Greenland 2012

[SVT450R]

Don't think i seen this posted before from DMI about current surface mass balance budget bunch of graphics in the link.

http://beta.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/

[The_Global_Warmer]

Don't think i seen this posted before from DMI about current surface mass balance budget bunch of graphics in the link.

http://beta.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/

 

Thanks for the link.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Greenlands slow melt season is over.

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

Greenland melt has started.  And so everyone knows I don't know why the red line drops to 0 in front of the previous day's update.  Because the other graph obviously shows that it wasn't zero.  It's about to blow way upwards above climo.

 

 

 

[LithiaWx]

Greenland melt has started. And so everyone knows I don't know why the red line drops to 0 in front of the previous day's update. Because the other graph obviously shows that it wasn't zero. It's about to blow way upwards above climo.

maybe the models will be right this time. we are behind schedule at the moment but since it is june 2nd it wouldnt surprise me to see greenland melt a bit.

[LithiaWx]

Another below average days for temps in Greenland and the arctic in general.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Greenland has already started the process form the average to slightly below average first week to ten days of the melt season.  To exploding way above climo.  The Dark Ice layer will be fully visible in a few days.  the single day snow melt on the East side today as seen on Modis was impressive. 

 

When tomrorow's ice sheet melt percentage chart is posted it should show a huge jump above climo.

[The_Global_Warmer]

We have reached that time of year where I end up talking to myself for the most part in these threads.

 

Before we get to incipient melt that is about to **** the bed.  Let's give a big round of applause to the +NAO and all the work he put in to slow the onset of the "real" melt season.  We actually are still in a +NAO.  Which is expected to abruptly switch to a negative NAO as we speak.  Anyways the +NAO saved us from a potential epic melt season.

 

However by abandoning us now when we need him the most like he as done for a decade he is leaving us to yet another massive GIS land ice loss season.  It is starting to seem that snow cover/albedo feedback is playing havoc on the Northern Hemisphere Weather Patterns. 

 

It's happening again.  Almost every day with a new set of model runs they get locally warmer and warmer over GIS as they pick up on the lowering albedo, subsequent warming atmosphere snow melt over the coastal land regions which causes albedo there to drop much more than the snow to ice does. The large high pressure lot's of Sun pattern is going to warm the regional large water masses lower it's effect to lower potential heat uptake to the ice sheet. 

 

This process has barely begun.  In a week we will see 40-50% of the ice sheet seeing melt.  But the most important region the Westen Coast, once again is progged to blow torch and the ugly black ice will be with us in a few days.

 

 

 

 

 

 

NAO going into the tank. 

 

 

A cut off SLP South of GIS is helping bring heat to GIS.  This has also decimated the Eastern side Ice Pack.  On top of that persistent HP has dramatically warmed the Ocean East of Greenland.  This helps prevent cooling of Warmer air being pulled in from the South.  Besides the HP and Sunny skies and the Weather on the East side bringing heat.

 

We can see a huge Ball of heat out West over Central Canada slides East.  It is warmer than models anticipated because of the pattern change allowing the airmass to build over lower albedo regions of Canada.  It will lose heat as it slides East over ice and snow pack West of GIS.

 

 

 

I have to say I look forward to the first post using the Greenland Summit temperature to say it's not really that bad.

[LithiaWx]

Two days down an we are nowhere near 40-50% melt. Friv I think and hope your prediction fails miserably.

The arctic is enjoying another cold day. Maybe Greenland will warm up for a short time but no way to tell after that. What we do know is Greenland has seen below normal temps for a few weeks now like the rest of the arctic.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Two days down an we are nowhere near 40-50% melt. Friv I think and hope your prediction fails miserably.

image.jpg

The arctic is enjoying another cold day. Maybe Greenland will warm up for a short time but no way to tell after that. What we do know is Greenland has seen below normal temps for a few weeks now like the rest of the arctic.

 

This process has barely begun.  In a week we will see 40-50% of the ice sheet seeing melt.  But the most important region the Westen Coast, once again is progged to blow torch and the ugly black ice will be with us in a few days.

