It looks like the Maslowski Countdown has ended early and there will be no “ice free Arctic” as predicted this year.
From NSIDC, which has a 5 day average in the plot. It looks like the minimum extent is ~5.0-5.1 million sq kilometers. NSIDC has yet to make an announcement on the turning point as of this writing. Note the minimum is within the standard deviation bounds (grey shading) that NSIDC provides.
Note also that it is still possible to see a drop again, as this has happened in years past, but given the colder temperatures this year, a reversal appears unlikely.
![N_stddev_timeseries[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/n_stddev_timeseries1.png?quality=75)
The JAXA plot concurs:
![AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent_L[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/amsre_sea_ice_extent_l1.png?quality=75)
The JAXA data says:
09-10 5084063 09-11 5029688 09-12 5000313 09-13 5031094 09-14 5055625 09-15 5063438
The NANSEN plot concurs as well:
More at the WUWT Sea Ice page: http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/
Related articles
- Tough Times For Sea Ice Melt Enthusiasts… (wattsupwiththat.com)
- The early chill in the Arctic continues (wattsupwiththat.com)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Last rites for the death spiral:
http://judithcurry.com/2013/09/16/inter-decadal-variation-in-northern-hemisphere-sea-ice/
Lord Galleywood says:
September 16, 2013 at 3:25 pm
I spent my boyhood weekends on the Common cycling up,down and round the old clay pit “bumps” and my late youth weekends in the Horse and Groom!
Small world…
Simply by watching on a day-to-day basis, I have seen air temperatures 1 to 10 degrees below the freezing point of salt water have little immediate effect on the extent of the ice. Instead it cools the entire column of water down to the pycnocline, roughly 300-400 feet down.
When the sea is protected from the wind by a layer of ice, the warm AMO can push currents under the ice and melt the ice from beneath, even when the air is cold above. However once the warm AMO creates a large area of open water towards Eurasia, it is in effect hastening its own demise, for that entire area effectively loses heat all the way down to 400 feet below the surface.
I thought this colder water would cause an early refreeze, but I haven’t seen that this year. However I think colder water may have contributed to the colder summer over the arctic. The summer storms couldn’t stir up warmer waters from below when the water was cold all the way down to 400 feet.
Once the air temperatures get down to 20-40 below the freezing point of salt water the surface seems to freeze even when the water is warmer below. Although salt water, unlike fresh water, sinks at near-freezing temperatures, in cases where it is blown and becomes spray, it freezes, and ice doesn’t sink.
Sometimes you read of a “lens of fresh water” atop the Arctic Sea, created by melting fresh-water icebergs. The water is never truly fresh. It is less salty, but still has a freezing point of -1.7 C at best. There are reports of the open water being so cold that when snowflakes (fresh water) fall on the sea they don’t melt, and actually accumulate.
“Sometimes you read of a “lens of fresh water” atop the Arctic Sea, created by melting fresh-water icebergs. The water is never truly fresh. It is less salty, but still has a freezing point of -1.7 C at best. There are reports of the open water being so cold that when snowflakes (fresh water) fall on the sea they don’t melt, and actually accumulate.”
The term “lens” is a total misnomer. It seems to have been taken from fresh water in atolls where it has that form (albeit underground).
The argument is that this layer impedes convection of the lower waters that are warmer that the surface, it thereby prevents melting by preventing convective mixing. This is suggested to be the origin of the annual negative correlation (aka 2 year cycle).
Spectral analysis shows the 2y signal is split into a triplet by modulation of a circa 12y period:
http://climategrog.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=438
My article at Judith Curry’s site yesterday shows a rectified 11.16 year pattern. This may be the same period. Also interference patterns from the triplet probably account for the reduced variability between 1997 and 2007.
http://judithcurry.com/2013/09/16/inter-decadal-variation-in-northern-hemisphere-sea-ice/#comment-381315
In any case, the energy in the 2y oscillation is significant. Looking at high pass filtered ice data shows strong harmonics of the 2y period as well as harmonic of 1 year.
As a side note one of the side lobes of the 2y triplet seems to correspond to the “quasi-biennial oscillation”. QBO may well have its origins in the Arctic.
cf strong 2.442 peak in trade winds:
http://climategrog.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=283
” There are reports of the open water being so cold that when snowflakes (fresh water) fall on the sea they don’t melt, and actually accumulate.”
The annual anti-correlation is evidence of a very strong negative feedback. This is ignored by those desperately searching for a dominant +ve f/b and a death spiral.
As Steven Goddard points out, all that new ice is likely to became a multiyear one.
So…let the sea ice **creation** begin! See everyone next April for the 2014 Arctic Sea Ice Follies.
(PS Why does everyone in mainstream climate “science” ignore the annual **increase** in sea ice extent, area, and volume? Is it not as interesting as sea ice melt?)
Dermot O’Logical says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:20 pm
Given that the NSIDC’s office in Boulder is shut down due to the flooding, I wouldn’t be expecting any announcements of any kind from them for a while. The staff there have got bigger problems right now.
