bluewave

I agree that the MYI loss is the big story. https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2817/with-thick-ice-gone-arctic-sea-ice-changes-more-slowly/ With thick ice gone, Arctic sea ice changes more slowly The Arctic Ocean's blanket of sea ice has changed since 1958 from predominantly older, thicker ice to mostly younger, thinner ice, according to new research published by NASA scientist Ron Kwok of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California. With so little thick, old ice left, the rate of decrease in ice thickness has slowed. New ice grows faster but is more vulnerable to weather and wind, so ice thickness is now more variable, rather than dominated by the effect of global warming. Working from a combination of satellite records and declassified submarine sonar data, NASA scientists have constructed a 60-year record of Arctic sea ice thickness. Right now, Arctic sea ice is the youngest and thinnest its been since we started keeping records. More than 70 percent of Arctic sea ice is now seasonal, which means it grows in the winter and melts in the summer, but doesn't last from year to year. This seasonal ice melts faster and breaks up easier, making it much more susceptible to wind and atmospheric conditions. Working from a combination of satellite records and declassified submarine sonar data, NASA scientists have constructed a 60-year record of Arctic sea ice thickness. Right now, Arctic sea ice is the youngest and thinnest its been since we started keeping records. More than 70 percent of Arctic sea ice is now seasonal, which means it grows in the winter and melts in the summer, but doesn't last from year to year. This seasonal ice melts faster and breaks up easier, making it much more susceptible to wind and atmospheric conditions. Kwok's research, published today in the journal Environmental Research Letters, combined decades of declassified U.S. Navy submarine measurements with more recent data from four satellites to create the 60-year record of changes in Arctic sea ice thickness. He found that since 1958, Arctic ice cover has lost about two-thirds of its thickness, as averaged across the Arctic at the end of summer. Older ice has shrunk in area by almost 800,000 square miles (more than 2 million square kilometers). Today, 70 percent of the ice cover consists of ice that forms and melts within a single year, which scientists call seasonal ice. Sea ice of any age is frozen ocean water. However, as sea ice survives through several melt seasons, its characteristics change. Multiyear ice is thicker, stronger and rougher than seasonal ice. It is much less salty than seasonal ice; Arctic explorers used it as drinking water. Satellite sensors observe enough of these differences that scientists can use spaceborne data to distinguish between the two types of ice. Thinner, weaker seasonal ice is innately more vulnerable to weather than thick, multiyear ice. It can be pushed around more easily by wind, as happened in the summer of 2013. During that time, prevailing winds piled up the ice cover against coastlines, which made the ice cover thicker for months. The ice's vulnerability may also be demonstrated by the increased variation in Arctic sea ice thickness and extent from year to year over the last decade. In the past, sea ice rarely melted in the Arctic Ocean. Each year, some multiyear ice flowed out of the ocean into the East Greenland Sea and melted there, and some ice grew thick enough to survive the melt season and become multiyear ice. As air temperatures in the polar regions have warmed in recent decades, however, large amounts of multiyear ice now melt within the Arctic Ocean itself. Far less seasonal ice now thickens enough over the winter to survive the summer. As a result, not only is there less ice overall, but the proportions of multiyear ice to seasonal ice have also changed in favor of the young ice. Seasonal ice now grows to a depth of about six feet (two meters) in winter, and most of it melts in summer. That basic pattern is likely to continue, Kwok said. "The thickness and coverage in the Arctic are now dominated by the growth, melting and deformation of seasonal ice." The increase in seasonal ice also means record-breaking changes in ice cover such as those of the 1990s and 2000s are likely to be less common, Kwok noted. In fact, there has not been a new record sea ice minimum since 2012, despite years of warm weather in the Arctic. "We've lost so much of the thick ice that changes in thickness are going to be slower due to the different behavior of this ice type," Kwok said. Kwok used data from U.S. Navy submarine sonars from 1958 to 2000; satellite altimeters on NASA's ICESat and the European CryoSat-2, which span from 2003 to 2018; and scatterometer measurements from NASA's QuikSCAT and the European ASCAT from 1999 to 2017.

Updated for July 2020. 7....2020...EWR...5...NYC...7...LGA...1.....JFK...4...BDR....1...ISP....4

Updated for the 3.17 in Montclair, NJ with Tropical Storm Fay. 7/11/2020 8:00 AM NJ-ES-31 Montclair 0.7 N 3.17 NA | NA NA | NA NJ Essex

Updated for June 2020 6....2020...EWR..10..LGA...3...BDR...5.....ISP....5

Updated for the 3.99 at Bridgeport on July 3rd.

This record +AO pattern was more like something we saw around 1990. https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ Previous studies, led by University of Washington scientist Ignatius Rigor (e.g., Rigor et al., 2002), suggest that a positive winter phase of the Arctic Oscillation favors low sea ice extent the subsequent September. Wind patterns “flush” old, thick ice out of the Arctic Ocean through the Fram Strait and promote the production of thin ice along the Eurasian coast that is especially prone to melting out in summer. However, in recent years, this relationship has not been as clear (Stroeve et al., 2011). The potential effects this winter’s positive AO on the summer evolution of ice extent and the September 2020 minimum bears watching.

If the rate of warming since 1980 continues, then we are on track for +1.5 C of warming around 2035.

