Sunshinehours reports that the Antarctic Sea Ice Extent for September 19th, 2014 is 20.11297 million square kilometers,
which is 1,535,000 sq km above the 1981-2010 climatological mean.
Another 58,000 sq km. was added since yesterday, making it the 7th All-Time Record in 7 Days.
This new record is 610,000 sq km higher than the previous daily record. The red line represents 2014 data.
![antarctic_sea_ice_extent_zoomed_2014_day_261_1981-2010[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/antarctic_sea_ice_extent_zoomed_2014_day_261_1981-20101.png?quality=75)
Data for Day 261. Data source: ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/south/daily/data/
NSIDC concurs:
![S_stddev_timeseries[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/s_stddev_timeseries1.png?quality=75)
A look at the data presented by NSIDC as it would be from space if there were no clouds:
h/t to Thomas Wysmuller
More data on the WUWT Sea Ice page
UPDATE: Andres Valencia reports in comments:
The University of Bremen (The new satellite “Shizuku”, AMSR2 sensor) will have to rescale their plots:
![extent_s_running_mean_amsr2_previous[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/extent_s_running_mean_amsr2_previous1.png?quality=75)
Source: http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr2/extent_s_running_mean_amsr2_previous.png
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
We are just over 3 months away from the SH summer solstice when when everywhere south of -70 degrees gets more daily sunlight than anywhere else on earth, at any time of the year.
http://applet-magic.com/insolation.htm
The albedo cooling of all that extra ice around the solstice will be very large.
And as sea ice increases we get a positive (cooling) feedback annually. I’d say it’s a safe bet sea ice will be higher still next year.
The supply problems caused by sea ice at Australia’s Antarctic bases the last couple of years look to get worse next year. At some point one or more will have to be abandoned. Despite the embarassment to the AGW crowd.
It’s worse that that!
The MAXIMUM solar top-of-atmosphere radiation occurs the first week in January (about 45 watts/m^2 MORE than the yearly average) and about 90 watts/m^2 MORE than when the Arctic sun is highest in late July.
true! Part of the Antarctic ice is hidden from the (southern summer) sun at its maximum, and part of the Antarctic summer maximum has already melted (the Antarctic sea ice is NOT at its maximum when the sun’s TOA radiation is at its maximum. BUT! Much of it is still exposed.
That was basically the reasoning followed by defenders of the spiral of death for the arctic, the albedo feedback. We know it didn’t turn out to be exactly correct, as there are many factors in play, not only the albedo. So if you accept bets, I’m willing to bet against your prediction.
The reasoning for the ‘Arctic Ice Death Spiral’ was that it was caused by warming temperatures.
I don’t believe that to be true, and think it was caused by embedded black causing decreased ice albedo combined with increased solar insolation from decreased aerosols. And the subsequent replacement by sea ice with much lower levels of BC (after Russian shutdown most of its heavily polluting Arctic industries)
Some time ago, here at WUWT, I said the melt out of older ice with high levels of BC was almost complete (3+ year ice is 90% gone with large increases in 2 and 3 year ice) and this year would see a significant increase in Arctic sea ice minimum. My explanation for the Arctic sea melt also predicts increasing Arctic sea ice from here as the albedo (cooling) effect increases.
I do take bets, and would take one on SH sea ice increasing next year. While by no means certain, because as you say, other factors are at work, I’d say the odds are well in its favour.
regards
Hello Philip,
Let’s bet then. How about 50 US dollars? I’m not willing to publicly give my email address here for fear of spammers and other ill-minded people that may see it, however if you use the contact form in this non-climate-related web page (in spanish, but it’s just a form, not difficult to use), whatever you write will end up reaching me and I will be able to respond to the email address that you provide and we can discuss further privately:
http://www.elsideron.com/F1Spain/2014/contact.php
Wow, the polynyas have been growing fast – presumably there will now be a rapid decline in Antarctic sea ice. Perhaps a multi-million square kilometre ice berg my soon be heading into the Atlantic.
Must be thin sheets though as newly made ocean ice. Still, it will provide a growing surface for algae on the water-side as the sun gets higher in the coming months and shines through the thin ice. Plankton feeds on the algae. Krill feeds on the plankton. Ocean mammals and pelagic life feed on all of it. Man feeds on the fish, and the Japanese feed on the whales (for research of course).
