NASA says Arctic sea ice 'Unlikely To Break Records' in 2013

A video animation follows. Note also that Dr. Walt Meier is now with NASA Goddard, after leaving NSIDC at the end of July. This is his first report from NASA. – Anthony

Arctic Sea Ice Update: Unlikely To Break Records, But Continuing Downward Trend

The melting of sea ice in the Arctic is well on its way toward its annual “minimum,” that time when the floating ice cap covers less of the Arctic Ocean than at any other period during the year. While the ice will continue to shrink until around mid-September, it is unlikely that this year’s summer low will break a new record. Still, this year’s melt rates are in line with the sustained decline of the Arctic ice cover observed by NASA and other satellites over the last several decades.

“Even if this year ends up being the sixth- or seventh-lowest extent, what matters is that the 10 lowest extents recorded have happened during the last 10 years,” said Walt Meier, a glaciologist with NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. “The long-term trend is strongly downward.” 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiSuUe8dhZ0

The icy cover of the Arctic Ocean was measured at 2.25 million square miles (5.83 million square kilometers) on Aug. 21. For comparison, the smallest Arctic sea ice extent on record for this date, recorded in 2012, was 1.67 million square miles (4.34 million square kilometers), and the largest recorded for this date was in 1996, when ice covered 3.16 millions square miles (8.2 million square kilometers) of the Arctic Ocean.

Watching the summertime dynamics of the Arctic ice cap has gained considerable attention in recent years as the size of the minimum extent has been diminishing – rapidly. On Sept.16, 2012, Arctic sea ice reached its smallest extent ever recorded by satellites at 1.32 million square miles (3.41 million square kilometers). That is about half the size of the average extent from 1979 to 2010.

Sea ice extent is a measurement of the area of the Arctic Ocean where ice covers at least 15 percent of the ocean surface. For additional information about the evolution of the sea ice cover, scientists also study the sea ice “area,” which discards regions of open water among ice floes and only takes into account the parts of the Arctic Ocean completely covered by ice. On Aug. 21, 2013, the Arctic sea ice area was 1.98 million square miles (5.12 million square kilometers).

This year’s melting season included a fast retreat of the sea ice during the first half of July. But low atmospheric pressures and clouds over the central Arctic kept temperatures up north cooler than average, slowing down the plunge.

With about three weeks of melting left, the summer minimum in 2013 is unlikely to be a record low, said Joey Comiso, senior scientist at Goddard and coordinating lead author of the Cryosphere Observations chapter of the upcoming report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

“But average temperatures in the Arctic fluctuate from one week to another, and the occurrence of a powerful storm in August, as happened in 2012, could cause the current rate of decline to change significantly,” Comiso said.

This year, the Arctic has witnessed a few summer storms, but none of them as intense as the cyclone that took place in August 2012.

“Last year’s storm went across an area of open water and mixed the smaller pieces of ice with the relatively warm water, so it melted very rapidly,” Meier said. “This year, the storms hit in an area of more consolidated ice. The storms this year were more typical summer storms; last year’s was the unusual one.”

The Arctic sea ice cap has significantly thinned over the past decade and is now very vulnerable to melt, Comiso said. The multiyear ice cover, consisting of thicker sea ice that has survived at least two summers, has declined at an even faster rate than younger, thinner ice.

Meier said that a thinner, seasonal ice cover might behave more erratically in the summer than multiyear ice.

“First-year ice has a thickness that is borderline: It can melt or not depending on how warm the summer temperatures are, the prevailing winds, etcetera,” Meier said. “This year’s conditions weren’t super-favorable for losing ice throughout spring and summer; last year they were. Whereas with multiyear ice, it takes unusual warm conditions to melt it, which is what we’ve seen in the most recent years.”

On the opposite side of the planet, Antarctic sea ice, which is in the midst of its yearly growing cycle, is heading toward the largest extent on record, having reached 7.45 million square miles (19.3 million square kilometers) on Aug. 21. In 2012, the extent of Antarctic sea ice for the same date was 7.08 million square miles (18.33 million square kilometers). The phenomenon, which appears counter-intuitive but reflects the differences in environment and climate between the Arctic and Antarctica, is currently the subject of many research studies. Still, the rate at which the Arctic is losing sea ice surpasses the speed at which Antarctic sea ice is expanding.

The sea ice minimum extent analysis produced at Goddard – one of many satellite-based scientific analyses of sea ice cover – is compiled from passive microwave data from NASA’s Nimbus-7 satellite, which operated from late October 1978 to August 1987, and the U.S. Department of Defense’s Defense Meteorological Satellite Program, which has been used to extend the Nimbus 7 sea ice record onwards from August 1987. The record, which began in November 1978, shows an overall downward trend of 14.1 percent per decade in the size of the minimum summer extent, a decline that accelerated after 2007.

