Ice melting Arctic cyclones more common than previously thought

Remember the Arctic cyclone that chopped up the Arctic sea ice in 2012, resulting in a new record low summer extent for the satellite era? It turns out they are rather common.

From the AGU Fall Meeting and the Ohio State University

Data analysis reveals hundreds of storms — mostly smaller ones — that had previously escaped detection

SAN FRANCISCO—From 2000 to 2010, about 1,900 cyclones churned across the top of the world each year, leaving warm water and air in their wakes—and melting sea ice in the Arctic Ocean.

That’s about 40 percent more than previously thought, according to a new analysis of these Arctic storms. 

A 40 percent difference in the number of cyclones could be important to anyone who lives north of 55 degrees latitude—the area of the study, which includes the northern reaches of Canada, Scandinavia and Russia, along with the state of Alaska.

The finding is also important to researchers who want to get a clear picture of current weather patterns, and a better understanding of potential climate change in the future, explained David Bromwich, professor of geography at The Ohio State University and senior research scientist at the Byrd Polar Research Center.

The study was presented Thursday, Dec. 12 at the American Geophysical Union meeting, in a poster co-authored by his colleagues Natalia Tilinina and Sergey Gulev of the Russian Academy of Sciences and Moscow State University.

“We now know there were more cyclones than previously thought, simply because we’ve gotten better at detecting them,” Bromwich said.

Cyclones are zones of low atmospheric pressure that have wind circulating around them. They can form over land or water, and go by different names depending on their size and where they are located. In Columbus, Ohio, for instance, a low-pressure system in December would simply be called a winter storm. Extreme low-pressure systems formed in the tropical waters can be called hurricanes or typhoons.

How could anyone miss a storm as big as a cyclone? You might think they are easy to detect, but as it turns out, many of the cyclones that were missed were small in size and short in duration, or occurred in unpopulated areas. Yet researchers need to know about all the storms that have occurred if they are to get a complete picture of storm trends in the region.

“We can’t yet tell if the number of cyclones is increasing or decreasing, because that would take a multidecade view. We do know that, since 2000, there have been a lot of rapid changes in the Arctic—Greenland ice melting, tundra thawing—so we can say that we’re capturing a good view of what’s happening in the Arctic during the current time of rapid changes,” Bromwich said.

Bromwich leads the Arctic System Reanalysis (ASR) collaboration, which uses statistics and computer algorithms to combine and re-examine diverse sources of historical weather information, such as satellite imagery, weather balloons, buoys and weather stations on the ground.

“There is actually so much information, it’s hard to know what to do with it all. Each piece of data tells a different part of the story—temperature, air pressure, wind, precipitation—and we try to take all of these data and blend them together in a coherent way,” Bromwich said.

The actual computations happen at the Ohio Supercomputer Center, and the combined ASR data are made publicly available to scientists.

Two such scientists are cyclone experts Tilinina and Gulev, who worked with Bromwich to look for evidence of telltale changes in wind direction and air pressure in the ASR data. They compared the results to three other data re-analysis groups, all of which combine global weather data.

“We found that ASR provides new vision of the cyclone activity in high latitudes, showing that the Arctic is much more densely populated with cyclones than was suggested by the global re-analyses,” Tilinina said.

One global data set used for comparison was ERA-Interim, which is generated by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. Focusing on ERA-Interim data for latitudes north of 55 degrees, Tilinina and Gulev identified more than 1,200 cyclones per year between 2000 and 2010. For the same time period, ASR data yielded more than 1,900 cyclones per year.

When they narrowed their search to cyclones that occurred directly over the Arctic Ocean, they found more than 200 per year in ERA-Interim, and a little over 300 per year in ASR.

There was good agreement between all the data sets when it came to big cyclones, the researchers found, but the Arctic-centered ASR appeared to catch smaller, shorter-lived cyclones that escaped detection in the larger, global data sets. The ASR data also provided more detail on the biggest cyclones, capturing the very beginning of the storms earlier and tracking their decay longer.

Extreme Arctic cyclones are of special concern to climate scientists because they melt sea ice, Bromwich said.

“When a cyclone goes over water, it mixes the water up. In the tropical latitudes, surface water is warm, and hurricanes churn cold water from the deep up to the surface. In the Arctic, it’s the exact opposite: there’s warmer water below, and the cyclone churns that warm water up to the surface, so the ice melts.”

As an example, he cited the especially large cyclone that hit the Arctic in August 2012, which scientists believe played a significant role in the record retreat of sea ice that year.

###

ASR is a collaboration among Ohio State, the National Center for Atmospheric Research, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and the University of Colorado-Boulder. It is funded by the National Science Foundation as an International Polar Year project.

