Antarctic Sea Ice At Record Levels

All data from last week’s WUWT (May 8) Sea Ice Page. (Today’s values (May 12) are slightly lower. Then again, we are 5 days closer to the maximum solar exposure in the Arctic. Thereafter, the arctic gets less sun every day.) But the Antarctic gets more everyday.)
1. “Excess” total sea ice area anomaly is now (May 8) greater than 1.050 million sq km’s.
Hmmmn. An “excess” total sea ice area anomaly (which combines both the Arctic and Antarctic sea ice areas together) approaching the size of Hudson Bay.
2. “Excess” Antarctic sea ice area is now 1.67 Million sq km’s (May 8)… Or 97% the area of the entire Greenland ice cap. (A fact which 97% of government-paid climate scientists in the Obama administration will chose to ignore.)
3. By itself, “Excess” Antarctic sea ice area is now back over 1.67 Mkm^2 … a level only reached 5 times before.
A level NEVER reached between 1979 and 2007 in the modern (global warming) era, but has been passed five times in the 7 years between 2007 and 2014. Obviously, the more CO2 is in the air, the more Antarctic sea ice area keep increasing, right?
Combine this with the “Inconvenient Fact” that actual measured satellite global temperatures have NOT increased since 1996 … Makes Obama seem a bit – premature in claiming today that global warming is a national crisis?
4. “Excess” Antarctic sea ice area in 2014 is now (May 8) about 1.0 Mkm^2 GREATER than 2013′s sea ice area on this date last year. And 2013 set a record-breaking maximum Antarctic sea ice area in late December. Makes you wonder what will come later in this year.
5. And the Great Lakes sea ice – which is NOT included in the NSIDC’s “sea ice area” calculations! – has not yet melted away – but we are now in the second week in May. Steel, iron ore, coal production are already being affected, companies have already announced second quarter incomes and jobs are being affected in the Great Lakes region.
Now, Arctic sea ice is of course melting, and Arctic sea ice area has been dropping since early April as it does every year. Total sunlight onto the Arctic is increasing, and will increase until June 22 – about 5 weeks from now. Arctic sea ice will continue melting through the long summer days up north. But Arctic sea ice will continue decreasing its albedo until late July – decreasing from its present 0.93 to towards its low of 0.45 or so in July. But by mid-September when Arctic sea ice is at its minimum and Antarctic sea ice will be near its maximum, the Antarctic sea ice edge will be irradiated by five TIMES as much solar energy per square meter than the Arctic sea ice edge.
So, if 5 times the solar radiation falls on 1.67 million “extra” square kilometers of newly-frozen “excess” Antarctic sea ice than falls on a missing 0.4 Mkm^2 of Arctic sea ice, what happens to the planet’s total heat balance?
Do we not cool off even more?

Box of Rocks says:
May 12, 2014 at 2:50 pm ( replying to)

Ragnaar says:
May 12, 2014 at 2:22 pm
…”
Important point. Significantly I think, ice insulates …”

Here is a thermo type problem for all y’all….
Calculate the thickness of ice in a water tower place 125′ above ground and is spherical with a radius of 20′.
What is the maximum thickness the ice layer will be in the tower at a steady state condition.
Assume that the air temperature does not rise above 32 degrees F for 45 days.
Will the tank need to be heated? If so at what rate?