Related Link

› Arctic sea ice multimedia resources from NASA Goddard’s Scientific Visualization Studio

Maria-José Viñas

NASA’s Earth Science News Team

Source: http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/arctic-sea-ice-update-unlikely-to-break-records-but-continuing-downward-trend/

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

112 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 23, 2013 8:57 am

…Dr. Walt Meier is now with NASA Goddard…
———————————————————-
Say hello to the new boss, same as the old boss.

August 23, 2013 9:01 am

Here are the ice extent anomalies from the satellite era for the Arctic and Antarctic:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.arctic.png
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png
One has slightly decreasing ice extent with increasing variability since about 2006 that makes it difficult to discern a trend.
One has slightly increasing ice extent with increasing variability since about 2006 that makes it difficult to discern a trend.
Which should I fear? The creeping doom of Global Warming emanating from the North? Or the creeping doom of an Ice Age emanating from the South?

August 23, 2013 9:04 am

There exists great economic benefits for an ice free Arctic. Same for Antarctica.

August 23, 2013 9:07 am

Will keep our finger cross

Chris B
August 23, 2013 9:10 am

Melting ain’t all bad.

August 23, 2013 9:11 am

And here is a most interesting graph from IPCC AR4 WG1 Chapter 2. The meme has always been that doubling of CO2 increases radiative forcing by 3.7 w/m2 which increases temps on average by 1 degree + feedbacks, with current CO2 levels producing about 2.1 w/m2. But they also go out of their way to explain that radiative forcing is measured across the atmospheric air column while surface forcing is actually a different value. Taking a look at this graphic, we see that forcing from GHG’s amounts to, at the surface, only 0.25 w/m2 compared to 2.1 w/m2 for radiative forcing:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/figure-2-23.html
So… how does 0.25 w/m2 at the surface account for any substantive melting at all? Further, their own graph shows that forcing at the surface from all sources combined is actually on a negative trend, which ought to result in more ice, not less.
But hey, it wouldn’t be the first time the IPCC contradicted itself.

beng
August 23, 2013 9:20 am

***
Susan Crockford says:
August 23, 2013 at 8:22 am
See my summary of the evidence: http://polarbearscience.com/2013/08/18/polar-bears-have-not-been-harmed-by-sea-ice-declines-in-summer-the-evidence/
***
Thanks for the link. That’s the most comprehensive and readable general overview of polar bear population trends I’ve seen. The bears seem alot more capable than some researchers give them credit for…

Jimbo
August 23, 2013 9:21 am

It’s a funny thing Arctic amplification.
“56% Increase In Arctic Ice Since Last Year”
August 23, 2013
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/56-increase-in-arctic-ice-since-last-year/

Editor
August 23, 2013 9:23 am

“The storms this year were more typical summer storms; last year’s was the unusual one.”
Now why didn’t we hear that explanation last year, for the low ice extent that they reported then?

Chris B
August 23, 2013 9:32 am

It looks like the previous video couldn’t be embedded so I’ll try another one that worked in preview mode.

Jeremy
August 23, 2013 9:36 am

“Even if this year ends up being the sixth- or seventh-lowest extent, what matters is that the 10 lowest extents recorded have happened during the last 10 years,” said Walt Meier.
He failed to explain Why this matters. This matters ONLY because Dr Walt Meyer is an alarmist pseudo- scientist dependent upon grossly exaggerated alarmist declarations in order to help secure and to protect his departmental funding.
Since when is a decade a long term trend? This may be long in terms of the career of money grabbing fraudsters but comparatively speaking a mere micro-second in terms of planet Earth.

Raptor
August 23, 2013 9:37 am

Re: Susan Crockford
You have an excellent research site and are well qualified to comment on arctic ecology. Perhaps if there is a slight downside to the arctic having less ice it might be that orca killer whales can kill them while swimming. I bet it’s pretty hard to qualify though since if it happens there is little evidence of the kill left to examine. The polar bears only other natural predator is man and bacteria I think. Probably the biggest long term threat to polar bears is just more humans trying to live and work in the bear’s traditional habitats. That’s a harder problem to solve, not loss of late summer sea ice.

C.M. Carmichael
August 23, 2013 9:42 am

The best thing about WUWT is, if you read it frequently and understand it, it is impossible to sound as stupid as the average politician. Anthony, you need a second website just for politicos, big letters and small words and maybe some pictures for them to color. The quality of information and informed discussion on these page beats every government chamber on earth. Trolls are treated to intelligent responses including references, and never called nazis or fascists, try to find intelligent discussions on the CAGW sites. Anthony your site is a wonder of the internet!

Editor
August 23, 2013 9:47 am

IARC/JAXA is up and running again, along with the past few missing days’ data being filled in.

