Lowest mid winter Ice extent on record

[Peter M]

February 2, 2011

Arctic Oscillation brings record low January extent, unusual mid-latitude weather

Arctic sea ice extent for January 2011 was the lowest in the satellite record for that month. The Arctic oscillation persisted in its strong negative phase for most of the month, keeping ice extent low.

Overview of conditions Arctic sea ice extent averaged over January 2011 was 13.55 million square kilometers (5.23 million square miles). This was the lowest January ice extent recorded since satellite records began in 1979. It was 50,000 square kilometers (19,300 square miles) below the record low of 13.60 million square kilometers (5.25 million square miles), set in 2006, and 1.27 million square kilometers (490,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average.

Ice extent in January 2011 remained unusually low in Hudson Bay, Hudson Strait (between southern Baffin Island and Labrador), and Davis Strait (between Baffin Island and Greenland). Normally, these areas freeze over by late November, but this year Hudson Bay did not completely freeze over until mid-January. The Labrador Sea remains largely ice-free.

See http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20110202_Figure3.png

http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Ice-Age-9-10.gif

[Clifford]

If you go to the official AMSR-E website:

http://www.ijis.iarc...aice_extent.htm

You will notice that in December 2010, the sea ice extent fell to the lowest for the satellite records (Orange Line, Right side of graph). However, falling is not the proper term, but rather it did not gain as much as typical.

However, since about mid-January (Red line on the left), the sea ice level has overtaken that in previous years.

For most of the month, the sea ice extent has been greater than 2006 (green line).

Near the end of January it also passed the level of 2005 (light blue).

And it appears to have intersected the 2010 level (Orange line).

So...

Right now, 2011 appears to be tied for third lowest sea ice extent, or tied for the 6th highest.

If you look at the Arctic Ocean though. Essentially by this time of year, 100% of the Arctic Ocean is frozen. So, the ice extent that is being formed is really outside of the main Arctic Ocean and may not really correspond to the "low ice extent" that will occur later in the summer when half to 3/4 of the ice will normally melt.

The real difference that has happened is that much of the "old ice" has been flushed out of the Arctic.

Watch the Fowler Animation.

http://nsidc.org/new...0822_oldice.gif (1982-2007)

http://wattsupwithth...0_animation.gif (2009-2010)

And, while some of the old ice is melting, a lot of it just appears to be washing out of the Arctic into the Atlantic.

Also, see the chart I posted of the January RSS data.

The strong "Blocking Pattern" that has caused Europe and North America to turn so cold has also caused a corresponding increase of temperatures in the Arctic. I think of it as transferring cold from the North to the normally more temperate regions, thus causing a corresponding heating in the poles.

See the far right of the graph. Arctic (red) is up. Northern Hemisphere (blue) is down.

The La Niña currents which we now are in causes significant equatorial cooling of the ocean (defined with the Pacific). And in general a corresponding lower average temperatures of the global ocean surface, and perhaps the world. However, equatorial cooling might be associated with polar warming.

[stellarfun]

All the low ice, compared to last winter (and previous winters) is concentrated in the Bering Sea, the Sea of Okhotsk, and Baffin/Newfoundland Sea. All these seas completely melt out in the summer. The amount of ice in the Barents and Greenland seas is subject to a lot of flux at this time of year, depending on the wind and current.

For fans of Arctic summer ice, the concerns, IMO, would be how quickly the ice flushes out of the Nares strait and upper Baffin Bay, and the McClure Strait. If these are free of ice early, it could facilitate passage of ice out of the Arctic Basin and the Beaufort Sea.

The possible thinness of first year ice would be a second concern.

[skierinvermont]

If you go to the official AMSR-E website:

http://www.ijis.iarc...aice_extent.htm

You will notice that in December 2010, the sea ice extent fell to the lowest for the satellite records (Orange Line, Right side of graph). However, falling is not the proper term, but rather it did not gain as much as typical.

However, since about mid-January (Red line on the left), the sea ice level has overtaken that in previous years.

For most of the month, the sea ice extent has been greater than 2006 (green line).

Near the end of January it also passed the level of 2005 (light blue).

And it appears to have intersected the 2010 level (Orange line).

So...

Right now, 2011 appears to be tied for third lowest sea ice extent, or tied for the 6th highest.

If you look at the Arctic Ocean though. Essentially by this time of year, 100% of the Arctic Ocean is frozen. So, the ice extent that is being formed is really outside of the main Arctic Ocean and may not really correspond to the "low ice extent" that will occur later in the summer when half to 3/4 of the ice will normally melt.

The real difference that has happened is that much of the "old ice" has been flushed out of the Arctic.