The thing about the polynyas is that they are made by winds screaming down from the highlands, and pushing the sea-ice away from shore. People who have been to antarctic often comment about how uncomfortable these winds are, even during the summertime. During the winter they become extreme, for they are fed by the fact cold air sinks. When air is down to minus 120 it is very dense, and flows down to sea level and out to sea at speeds that can exceed 100 mph. Even though the air warms as it sinks, it is still around minus 50 when it gets to sea-level. Just imagine the wind chill of minus fifty and 100 mph winds! Yet there is open water? Yes there is. Bizarre but true.
It is counter-intuitive, but it is the cold air that makes the open water. If it actually was warmer over Antarctica, the winds would be less, and the polynyas would be smaller.
When all the ice is pushed away from land so is the surface water. This leads to slightly warmer sub-surface water up-welling up close to land.
That creates another counter-intuitive situation. IE: the colder it is the more slightly warmer sub-surface water upwells at the coast.
There are some Alarmists who haven’t done their homework. They simply see slightly warmer, open water on the coast, and clap their hands in childish glee, exclaiming, “Oh! Look! We have proof it is warmer!”
Why all the fuss? It’s just weather.
Need I add the /(you know)?
Damn, didn’t you learn from the alarmists?
More ice is a sure sign of global warming!
/sarc
I am so glad no one has used the term “unprecedented”.
Cryosat 2 did.
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/CryoSat/Ice_sheet_highs_lows_and_loss
3 years of data.
In the 19th century ships reported icebergs far north of where they are found today.
On January 2, 1868 the 1326 ton clipper “Mermaid” arrived in Lyttelton after an 89 day passage from GB and it was reported that, ” When in the vicinity of Cape Leeuwin, Captain Rose and his officers had an anxious time avoiding 30 huge icebergs.”
http://www.warwickhughes.com/climate/Iceberg.htm
Cape Leeuwin is 34 degrees south. The furthest north Southern Ocean iceberg from the 20th century was recorded at 56 degrees south. About 2,400 kilometers difference.
Perhaps we are reverting to 19th century Southern Ocean climate.
The 1868 bergs were probably tabular bergs from the ongoing break-up of the East/West Antarctic (your choice) ice shelves that we’re constantly being warned about. The break-ups are, of course, not cyclical.
/sarc
I’m thinking the end of the LIA caused large scale breakup of Antarctic icesheets. And note January 2nd is mid-summer when temperatures are normally well over 30C in that area.
In the Cold War days this would be reported “internally” as a ‘break-out.’
A ‘break-out’ could entail the ‘wide-area’ authorization of nuclear weapons by Strategic Forces given an “event” provocation. In those days SSBN US Nuclear Submarine Captains sailed under orders to ‘launch on warning’ should an ‘event’ occur regardless of regional force deployments and postures.
Today, SSBN Capitans do not have such … “latitude.”
Doesn’t just beat the modern record, also beats 1964’s value of 19.7M km^2:
http://nsidc.org/monthlyhighlights/2013/04/glimpses-of-sea-ice-past/
IIRC, just a few years after that, another Nimbus satellite observed a value for Antarctica that was lower than any other annual maximum in the microwave-satellite record. Looking it up, it appears the 1966 had a maximum near 15.7M km^2, which is so low that it’d be off the bottom of the chart showing 16-20+M km^2 on this page!
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=6547200
If the expansion is due to global warming, why was 1964’s value higher than all of the microwave record until this year?
-Scott
Well folks, the record breaking ice cover around Antarctica is caused by global warming according to scientists down under. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-14/record-coverage-of-antarctic-sea-ice/5742668
This is in fact a Hollywood plot to build up to the launch of the 2016 film “Ice” about Ernest Shackleton’s Antarctic expedition.
How many time to run the same thing?
Wait until it hits the max then report. Oddly WUWT seems to have missed the Artic turning point on the 11th.
This is rather early in the year, Arctic recovery is far more important in that it breaks all the notions on “run away” melting and positive feedbacks.
Greg – It depends on which numbers you look at. I agree that the Cryosphere minimum appears to have been reached on 11 September, although that is only 1 day before the average since 1979.
However, the JAXA minimum for the daily figure (so far) was only reached on 17 September and the 5-day figure is showing its minimum on 16 September which is the latest day for which figures are available. These are both slightly later than their respective averages since 1979.
Turning to the NOAA figures, they seem to have turned on 16 September also, and that, too, is slightly later than the average there.
So this year has been really uneventful in the Arctic. Yes, the figures are considerably below average since 1979 but they are displaying steady if unspectacular improvement.
Spot on.