You are trying to make a point, but you have exactly the WRONG geometry to make your point.
In your case (a spherical tower holding water high up above the ground in the midst of sub-freezing air), it is the amount of sunight received AND the air temperature that matters, NOT the layer of ice forming continuously on top of the water in the spherical tower.
But … that is NOT the geometry in the high arctic.
First, consider the case of 1 Mkm^2 of sea ice at the equator above the atmosphere exposed to sunlight (This is, after all, what the so-called climate scientists use their classrooms and on their mid-term exam tests). When the sunlight hits this “iceberg” in space, it reflects sunlight proportional to the ice albedo of 0.95. If that 1.0 million sq km’s of ice were to melt, the darker albedo of seawater at 0.066 would require the sea water to absorb more much heat energy and the water would heat up the air and, eventually, the earth.
The Antarctic sea ice varies over the year between a latitude of 71 degrees south (at it minimum sea ice extents of 3-4 Mkm^2) and extents as far north as 59 south latitude (at its recent maximums of 19-20 Mkm^2 sea ice extents.) At these latitudes, the edge of Antarctic sea ice receives 5 times the amount of solar radiation that the edge of the Arctic sea ice does in mid and late September each year. At these latitudes of 60 – 70 south, the solar energy penetrates less atmosphere, has much less losses in the atmosphere, hits the water at high solar elevation angles every hour of the day, and is hit with substantially more solar radiation all year for more hours of every day of the year.
So YES, if the antarctic sea ice edge expands – goes further north – more solar energy is reflected from the earth with each square meter of Antarctic sea ice expansion.
Not so in the high arctic – particularly at the tie of minimum Arctic sea ice extents. The edge of the Arctic ice varies somewhat but can be averaged at 80 north latitude to 78 north latitude in recent years. At these latitudes in mid-September, the sun is only 8 to 10 degrees above the horizon. The albedo if BOTH water is 0.30 – 0.35 at these angles. Worse, the sunlight is trying to penetrate 8 to 14 atmosphere thicknesses at these low solar elevation angles. So their is almost no solar energy being absorbed – IF the sunlight can actually penetrate the 70% clouds found that far north at this time of year. If there are clouds, even LESS solar energy gets through to strike the top of the sea ice or water.
So, if the Arctic sea ice melts, little solar energy is absorbed into the Arctic waters through the 12 hours of sunlight at mid-September Not zero, but very little compared to lower latitudes.
However, if the open arctic water is exposed, longwave radiation losses increase significantly.
Evaporation losses – zero if ice-covered – go up significantly.
Conduction and convection losses increase when the sea ice not present.
So, if the Arctic sea ice melts under today’s condition in the Arctic anytime between late August and early April (7 months of the year!~) more heat is lost from the Arctic ocean than can be absorbed into the newly exposed sea water from the sunlight.

Dr. Strangelove says:
May 12, 2014 at 8:36 pm (replying to)

RACook
“So, if the Arctic sea ice melts under today’s condition in the Arctic anytime between late August and early April (7 months of the year!~) more heat is lost from the Arctic ocean than can be absorbed into the newly exposed sea water from the sunlight.”

No. The solar insolation in the Arctic on summer is about 500 W/m^2. The seawater must have a temperature of 37.5 C to radiate 500 W/m^2. If the water is cooler than this, it will be heated by the sun.v

Are you trying to claim that longwave radiation is the only heat loss from Arctic waters? That’s wrong – unless you have this mental image of that iceberg-in-space that I’ve seen in university exams.
Well, I am specifically and very exactly talking NOT about some mythical “summer day” in the Arctic – you may pick any one you wish – but the very real mid-September days when this supposed “Arctic sea ice crisis” is at its minimum. So, at the 2012 Arctic sea ice minimum of 3.0 Mkm^2, the edge of the Arctic sea was a rough cap over the arctic going fro the pole down to 80 north latitude. At that latitude on Sept 22 (you may pick another day-of-year if you wish) the ACTUAL clear sky no clouds maximum solar radiation onto a flat surface is 7.0 watts/m^2 at 0700, 57 watts/m^2 at 09:00, 100 at 11:00 through 13:00, back down to 57 watts again at 15:00 (3:00 pm), and only 7 watts/m^2 at 17:00 (%:00 pm). Sunlight is of 0.0 between 17:00 and 07:00 the next morning.
Now, where did you get your 500 watts/m^2 at what latitude at what day of year? (Clear sky only now!)
So, for these few watts of incoming solar energy, YOU claim all the energy is radiated away by long wave? Convection alone is 35 – 50 watts/m^2 into the wind-swept air. Evaporation depends on air temperature of course – 30 – 70 watts/m^2 is an accepted value.
Longwave radiation, eh?
So, calculate this: Emissivity of water and ice are nearly the same. Both are emitting into the same cloudy sky, or clear sky if you wish. Longwave radiation occurs 24 hours per day though.
If the surface is open water, then the surface temperature is 2-4 degrees C. 275 to 277 K.
if the surface is ice-covered, then the radiating surface is at air temperature: -10 C to -15 C that day-of-year.
Hmmmn. Only (273-15) = 258 K, right?
So, open water radiates (278^4)/(258^4) MORE energy than does ice-covered water, right?
35% more energy is lost from open Arctic water in Arctic waters at 80 north in mid-September.