 

 

Yeah.  5 day's to go.  That's why it's called a process.  You hope?  That explains a lot.  Hope and practical application are not a very good combination.

 

FYI.  While Greenland might be below normal today as whole over 2000M up. Posting a graph using 1985-1996 operational model data that is smoothed on a 5 day running mean using daily operational model data and passing it off as fact is ridiculous on many levels.  And is something you keep doing over and over.  I am guessing you look for whatever fit's that HOPE you have for what you want it to be or want it to happen VS what is happening and what you expect to happen.  I let it go for a while.  But it's time to end the distorted reality you are presenting.

 

 

 

This is on the same website you pulled that graph from. 

 

Hopefully one day you acquire enough respect for scientific honesty that you put you're hope aside long enough to take an extra 5 minutes to investigate the products that you use.

[LithiaWx]

Yeah. 5 day's to go. That's why it's called a process. You hope? That explains a lot. Hope and practical application are not a very good combination.

FYI. While Greenland might be below normal today as whole over 2000M up. Posting a graph using 1985-1996 operational model data that is smoothed on a 5 day running mean using daily operational model data and passing it off as fact is ridiculous on many levels. And is something you keep doing over and over. I am guessing you look for whatever fit's that HOPE you have for what you want it to be or want it to happen VS what is happening and what you expect to happen. I let it go for a while. But it's time to end the distorted reality you are presenting.

This is on the same website you pulled that graph from.

Hopefully one day you acquire enough respect for scientific honesty that you put you're hope aside long enough to take an extra 5 minutes to investigate the products that you use.

You should educate yourself on what tact means. You really need to learn how to use it.

My point remains unchanged and proven regardless of what chart you show. I've got two more for you that further illustrate my point. I hope these meet your stamp of approval. Wait....actually I don't care but the charts you reference cement my position even better so I thank you for that. As for hope, you're darn right I hope you're wrong. When I look at the state of the arctic I want to see the ice stick around, not melt.

[LithiaWx]

[The_Global_Warmer]

Soup Sandwhich off the West Coast of Greenland has returned.

 

6-10-12:

 

 

2013:

 

[LithiaWx]

What is a soup sandwich?

[LithiaWx]

Melt dropped off a bit yesterday. Two days left to hit 40-50% for your prediction to verify Frivolous. I really don't see that as realistic.

[The_Global_Warmer]

The Greenland Summit warmed to 29.5F today.

 

Definitely a sign of melting enhancing warmth feedback.

[LithiaWx]

Slightly above climo but no catastrophic melt over the past week.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Temperatures over the WSW Greenland coast have warmed into the low 60s to 70F today.  Melt ponds have formed along the emerging dark ice layer where snow is melted off.

 

 

 

 

The snow melting line coinciding with this area.  It's the large patch of bare land over WSW Greenland has doubled it's size moving up the glacier.

 

It is now almost on top of the 2000M line in this area.

 

This lead's to one of the most spectacular event's I think in the arctic that I love to track.  90% of the Land ice loss from Summer surface melting comes from less than 15% of the entire glacial surface.  Essentially melt percentage above 1500M tell us very little about this Summer's melt's and is more of a tool for tracking super long term changes of the glaciers surface composition and warming. 

 

This is why 2010, 2011, and 2012 while all having different levels of "Greenland torch".  2011 on the whole would have appeared to be a much weaker melt but was slightly below 2010 in Summer ice mass loss and a bit more behind 2012.  But 2012 torched hardcore obviously.  But the torching differences in the lower 1500M make the difference. 

 

The combination of warm water pouring out of the glacier from melting.  With localized heating feedbacks warming coastal waters even more.  As well a ice albedo feedback/snow melt albedo feedback and obviously most important of all.  The snow cover melting leaving the darker exposed bare land to kick it all off.  Incredible localized heating takes place here.  This spreads up the entire Western side of the Glacier given cooperative weather(Sun-light) models do a terrible job of capturing this beyond day two.