To the staff of NSIDC, I hope you are all OK, and that you get back on your feet soon.
////////////////////////////////////
Of course, Boulder was flooded due to Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption/extreme weather events – what else…?
/sarc
nc says:
September 17, 2013 at 12:20 am
… Dan Riskin is a firm believer in AGW. He has a PHD in zoology, his specialty, the study of bats.
///////////////////////////////
While some species of bats are notorious for spreading Rabies, the expression “batshitcrazy” instantly springs to mind….
Glenn says:
September 16, 2013 at 7:15 pm
pinetree3 says:
September 16, 2013 at 7:05 pm
That ice is very thin.
How thin is it?
///////////////////////////////
From 3 to 15 feet, respectively, according to
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictnowcast.gif
Personally, I wouldn’t call that “very thin”.
From a physics standpoint, it has always seemed to me that a transparent body of water radiates heat from the bottom, not necessarily from the surface, sort of like how when you first light a fireplace the heat radiates through glass and can be felt before the glass gets warm, so if the bottom of open arctic waters is 34F or so as compared to an icy surface at 0F then the extra heat radiated is quite large and all this extra lost heat is deep, not necessarily at the surface, and wouldn’t be revealed until much later … perhaps as a large rebound in ice extent the next summer, as the colder waters are slow to melt ice. I may have this wrong if someone wants to straighten me out on this feel free.
The nice thing about all this focus on Arctic ice is that it is sort of like doomsday clock for AGW, when Arctic ice gets above the long term average, AGW is OVER!
NIC shows another, smaller, increase yesterday, so it’s looking like the minimum was reached on Sept. 14 in the NIC estimates.
Arctic Min Date >8/10ths Marg Zone M.sq Km
14/09/2013 4.84 0.67 5.51
21/09/2012 3.28 0.92 4.20
20/09/2011 4.30 0.97 5.27
22/09/2010 4.75 0.91 5.66
21/09/2009 4.58 1.27 5.84
23/09/2008 4.16 0.77 4.93
18/09/2007 3.60 1.01 4.61
A remarkable recovery, especially in the packed ice extent and the early date.
Well that puts the mockers on my wild guess for the sea ice minimum competition! Nice to be wrong, though not too wrong please..
Scott says:
September 17, 2013 at 6:14 am
From a physics standpoint, it has always seemed to me that a transparent body of water radiates heat from the bottom, not necessarily from the surface,
Unfortunately for your belief water is not transparent to ‘heat’, aka IR radiation, rather it is a strong absorber.
Regarding thickness: The satellite remote sensing for concentration and that used for thickness appear to be at odds. What I refer to are areas where concentration significantly above zero is shown, yet thickness is shown as zero or nearly so. Check it out and see what I mean. One of the two “measurements” is wrong.
Caleb says:
September 17, 2013 at 3:13 am
Simply by watching on a day-to-day basis, I have seen air temperatures 1 to 10 degrees below the freezing point of salt water have little immediate effect on the extent of the ice. Instead it cools the entire column of water down to the pycnocline, roughly 300-400 feet down.
When the sea is protected from the wind by a layer of ice, the warm AMO can push currents under the ice and melt the ice from beneath, even when the air is cold above. However once the warm AMO creates a large area of open water towards Eurasia, it is in effect hastening its own demise, for that entire area effectively loses heat all the way down to 400 feet below the surface.
I agree with this picture of a kind of thermal conflict between air and water at the Arctic. The timing of oceanic oscillations such as the PDO and AMO play a role here. In recent years the Arctic air temperatures have dropped possibly influenced by the dropping PDO. However the peaking AMO – lagging behind the PDO – means that warm water, a legacy of 2-3 decades of PDO warm phase (el Nino dominated) results in a continuing supply of Atlantic warm water – via the gulf stream – into an Arctic in which air temperatures are cooling. The result of this is the sharp increase in amplitude seen in recent years between low simmer minima and high winter maxima of ice extent and volume. So there is a tension between cooling Arctic air temperatures and residual subsurface warmer water. However that legacy AMO warm water – hiding as you say subsurface at the Arctic – will eventually be cooled, this process assisted by more open water in the Arctic summer. There was a good article recently by Jim Steele here about this:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/22/why-antarctic-sea-ice-is-the-better-climate-change-indicator/
It definitely is a negative feedback, the Arctic sheds the el Nino heat of former decades out to space.
Kelvin Vaughan says:
September 17, 2013 at 1:43 am
RACookPE1978 says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:39 pm
Should we begin predicting when Cape Horn will be blocked by Antarctic Sea Ice in April and May,
I like winding people up! I will start the ball rolling on my Facebook page right away.
Well I put it on asking how long until the Antarctic sea ice reaches Cape Horn and got the reply “1/2 inch on my map”.
