
Image Credit: NSIDC
WUWT Regular “Just The Facts”
As you can see from the Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Extent With Anomaly map above, there are currently two large fingers of anomalous Sea Ice protruding out in the Weddell Sea. This is the same Weddell Sea that in 2012 it was claimed that;
“Warm ocean currents are projected to melt the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area of Antarctica opening instabilities in the West Antarctic Ice sheet (WAIS) which will impact global sea level rise. Climate change is waking up the sleeping giant of Antarctica.
Significant scientific research has been published in recent weeks on the impact of global warming on changing wind patterns and southern ocean currents and the flow-on impact on Antarctic ice shelves and glaciers. The most recent studies reveal the potential instability of the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area. But the real questions to be asked concern the long term stability of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) and how rapidly it could collapse raising global sea levels by up to 6 metres.” Climate Citizen
So there are no apparent signs of the “warm ocean currents” that “are projected to melt the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area of Antarctica opening instabilities in the West Antarctic Ice sheet”. If fact those fingers still look reasonably concentrated;

and Antarctic Sea Ice Extent – 15% or Greater has remained above two Standard Deviations of the 1981 – 2010 average for the entire melt season:

Additionally, Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area Anomaly has been above the 1979 – 2008 Average for the last two years:

Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area Anomaly is in the midst of its third large spike since 2007;

and there is a clear trend towards larger Southern Sea Ice Area Minimums:

The result is Global Sea Ice Area had its highest maximum since 2006 and remained stubbornly average for the entirety of 2013:

However, in terms of the large fingers of Sea Ice protruding into the Weddell Sea;

