ORH_wxman

He's not wrong that there were probably some pretty low ice extents in the late 1930s or 1940s akin to perhaps the late 1990s or early 2000s but that definitely doesn't matter in the larger picture. The best data starts in 1979 so that is the natural starting point for most ice related graphs. It's not some conspiracy.

Final June NSIDC-adjusted area numbers are in, and we're currently 2nd lowest on record behind 2012 though 2007 and 2010 were very close to 2019 as well. What this means is that this year has an excellent chance to finish in the top 3 lowest extent/areas on record. Here are the top 5 lowest: 2012 (6.53 million sq km) 2019 (6.76 million) 2010 (6.77 million) 2007 (6.81 million) 2016 (6.94 million) Does this year have enough of a good start to set a new record? Most likely not. The numbers do not support it. That doesn't mean 0 chance though like more recent years. But we will have to set a new record for area loss between now and the minimum to get there...however, we don't have to set it by much....only about 40k. If we melt 40k more area than 2016 from here on out, we'll set a new minimum area record. The average 2007-2018 loss from July 1st onward was 4.13 million sq km. That would leave 2019 at 2.63 million sq km of ice at the minimum for area. The 2012 record sits at 2.22 million sq km of ice which means in order to set a new recrod, we need to lose 4.56 million sq km of ice area. 2016 is the current record of ice area loss from this point forward losing 4.52 million sq km. So as stated above, we will need to beat this by about 40k or more to pass 2012 at the minimum. That is going to be about 2 standard deviations or even a little more for losses. So I'd put the chances of setting a new record at about 5%. Again, this is for area only. Not extent. Extent is a little tougher since things like compaction can occur that affect extent a lot more than it affects area. Still, it will be hard to set the extent record as well. We might have a slightly greater than 5% chance at setting the extent record since 2012 wasn't extremely compacted. Getting back to area, below is a histogram of what would happen to 2019 if we followed all area losses from previous years....so for example, if we followed 2018 area losses from this point forward, we would finish with an area minimum of just over 2.50 million sqkm: So given the information above, I am going to predict a minimum area of 2.60 million sq km +/- 200k (2.4-2.8 for a range). I will set a minimum NSIDC extent of 3.8 million sq km +/- 200k (3.6-4.0 as a range). Neither of these ranges include the 2012 record...I don't believe we will quite make it. But this year at least has an outside shot unlike previous recent years, so at least there is a reason to track closely.

2010 (not listed on the graph) was actually the leader right now....but then it stalled starting tomorrow. But I think this year def has a better chance than 2010 since the weather forecast remains favorable for big ice losses over the next week.

I think "ice-free" has been defined as less than a million sq km of ice extent. I'm not sure if blue ocean event is the same thing but I'd assume it is. 100% ice free will never happen in this century because there will always be some residual ice clinging to northern Greenland or chunks of ice breaking off the Greenland glaciers.

The chance of a blue ocean event this year is 0%.

2019 is still in the running, but will need a strong finish to June: 2016: +70k 2012: -190k 2010: -300k 2007: +5k You can see how 2010 was actually running ahead of 2012 here for melting, but it then stalled near the end of the month and it continued into early July....putting an end to any chance of a nuclear finish like 2012 had. The guidance this year has a very impressive dipole to finish the month of June...so we might have a legit shot here. The big question will be if we can turn that into a big blocking high over the CAB or if it retreats more to the Asian side and becomes a reverse dipole, which would probably put an end to our chances at a record....the guidance is kind of split on that idea for the longer term. This melt season might finally have some drama after the colder early summers we've seen in recent years.

Area already takes into account lower concentration. So if the pack is very fragmented, we will get lower area readings. I don't see any clear evidence why we should treat area as different than we normally do. This year is already quite low on area, so it isn't like area is showing something drastically different than what we'd expect given the very warm conditions thus far. If we get very hostile weather from here on out, we could still see a new record low this year. Right now, I'd bet against it, and settle on something in the top 3 or 4 instead. But there is still time for things to change.

The thing is....NSIDC area is measured by SSMI/S and that particular satellite gets "tricked" by melt ponds into thinking it is water. It's been measuring like this for decades so we have a consistent database. So if we are a few hundred thousand sq km behind 2012 on this measurement, it's likely because we have less melt ponding than that year. Since melt ponding in June is the best predictor of final extent/area, we closely monitor the SSMI/S area numbers.

Area is basically in a dead heat with 2016 right now. We'll see if it can pull ahead before the end of the month. Extent is harder to predict. It's a lot easier to predict final area. Extent obviously has the nuances of compaction...take 2015 vs 2010 for example. 2015 finished with greater area but far less extent since 2015 had an epic compaction occur in August/early September. That's probably why they missed the extent prediction the most of any of their forecasts. They correctly saw that there would likely be more ice area than some other years at the minimum but had no way of knowing how compacted it would be.

This is in line with area numbers...which is a proxy for melt ponds.

I had assumed 2015 would be the longest period below freezing too....but then was surprised when my numbers said January 2003 had a longer streak. Of course, as noted in the post, 2015 barely missed beating 2003 by 10 days because of a mere few hours spiking to 34F on Feb 4-5....ironically, during a snow event. Aside form those two years, 17 days seemed to be a popular number. Achieved in Jan 2004, Jan 2009, and Dec 2017-Jan 2018. I was amazed at how many below freezing streaks were broken by unremarkable temps...like a random high of 35F or something and then it went below freezing for another week. I almost expected more cutters or torches to break the streak but they were rarer to occur immediately following a deep cold snap. I didn't list the coldest temp, but that occurred on February 14, 2016....ironically during a torch winter. That was the coldest temp recorded in ORH since 1957 at -16F.