Kelvin Vaughan says:
September 17, 2013 at 11:40 am
Kelvin Vaughan says:
September 17, 2013 at 1:43 am
RACookPE1978 says:
September 16, 2013 at 2:39 pm
Should we begin predicting when Cape Horn will be blocked by Antarctic Sea Ice in April and May,
Antarctic ice reaching Cape Horn would block the circumpolar current, leading to some negative-feedback warming at least for a while since the circumpolar current exerts a strong cooling influence globally. But its an interesting question…
So, WUWT wins again.
New record low volume of Arctic ice, as measured by Cryosat, going all the way back to October 2010!
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/358504
Probably not a valid observation, but even if accurate, what would you expect after the storm-driven ice destruction of 2012. Thickness should increase with new addition of multi-year ice after this years piddling melt back.
Kelvin Vaughan says:
September 17, 2013 at 11:40 am
Cape Horn lies at 55°58′47″S, although shoals extend some way south from it, which would have been exposed during the Last Glacial Maximum. It’s thus possible that during the LGM maximum winter sea ice might have closed at least surface circulation of the Southern Ocean.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/98GL02012/abstract;jsessionid=0A4861126EE11C8E1C61ACCF7CB9861B.d04t03?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
Abstract
We used modern analog technique applied to Antarctic diatoms to quantitatively reconstruct seasonal sea-ice extent at the Last Glacial Maximum. Winter maximum sea-ice limit occurred around 48°S in the Atlantic and western Indian sectors, around 55°S in the eastern Indian and western Pacific sectors, and around 58–60°S in the eastern Pacific sector of the Southern Ocean. Summer maximum sea-ice extents during the last ice age and today are similar, which contradicts CLIMAP’s findings. This implies a reduced summer albedo feedback of the Southern Hemisphere and a greater transfer of heat and moisture from the ocean to the atmosphere than shown by previous qualitative studies.
Scotese however shows the sea ice not reaching the Cape at the LGM:
http://www.scotese.com/lastice.htm
Don’t know if he relied on CLIMAP for ice extent, however.
And I thank all for their comments. However, I would point out that the ocean depths between Cape Horn and the Antarctic peninsula are very deep, and that floating sea ice (1-2 meters thick for fresh ice) will do little to retard the strong currents flowing around Antarctica.
On the other hand, such circumpolar currents would tend to “raft’ large sections of the sea ice already formed,and those large sections torn off of the sea ice “plates” are by themselves dangerous to shipping. True, the bows of large merchants are made of formed plates 1-1/2 to 2 inches thick (37 mm to 50 mm, for you of the metric persuasion) but hundreds of thousands of tons of 2 meter ice hitting ships that weight 50,000 to 150,000 tons themselves will form dangerous forces. Thus, it is not really necessary for sea ice to completely “block” the Cape and its smaller straits (themselves prone to ice freezing over) but only that sea traffic be threatened.
Ice breakers? Well, consider that the very storms that frequent the Antarctic oceans blow and twist the ships. thus, meekly following an icebreaker through the small “channel” it breaks in sea will be impossible: Where the ice itself is not blown sideways or blown back across the newly-opened narrow channel, the following ship will equally find it impossible (unsafe) to follow so close as to remain in the wake of the icebreaker. What is possible in calm seas at low speeds at 300 meters should be 3 to 6 nautical miles at rough waters.
Rafting ice islands of dangerously thick ice are also a “longer time” threat – if the merchant captains determine that sea ice is indeed the problem that it may become. ( My at-sea navigation time was not spent on the surface, nor in target (er, merchant) hulls. ) But, since rafts of sea ice could break off randomly even when the edge may be 10, 100, or 500 kilometers from the Cape itself, closure or threatened sea conditions may last for longer than those few days when sea ice ‘touches” both Antarctica and South America.
For a few luxury “yachts” to get through the Northwest passage in a publicity stunt the island straits north of Canada need to be open for only two days – but those two days need to be “open” when the yachts are at the islands, right? Thus, NEXT YEAR, as soon as the ice recedes a few feet for a few days, the boats will rush through – believe me, nobody wants to stay up there another year! – and the CAGW alarmists will declare “Mission Accomplished” and the “The Northwest Passage is open!” and the newspapers and TV crews will fly up and they will get want they want. Commercial exploration of the Arctic as a shipping connection requires known, predictable openings for months-long periods. “Guessing” won’t work. “Potentially open” maybe’s won’t work if the penalty for guessing wrong is a frozen in ship and cargo for another 9 months.
Besides, the real traffic/distance savings is going north past Norway and Murmansk eastwards towards the Bering Strait and then south to the China ports.
Would appear so:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CLIMAP.jpg
RACookPE1978 says:
September 17, 2013 at 12:53 pm
Drake Passage is indeed deep, which is why I mentioned surface circulation only.
Since Cape Horn was passable, though dangerous, during the LIA, presumably it won’t be effectively closed by whatever cooling may occur in coming decades. Don’t know how often it was attempted in winter however, between 1616 & the mid-19th century. The advent of steam propulsion would certainly have helped.