Updated for top 10 warmth in February 2020. 2....2020...EWR...6...NYC...6...LGA....8...JFK...4...BDR...5....iSP...3

Updated for the top10 warmth in January 2020. 1....2020...EWR...9...NYC...9...LGA....7...JFK...6...BDR...3....ISP...6

2nd warmest year for the Arctic behind 2016.

Record low Arctic sea ice extent for the Chukchi Sea in 2019.

Updated for 3.44 in Woodbury, NY. https://nwschat.weather.gov/p.php?pid=201912141224-KOKX-NOUS41-PNSOKX WOODBURY 3.44 704 AM 12/14 CWOP

The record amount of open water for the Chukchi Sea continues to be one of the big stories this year.

That was a very cold -NAO/+PNA pattern for the first week of December 2003. It was the snowiest first week of December and the 11th coldest for NYC.

Every month since April has featured top 3 warmth in the Arctic. This is a first for April through October. https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/timeseries/

Similar to the findings in this recent paper. https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/8/eaat6773 DISCUSSION Implications and outlook The doubling of BG halocline heat content over the past three decades appears attributable to a warming of the source waters that ventilate the layer, where this warming is due to sea ice losses in the Chukchi Sea that leave the surface ocean more exposed to incoming solar radiation in summer. The effects of an efficient local ice-albedo feedback are thus not confined to the surface ocean/sea ice heat budget but, in addition, lead to increased heat accumulation in the ocean interior that has consequences far beyond the summer season. Strong stratification and weak mechanical mixing in the BG halocline ensure that significant summertime heat remains in the halocline through the winter. With continued sea ice losses in the Chukchi Sea, additional heat may continue to be archived in the warm halocline. This underscores the far-reaching implications of changes to the dynamical ice-ocean system in the Chukchi Sea region. However, there is a limit to this: Once the source waters for the halocline become warm enough that their buoyancy is affected, ventilation can be shut off. Efficient summertime subduction relies on the lateral surface front in the NCS region between warm, salty water that is denser to the south and cooler, fresher water that is less dense to the north. For longer-duration solar warming (that is, longer-duration ice-free conditions in the region), SSTs on the south side of the front may become warm enough (around 13°C, under the assumption of a 1.5-month ice-free period dominated by solar absorption) that the lateral density gradient is eliminated [see (24)]. It remains to be seen how continued sea ice losses will fundamentally change the water column structure and dynamics of the Arctic halocline. In the coming years, however, excess BG halocline heat will give rise to enhanced upward heat fluxes year-round, creating compound effects on the system by slowing winter sea ice growth.

Updated for the 9th warmest October at EWR and 7th warmest at ISP.

According to the NSIDC data, October 2019 beat 2012 for the lowest monthly average extent. This makes the 3rd new lowest monthly extent record for 2019. It’s also the 10th new lowest monthly extent since 2016. ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/seaice_analysis/Sea_Ice_Index_Monthly_Data_with_Statistics_G02135_v3.0.xlsx 1 2019 5.66 2 2012 5.89 NSIDC lowest average monthly extents Jan...2018 Feb...2018 Mar...2017 Apr....2019 May...2016 Jun....2016 Jul.....2019 Aug...2012 Sep...2012 Oct...2019 Nov...2016 Dec...2016

While the ESS is finally freezing up, Chukchi extent remains at record low levels for the end of October.

Daniel Swain is probably one of the best sources of information on this topic. While all these California wildfire posts probably belong in a different thread, the information below helps people understand the issues involved. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/13112018/california-deadly-wildfires-climate-change-dry-autumn-late-rainy-season-swain-interview What does the recent data show in California? And how are these changes impacting overall rainfall? We are starting to see a trend towards drier autumns in California. It's somewhat new, it's just emerging from the noise, one might say, but it is actually there. This year is going to add another data point in that direction. It matches climate projections. There has long been an expectation that California's so-called shoulder season precipitation would probably decrease—that's autumn and spring. Now what we're starting to see is, especially in the autumn, that process now appears to be underway. It's both an emerging observation but also a projection for the future, a future that maybe isn't really the future any more. That actually doesn't necessarily mean the overall amount of precipitation is decreasing. There's a growing overall concentration of water in the rainy season. Our research suggests that concentration will be a pretty strong indicator of California's future climate. You've made the point that it's problematic to ask whether climate change causes a specific event. Why is that? In any sort of natural system there's never really, in any context, a singular cause of anything. It depends how you define causation, which then is a non-trivial task. It ends up being more meaningful to say, look, we're going to have fires no matter what. Whether they're caused naturally by lightning, by totally innocent human error or by more malicious human intent. It doesn't really matter what started the fire. But the question is, what factors contribute to what happened after the fire starts. The real question is not so much what caused it, because ultimately it doesn't really matter. The question is what made it as bad as it was. Then you can get an answer that, yes, there is a link between wildfire behavior intensity and climate change. As climate change progresses, what is expected to happen with wildfire season? When it comes to wildfire trends, the last five years in California have really been something else. It's really been hard to watch. it's pretty rare to see such large, dramatic step changes as what we've seen in California in the last five to 10 years. We've broken every record, and we've broken them several times. Largest, most destructive, deadliest—all

Highest rainfall total in CT again. https://nwschat.weather.gov/p.php?pid=201910280141-KOKX-NOUS41-PNSOKX WESTPORT 3.04 801 PM 10/27 CWOP

NSIDC put out a tweet about the new record departure.

It sure is.