drumphil says:
May 12, 2014 at 8:04 pm

(RACook)
“Irrelevent. Why do you ask?”

How is the volume of the ice irrelevant to how much ice there is? How is how much ice there is irrelevant?

The amount of solar energy reflected by sea ice or by open water at sea level is independent of ice volume. Reflection only depends on area and solar elevation angle. (In the arctic, sea ice albedo also depends of day-of-year, varying between 0.93 in early April down to 0.45 in mid-July.) The elevation of the central Antarctic ice cap is NOT changing over time. The total arae of the Antarctic ice cap stays at 14.0 Mkm^2.
The area of the ice shelves around Antarctica are NOT changing with time, they are steady at 3.5 Mkm^2. By the way, these ice shelves are NOT included in the NSIDC’s antarctic sea ice totals.
Almost all of the record-breaking high 19.0+ Mkm^2 Antarctic sea ice we’ve had recently melts every year. (Unlike the Arctic sea ice which is only 50% first-year ice.) You can play games with claims of multi-year ice in the arctic, but NOT around the Antarctic.
So, at the same time that arctic sea ice is at 80 degrees north getting hit with 50 or 100 watts at noon, the antarctic sea ice edge is receiving five TIMES as much radiation on a horizontal square meter.
You need 5 times the sea ice loss in the arctic just to equal what is reflected back into space in the antarctic each second. And, at the low elevation angles of the sun in the arctic, even that ratio is too small.

Ragnaar says:
May 12, 2014 at 9:06 pm
A picture might help. Ocean heat loss in winter:
http://www.whoi.edu/cms/images/lstokey/2005/1/v39n2-schmitt3en_5614.gif

Nice try. pretty picture. Doesn’t work.
Now, through the entire last winter in the antarctic, we had about 1.3 Mkm^2 of “excess” antarctic sea ice. EXCESS antarctic sea ice. The ENTIRE period from mid-2011 through 2014 we have been AVERAGING a little over 1 million EXCESS square kilometers of antarctic sea ice. Your “theory” has to work for every day of the past three years!
How many cubic kilometers of antarctic continental ice had to “melt” and run off into the antarctic ocean to create that mythical “cold water” insulation-blanket of low convection cycles you claim in your image? Give me the calculations.
How much antarctic continental ice melted, where did it melt from to go out evenly and smoothly underneath 19 million square kilometers of the ocean waters surrounding Antarctica to INCREASE the freezing of 1 million EXTRA square kilometers of sea water?
How much did that ocean water have to get colder to freeze DUE TO FRESH WATER DILUTION? (Antarctic air temperatures didn’t change.)

drumphil says:
May 12, 2014 at 10:09 pm (replying to)

RACookPE1978 said:
“The amount of solar energy reflected by sea ice or by open water at sea level is independent of ice volume. ”

What, because reflected solar energy is the only reason we measure sea ice, and the answer gives us no other information?

Your question, not mine: Name any other reasons arctic and antarctic sea ice matter towards the world’s heat balance.
I am NOT the one worried about “arctic” sea ice loss the past few years.
I am NOT the hundreds of publicists and propagandists in the CAGW religion who are obsessing about arctic sea ice loss, while ignoring antarctic sea ice gains.
I AM however laughing at the hypocrisy of those in the CAGW religion who (deliberately) inflate the problems of losing arctic sea ice (which cools the planet if sea ice minimums continue to shrink!) while ignoring antarctic sea ice gain (which cools the planet if antarctic sea ice levels continue to increase steadily!
By the way, in how many years will Cape Horn be closed to sea traffic due to excess antarctic sea ice extents in September and October?

