
UPDATE: Perhaps in response to criticism here, MIT has changed the press release wording. See below.
From MIT, now if they could work the wind patterns in, as NASA suggests, we might have a clearer picture of why the Arctic summer sea ice extent has changed.
Ocean currents play a role in predicting extent of Arctic sea ice
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — Each winter, wide swaths of the Arctic Ocean freeze to form sheets of sea ice that spread over millions of square miles. This ice acts as a massive sun visor for the Earth, reflecting solar radiation and shielding the planet from excessive warming.
The Arctic ice cover reaches its peak each year in mid-March, before shrinking with warmer spring temperatures. But over the last three decades, this winter ice cap has shrunk: Its annual maximum reached record lows, according to satellite observations, in 2007 and again in 2011.
Understanding the processes that drive sea-ice formation and advancement can help scientists predict the future extent of Arctic ice coverage — an essential factor in detecting climate fluctuations and change. But existing models vary in their predictions for how sea ice will evolve.
Now researchers at MIT have developed a new method for optimally combining models and observations to accurately simulate the seasonal extent of Arctic sea ice and the ocean circulation beneath. The team applied its synthesis method to produce a simulation of the Labrador Sea, off the southern coast of Greenland, that matched actual satellite and ship-based observations in the area.
Through their model, the researchers identified an interaction between sea ice and ocean currents that is important for determining what’s called “sea ice extent” — where, in winter, winds and ocean currents push newly formed ice into warmer waters, growing the ice sheet. Furthermore, springtime ice melt may form a “bath” of fresh seawater more conducive for ice to survive the following winter.
Accounting for this feedback phenomenon is an important piece in the puzzle to precisely predict sea-ice extent, says Patrick Heimbach, a principal research scientist in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences.
“Until a few years ago, people thought we might have a seasonal ice-free Arctic by 2050,” Heimbach says. “But recent observations of sustained ice loss make scientists wonder whether this ice-free Arctic might occur much sooner than any models predict … and people want to understand what physical processes are implicated in sea-ice growth and decline.”
Heimbach and former MIT graduate student Ian Fenty, now a postdoc at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, have published the results from their study in the Journal of Physical Oceanography.
An icy forecast
As Arctic temperatures drop each winter, seawater turns to ice — starting as thin, snowflake-like crystals on the ocean surface that gradually accumulate to form larger, pancake-shaped sheets. These ice sheets eventually collide and fuse to create massive ice floes that can span hundreds of miles.
When seawater freezes, it leaches salt, which mixes with deeper waters to create a dense, briny ocean layer. The overlying ice is fresh and light in comparison, with very little salt in its composition. As ice melts in the spring, it creates a freshwater layer on the ocean surface, setting up ideal conditions for sea ice to form the following winter.
Heimbach and Fenty constructed a model to simulate ice cover, thickness and transport in response to atmospheric and ocean circulation. In a novel approach, they developed a method known in computational science and engineering as “optimal state and parameter estimation” to plug in a variety of observations to improve the simulations.
A tight fit
The researchers tested their approach on data originally taken in 1996 and 1997 in the Labrador Sea, an arm of the North Atlantic Ocean that lies between Greenland and Canada. They included satellite observations of ice cover, as well as local readings of wind speed, water and air temperature, and water salinity. The approach produced a tight fit between simulated and observed sea-ice and ocean conditions in the Labrador Sea — a large improvement over existing models.
The optimal synthesis of model and observations revealed not just where ice forms, but also how ocean currents transport ice floes within and between seasons. From its simulations, the team found that, as new ice forms in northern regions of the Arctic, ocean currents push this ice to the south in a process called advection. The ice migrates further south, into unfrozen waters, where it melts, creating a fresh layer of ocean water that eventually insulates more incoming ice from warmer subsurface waters of subtropical Atlantic origin.
Knowing that this model fits with observations suggests to Heimbach that researchers may use the method of model-data synthesis to predict sea-ice growth and transport in the future — a valuable tool for climate scientists, as well as oil and shipping industries.
“The Northwest Passage has for centuries been considered a shortcut shipping route between Asia and North America — if it was navigable,” Heimbach says. “But it’s very difficult to predict. You can just change the wind pattern a bit and push ice, and suddenly it’s closed. So it’s a tricky business, and needs to be better understood.”
Martin Losch, a research scientist at the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in Bremerhaven, Germany, says the feedback mechanism identified by the MIT group is important for predicting sea-ice extent on a regional scale.
“The dynamics of climate are complicated and nonlinear, and are due to many different feedback processes,” says Losch, who was not involved with the research. “Identifying these feedbacks and their impact on the system is at the heart of climate research.”
As part of the “Estimating the Circulation and Climate of the Ocean” (ECCO) project, Heimbach and his colleagues are now applying their model to larger regions in the Arctic.
This research was supported in part by the National Science Foundation and NASA.
Written by: Jennifer Chu, MIT News Office
###
Note:Sloppy reporting by MIT, not citing the paper title or DOI. It doesn’t seem to be online yet here at the journal:
http://journals.ametsoc.org/loi/phoc
Doesn’t have this paper, in monthly or early edition that I can find by searching for the author names.
