreeze ever!
Arctic Sea Ice Extent has increased by 43.8% since the minimum was reached.
Extents are in millions of sq km.
(And note I am using NSIDC data here and their algorithm is making the refreeze appear slow compared to NORSEX)
| Year | Minimum_Extent | Extent Day | Extent_Change | Extent_Change_Pct |
| 1979 | 6.89236 | 295 | 2.55691 | 27.1 |
| 1980 | 7.52476 | 280 | 0.95144 | 11.2 |
| 1981 | 6.88784 | 284 | 1.71672 | 20 |
| 1982 | 7.15423 | 287 | 2.41499 | 25.2 |
| 1983 | 7.19145 | 282 | 1.70096 | 19.1 |
| 1984 | 6.39916 | 291 | 2.08442 | 24.6 |
| 1985 | 6.4799 | 281 | 1.50769 | 18.9 |
| 1986 | 7.12351 | 280 | 1.8491 | 20.6 |
| 1987 | 6.89159 | 276 | 1.37713 | 16.7 |
| 1988 | 7.04905 | 286 | 1.76783 | 20.1 |
| 1989 | 6.88931 | 296 | 2.70935 | 28.2 |
| 1990 | 6.0191 | 295 | 3.46791 | 36.6 |
| 1991 | 6.26027 | 290 | 2.69726 | 30.1 |
| 1992 | 7.16324 | 282 | 1.67903 | 19 |
| 1993 | 6.15699 | 280 | 1.85199 | 23.1 |
| 1994 | 6.92645 | 279 | 1.1014 | 13.7 |
| 1995 | 5.98945 | 283 | 0.5189 | 8 |
| 1996 | 7.15283 | 285 | 1.77882 | 19.9 |
| 1997 | 6.61353 | 277 | 0.65032 | 9 |
| 1998 | 6.29922 | 291 | 2.35169 | 27.2 |
| 1999 | 5.68009 | 286 | 2.68723 | 32.1 |
| 2000 | 5.9442 | 286 | 2.32372 | 28.1 |
| 2001 | 6.56774 | 293 | 1.95252 | 22.9 |
| 2002 | 5.62456 | 287 | 2.41992 | 30.1 |
| 2003 | 5.97198 | 291 | 2.10126 | 26 |
| 2004 | 5.77608 | 294 | 2.37329 | 29.1 |
| 2005 | 5.31832 | 296 | 3.09221 | 36.8 |
| 2006 | 5.74877 | 288 | 1.72446 | 23.1 |
| 2007 | 4.1607 | 288 | 1.39556 | 25.1 |
| 2008 | 4.55469 | 293 | 3.33615 | 42.3 |
| 2009 | 5.05488 | 286 | 1.45951 | 22.4 |
| 2010 | 4.59918 | 293 | 2.88065 | 38.5 |
| 2011 | 4.30207 | 282 | 1.35023 | 23.9 |
| 2012 | 3.36855 | 291 | 2.62409 | 43.8 |
Source: sunshine hours
===========================================================
Here’s the NORSEX plot and NSIDC plot compared:
See all the data on the WUWT Sea Ice Reference Page
In other news. I’ve been in touch with Bill Chapman at UUIC/Crysophere Today to point out this bug:
It turns out to be an accidental issue, and he says:
“I was using the script to generate a plot for a publication that wanted a U.S.-centric view and it looks like I forgot to put things back to the way they were originally.
I’ll have it fixed by tomorrows update.”
Stuff happens, no worries.
I can address the fact that you have to look at the full picture when wishing for the world to not have arctic sea ice and if your climate changes for the worse and does so rather quickly, then maybe you don’t live in Greenland, upper Canada or Siberia.
There is enough positive feedback in our warming trend to make major climate changes, like turning our bread basket into a Dust Bowl. The warming will continue for years.
Phil. says:
October 19, 2012 at 9:18 am
Crispin in Yogayakarta says:
October 19, 2012 at 8:16 am
Can we please see the CO2 level in the vicinity of the freeze? Freezing ocean water expels CO2. That means the CO2 concentration in the area should rise faster than eh-vah. Yes or no?