Poster A43C-0280, “Storm tracks in Arctic System Reanalysis – New View of Polar Cyclone Activity,” will be presented on Thursday, Dec. 12 from 1:40-6:00 p.m. PT in Hall A-C of Moscone South.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
41 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Owen in GA
December 12, 2013 8:34 am

So the Arctic cyclones are a way for the Earth to bleed much more ocean heat content to space than would otherwise occur if the ice were undisturbed. Could this be a reflection of another emergent thermostat phenomena?

Brian
December 12, 2013 8:37 am

The article is mostly about the discovery of much smaller cyclones, not ones the size of the August 2012 storm. So I think your opening line saying that cyclones like the August 2012 one are “rather common” is misleading.

P. Berkin
December 12, 2013 8:39 am

So low arctic ice represents a loss of energy – is that where some or all the “missing heat” left?

Bugs Man
December 12, 2013 9:09 am

Very interesting. Yet another weather/climate variable not included in the models that predicate policy and plunge the UK into an energy crisis.

Steve Keohane
December 12, 2013 9:33 am

Seems the Arctic is a thermostat, less ice makes it more efficient at dumping heat. These small storms make the process more efficient.

gopal panicker
December 12, 2013 9:34 am

than previously thought ?? which morons were ‘thinking’ ?

December 12, 2013 10:01 am

I would have thought that the storms chopped the ice up and caused the pieces to ride on top of each other, (rather than causing them to melt suddenly,) thus revealing more open water.

Alan Robertson
December 12, 2013 10:06 am

Brian says:
December 12, 2013 at 8:37 am
“The article is mostly about the discovery of much smaller cyclones, not ones the size of the August 2012 storm. So I think your opening line saying that cyclones like the August 2012 one are “rather common” is misleading.”
_____________________________
I think that the only reason you come here is to find a way to denigrate the site.

TomRude
December 12, 2013 10:10 am

Unbelievable… They are discovering meteo 101… Still are not yet sure how it all works together… They could learn a thing or two from this paper:
http://ddata.over-blog.com/xxxyyy/2/32/25/79/Leroux-Global-and-Planetary-Change-1993.pdf

December 12, 2013 10:18 am

“…We do know that, since 2000, there have been a lot of rapid changes in the Arctic—Greenland ice melting, tundra thawing—so we can say that we’re capturing a good view of what’s happening in the Arctic during the current time of rapid changes,” Bromwich said.
*
Lost me right there. Data is no use at all if they are still running it side-by-side with assumptions of warming, melting and “rapid changes”. They are determined to see and use the meme that We Dun It.

kent blaker
December 12, 2013 10:25 am

The assumption that sea ice melted in 2012 to a record low number is just that, an assumption.When you understand how they arrive at their sea ice area numbers you quickly realize there is a fault in their methodology. They might consider how the wind effects their numbers. By deleting ice below a certain % density and ignoring what happens when the wind .takes ice from one area and piles it into an area that is already 100% covered they are making it look like the ice has melted. when it has simply moved around.
What is most annoying is the fact that they don’t measure energy gained vs energy lost in the Arctic.It is always about what happens with the sunlight never about what happens in the darkness.Exposed sea water radiates more thermal energy than ice covered water when the sun isn’t shining but where is the research regarding thermal gain vs thermal loss. When sea water warms it stays on the surface, ( mostly) when sea water cools it drops out of sight.to be replaced by warmer sea water. Why is it that so called Arctic experts seldom tell people just how hard it is to make sea water freeze when they know by comparison how easy it is to freeze fresh water? Is it because they know most people don’t know the difference?

Paul Deacon
December 12, 2013 10:25 am

Anthony – is the phrase “north of 55 degrees latitude” correct (3rd para of article)? That’s not very far north – Edinburgh and Glasgow in Scotland, and Copenhagen in Denmark are all north of 55 degrees.
All the best.

Bloke down the pub
December 12, 2013 10:27 am

When there is less sea ice than normal, a storm will have more effect, as the reach of the waves will be longer and the waves therefore bigger.

‘When a cyclone goes over water, it mixes the water up. In the tropical latitudes, surface water is warm, and hurricanes churn cold water from the deep up to the surface. In the Arctic, it’s the exact opposite: there’s warmer water below, and the cyclone churns that warm water up to the surface, so the ice melts’.

As Owen in GA was the first to point out, the release of energy at the poles, while reducing ice area in the short term, in the longer term will act as a thermostat and lead to a net cooling.