It has indeed now turned, as I mentioned at the open thread yesterday. AW has been in Bristol UK for a climate meeting or two. Maybe someone could contribute a post about the minimum.
Hmm. It looks as though my reply has been killed off. Hey ho.
Strangely, this remains unreported by the Guardian, the BBC or The Independent who are psychotically obsessed with their “Last Chance To Save The World” so-called “Climate Summit.”
Is the GRACE data reliable, or is the earlier ICECAP data valid? Is the ice mass on Antartica decreasing as glaciers melt (if so, more likely IMHO from volcanic activity than small surface temperature changes) or not?
Why can’t everyone involved in the climate game just ‘fess up and admit they haven’t got the first idea what’s happening and even less of an idea why or how?
Grace is total bollocks.
+1
Antarctic temperatures don’t get warm enough to melt glaciers, and the alleged loss of ice mass didn’t make the ocean levels rise.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
“But in 2010, sea levels mysteriously began to drop by 7mm, and stayed lower than expected for 18 months.”
[…]
This water notoriously hit Queensland first in December 2010 and three quarters of the Australian state was declared a disaster zone. But then the water got caught up in what the authors called “Australia’s expansive arheic and endorheic basins”. This is another way of saying the water stayed on land, trapped in salt lakes, to evaporate slowly.
Meanwhile, with all that water soaked up in the arid landscape, the sea levels actually began to fall, unexpectedly, and to stay low before once more resuming their ominous and potentially destructive rise. Australia is now hit by drought [fiction], and ocean levels now seem to be rising even faster, at 10mm a year [fantasy].
The scientists pieced together the chain of events by studying data from satellites called Grace…”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/23/australian-floods-global-sea-level
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Is the GRACE data reliable?
No.
Grace was originally intended to map gravitational anomalies and large scale terrestrial water retention (e.g. Australia). It lacks sufficient precision to map ice changes reliably, which is why results from it for say, the Himalyan glaciers vary wildly. Also, Grace is deteriorating. NASA already reversed the lead/lag satellites, which maneuver has further degraded precision.
Is this record because some ice shelf calved an enormous floe which has drifted away somewhat as an unlikely protrusion? The trouble with having a freak high is that it raises expectation and will be used to make future, normal ice cover look like a problem. The graph looks more and more like a bell curve every year, why can’t it simply be a bell curve?
The top figure is indeed quite striking.
Antarctic ice will of course continue to be normal, until it’s not.
Southern Ocean sea ice has been in an increasing trend going back 20 years. The trend has accelerated over the last 5 years. This is not a ‘freak result’. Just the continuation of the trend.
It’s not a bell curve. Bell curve refers to a statistical distribution.
To see the bell curve you simply pick a date and ask yourself if the data tend toward a curve in the fashion of a bell curve. OTOH I just had a TIA so it is possible I am arguing with a fried brain.
Robin, I´m not a climatologist, but I worked on an Arctic (not Antarctic) project starting about 24 years ago, so I´m teensy bit familiar with ice. Yesterday I spent a few hours skimming papers and literature which discussed the Antarctic ice surface area, and I didn´t find a convincing explanation for the current increase.
What I have found is that Antarctica is large and the climate changes on a regional basis. This means what goes on with ice formation can vary from side to side. My (amateur) estimate is that an enormous floe wouldn´t have the ability to influence ice formation all around the continent.
I took a peek at the water temperature and salinity data taken by Argo buoys just outside the ice boundary in the last couple of months, The water seems to have had a top layer about 100 meters to 200 meters thick, temperature about minus 1 to minus 1.5 degrees C, salinity a little less than 34. The layer underneath is about 0 degrees C, salinity about 34.7. The salinity seems to be a teensy bit lower than “normal”. However, the buoys are drifting hundreds of kilometers away from the coast.
Purely guessing, I think the increased ice extent is mostly caused by wind patterns (cyclones appear to be possible candidates). This means the increased ice extent itself may lead to further changes, which in turn could make ice extent go either way. One thing I learned when studying physical phenomena in other fields is that nature (in the longer term) tends to balance things out.
Don’t worry folks. It’s all understood. It IS changed wind patterns that are causing this damned increase in sea ice, isn’t it? Well the ozone hole is the culprit. Sorry, is most likely the culprit.
The WMO reports that reports that ozone depletion in the Antarctic stratosphere (10-50 km above the Earth’s surface) is very likely the dominant cause of a southward shift of summertime weather patterns in the Southern Hemisphere.