Check out what happens at Point Barrow in Oct-Dec (below)
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/co2/barrsio.co2
CO2 low is when there’s the most open water. Cold water, which arctic water is, absorbs more co2 than warm water or I have to assume than ice and snow do. That’s why co2 rises as more and more of the arctic turns to ice, blocking cold water from absorbing co2.
Gary Lance says
There is enough positive feedback in our warming trend to make major climate changes, like turning our bread basket into a Dust Bowl. The warming will continue for years.
Henry says
that is not going to happen, unless it happens because of global cooling.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/18/sea-ice-news-volume-3-number-15-arctic-refreeze-fastest-ever/#comment-1113982
Otherwise, here on wuwt we challenge scientists to actually show their results, or, at the very least, show us the results of someone you believe in, so we can have a look at those, and challenge their conclusions, made from those results.
I have not seen anything from you, Gary?
Rob Murphy: “Who cares? The percent increase of sea ice extent at day 31 after that year’s minimum is a number without any significance”
I care. The refreeze has been fast. In terms of area 8th fastest. In terms of percent, the fastest.
Part of the reason for the post was to mock the NSIDC excuses for Antarctica.
You don’t care because your ilk kept quiet about the recovery in the Arctic Maximum in 2012 so you focus on the irrelevant minimum caused by the cyclone.
Thanks Phil. There is clear evidence in spring and fall/winter that the ice melt is absorbing the CO2 and expelling it again when it re-freezes. I am amazed that I have never read anything about this. So, obviously this feeds into my calculation that if the ice on Greenland (3.5 m cu km) and surrounding lands melts, it will absorb roughly 320 ppm CO2. Without repeating the details on this thread, that is about as much CO2 as mankind ever emitted. Based on the ice available – about 25 m cu km – the CO2 concentration is self-levelling. As CO2 causes ice to melt (they claim) then that meltwater absorbs CO2 with no effort on our part at all, and I am talking about thousands of gigatons.
Let’s see the alarmists weasel their way out of that one.
I’m disappointed Anthony. You missed the opportunity for the title to read…
worst refreeze evarrr.
Gary Lance says:
October 19, 2012 at 9:20 am
“I can address the fact that you have to look at the full picture when wishing for the world to not have arctic sea ice and if your climate changes for the worse and does so rather quickly, then maybe you don’t live in Greenland, upper Canada or Siberia.”
“There is enough positive feedback in our warming trend to make major climate changes, like turning our bread basket into a Dust Bowl. The warming will continue for years.”
Funny how our “warming trend” is so scary, worrisome, etc., yet this interglacial period has seen much warmer times in the past with a consequence that assisted our ability to flourish. Furthermore, is there evidence that during those periods of warmer temperatures that the mid-west US was a dust bowl? Keep in mind the driest desert on the planet is located in Antarctica and warmer air holds more moisture…and when to all the floods happen in the mid-west? ( http://www.srh.noaa.gov/lix/?n=ms_flood_history ) I believe if you check, there is no lack of mid-west flooding during the WARM period of the 1930’s. If anything, you will maybe see less flooding during colder periods.
Additionally, warmer or colder is not a change in climate. The northern hemisphere generally has air flow from west to east. That is the primary maker of the northern hemisphere climate, followed by where oceans in relation to continents. As pointed out previously; climate is tropical, subtropical, dry continental, marine, polar and so forth. Being warmer or colder is not climate change. The seasons exhibit temperature changes in weather which are a result of the air masses from which climate drives.
Phil. says
Check out what happens at Point Barrow in Oct-Dec (below)
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/co2/barrsio.co2
Henry says
Come on, Phil.
that data goes only until 2007.
Where is the rest?
i.e. the rest. from 2007-2012, must show cooling,
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/18/sea-ice-news-volume-3-number-15-arctic-refreeze-fastest-ever/#comment-1113982
i.e. a decrease in CO2,
which they all keep hiding…..(to try and save their jobs?)