Rob Dawg
December 12, 2013 10:34 am

“Data analysis reveals hundreds of [Arctic] storms — mostly smaller ones — that had previously escaped detection”
Wait. Is this the same patch of our planet where unmeasured temperature datasets are being extrapolated? Ooops.

u.k.(us)
December 12, 2013 10:52 am

“That’s about 40 percent more than previously thought, according to a new analysis of these Arctic storms.
A 40 percent difference in the number of cyclones could be important to anyone who lives north of 55 degrees latitude—the area of the study, which includes the northern reaches of Canada, Scandinavia and Russia, along with the state of Alaska.”
===============
Anyone living north of 55 degrees saw the storms whether they were detected by satellite or not.
There was not “A 40 percent difference in the number of cyclones…”, they were always there, but now we have detected them.
Just because they have been detected doesn’t change their affects, which have been ongoing, or am I missing something ?

kent blaker
December 12, 2013 10:55 am

While we all tend to focus on sea ice area/extent we neglect the fact that we are talking about a thin lair of ice floating on hundreds to thousands of meters of sea water It is this vast volume of sea water that we should be looking at when we consider the effects of polar cooling. While sea ice is .hard to form, cooling open sea water is easy.
The thing about cooling sea water is that it sinks out of sight.Out of sight,out of mind, but where does it really go.We hear about all those Argo floats but how many are under the Arctic sea ice?

MattN
December 12, 2013 11:06 am

“about 1,900 cyclones churned across the top of the world each year, ”
5-6 per day? Every day? I find that very unlikely.

mpainter
December 12, 2013 11:23 am

Rob Dawg says:
December 12, 2013 at 10:34 am
“Data analysis reveals hundreds of [Arctic] storms — mostly smaller ones — that had previously escaped detection”
Wait. Is this the same patch of our planet where unmeasured temperature datasets are being extrapolated? Ooops.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes, ooooops indeed. Now they will have to take into account the heat sucking vortices that are taking all of that extrapolated heat away from the planet. I will bet that this particular discovery disappears from view.

DesertYote
December 12, 2013 11:33 am

Paul Deacon says:
December 12, 2013 at 10:25 am
###
Its a press release! Anthony did NOT write it. SHEESH.

December 12, 2013 11:59 am

Do we know how deep the churning of cold and warm water reaches into the depths?
I understand that submarines do not have to submerge very far to escape all surface effects from storms etc.
Do we know the temperature gradient of the sea in this area of interest?
Is it high enough to have an effect I wonder?

Dr. Lurtz
December 12, 2013 12:32 pm

How the Arctic Ocean heat actually is radiated into space. Remember that the snow and ice acts as an efficient insulator. The R factor [insulation] for ice is four times that of water. The R factor of snow on ice could be 100 times that of water.
1) By simple analysis of the above, most heat, from the ocean to the atmosphere into space, must come from open water.
2) Open water exists at the edges of the ice sheet and at the breaks in the ice pack.
3) Heat from the edges or breaks forms the cyclones. Rising heat moves air up creating a low pressure that must be replaced by incoming surface air.
4) More cyclones, more ice sheet movement and breaks.
5) We are in a time of warm oceans, cool land/ice surface areas.
6) More heat and moisture moving upward increases the Noctilucent Ice Crystal Clouds.
7) More Noctilucent Clouds, more UV reflection, less heat from the Sun.
8) More Noctilucent Clouds, greater Infrared Radiation into space.
As the Sun ramps down in cycle 24, the difference between the warm oceans and cool lands will increase resulting in more massive polar cyclones and greater cooling at the Poles.

Jimbo
December 12, 2013 12:39 pm

As an example, he cited the especially large cyclone that hit the Arctic in August 2012, which scientists believe played a significant role in the record retreat of sea ice that year.

Considering the September extent in 2013 we have interesting times ahead. Has Professor Peter Wadhams and Professor Wieslaw Maslowski factored this new finding into there excellent computer models?

Katherine
December 12, 2013 3:28 pm

“When a cyclone goes over water, it mixes the water up. In the tropical latitudes, surface water is warm, and hurricanes churn cold water from the deep up to the surface. In the Arctic, it’s the exact opposite: there’s warmer water below, and the cyclone churns that warm water up to the surface, so the ice melts.”
The satellite animation of the sea ice flow during that storm showed the ice loss was due to it breaking up and getting swept out of the Arctic basin. The culprit wasn’t warm water melting the ice.

December 12, 2013 5:14 pm

The record global low temperature was set (as far as has been recorded) but only discovered 3 years after it happened. Now we only recently notice that there are more Arctic storms that reduce the ice pack than we noticed before. What else has been going that we don’t know about?
I don’t oppose learning more to gain a better understanding of what’s going on around us. Practical information can come from such endeavors. (Should I buy a snow blower or an umbrella?)
But to base political policies, energy policies on a hypothesis with such gaps in knowledge and understanding? A hypothesis whose long range predictions/projections/prophesies have been so wrong in the short term? A hypothesis that scammers (Al Gore et. al.) have made millions from and others have gained political from? That I oppose.

OssQss
December 12, 2013 5:14 pm

How many “small ones” can you all count in this video from last years August Arctic cyclone ?
Warning an excersise of this nature may make you cross eyed! =-O