Australian Antarctic Division atmospheric scientist, Dr Simon Alexander, who co-authored a chapter of the Assessment, said cooling in the Antarctic lower stratosphere, as a result of ozone depletion, had very likely shifted the region of mid-latitude strong westerly winds and associated rainfall southward.
“Antarctic ozone depletion has also likely contributed to a southward expansion of the tropical circulation in summer and it may have increased subtropical rainfall,” he said.
Dr Alexander said the Antarctic ozone hole would continue to form each spring, and its recovery is not expected until the middle of the century, due to the long lifetime of ozone depleting substances, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), in the stratosphere.
More here:
http://www.antarctica.gov.au/news/2014/antarctic-ozone-hole-alters-southern-hemisphere-climate
Despite the disappearing ozone, it is interesting that the Australian Antarctic Division do not appear to have changed their shipping resupply schedules in 2014-15 to that of last season when they encountered considerable delays because of increased sea ice. It will be fascinating to follow their progress next November.
But if you want to do your bit to detect increases or decreases in penguin numbers as a result of environmental changes in the Antarctic you can volunteer your services here:
http://www.penguinwatch.org/
Not quite sure what environmental changes they are talking about but I am sure that the penguins will most likely tell us by the middle of he century.
King of Cool
You need a different source. The ozone holes are seasonal and temporary, forming each September and then diminishing until they have disappeared by November. Chlorinated hydrocarbons are naturally formed and will never disappear from the atmosphere. The ozone depletion over Antarctica is a natural, not a manmade phenomenum and has nothing to do with climate or ice or penguins..
It has a lot to do with the wet bottoms of the alarmists, however.
Wow, looking forward to the spinning of this one
That’s basically a 34 million square kilometre ice cap. The continent of North America, including the Arctic Archipelago and Greenland, is about 24 million km^2. That’s an extra Canada of ice.
Can someone please explain the discrepancy:
Cryosphere Today indicates (only) 16.58945 million sq km at Day259 for Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/antarctic.sea.ice.interactive.html
Thanks.
[The 16.6 million sq kilometers is the “area” of sea ice, 20.5 million sq kilometers is the “extent” of all ocean water covered by at least 15% sea ice and floating icebergs. It’s OK – BOTH are record high sea ice levels in their own category. .mod]
Thanks Mod. Your very swift response is appreciated.
How to spin this? Easy. When the vast area of thin ice at the edge melts in the Southern Summer, it will be a record ice melt for Antarctica. Please folks, get with the program!
Rate of gain of antarctic sea ice: 30 billion tonnes per year (Holland et al.)
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00301.1?af=R&
Rate of loss of antarctic land ice: 160 billion tonnes per year (yes from WUWT!!)
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/05/23/climate-alarmists-make-major-blunder-in-reporting-antarctica-ice-loss-results/
Conclusion: the antarctic is losing ice. The endless focus in WUWT on sea ice gain is looking less like cherry picking and more like straining out gnats while swallowing camels (ref: Gospels)
Bill H. says, September 20, 2014 at 4:57 am:
“Rate of loss of antarctic land ice: 160 billion tonnes per year”
The jury is still out on that one, I’m afraid. GRACE claims loss, IceSAT claims gain. And the loss/gain rates vary A LOT from region to region.
True. NASA says loss, NOAA says net gain. Neither instrument is precise enough to settle the score. But the most likely area for net ice mass loss are in WAIS. There on ground sampling shows Ronne is gaining mass, Ross is more or less stable, and the Amundsen Embayment is losing. The most recent estimate (the Rignot stuff misreported by MSM) is maybe 300km^3 year. That is possibly an outlier, because the previous ground survey has about half that rate. Most of this is the PIG (Pine Island Glacier) which may have an active volcano underneath that would explain the discrepancy. The volcano is there. The question is whether it has become active.
Kristian, It would help if you could provide references for your claims. IceSAT uses radar altimetry as does the more hi-tech Cryosat. Cryosat provides higher resolution and more complete coverage, especially in the key coastal regions where ice loss due to calving is occurring. Cryosat shows antarctic ice loss of around 160+/- 50 billion tonnes per year, in agreement with GRACE.
Have a look at Anthony’s article which I’ve already referenced in this thread, or look at the actual paper on which he reports: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GL060111/pdf
Still if you will insist on cherry picking old IceSAT data and ignoring CryoSAT…..