UPDATE: Perhaps in response to the complaint I sent to the PR officer and the author, they have now changed the text to read:
Before:
Heimbach and former MIT graduate student Ian Fenty, now a postdoc at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, have published the results from their study in the Journal of Physical Oceanography.
After:
Heimbach and former MIT graduate student Ian Fenty, now a postdoc at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, will publish a paper, “Hydrographic Preconditioning for Seasonal Sea Ice Anomalies in the Labrador Sea,” in the Journal of Physical Oceanography.
“Each winter, wide swaths of the Arctic Ocean freeze to form sheets of sea ice that spread over millions of square miles. This ice acts as a massive sun visor for the Earth, reflecting solar radiation and shielding the planet from excessive warming.”
Ummm, hardly. In the winter the ice sheet forms because there is no solar radiation and the Arctic is completely dark for 6 months. How then can it act as a solar vizor reflecting solar radiation and protecting the planet from excessive warming???
Laughable.
This will garner no press, particularly if understood by the morons who write for the news agencies. It is too close to undermining the greatest global warming trophy, the iceless arctic.
Found Heimbach’s WordPress site:
http://heimbach.wordpress.com/publications/
There are actually two papers:
Fenty, I.G. and P. Heimbach, 2012: Coupled Sea Ice-Ocean State Estimation in the Labrador Sea and Baffin Bay. J. Phys. Oceanogr., accepted.
Fenty, I.G. and P. Heimbach, 2012: Hydrographic Preconditioning for Seasonal Sea Ice Anomalies in the Labrador Sea. J. Phys. Oceanogr., accepted.
Good point Ryan.
And I thought the issue was the “record” (well, for the last 30 years) low minimum ice area in the summer not this:
“Its annual maximum reached record lows, according to satellite observations, in 2007 and again in 2011.”
With this as a the press release, not sure what to think of the paper…..
“But over the last three decades, this winter ice cap has shrunk: Its annual maximum reached record lows, according to satellite observations, in 2007 and again in 2011.”
I thought the “annual maximum” was well within the normal range for 2012 but the annual minimum was less due to the storm that blew the ice to heck.
Ryan- Good point.
Here is what it should have said:
“Each winter, wide swaths of the Arctic Ocean freeze to form sheets of sea ice that spread over millions of square miles. In the perpetual darkness of the Arctic winter, this ice and its snow topping acts as a massive thermal insulator for the Arctic ocean, reducing radiative and convective heat loss and shielding the planet from excessive cooling.”
Ryan says: “Ummm, hardly. In the winter the ice sheet forms because there is no solar radiation and the Arctic is completely dark for 6 months. How then can it act as a solar vizor reflecting solar radiation and protecting the planet from excessive warming???
Laughable.”
In June, when the arctic is getting 24 hrs of sunlight per day, most of that ice is still there. So I can imagine the reflecting effect is very real.
This ice acts as a massive sun visor for the Earth, reflecting solar radiation and shielding the planet from excessive warming.
Massive? 5,500,000 square miles out of 200,000,000 or 2.57%
Excessive warming? The Sun gets to 23.5° above the hotizon maximum. Not a lot of heat there then to be reflected away!
Ms Chu should go and spend some time north of the Polar Circle during the winter months. No sun/light at all for months: darker than a polar bear’s ass. How can this be a “sun visor” for the earth?. The inability to think analytically is scary.
Blown apart in their first paragraph. Ryan and Rob got there first.
Rob Potter says:
November 21, 2012 at 8:40 am
Good point Ryan.
And I thought the issue was the “record” (well, for the last 30 years) low minimum ice area in the summer not this:
“Its annual maximum reached record lows, according to satellite observations, in 2007 and again in 2011.”
Well a quick look at Cryosphere Today does show this to be true, those two years did have record low maxima in area. NSIDC shows 2006 and 2011 tied for record lows with 2007 rather close behind.
Ryan, that is not true. yes there is 24 hour darkness above the arctic circle around the solstice, but then the sun reappears, and in any case the icecap persists in the summer as well. Sunlight is reflected by ice and clouds, but mostly absorbed in seawater.
I hardly think solar radiation has much to do with the ice pack forming. There is plenty of solar radiation year round in places such as Glacier National Monument, the top of Kilimanjaro (near the equator), St. Mary’s Glacier, etc.
It appears part of the disclaimer which limits the focus of the article has cause and affect wrong.
The point I want to make is, it does not appear that Solar Radiation has anything to do with accumulation of ice.
However, if solar radiation has anything to do with ice packs forming and glaciation, maybe it is a good thing which prevents us from living in a snow ball earth.
Only sea currents have enough energy to change the climate, since by some accounts the TSI is unable to do it, but do not write off the sun.
Question is what makes sea currents change.