 

 

 

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

 

Top: The total daily contribution to the mass balance from the entire ice sheet (blue line, Gt/day). Bottom: The accumulated mass balance from September 1st to now (blue line, Gt). The dark grey line shows the corresponding average number from the climatology along with two standard deviations on each side (light grey). In the bottom panel, we also show the season 2011-12 (red) which had very high summer melt in Greenland.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think is very accurate. The model above calculates that 6GT equivalent of ice mass loss took place yesterday. It also shows a heavy snow storm over the SE portion of the ice sheet.  With the heaviest right on the edge of the sheet.

 

this did not happen.  The Ice sheet in the Southern 1/4th of Greenland does peak out at 2820M over the middle of the 1-6MM of mass gained region.  Any precip there would fall as snow.  The freeze level was between 1500-1700M yesterday all day over that region.  The darkest blue showing 36MM of ice mass gained is 0-500M region.  The 1500M mark is essentially along the 6-12MM line.  Surface OBS like 5-10 miles off the ice sheet up and down the SE coast showed low 40s all day and rain.  Soundings at the SE corner and Eastern edge where the blue is between the two reds both show the freeze level at 1500-1800M. And they warmed at the 00Z soundings and models show the freeze level rising to 2000-2200M by tomorrow peak heating.

 

if any precip fell it was rain.  The visible sat images show no snow over the bluesish melt layer up to 1200M over the SE coast.  If any snow fell it would of been gone. This was by mid afternoon. 

 

 

 

 

The model's red line show's in 2011-2012 cold season.  500GT of new ice mass came by snow.  Then it show's 475GT of surface melt equivalent of ice mass loss.  They show a 200GT overall yearly loss because of calving glaciers. 

 

Below grace shows about 190-200GT of ice mass gained by snow.  Then a drop of 700GT of ice mass loss from surface melt/calving glaciers. 

 

 

The final dagger is this:

 

 

Map of the accumulated mass balance (in mm water equivalent) from September 1st to now.

 

 

At first I thought it said MM of snow.  Now I can see it says MM in water equivalent.

 

That show's areas along the SE coast receiving 2250MM of precip or more.  That would come to 88" of qpf.  At 10-1 ratios it would be  880" of snow. 

 

Or 73 FEET OF SNOW.

 

lol, sorry that can't be happening there.

 

I will look more into how much snow falls over that region and fell last winter.  But they can't be pulling 70+ feet a winter over the 0-500M above Sea level area. 

[The_Global_Warmer]

Today's sst anomaly show big warming W/SW Greenland coast.  This actual sst's are 3-6C now. 

 

 

From yesterday the close up:

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

We have reached that time of year where I end up talking to myself for the most part in these threads.

 

Before we get to incipient melt that is about to **** the bed.  Let's give a big round of applause to the +NAO and all the work he put in to slow the onset of the "real" melt season.  We actually are still in a +NAO.  Which is expected to abruptly switch to a negative NAO as we speak.  Anyways the +NAO saved us from a potential epic melt season.

 

However by abandoning us now when we need him the most like he as done for a decade he is leaving us to yet another massive GIS land ice loss season.  It is starting to seem that snow cover/albedo feedback is playing havoc on the Northern Hemisphere Weather Patterns. 

 

It's happening again.  Almost every day with a new set of model runs they get locally warmer and warmer over GIS as they pick up on the lowering albedo, subsequent warming atmosphere snow melt over the coastal land regions which causes albedo there to drop much more than the snow to ice does. The large high pressure lot's of Sun pattern is going to warm the regional large water masses lower it's effect to lower potential heat uptake to the ice sheet. 

 

This process has barely begun.  In a week we will see 40-50% of the ice sheet seeing melt.  But the most important region the Westen Coast, once again is progged to blow torch and the ugly black ice will be with us in a few days.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Look's I came up short in the 7 day time-frame.  It looks to surely go above 30 percent today.  And has a shot at 40%+ for a day before things "cool" off a bit.

 

12z Sounding show the Southern tip of Greenland the freeze level is 1800M. 

The Western coast freeze level is up to 2650M.