BillH:
No one has yet explained how Antarctica is getting colder and yet losing ice. Do you say CO2? Well that has not warmed the rest of the globe. Here are the facts: the figures for Antarctic ice loss are untrue and that part of the globe is not warming just As the rest of the planet is not warming.
Antarctica loses a heap of ice in just one peninsula known to be extremely volcanically active. More ice everywhere else.
Hmmmmm, let me think…yep, gotta be CO2s to blame.
But don’t volcanoes emit some CO2 ….. And there we have it, CO2 is to blame, the heat from the volcano is an irrelevance to climate science.
Antarctic mass is irrelevant and academic. It may be unrelated to climate.
Antarctic sea ice matters. As it extends equatorwards albedo soars. It has real potential to disrupt climate and even to precipitate a sharp cooling episode.
Growing Ice , not a problem thanks to the ‘magic’ of the cause more ice is also proof of AGW
Reduction of Arctic ice is due to global warming.
Growth in Antarcric ice is also due to global warming.
Sorry Spivs-R-Us, I’m not buying it.
Regarding the comments above about Albedo, here is nice pic of Earth yesterday.
Nothing but white from 50S to 90S.
At very close to 12 hours of sunlight everywhere right now, this area south of 50S is getting 7.7% of the total solar energy received by the Earth today and the majority of that it is going directly back into space with the weighted average Albedo of the area being at about 66% today. 66% is a big number.
The impact on the climate of the glaciers and sea ice really does depend greatly on how far it gets toward the equator. At the poles, it makes a tiny difference, but getting into the 50s latitudes, now we are getting larger and larger and larger impacts.
http://s28.postimg.org/tk2viscrx/Earth_Sept_19_2014.jpg
How is it affecting the climate, look at the SSTs next to the ice.
http://s9.postimg.org/pxxw42opr/SST_Sept_19_2014.png
Well said Bill. Not all sea ice is created equal when it comes to global energy balance. One unit of sea ice has a greater impact on albedo at lat 65S then it does at lat 70S. The effect on albedo is most amplified at the outer envelope. If the outer envelope is tending to push out toward the equator at the seasonal max then this is a phenomenon that needs to be discussed more widely.
Not only is the SH sea ice closer to the equator, in the SH summer the earth is closest to the sun, which is about 7 percent more intense, meaning a larger reduction in solar energy through albedo then in the NH, just based on that alone. The SH reflects more intense solar insolation, more direct solar insolation, and does not release as much ocean heat when the ice is gone like in the N.H.
But it is even worse than that! Now 58 south latitude!
It’s sad that almost every other source of Antarctica sea ice extent articles I’ve checked in the past hour that mentions the new record … has to mention Arctic sea ice extent too (but without bothering to mention the huge growth in the last two years) and “climate scientists” claiming more Antarctica sea ice is actually a symptom of “climate change” (these days EVERYTHING is a symptom of climate change).
.
Even the headlines for the articles (except here) can’t seem to focus ONLY on the new Antarctica sea ice extent record (for those readers who never get beyond the headlines, I suppose).
.
But there is good news too: Thanks to the internet, real scientists (not climate astrologers playing computer games), and people not affected by extremist left-wing beliefs, can share scientific data not slanted by those political beliefs.
.
Freedom of speech would be impossible without excellent websites like this one.
.
As a general rule of thumb, leftists are willing to lie and mislead about any subject to further their quest for big government socialism.
.
When leftists use statistics to support their “arguments”, the data they use are very likely to be wrong, or misleading, or even a complete fabrication.
.
That statement is based on the economic data they use to promote an inferior economic system called socialism.
.
For global warming, where I’m not as well versed as in economics, I just assume the same people who lie and mislead about economics, will behave the same way when discussing global warming (or any other subject).
.
The old political/religious strategy of claiming a catastrophe is coming unless everyone does as their leaders say has morphed again and again since the 1960’s for “environmentalists” — the boogeyman has changed from DDT, to acid rain, to a hole in the ozone layer, to global warming (I left out a dozen more).
.
When the general public stops believing in the alleged global warming threat, there will be another “coming catastrophe” the leftists will claim can only be stopped by everyone doing as they say (maybe global cooling?).
.
Two things you can generalize about leftists: They are well practiced liars/deceivers, but they are not bright enough to lie without getting caught (ex; Hockey Stick Chart)
.
Well said!
There you go. With global warming we can expect more ice and cooling. That’s what makes it so insidious. Warming takes many forms. It is the cause of everything that happens or doesn’t happen. It could mean hot or cold. Climate change is Gaia’s menopause.