Here's the current breakdown of how other years compare to 2019 right now......i.e, 2018 had 370k sq km more ice than 2019 at this point. 2018: +370k 2017: +300k 2016: -20k 2015: +170k 2014: +390k 2013: +350k 2012: -280k 2011: +70k 2010: +50k 2009: +1.1 million 2008: +450k 2007: -20k What sticks out here is how closely bunched 2019 is with 2016, 2011, 2010, and 2007 (and how much more ice 2009 had at this point than the others). Those are big melt years, so this one is on track for a big year. But we're still clearly lagging 2012 and that gap probably will need to be closed significantly before the end of the month to have a chance at a new record. 2012 loses about 1.2 million sq km of area between now and 6/30, so we're gonna need to lose more than that....which is hard to do. Only 2010 and 2007 lost more between 6/19 and the end of the month than 2012 did. The pattern beyond D6-7 on the euro shows a very hostile setup for the ice....I think we'll need this to verify in order to keep within striking distance of 2012.

My time lurking on the forums actually go back to the 2000-2001 winter, but I didn't start posting until WWBB in 2004-2005. The following since 2000-2001....not my entire life. Other metrics may be exceeded if I expanded it to my entire life. Anyways: Largest seasonal snowfall: 119.7 (2014-2015) Lowest seasonal snowfall: 43.8 (2011-2012) Highest storm total: 34.5" (Jan 26-27, 2015) Deepest snow depth: 49" (Mar 2001) Longest period with snow OTG: 113 days (Dec 19th, 2000 - Apr 10th, 2001) Longest period of time below freezing: 22 days (Jan 10, 2003 - Feb 2, 2003) [minor note: 2015 just barely missed 32 days having hit 34F for a few hours overnight on Feb 4-5 between Jan 23 and Feb 22] Snowfall seasonal average since lurking in 2000-2001: 79.1

Area is currently about 300k behind 2012 right now. Still within striking distance but it needs to close the gap soon as 2012 goes cliff-diving again soon. We're running about 100k ahead of 2007 and nearly tied with 2016. So this year is definitely in that top 3-ish zone right now. I'm a bit skeptical of it keeping pace with 2012 looking at the medium range forecast...but the long range euro tries to go nuclear, so if that happened, then we'd have a chance. But I try and not get sucked into anything beyond D5-6 in the Arctic.

Need to see the arctic basin as a whole if we want data that predicts the future this summer...so include ESS/Laptev/Beaufort and Chukchi in those numbers....you'll see that 2019 is 3rd lowest if we do that, But there's been a recent slowdown in area loss that has seen it fall behind 2012...and it needs breathtaking losses to keep up with 2012 over the next 7-10 days. I don;'t see it happening. Today did see an acceleration again, so we'll see if that is the start of a June Cliff or not. The weather pattern doesn't look very conductive for monster losses. It looks like the Laptev and ESS could take a beating for several days, but then a vortex overtakes the arctic basin again.

Area is beginning to stall quite noticeably the last 3-4 days. 2012 was starting to go absolutely nuclear at this point. Starting to become skeptical of a record. We'll need that trend to reverse sharply in the second half of the month.

It was pretty obvious we weren't getting a 1995 minimum last year. The area data near the end of June did not support anything remotely close to that. I will post my prediction again this year. Here is last year's prediction: https://www.americanwx.com/bb/topic/48618-arctic-sea-ice-extent-area-and-volume/?do=findComment&comment=4953872

We'll have a better idea soon....the next 3 weeks will basically decide if a new record is possible in September. This is definitely our best shot since 2016....2016 just didn't quite have the melt ponding that 2012 did in June, so the momentum wasn't able to carry us to a new record. The last two years (2017 and 2018) haven't even been close. We knew those seasons would be pedestrian in the post-2007 sense by the end of June.

That's pretty solid for Kmart....they've had closing days a lot uglier than that.

Yeah the terrain is insane there....when I flew into Montrose on my Telluride trip in 2016, I noticed how ridiculous steep the wall was to the east...that's where Crested Butte was.....inside the mountains that created that monstrous wall....and Telluride was to the south, another monster wall of terrain. The upslope from some direction is crazy good and of course they can handle the moiste southwest flow deep-moisture at 500mb...events that turn 7,000 foot areas into rain as you said, but they are just getting smoked. I marked all the areas with an X on the terrain map....

Yeah that's awesome. I love pristine snow records from weenie sites like that. I remember posting these two pics from that January 2017 dumping there...and these pics were before they got another 2 feet a day or two later.

That area in SW CO can go gangbusters at times. I remember a couple years back, Crested Butte was the snowiest town in the country. January 2017 I think it was...they got something like 9 or 10 feet of snow in 2 weeks.

Biggest difference fozz will see is more "snow on snow" events. His old stomping grounds in NE MD was pretty good for big storms. Plenty of 12"+ storms there and of course some 20"+ storms. But they don't get a lot of moderate events in between with snow on the ground. N RI will have a lot more events where snow falls on top of existing snowpack. So if you are into the "winter appeal" aspect, then it's a positive change.

2015 was kind of like 2010 for you guys except it lasted a bit longer and had and extra 3-4 feet of snow in the process. Think 90-110 inches in 3 weeks instead of 40-60". Pretty crazy stuff for both areas actually compared to climo. Those stretches are rare so prob not happening again anytime soon but you'll prob see some 35-40" months within the next 2-3 years unless we get unlucky.

Yeah it's sneaky good at times. Flies under the radar. Big gradient in northeast RI but Cumberland is typically on the better side of things....esp N of 295. Either way, as long as it's not a total ratter, his first winter should feel pretty snowy there.