Not likely, because:
“I care. The refreeze has been fast. In terms of area 8th fastest. In terms of percent, the fastest.”
But it doesn’t mean anything. In a week it might be the 5th, or the tenth. Next month it might be an average recovery from the minimum. What matters is the minimum is trending down, and fast. As is the volume -it’s still at record low volume and has been since May. This years minimum volume is about 80% lower than what it was 30 years ago. As the minimum extents approach zero, the “percent increase” after the minimum will approach infinity. The ice that has come back is a thin layer.
“Part of the reason for the post was to mock the NSIDC excuses for Antarctica.”
It looks more like you are mocking “skeptics” by having them fall for such a silly claim. I really thought you were pulling people’s legs with this, but I sadly see you were serious.
“You don’t care because your ilk kept quiet about the recovery in the Arctic.”
It isn’t recovering in the Arctic. I think you meant to say Antarctic. The “recovery” lasted a day or two and is insignificant.
“so you focus on the irrelevant minimum caused by the cyclone.”
The Arctic minimum is far more important than the Antarctic maximum. It was probably going to be a new record this year with or without the storm that came through anyway.
Your post shows the desperation that “skeptics” feel. I pity you.
“Being warmer or colder is not climate change.”
It sure as hell is. What a silly thing to say.
@MICro
“CO2 low is when there’s the most open water. Cold water, which arctic water is, absorbs more co2 than warm water or I have to assume than ice and snow do. That’s why co2 rises as more and more of the arctic turns to ice, blocking cold water from absorbing co2.”
I am pretty sure the ocean is in balance with the partial pressure of CO2 within a few minutes. The ice is not blocking uptake, it is expelling CO2. Let me put it this way:
CO2 low is when there’s the most melted water. Cold water, which arctic water is, warms in summer when the ice melts expelling CO2 but the absorption my melted water overwhelms it. That’s why co2 rises as more and more of the arctic turns to ice, as sea ice has zero CO2 in it. The same applies to snow and ice all over the northern hemisphere. When it melts in spring, the CO2 is re-absorbed, and very rapidly. The ocean is not an endless sink for CO2, it rapidly equilibreates at 320 ppm.
The minimum is trending down slow because of the AMO.
http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2012/09/30/amazing-graph-of-amo-vs-arctic-sea-ice-vs-antarctic-sea-ice/
The maximum did recover in 2012. For about 50 days it was 97/98% of the 1980’s average.
http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2012/08/28/arctic-ice-2012-a-little-perspective/
Have a little perspective. The cyclone skewed 2012.
http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2012/09/18/great-arctic-cyclone-2012-caused-the-record-low/
I pity you. You and your kind are like chicken little, forever proclaiming the sky is falling.
Rob Murphy says
Your post shows the desperation that “skeptics” feel. I pity you.
henry says
Your post shows how little you understand of the real physics (that will make make more ice)
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
I pity you. Better get yourself some extra warm cloths for this winter and the next 6 winters to come…..
Gary says, There is enough positive feedback in our warming trend to make major climate changes…The warming will continue for years.
Well I’m sure you’re sincere in all these comments , this is the panic mode western media and a good proportion well-meaning, “concerned” scientists have been feeding us for the last 20 years.
The good news is : you are misinformed.
Here’s what you don’t see on the evening news (or anywhere else that I’ve seen).
Rather getting obsessive about one day out if the Arctic year if we look at all 365 days of data we get a more honest look at what is happening.
Take the length of the melting season from winter max to summer minimum:
http://i45.tinypic.com/27yr1wy.png
That would indicate there was a turn around in 2005, pretty clear it isn’t positive feedbacks, tipping points and run away global warming.