I think they may be a sign from Antarctica telling us that we’ve beat global warming, or at least that the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea is safe from collapse for another year… What do you think?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Leo Geiger:
At January 19, 2014 at 2:15 pm you write saying in total
Oh, but you have provided cogent evidence for “that assertion” with your links.
The first says
and the second says
The ice shelves are growing, and your links each says that warm ocean currents under the ice are the major cause of “ice shelf mass loss”.
Thanks for providing such clear evidence that your assertions are rubbish.
Richard
Leo Geiger says: January 19, 2014 at 1:47 pm
Keep is simple then. Is the grounding line of Pine Island glacier retreating? No computer models needed to answer that. Is it retreating while Antarctic sea ice extent has grown?
Yes and yes.
Perhaps, then, there isn’t a simple relationship between sea ice extent and what an ice shelf does.
Correct, however if there were “signs of warm ocean currents”, then one would expect those to also affect sea ice extent.
I would be interested in knowing the source you are using to declare that sea ice extent tracks deeper ocean temperatures (not surface temperatures) along the margins of Antarctica.
So would I, as I have no recollection of declaring “that sea ice extent tracks deeper ocean temperatures (not surface temperatures) along the margins of Antarctica.” Can you please highlight where I made such a declaration?
Leo, you might be interested in the following. Furthermore check out 2,200 year ago volcanic explosion spreading ash, got buried and is today causing much slip and slide.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038%2Fngeo106
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/21/new-research-sheds-light-on-antarcticas-melting-pine-island-glacier/
It must be global warming, hot, bubbling magma just cannot melt a damned thing.
http://www.livescience.com/2242-buried-volcano-discovered-antarctica.html
Leo. Ice mass in Antarctica has been increasing over the last 30 years based on record levels of sea ice extent ie above average over this time.
Do these “fingers of ice” break off and later melt or do they melt without breaking off? Would not a long ice sheet undergo stress (is that the correct word?) from tides and shoaling waves?
I believe there was a WUWT thread rebutting that study a few years ago. I searched but couldn’t find it. If anyone remembers it, please post a link.
Is the Antarctic rabbit going to eat all the grass from South America?
“Keep is simple then. Is the grounding line of Pine Island glacier retreating? No computer models needed to answer that. Is it retreating while Antarctic sea ice extent has grown?…..”
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/tmp/gistemp/STATIONS/tmp_700891250008_14_0/station.txt
This is one of the nearest stations based there, do you think it will melt at between -10 c and -15 c during the warmest month January?
Leo, check this out. In February 2013 a paper finds Antarctica has been gaining surface ice mass over past 150 years. You see, we can all find papers to back our positions. Just lean back and think about Antarctica. It’s not really doing what you want, so leave it alone. It’s a very thick slab of ice with growing extent and more snow is likely there in a warming world.
http://www.the-cryosphere.net/7/303/2013/tc-7-303-2013.html
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/04/antarctica-gaining-ice-mass-and-is-not-extraordinary-compared-to-800-years-of-data/
Leo Geiger says: January 19, 2014 at 2:15 pm
Maybe that was keeping it too simple…
Mass loss from ice shelves is primarily driven by basal melting from warm (relatively speaking) water, and to a lesser extent calving. That means basal melt rates (derived from changes in surface elevation) and calving rates would be better things to use to draw conclusions about the temperature of the deeper water (which is hard to measure directly) and the health of ice shelves.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/earth20130613.html
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6143/266
Per the NASA artical:
“To determine how much ice and snowfall enters a specific ice shelf and how much makes it to an iceberg, where it may split off, the research team used a regional climate model for snow accumulation and combined the results with ice velocity data from satellites, ice shelf thickness measurements from NASA’s Operation IceBridge – a continuing aerial survey of Earth’s poles – and a new map of Antarctica’s bedrock. Using this information, Rignot and colleagues were able to deduce whether the ice shelf was losing mass through basal melting or gaining it through the basal freezing of seawater.” http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/earth20130613.html
So another complex model and some deduction, how about you present some observational evidence to support your assertion that there are ““signs of warm ocean currents”.
Furthermore, please explain how “basal melt rates (derived from changes in surface elevation) and calving rates would be better things to use to draw conclusions about the temperature of the deeper water.” Why would surface ice measurements help “draw conclusions about the temperature of the deeper water.”?
But apparently you believe simply looking at sea ice extent is all you need to do to declare “there are no apparent signs of the “warm ocean currents”.
I don’t think that simple assertion has much factual support.
I presented evidence that Southern Sea Surface Temperature as been below average for the last 6 years, I take it that you cannot refute this?
How about this:
“Strong Sensitivity of Pine Island Ice-Shelf Melting to Climatic Variability” “Observations and numerical modeling reveal large fluctuations in the ocean heat available in the adjacent bay and enhanced sensitivity of ice-shelf melting to water temperatures at intermediate depth, as a seabed ridge blocks the deepest and warmest waters from reaching the thickest ice. Oceanic melting decreased by 50% between January 2010 and 2012, with ocean conditions in 2012 partly attributable to atmospheric forcing associated with a strong La Niña event. Both atmospheric variability and local ice shelf and seabed geometry play fundamental roles in determining the response of the Antarctic Ice Sheet to climate.”
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/343/6167/174.abstract
So “Oceanic melting decreased by 50% between January 2010 and 2012” and “ocean conditions in 2012” are “partly attributable to atmospheric forcing associated with a strong La Niña event”. Show us some observation evidence to support your claims of “warm ocean currents” and the conclusions you’ve drawn “about the temperature of the deeper water.”
You said this,
How do you get from “A” to “B” if you aren’t using sea ice extent to draw conclusions about ocean currents and basal ice shelf ocean temperatures? I gather this is the logic:
It’s that simple, eh? But, at the same time, somehow not so simple that one would expect those warm ocean currents to impact observations of calving rates or basal melt (ice shelf elevations)…
FWIW the Larsen B Ice Shelf appears to have regrown since it famously broke up in 2002. Of course the entire area is encased in fast ice, but there does appear to be a clear ridge where the shelf boundary is. A good image date is Dec 19, 2012.
“What we’re seeing is one of the strongest warming signals on Earth,” says Andrew Monaghan, a co-author and scientist at the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research.”
And that ‘warming signal’ is from a computer model that was used to “infill missing data”. It seems to me in the real world the infilling is being done by ice.
Leo Geiger says:
January 19, 2014 at 3:01 pm
…It’s that simple, eh? But, at the same time, somehow not so simple that one would expect those warm ocean currents to impact observations of calving rates or basal melt (ice shelf elevations)…
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
WHAT warm ocean currents?
I think you are mixing up the Arctic that has warm water from the Gulf Stream head in its direction vs the Antarctic with its Antarctic Circumpolar Current or ‘West Wind Drift’ that completely isolates the Continent form waters from the equator.
The opening of Drake Passage at the tip of South America (Cape Horne) allowed this current that completely circles the continent to form plus the closing of the Isthmus of Panama is thought to be the geologic events that sent the earth into the present ice age.
…
From some of my recent searches:
The Cape Horn Current: “…The Cape Horn Current is a cold water current that flows west-to-east around Cape Horn. This current is caused by the intensification of the West Wind Drift as it rounds the cape….” WIKI
From another source that I trust a heck of a lot more, Maritime Safety Information CHAPTER 31 OCEAN CURRENTS: TYPES AND CAUSES OF CURRENTS I start at the beginning of the passage which talks of the southern Atlantic. The chapter also has a map that shows that some of the cold water heads up along the west coast of South America. And it show the West Wind Drift as COLD water going round and round the continent of Antarctica.
The two finger salute is used in Australia as well, so this could be Antarctica’s message to Chris Turney.
Leo Geiger says: January 19, 2014 at 3:01 pm
So would I, as I have no recollection of declaring “that sea ice extent tracks deeper ocean temperatures (not surface temperatures) along the margins of Antarctica.” Can you please highlight where I made such a declaration?
You said this,
As you can see from the Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Extent With Anomaly map above, there are currently two large fingers of anomalous Sea Ice protruding out in the Weddell Sea…
So there are no apparent signs of the “warm ocean currents” that “are projected to melt the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea area of Antarctica opening instabilities in the West Antarctic Ice sheet”.
How do you get from “A” to “B” if you aren’t using sea ice extent to draw conclusions about ocean currents and basal ice shelf ocean temperatures? I gather this is the logic:
…if there were “signs of warm ocean currents”, then one would expect those to also affect sea ice extent.
So what you are saying is that I made an inference rather than a declaration, and that the inference I made had nothing to do with “deeper ocean temperatures”?
It’s that simple, eh? But, at the same time, somehow not so simple that one would expect those warm ocean currents to impact observations of calving rates or basal melt (ice shelf elevations)…
You are going in circles. Let’s try again. Can you show us observational evidence of the “signs of warm ocean currents” you claim?
Chad Wozniak says:
January 19, 2014 at 11:30 am (Edit)
At today’s rate of Antarctic sea ice extents increase, and that positive rate of Antarctic Sea Ice extent has been positive since May 2011 so it crosses now nine seasons of sea ice melting (November, December, January), sea ice minimums (February-March), Sea ice freezing (April, May, June, August) and sea ice maximums (September-October) each year …..
if this trend continues, the Drake Passage, Straits of Magellan, and Cape Horn (56-58 south latitude) could be closed to ship traffic for weeks at a time due to excessive Antarctic Sea Ice in as few as 8-12 years.
Unlike others, I do not believe that even a solid cover of ice across Cape Horn for two months will stop currents from flowing under the ice. The depths at mid-strait are simply too deep, and the inertia of the remaining part of the sea is enough the keep currents circling. Maybe.
Now, will today’s trends continue?
