
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.
You can see the wind-drive ice advection by following the WUWT sea ice page. Another factor is that the wind comes off the ice and its cold.
DR (November 21, 2012 at 5:29 pm) wrote:
“Bill Illis, I always look for your comments.”
Likewise. Bill’s knowledge of climate far surpasses that of the physicists who comment here (and this is an understatement).
Chris Y
great comment! Just curious where the figure for downwelling radiation comes from?
Thanks
Chris Y
Here is some measured long wave radiation up and down from a detector in the Arctic (Eureka Nunavut, Canada)
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/arctic/observatories/eureka/eureka_tower.html
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/arctic/observatories/eureka/img/eureka.tower.2009.png
the detector is over land and not water, and the numbers are different than yours but the detector indicates in July, more watts leaving than arriving.
There is a recurring notion that all of the arctic is dark as a tomb in the winter time. It gets dark for a short while in December but most of time there is twilight everywhere. There’s a reason Floridians use daytime pool shades – water absorbs IR and converts it to heat very effectively.
Dave in Canmore-
The downwelling radiation figure is from page 341 of-
Mariani, Z. et al., “Infrared measurements in the Arctic using two atmospheric emitted radiance interferometers,” Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 5, 329-344, 2012.
Data was measured at Eureka, Nunavut at 80 degrees N latitude. It is an impressive paper. I found a non paywalled copy with a google search.
Dave in Canmore-
For the paper, try http://www.atmos-meas-tech.net/5/329/2012/
Hindcast models should always work if done properly so what. They prove nothing more than you can fit a mathematical model to the original waveform. The only meaningful test is how realistically that model predicts future patterns.
What chance of that depends on whether it has actually incorporated the obvious hot spot sources in the area which cannot be just dismissed as insignificant no matter how much climate researchers of all flavours would love to do it because they are at random locations and highly unpredictable size.
Could someone please explain the hot spot near the Svalbard archipelago
http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/sst/ophi/color_anomaly_NPS_ophi0.png
Cold PDO now, and more ice than normal, in water colder than normal, on the Bering Straits side of the pole. Warm AMO, and less ice than normal and water warmer than normal north of Europe.
Obviously currents matter.
Bob Tisdale is working hard on the observed data, and there does seem to be a teleconnection and delyed cycle, where the Atlantic eventually cools after the Pacific cools.
Besides this nice, neat, teleconnected cycle, there is the simple fact chaos is involved, whenever a stream of water meanders. When a river is allowed to wander, without man building levees, it tends to run down the middle of a floodplain, but at times can meander over to the very edge, and leave an ox-bow lake at the very edge of a floodpain. In the same manner the Gulf Stream meanders north and south in a manner I imagine is chaotic and difficult to predict until you see it start to happen.
Last but not least, in the winter leads of open water in the ice are quickly refrozen by temperatures of forty below, however during the summer air temperatures are just above freezing, and any such crack in the ice does not “heal” and is part of the break-up of the “100%” ice. The simple fact a good number of icebreakers travel right to the pole these days contributes to the crack-up of the solid 100% ice. (Some say this contribution is too small to matter, but I disagree.)
@Philip Bradley
> That’s interesting. Although just the current year it shows summer temperatures are almost
> identical to the long term average
Of course, it’s impossible to have higher temperatures unless all ice is melt.
> Yet we are seeing record summer Arctic sea ice melt AND record winter sea ice formation.
Record extent. Volume and thickness of ice formed were very low.
> This compelling that air temperatures have minimal effect on sea ice extent.
Of course, ice forms everywhere, where temperature is lower than melting point of ocean (salty) water, no matter it’s -2 or -40 Celcius degrees. But there is ENORMOUS effect on the thickness of the ice formed. The result of few degrees higher average temperature is much thinner ice formed.
If the model is in anyway accurate then it should be fairly simple to produce 3, 6, 9 and 12 month forecasts as to the Arctic Sea Ice extent/volume/cover for the next year. Updated on a monthly basis, say, looking forward like most other models.
It would be interesting to see what any projections are and how accurate they actually prove to be.
Hindcast can end up being curve fitting, accurate forecasting provides much more validation.
I do not quite see how the Arctic sea ice winter buildup reflects all that sun given that Arctic winter sees no sun at all because it is below the horizon for 3 months so can’t reflect any. Do these people forget we live on a tilted, revolving, orbiting planet?
I have no doubt that Arctic Ocean currents and wind plays a big part in ice distrubution and thickness, probably the major part so not to include them in any study of ice coverage is foolhardy.
Robertvdl says:
November 22, 2012 at 1:41 am
Could someone please explain the hot spot near the Svalbard archipelago
http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/sst/ophi/color_anomaly_NPS_ophi0.png
Possibly a more interesting question is why the Northern side of the Iceland-Shetland cold front is also colder than normal. Is that related to warmer water showing up further to the North around Svalbard?