Atlantic temps and cyclone energy level off at the top of the 60y cycle that has been going on as long as we can detect it.
http://i48.tinypic.com/29ni90i.png
the big slide in Arctic ice extent has stopped
http://i48.tinypic.com/dzj70k.png
Look at that in rate of change as well, a very clear change of mode in 2005 and a period of actual recovery (positive rate of change):
http://i49.tinypic.com/xudsy.png
rate of change of lower tropo air temp. there’s a clear down ward drift since 2000
http://i45.tinypic.com/j60q36.png
MiCro says:
October 19, 2012 at 8:40 am
“So the implication that open water would have a greater cooling effect that ice cover is not obvious. Can anyone provide evidence or logic for that statement?”
You are right it is not obvious and vague arguments either way are not very informative. So take a look a some data. Take a look at rate of change of Arctic sea ice in relation to AMO (North Atlantic sea temps)
http://i46.tinypic.com/r7uets.png
Warmer waters have caused a lot of ice to melt , sea temps (inverted in this plot) have turned the corner and ice has stopped the accelerating decline we saw from 1997-2007. It seems to have reached a new equilibrium with the warmer water.
It’s still a bit early to be sure about where the new mode will settle but current evidence of such an equilibrium suggests the newly exposed water has a countering effect.
I’m not saying that is firm proof but you asked if there was any evidence and logic for such a proposition and there you have some.
One thing is certain in all that is the message is getting clearer and it is not saying positive feedback , run away warming and catastrophic melting of the Arctic.
henry says
Your post shows how little you understand of the real physics (that will make make more ice)
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
Henry , your post and that plot shows how little you understand of the real physics and about curve fitting and about how and why you construct a model to fit to data.
Don’t be so derisive of others.
[snip. Read the site Policy. — mod.]
HenryP says:
October 19, 2012 at 10:39 am
Phil. says
“Check out what happens at Point Barrow in Oct-Dec (below)
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/co2/barrsio.co2”
Henry says
Come on, Phil.
that data goes only until 2007.
So what, the question was, “Can we please see the CO2 level in the vicinity of the freeze? Freezing ocean water expels CO2. That means the CO2 concentration in the area should rise faster than eh-vah. Yes or no?”
That dataset answered the question perfectly, there’s no reason to suppose that freezing water no longer expels CO2.
Where is the rest?
i.e. the rest. from 2007-2012, must show cooling,
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/18/sea-ice-news-volume-3-number-15-arctic-refreeze-fastest-ever/#comment-1113982
i.e. a decrease in CO2,
which they all keep hiding…..(to try and save their jobs?)
Must it Henry, you’re sure about that?
Hiding it in plain sight apparently!
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/flask/month/co2_brw_surface-flask_1_ccgg_month.txt
“henry says
Your post shows how little you understand of the real physics (that will make make more ice)”
I understand it just fine. Certainly I wouldn’t make the mistake of using a made up statistic like “percent recovery of the ice at day 31 since minimum” as in indicator of well, anything. It means nothing. It’s a desperate attempt to pretend that the ice isn’t melting fast, and has been for a while now. If the extent had been 1 million km^2 at minimum and it added 2 million km^2 by the 31st day, that would have been a 200% increase. That would make it clearly the biggest “recovery” on record! The ice is just “fine” so-called “skeptics” would say. If the ice had melted completely, and there was 1 million km^2 by day 31 after the minimum, the percent increase would be infinity! Can’t get more of a recovery than that!
The statistic is useless, except for fooling gullible people.
It’s a joke to ask for a scientist to point out that arctic sea ice has volume, so extent isn’t what is melted. Sea ice has an extent when 15% of an area is sea ice over a five day running average. That means 85% of that area can be liquid ocean. The amount of heat that is needed to melt ice at 0 degrees C to water at 0 degrees C is enough to warm 4 times that amount of 0 degrees C water to 20 degrees C. That means when there is no ice to melt, that heat can rapidly change temperatures and climate.
There is evidence throughout the world of obvious warming, so what feedbacks can prevent it? Adding more greenhouse gases isn’t a negative feedback to warming and it’s already calculated we have added 7% more water vapor. I pointed out 2012 had nearly 6 million square kilometers less snow cover in June and that is nearly three times the minimum sea ice area or area of Greenland. That much albedo change is significant positive feedback and permafrost loss increases methane releases. Aerosols don’t last long in the atmosphere and the trend is to remove them, which will also cause warming. Lossing ice from sources that were year round ice means that heat doesn’t have to melt ice that isn’t there to melt.