August 23, 2013 9:48 am

Thanks Anthony.
And thanks for the feedback (Beng and Raptor), I really appreciate it.
Now, to work!
Susan

Richard111
August 23, 2013 9:50 am

And what is the effect of these North Pole Cruises aboard Russian nuclear icebreakers?
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/56833

JohnB
August 23, 2013 9:59 am

Let me get this straight, now.
We have a pause in temperature increases.
We have a pause in arctic sea ice decline.
We have a pause in category 3 and above hurricanes (never mind category 6)
One more pause and we’d have a polar bear.
Oh, wait! We have a pause to reflect on polar bear endangerment.
We have a happy polar bear.

Peter in MD
August 23, 2013 9:59 am

Richard111:
Great link, it would be interesting if they would cease all ice breaking for a couple of years and see what happens. Of course I sure it can explained away that only .01% of ice loss is due to ice breaker cruises.

neal kaye
August 23, 2013 10:05 am

The NASA guys sound SO disappointed.

James at 48
August 23, 2013 10:20 am

The curve would have to suddenly go wild in order for this not to be true.

John West
August 23, 2013 10:31 am

News Flash 9630:
As ice sheets expand globally for the third century in a row, Al Gore CCCXXI makes an unprecedented shift from advocating for action on global warming to action on global freezing stating: “It is now clear that CO2 induced warming is no longer a threat to mankind, but there is no doubt that the continued use of thorium will only serve to intensify Global Freezing. We must act now to avoid the worst effects of global freezing and the inevitably catastrophic snowball earth scenario. The true cost (including the social costs) of thorium must be included in our energy prices or we face certain annihilation.” The direct decedent of the Prophet went on to praise his ancestor’s accomplishments which undoubtedly saved the planet from thermageddon, but reiterated the need for immediate action on this mounting climate threat that the establishment has ignored for far too long.

Mike H
August 23, 2013 10:32 am

Susan Crockford, A UBC grad, hmmm. Keep dealing with facts and reality, they’ll find some reason to take away your PHD. And please be a thorn in Witch Dr. Weaver’s side.
Raptor. An orca taking out a polar bear. That would be something to see!!!!
I don’t think you have to worry about too many humans moving into their territory. The gov’t has been trying to get people up there for years. There is a reason 90% of us Canadians live within 100 miles of the USA border. The weather up there is friggin’ cold!!!! And if the cold doesn’t bother you, the bugs in summer are insane!!!
A little aside on the bugs. A friend of the family was a prisoner camp Commander in WW2 in Northern Ontario. One day, his 2nd in command came running in his office yelling about the prisoners had all escaped!!. He kind of shrugged his shoulders and said don’t worry about it. Sure enough, within 3 days the bugs drove every prisoner back to camp. It’s desolate up there now, imagine what it was like 70 years ago when population of Canada was in the 13 million range.

Matt
August 23, 2013 10:36 am

The rowers are giving up the attempt to row the Northwest Passage, according to an article they submitted to the Irish Times, and will stop at the half way point, Cambridge Bay. It is forecast to snow tonight in Cambridge Bay, and ice is no longer retreating in the channel to the north of Cambridge Bay.
Northwest Passage Diary: We needed Mother Nature to help. She hasn’t
http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/travel/long-haul/northwest-passage-diary-we-needed-mother-nature-to-help-she-hasn-t-1.1501355

Pieter F.
August 23, 2013 11:04 am

For a data base that begins in 1978 (at the very beginning of a warm regime), a year coming in as the 7th or 8th warmest suggests to me more that the warm regime of the 80s and 90s is subsiding. Further it just seems odd to me to claim that a reduction in sea ice (as in 2007 from a record that begins only n 1978) is due to global warming when the actual mean temperatures of the High Arctic are running below the long-term (60 yr+) mean. How can one claim warming is the cause when the temperatures are actually cooler?

SAMURAI
August 23, 2013 11:13 am

Funny that NASA didn’t mention that this year, the Arctic will easily set TWO records 1) for the largest year-on-year Arctic minimum recovery (around +1.5 million Km^2) and 2) the coldest Arctic summer since DMI started records in 1958.
The lack of a global warming trend since 1997, back-to-back record Antarctic Ice Extents, currently in the weakest solar cycle since 1906 and is now in decline to be followed by the weakest solar cycle since 1715, a string of brutal winters, the 30-yr PDO cooling cycle started in 2008, the 30-yr AMO warming cycle seems to be winding down, ENSO in a long neutral cycle, etc., all seem to point to future recovery of Arctic ice.
Things should continue to get real interesting as the Warmunistas seem to be in perpetual panic mode with so many of their dire predictions thwarted by observed empirical evidence, which is starting to smell a lot like hypothetical disconfirmation….