Only tectonic movements could make oceans change their regime by a fraction, and even small fraction in the oceanic heat flux can account for the decadal atmospheric temperature change, Solar activity and geological events (volcanic eruptions and strong earthquakes combined) appear to correlate, where the sunspots may only be an instrument of measure but not a direct cause.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN-NAP.htm
The Ap index confirms the above
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/Ap-VI.htm
It could be speculated that the tectonic movements in the Atlantic and Pacific have an effect on the regional and finally global temperatures.
In the North Atlantic possible factor in the Atlantic-Arctic currents flows
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SST-NAP.htm
In the Central Pacific possible factorin the behaviour of the South Equatorial current.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/ENSO.htm
and finally, in the North Pacific possible factor Kuroshio/Oyashio currents temperature balance (world’s third largest oceanic current system)
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NoaaD.htm
More models and maybe this one will some day turn out to have some short term usefulness. That is a maybe only. If, and that is a big if, enough empirical data is collected in a timely enough way for a long enough time and the models are refined enough, could work. Until them more science fiction and not anywhere as well written as the late I. Asimov would have done.
No one noticed that air temperatures over the Arctic Ocean are many degrees above average?
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
I also say this is rubbish.
There isn’t even a graph.
Going by my own graph:
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
we already know that the ice extent 88 years ago was about the same as it was now:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/03/16/you-ask-i-provide-november-2nd-1922-arctic-ocean-getting-warm-seals-vanish-and-icebergs-melt/
by 1945 everything had frozen up again, DUE TO THE COLD
\
better prepare yourselves
by 2038 everything up in the arctic will be the same as it was in 1945, DUE TO THE COLD.
mark my words.
Ryan says:
November 21, 2012 at 8:24 am
That quote goes wrong as soon as it mentions winter. Above the arctic circle the four seasons are dawn, day, dusk and night. 🙂
Now that the Orthodoxy of Climate Science has admitted that air and water currents can affect the Arctic ice cover, it may be time to raise the issue of the heat dumped into the Arctic ocean by sea-floor spreading along the Gakken Ridge.
Ryan is correct. Earl, I think your point is not fully valid.
“Ummm, hardly. In the winter the ice sheet forms because there is no solar radiation and the Arctic is completely dark for 6 months.”
Let’s look at the whole thing: In winter the ice cap prevents heat escapingfrom the warmer sea water under the ice into space.In summer the ice prevents the heat from escaping from the warmer sea water under the ice. AND it reflects light coming from the sun.
Now, what is the consequence of removing the ice? If it is not there in winter, massive amounts of heat presently retained would escape from the highly emissive water surface Ԑ=0.99 or so.) In summer if the ice was gone the Ԑ of the water would apply instead of the Ԑ for ice. Before making a claim that the water would heat up more, one must demonstrate that there is a net gain. Insolation is poor, oblique and onto a surface freely radiating what it could not before. So far I am not at all convinced there is. Even in the height of summer at the N Pole, the the loss is very high. The sun is only relatively high at noon. A significant indicator of the effect is ocean temperature at the surface which is arguably heated by the sun. There is arguably no increase in this temperature since ‘ever’.
The heat in the Arctic Ocean does not come from the Sun directly but indirectly from the warm ocean currents entering the basin. Any argument that claims net heating from ice loss must keep this in mind (and in the formula). It remains a fascinating subject with lots of commentary and very little math.
Model data synthesis? Umm right. I had thought the Russian Tsar’s Navy, The US Navy,British Admiralty and the nordic countries all kept records of arctic currents and ditto for some of the fishing and whaling fleets. Something about the current being important when you are using a sailing vessel or conserving fuel far from resupply.
Also a large Improvement over existing model? But the existing model were gospel just a year ago. If an accurate account, well improvement in the arctic circulation and ice life cycle can only help, problem is they have modelled too much garbage to be trusted. G.I.G.O is my default when I hear, New exciting, because our models tell us so.
Noting of course that there is not even tenuous theoretical support the predictive ability of hindcast tuned model for complexity, non-linear, feedback driven and incompletely described systems.
The last 40 years of numerical modelling is littered with the bones of failed attempts. In tuning a hindcast model you create a singular value decomposition for the underlying basis functions of a model. Quality of hindcast fit is increase by the number of parameters added, but this is simply adding enough bases such that the range now covers the input set. The output is then just a superposition of the bases that happens to match the hindcast period, without in fact creating a meaningful representation of underlying system.
Kelvin Vaughan nailed it! If you calculated the actual solar energy hitting that part of the earth in the summer, calculated how much difference ice has in reflecting than open water, then compare that to the whole of the solar energy hitting the earth, it would be tiny. open water does a prety good job of reflecting solar energy, and I thin that the arctic pack ice would not do as good as many people think. It is not a smoth ice sheet like at a skating rink, or a flat white layer like fresh snow.
Hey, what a novel, new technique using real data as an input to climate models. Why has no one thought it using real data before ?
Great idea.
If they want a feedback how about this:
http://i46.tinypic.com/r7uets.png
AMO warms, ice melts. AMO stops warming up but stays warm ; rate of change of ice returns to cycling around zero.
Whoda thought warm water would melt ice.