The signiture for greenhouse warming is the arctic and troposphere warming and the stratosphere cooling. The signiture of denial is to ignore the obvious and isn’t being skeptical. The signiture of climate change is to be totally indifferent to what someone believes, so thinking it isn’t happening will never save you. A drought doesn’t check a person’s ideology to determine which crop to ruin and the consequences of climate change aren’t something in the future. Putin was welcoming climate change saying it would help his northern country and that year a scientist checked the weather in Moscow and it said smoke. We don’t know where the excessive weather will strike, but we know it will strike and become the new norm.
People who deny climate change are in their last few years just like that arctic sea ice. Neither have a future.
Rob Murphy says:
October 19, 2012 at 10:52 am
“Being warmer or colder is not climate change.”
“It sure as hell is. What a silly thing to say.”
…right…the difference between day time highs and night time lows is climate change…climate is the general weather conditions usually found in a particular place, warmer or colder is only one aspect of climate. Example: Desert is dry regardless of being a warm desert or a cold desert, still the climate is desert. 🙂
Rob Murphy,
Like Gary Lance, you avoid the fact that the IPCC’s prediction was for both hemispheres to lose ice. That has not happened, thus the conjecture is falsified. But by all means, continue moving the goal posts. It is amusing to true scientific skeptics watching you turn your failed arguments into pretzels.
Crispin in Yogayakarta says:
October 19, 2012 at 11:06 am
“I am pretty sure the ocean is in balance with the partial pressure of CO2 within a few minutes. The ice is not blocking uptake, it is expelling CO2. Let me put it this way:”
The surface of the ocean may be in balance, but it’s already depleted some of the co2 near the water (reducing measured concentrations during the summer). Come winter, ice which doesn’t absorb co2, stops depleting surface air of co2.
“CO2 low is when there’s the most melted water. Cold water, which arctic water is, warms in summer when the ice melts expelling CO2 but the absorption my melted water overwhelms it. That’s why co2 rises as more and more of the arctic turns to ice, as sea ice has zero CO2 in it. The same applies to snow and ice all over the northern hemisphere. When it melts in spring, the CO2 is re-absorbed, and very rapidly. The ocean is not an endless sink for CO2, it rapidly equilibreates at 320 ppm.”
Ice can contain dissolved gases, that fact that you can freeze a can of pop sort of disproves this “sea ice has zero CO2”. But ignoring that.
The deep oceans at the temperature they are, can absorb 2,000-3,000 x the Co2 of the entire carbon cycle. Cold arctic waters laded with co2, sink transporting at least some of that co2 down to the colder deep water.
Just two simple reasons for the refreeze graph this year: (1) The sun vanishes from the Arctic lands the same each year — where the sun is gone, the freeze happens. Less ice = more refreeze. (2) There is an old-ice relic north of Wrangel Island — the last piece left from the Siberia-Alaska ice bridge which melted out in the very last melt days of September. This ice has grown back out and joined the main ice cap — and that configuration means a lot of extra ice perimeter and consequently ice growth. If the Alaska end of the ice bridge had survived, the growth would have been even faster.
“…right…the difference between day time highs and night time lows is climate change…”
That’s not what was being discussed. The change in average temps over time is climate change. Of course diurnal changes are not climate change.
“climate is the general weather conditions usually found in a particular place, warmer or colder is only one aspect of climate.”
So you agree that the average temps in an area are part of its climate after all. If those average temps change, than by definition the climate changed.
“Example: Desert is dry regardless of being a warm desert or a cold desert, still the climate is desert. :)”
The climate of a desert includes more than just its average precipitation; it includes its temperature as well. Temperature doesn’t define an area as a desert, but it certainly is a component of every desert’s climate. That’s why we call some “warm” deserts and others “cold” deserts. Antarctica doesn’t have the same climate as the Sahara even if both are “deserts”.