We don’t know. But – unlike the Arctic where “only” 3.5 million square km’s of sea could melt (2012 record low was being declared a disaster!) – there is an absolute minimum of 0.0 of sea ice left in September – there is no possible maximum to antarctic sea ice extents.
But it is worse than you think!
At today’s levels of Arctic sea ice, the Arctic sea ice is restricted to a small “cap” almost – but not exactly -centered around the pole between latitudes 82 north and 85 north.
At that latitude, at the time of minimum sea ice extent in the Arctic when even the maximum solar elevation angles cannot get over 8-10 degrees above the horizon, thermodynamics, heat absorption calcs, and heat transfer calculations show that more energy is lost from the open ocean from increased evaporation losses, increased convection and conduction losses, and increased long wave radiation losses from the open ocean that can be gained by the small change in albedo between open ocean and dirty sea ice.
So, in today’s world, increased Arctic sea ice loss cools the planet.
But it is even worse than you think!
In today’s world, the Antarctic land ice covers some 14.0 Mkm^2 of ice.
The Antarctic Ice Shelves add an additional 3.5 Mkm^2 of ice.
The Antarctic Sea ice surrounds both of these with an extra 19.0 – 20.0 Mkm^2 of additional reflective surfaces.
The total (14.0 + 3.5 + 20.0 = 37.5 mkm^2 of reflective ice surface) is greater than ALL other land areas combined in the southern hemisphere. It represents a single solid area from the pole up to latitude 60 south. And between latitude 60 south (Antarctic sea ice maximum) and latitude 70 south (Antarctic sea ice minimum) ALL of the changing sea ice surface is exposed to sunlight at 20 to 40 degrees EVERY daylight hour of every day of daylight through the year. Air mass is reduced, losses are reduced, albedo of the ocean is reduced, and the sea ice is “cleaner” and more reflective.
Under those conditions, every square kilometer of “extra” Antarctic sea ice reflects MORE energy from the planet …. And increases global cooling.
Simply comparing a “minus” Arctic anomaly to a “plus” Antarctic anomaly is wrong.
Adding the two together for a “net ice anomaly” is wrong.
Under today’s conditions of sea ice and day-of-year minimums and maximums, BOTH anomalies cool the planet.
Gary Pearse says:
January 19, 2014 at 2:06 pm
Yes, reflective (Arctic amplification) theory says that every extra sq km of sea ice will cool the planet more than “normal” during every day that we find an Antarctic “positive” anomaly. But nobody can assure you of whether or not that will actually happen on a month-month basis.
But … We have seen continuous positive Antarctic sea anomaly rates for more than 2-1/2 years now ….
RACookPE1978 says: @ur momisugly January 19, 2014 at 4:20 pm
I will agree that the current will continue under the ice if Drake Passage freezes. However the current is wind driven and with the ice you have more of a constriction. Will this push more cold water up along the coast of South America and causing more La Ninas?
As I already pointed out today. South America has been getting some pretty nasty winter weather in recent years. Could this be from additional cold water during the winter?
Brazil: Ice Age Now
Peru: Ice Age Now
Bolivia: Ice Age Now
Argentina: Ice Age Now
Chile: Ice Age Now
A comment from Jinlum Zhang at Harris-Mann Climatology
The actual paper: Modeling the Impact of Wind Intensification on Antarctic Sea Ice Volume
Will this form the largest iceberg in the satellite era?
justthefactswuwt says:
Ice shelves float. 9/10 below water, 1/10 above water. If the surface elevations are observed to decrease with time, it means the ice shelf is getting thinner below, and vice versa. Ice shelf surface measurements tell you if the bottom is melting or growing, and at what rate, which indicates basal temperature.
It is more complicated than that, but that is the general idea. Pine Island has been thinning continuously for decades. Does that count as observational evidence of warm currents?
But the real point here is that it *is* complicated. Enough so that drawing conclusions about ice shelves based on sea ice extent is a very bad idea. Consider the paper you quoted:
Here is the press release:
http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_releases/press_release.php?id=2452
“It is not so much the ocean variability, which is modest by comparison with many parts of the ocean, but the extreme sensitivity of the ice shelf to such modest changes in ocean properties that took us by surprise…”
Consider that. On top of the decadal thinning because of the Circumpolar Deep Water (CDW), a change in the depth of the thermocline, in two short years, lowered the temperature enough to decrease the basal melting rate by 50%. Would your plot of sea ice extent have told you either of those things?
The reason there are “no apparent signs” is because you are looking at sea ice extent. It’s the wrong tool for the job.
I’m sorry if the Pine Island glacier example is too far removed from Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf in the Weddell Sea, but it is the area I’m most familiar with.
“Antarctica Has Sea Ice Rabbit Ears, a V for Victory or Maybe It’s a Peace Sign?…”
Maybe it’s a message in Australian to the warmists.
richardscourtney says:
The ice shelves are growing? You wouldn’t by chance be confusing sea ice and ice shelves, would you? Not the same thing.
David L. Hagen says:
January 19, 2014 at 5:44 pm
Will this form the largest iceberg in the satellite era?
***************************************************************************************************************************Quick – break on of the ears off and tow it to California….
“….A hard freeze last month in central Argentina killed at least 22 percent of the 2013 winter wheat crop…”
Good maybe wheat in Kansas City will stay above $7.00/bushel.