Watch the Fowler Animation.

http://nsidc.org/new...0822_oldice.gif (1982-2007)

http://wattsupwithth...0_animation.gif (2009-2010)

And, while some of the old ice is melting, a lot of it just appears to be washing out of the Arctic into the Atlantic.

Also, see the chart I posted of the January RSS data.

The strong "Blocking Pattern" that has caused Europe and North America to turn so cold has also caused a corresponding increase of temperatures in the Arctic. I think of it as transferring cold from the North to the normally more temperate regions, thus causing a corresponding heating in the poles.

See the far right of the graph. Arctic (red) is up. Northern Hemisphere (blue) is down.

The La Niña currents which we now are in causes significant equatorial cooling of the ocean (defined with the Pacific). And in general a corresponding lower average temperatures of the global ocean surface, and perhaps the world. However, equatorial cooling might be associated with polar warming.

Lots of errors in this post:

1) Jaxa is not the official AMSR-E site. AMSR-E is satellite data that is processed by many different agencies. Jaxa is just one of several.

2) We are not currently at the "6th highest" in the satellite record. The satellite record of arctic sea ice goes back to 1979. According to NSIDC we had the lowest January extent in the satellite record. See chart below.

3) Generally the arctic is cooler in a Nina than Ninos I believe. This year it has been fairly warm though although so has pretty much every year in the last 10-15.

[BethesdaWX]

Lots of errors in this post:

1) Jaxa is not the official AMSR-E site. AMSR-E is satellite data that is processed by many different agencies. Jaxa is just one of several.

2) We are not currently at the "6th highest" in the satellite record. The satellite record of arctic sea ice goes back to 1979. According to NSIDC we had the lowest January extent in the satellite record. See chart below.

3) Generally the arctic is cooler in a Nina than Ninos I believe. This year it has been fairly warm though although so has pretty much every year in the last 10-15.

Only 1 problem, AMSR is the outlier....everyone else disagrees

[nzucker]

3) Generally the arctic is cooler in a Nina than Ninos I believe. This year it has been fairly warm though although so has pretty much every year in the last 10-15.

Yes, the Arctic will generally be colder in a strong La Niña, but this year we've had a polar blocking pattern (-AO/-NAO/-EPO) that has distributed much of the cold air to the mid-latitudes, which is uncharacteristic of a strong Niña winter. RSS showed that arctic temperatures were way above average in January. However, the AO has now gone positive as we revert to a standard La Niña pattern with high heights in the mid-latitudes and low heights over the poles. Here is what the GFS shows at Day 8, notice the areas of negative anomalies in the Arctic indicating a +AO.

[skierinvermont]

Only 1 problem, AMSR is the outlier....everyone else disagrees

The graph and data I posted was not AMSR, it was NSIDC which does not use AMSR, so you fail. Moreover, all sources agree on ice extent generally.

[skierinvermont]

Yes, the Arctic will generally be colder in a strong La Niña, but this year we've had a polar blocking pattern (-AO/-NAO/-EPO) that has distributed much of the cold air to the mid-latitudes, which is uncharacteristic of a strong Niña winter. RSS showed that arctic temperatures were way above average in January. However, the AO has now gone positive as we revert to a standard La Niña pattern with high heights in the mid-latitudes and low heights over the poles. Here is what the GFS shows at Day 8, notice the areas of negative anomalies in the Arctic indicating a +AO.

Thank you for repeating what I just said.. it is often colder in Ninas but this year is an exception.

[nzucker]

Thank you for repeating what I just said.. it is often colder in Ninas but this year is an exception.

I was just saying that we're about to see a pattern change to a regime over the cryosphere that is more typical of a strong La Niña, with the polar vortex hanging out over the Canadian Arctic and low heights covering much of the northern latitudes. For the first time since mid-November, the AO has gone strongly positive. We'll see if the colder look in the arctic lasts, however, with the ECM redeveloping a massive blocking pattern at Day 10.

AO:

12z ECM, -NAO/-AO pattern resumes:

We'll have to see if the current pattern of colder weather in the Arctic, as per bluewave's thread on Nunavut continues, or is just a blip on the radar in this very blocky winter. Fans of winter in the mid-latitudes would like to see the -NAO/-AO redevelop, but the Arctic's warmth is also concerning.

So I wasn't repeating what you just said, I was adding to it...stop being a PITA.

[Clifford]

I'm more interested in where we are TODAY with sea ice, rather than where we were a month ago.

Although there seems to be a lot of variability in the Peak Ice extent in March/April, and it doesn't necessarily correspond well to the Sept-Oct Sea Ice Minimum.

2008 ranked #2 by the AMSR-E graph at the peak in March, and hit second to last in Sept/Oct, then hit some of the highest ice extents by mid-November in the same year.