Dr. Strangelove says:
May 13, 2014 at 1:16 am (replying to)
Let me quote you RACook. You said:

“So, if the Arctic sea ice melts under today’s condition in the Arctic anytime between late August and early April (7 months of the year!~) more heat is lost from the Arctic ocean than can be absorbed into the newly exposed sea water from the sunlight.”

Wrong because sea ice melts on summer/spring and grows on autumn/winter. You must think the Arctic sea is in the southern hemisphere. See and learn.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/ssmi1_ice_ext1.png

Your summary “Wrong because sea ice melts on summer/spring and grows on autumn/winter.” = DEAD WRONG. Look at the plots again on the WUWT Sea Ice page.
Arctic sea ice is at its maximum sometime between mid-March (the equinox) and mid-April each year. Arctic sea ice is at its MAXIMUM in “spring”. Arctic sea ice reaches its minimum in mid-September each year – and is very consistent since records started in 1979 about this date. Hint: Skip the arbitrary and useless “spring” and “summer” and use actual dates. You will be less confused about Arctic and Antarctic as well.
Antarctic sea ice reaches its minimum slightly earlier (during mid-February normally) and reaches its maximum between mid-September to mid-October each year.) This is why the total global sea ice extents plots has more than two peaks each year.
But Arctic and Antarctic sea ice is constantly melting (retreating) and freezing (expanding) EVERY HOUR OF EVERY DAY OF EVERY YEAR. At any given day of year, more area may be added (frozen) than melted, or more area may be expanded and blown south or blown back north and compacted (Arctic). The anomaly is the difference between any given day-of-year’s average area and the satellite-measured actual area. The area is the surface (not volume) reflecting or absorbing sunlight on any given day-of-year.
Do you claim anything different? Do you have some other definition of “spring” and “summer”? There was a meaningless claim above that “the Arctic” receives 500 watts/m^2 “in the summer” …. But, in mid-September, the actual numbers show the edge of the actual Arctic sea ice at its minimum in 2012 received only 100 watts/m^2 for 2 hours per day. The rest of the day, that square meter of “arctic” was getting as little as 7 watts/meter^2. Overnight, that square meter received 0.0 watts from the sun.
My statement stands: If ANY region in the arctic melts (is changed from “covered by sea ice” into “open ocean water”) between early September each year through early April the next year, that square million (thousand, hundred, or tens) of kilometers of “open ocean” will lose more heat than can be gained from the sunlight hitting it.
Now, through the short midst of the five month Arctic “summer” between April and August each year, more heat energy IS GAINED when open water is struck by sunlight. But ONLY during those few days of summer. The rest of the year? The remaining seven months of the year? Less arctic sea ice means a cooler planet.
The Arctic sea ice anomaly IS negative all year, has been negative for many years now. Thus, 5 months of slightly higher heat gain (compared to “1970’s normal”), and seven months of increased heat loss (reflection) into space! To repeat what was clearly stated above: Increased sea ice loss ANYTIME between early-September through early April in the arctic means MORE heat lost by longwave radiation and convection and evaporation than can be gained by solar radiation.
Not so in the Antarctic. Every million square kilometers of “excess” Antarctic sea ice present ANYWHERE around the Antarctic ANYTIME of the year yields a cooler planet due to increased heat reflection because the edge (the ever-moving ever-melting and re-freezing part of the sea ice is that is measured by the antarctic sea ice anomaly) is many thousand kilometers closer to the equator than its arctic counterpart.
And the Antarctic sea ice anomaly has been POSITIVE every day since May 2011. Increasingly positive at that: Do you want to predict when the Cape Horn will blocked by sea ice? 8 years? 10? 12?