There is a short feedback loop here, with melting ice producing cold water around Iceland to mix with the warmer Atlantic water around Shetland to then feed up to Svalbard and thence make/melt ice.
If that Easterly cold current increases then the total mixture cools and the result is….?
Robertvdl says: November 22, 2012 at 1:41 am
—————
That’s anomaly. See the following for actual temperatures:
http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/sst/ophi/color_sst_NPS_ophi0.png
One reason it is warmer than normal is because the ice hasn’t formed there yet.
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticicennowcast.gif
I will mention again a great little program that runs on Windows that displays in real time the shadow cast on a map of the earth. Great for people who think the Arctic spends 6 months in darkness. You might be surprised:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/homeplanet/
Robertvdl says
Could someone please explain the hot spot near the Svalbard archipelago
Henry says
OK. Here is my take on it.
First of all, you have to try to understand my own observations of maximum temps. Maxima is an important parameter in climate science that nobody but me has been studying. It gives us a sense of the amount of energy coming in, never mind the myriad of things that happen to that energy once it arrives on earth.
This my best fit curve for the drop in maxima:
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
So, if you observe carefully you will notice that we have already entered a global cooling phase since about 1995, if you look at energy-in.
Before they started with the carbon dioxide nonsense they did look in the direction of the planets, rightly or wrongly, to explain this, see here.
http://www.cyclesresearchinstitute.org/cycles-astronomy/arnold_theory_order.pdf
To quote from the above paper:
A Weather Cycle as observed in the Nile Flood cycle, Max rain followed by Min rain, appears discernible with maximums at 1750, 1860, 1950 and minimums at 1670, 1800, 1900 and a minimum at 1990 predicted.
(The 1990 turned out to be 1995 when cooling started!)
Indeed one would expect more condensation (bigger flooding of the Nile) at the end of a cooling period and minimum flooding at the end of a warming period. This is because when water vapor cools (more) it condensates (more) to form clouds and water (i.e. more rain).
Now put my sine wave next to those dates?
1900- minimum flooding : end of warming
1950 – maximum flooding: end of cooling
1995 – minimum flooding: end of warming
So, there is a fairly simple explanation for your hot spot… It is called the green house effect…..
If cooling causes more clouds and more weather systems, then certain places, at the receiving end of those depressions, might get a bit warmer. So, in those places the where, if there were no clouds, it would normally be a lot cooler, my sine (temp) wave runs precisely opposite as the global average. I found this to be true in at least 3 places, namely CET, Norway north coast and USA east coast.
Hope that helps.
It’s 2012. Perhaps you could check before writing non verified things; ‘twould make you appearing less ignorant.
Re thinning of eggshells:
I don’t know about the USA, but in Europe aggressive shooting of birds of prey was an ongoing game management strategy for centuries until the 1970s,when conservation orders were issued on a broad range of predator birds. Their populations have rebounded and now are a major threat to small bird populations, which are of course their food.
It would be interesting to know if the increase in populations of these birds is completely unrelated to the ‘shell thinning’ affair, when the evidence gatherers may have had preconceived notions on the reasons for small populations?
Chris Y Thank you very much! Answers many lingering questions.
50% of the sea ice melting in summer is OK. ‘Tis normal. But 100% of the sea ice melting in summer will cause the world to end. Obviously. Not.
In the unlikely event that all sea ice in the Arctic were to melt, despite being at a very oblique angle to the sun, not nearly as white as you think it is in the infra-red and having miles of atmosphere between it and the suns incoming radiation, this would be accompanied by new shipping lanes opening up across the northern seas and vast new wheat fields becoming viable in the northern parts of Canada, Scandinavia and Russia. Sounds like a result to me. Sadly it won’t happen. Not enough energy reaches the Arctic during the summer to cause all the ice to melt after forming during the Arctic winter – that would take a long time.
daviditron-
You are welcome.
I visited your website. Very interesting posts and photos on hiking and climbing in the Canadian Rockies. I usually spend a week each summer in Canmore with family, and do some day hikes, including Ha Ling peak. Your three peaks in one day is well beyond anything I’ll ever attempt. Wow!
Just to make sure, I want you to know that I (in Africa) appreciate all those who comment on WUWT :
happy thanksgiving!~
Thank God for Wattsupwiththat where at last I found we can freely report the results of measurements, and express our opinions and observations freely, without being censured in any way.
God is good.
God has nothing to do with it. The herculean efforts of people like Anthony Watts, Steve McIntyre, Jo Nova, Bishop Hill, etc. are what causes this.
Jeff Alberts says
God has nothing to do with it.The herculean efforts of people like Anthony Watts, Steve McIntyre, Jo Nova, Bishop Hill, etc. are what causes this.
Henry says
so how did they get here?
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2011/07/23/why-do-i-believe-in-god/