Likewise, 2010 hit the highest levels in April, followed by the lowest levels 2 months later in June...

Here are the two graphs:

AMSR-E from:

http://www.ijis.iarc...aice_extent.htm

&

NSIDC

http://nsidc.org/ima...202_Figure3.png

The scale is different on the two graphs, so somehow they are calculating the area differently.

Looking at the AMSR-E graph, I would rank the average January as follows, although the end of the month data is a little different as a few months are flipped around.

No data for 2002 (line shows up mid-year).

Highest:

2003(dark blue)

2004 (mid blue)

2009 (yellow-green)

2008 (dark green)

Tossup between 2007 (black) & 2010 (orange)

2005 (light blue) Very close to 2007/2010

Tossup between 2011 & 2006.

Looking at NSIDC, you get:

2003

2004, 2008, and 2009 are similar

2007 and 2010 are similar

2005

2006 & 2011 are virtually the same.

I have no doubt that a statistical analysis would result in 2006 and 2011 being the SAME.

Except, as I had mentioned that this year, January 2011 FINISHED with 2011 edging out 2006 (for half the month).

The month ended by 2011 meeting 2010, and Just sliding past 2005 at the end of the month or early February.

Also note, that 2006 finished the month of February, March, the first half of April, and most of May DEAD LAST.

Now, looking at the NSDS, graph, there seems to be a periodicity in January the ice extent of 5-6 years, so next year will likely rebound somewhat.

I'm not sure how significant the differences in the winter sea ice extent are....

For example, by the end of April, the trends had reversed last year. So the rankings based on the AMSR-E map were

Highest:

2010

2009 (met 2010 at end of the month, but was consistently below for most of the month).

2008 (very close to 2003, but edging out 2003 at the end of the month)

2003 (see above)

2007 & 2005 met at the end of the month.

2004

2006

In fact... ever wonder why April 2010 was the highest for the AMSR-E records, and December had the lowest?

[skierinvermont]

Yes obviously years can improve from last to 8th to last within the course of a few months. But it is not "first" in the satellite record as you claimed it was. Just because Jaxa doesn't show years before 2003 doesn't mean the data doesn't exist. We have experienced a major decline since the 1980s at all times of year and there is simply a little variation around that decline.

And no winter extent doesn't predict summer extent very well at all. It oscillates back and forth a lot along that declining long term trend line.. never said it did.

[BethesdaWX]

The graph and data I posted was not AMSR, it was NSIDC which does not use AMSR, so you fail. Moreover, all sources agree on ice extent generally.

Not sure why I typed AMSR, I really meant NSIDC.

Again, its the outlier.............we don't use outliers to make conclusions...............when everyone else says "not so fast".

[skierinvermont]

Not sure why I typed AMSR, I really meant NSIDC.

Again, its the outlier.............we don't use outliers to make conclusions...............when everyone else says "not so fast".

It is not an outlier. All sources agree that this January had extent approximately equal with January 2006, which is tied for the lowest in the satellite record since 1979. Both Jaxa and NSIDC show January 2011 slightly below Jan 2006.

[BethesdaWX]

It is not an outlier. All sources agree that this January had extent approximately equal with January 2006, which is tied for the lowest in the satellite record since 1979. Both Jaxa and NSIDC show January 2011 slightly below Jan 2006.

you fail again

NORSEX SSM/I, Danish........Vs the American!

Versus

Huge outlier

[OHSnow]

Yeah, the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) is American! Thanks for filling us in on this little known fact.

you fail again

NORSEX SSM/I, Danish........Vs the American!

Versus

Huge outlier

[BethesdaWX]

I was typing fast, get over it.

If you knew it was japanese, why did you post?

You know what AMSR is, right?

[skierinvermont]

Looks to me like NANSEN is the outlier. JAXA, BREMEN, and NSIDC all show January as having the lowest extent since 1979, tied with or lower than 2006. 3 of 4 data sources show Jan '11 having the lowest extent in the satellite record. This includes JAXA which is the best data source because it uses the more modern AMSR satellite data while NANSEN uses the old SSM/I data. NANSEN also frequently produces erroneous results that are at odds with all three other data sources. It's amazing how you turn very simple graph reading into a complex task. If you weren't so biased and if you actually spent more than a quarter second formulating your thoughts you wouldn't make mistakes like this, or refer to JAXA as an American agency when it is Japanese.

JAXA and NSIDC both show January as having the lowest extent on record since 1979, tied with or slightly lower than 2006:

So does BREMEN:

[BethesdaWX]

If you are going to derride another datasource, you need to give examples of such.

You know what data NORSEX uses.........right? And more importantly, you should know the companies/organizations background as well...definitely needs to be taken into account.

There are more datasources that disagree than those that agree. Models don't dount FYI.