The Eastern Coast is 1500M. 

 

With peak heating not for 6-8 more hours. 

 

 

 

Local sst anomalys updated.  With 850s that warm.  The melt should reach over 2000M.

[The_Global_Warmer]

The melt model strikes again.  Apparently another big time snow event took place over SE Greenland.  This is the third day in a row according to this.  Some places have tallied 100MM+ of liquid equivalent snow.  Of course I am kidding that is a joke.  At best snow fell above 2200-2400 Feet if any precip fell at all. 

 

The daily melt should be 3SD below normal not 2SD.  This is why they think the surface is gaining mass.  I will probably stop posting this since folks will get confused who won't read through or want to believe this snow is happening.

 

 

 

 

[LithiaWx]

The melt model strikes again. Apparently another big time snow event took place over SE Greenland. This is the third day in a row according to this. Some places have tallied 100MM+ of liquid equivalent snow. Of course I am kidding that is a joke. At best snow fell above 2200-2400 Feet if any precip fell at all.

The daily melt should be 3SD below normal not 2SD. This is why they think the surface is gaining mass. I will probably stop posting this since folks will get confused who won't read through or want to believe this snow is happening.

You shouldn't dismiss data because you either 1) don't understand it or 2) doesn't fit your agenda. Some of the highest terrain in Greenland is found on that tip. If you combine that with the proximity to the ocean heavy snow is not very far fetched. 100 mm is only about 4 inches of liquid precip it's very likely that those mountains saw a few feet of snow over the course of a few days.

[LithiaWx]

Look's I came up short in the 7 day time-frame.  It looks to surely go above 30 percent today.  And has a shot at 40%+ for a day before things "cool" off a bit.

 

12z Sounding show the Southern tip of Greenland the freeze level is 1800M. 

The Western coast freeze level is up to 2650M.

The Eastern Coast is 1500M. 

 

With peak heating not for 6-8 more hours. 

 

 

 

Local sst anomalys updated.  With 850s that warm.  The melt should reach over 2000M.

The melt percentage actually dropped a bit. It didn't hit 30%. Perhaps you should research a bit more before making proclamations. You have two pretty big busts recently.

[icebreaker5221]

You shouldn't dismiss data because you either 1) don't understand it or 2) doesn't fit your agenda. Some of the highest terrain in Greenland is found on that tip. If you combine that with the proximity to the ocean heavy snow is not very far fetched. 100 mm is only about 4 inches of liquid precip it's very likely that those mountains saw a few feet of snow over the course of a few days.

 

 

Yes, it actually was a fairly long-duration upslope snow event along the SE mountains of Greenland.  No snow down to sea level, but feet of snow for elevations >1000 m no doubt. 

 

Friv is right that the west coast of Greenland is torching, however. 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

It didn't show up on visible satellite at 1000M of feet of snow.  I said I checked soundings and the visible sat images.  If there was even 4-6 inches of new snow it would be represented in a solid peach color. 

 

Obviously if feet of snow fell down to 1000M it would have shown up that way. The solid peach color of "dry" snow.  Or freshly fallen snow.

 

 

There is no indication of that.  Which was my point.  That model show's 100MM of snow to the ice pack edge.  Not only is the "peachy" coldor not consolidated at all. 

 

 

It clearly doesn't extend to the ice edge.  As in where the model showed the heaviest snow.  There is red blotches all the way back to the 2000M line. Which obviously wouldn't be the case if feet of snow feel down to 1000M.  If model temps showing the freeze layer never going below 1500FT up to 2200FT which the soundings also showed and the visible sat imagery shows no indication of what the model showed. 

 

I guess I just don't understand it.  Or looking at a ******* map in the real world backing what I said before I even posted about to confirm.  Well I guess I just can't see the feet of fresh snow.  My agenda driven eyes must be playing tricks on me and the snow shows up all the way to the glacier's edge. 

 

[LithiaWx]

It didn't show up on visible satellite at 1000M of feet of snow.  I said I checked soundings and the visible sat images.  If there was even 4-6 inches of new snow it would be represented in a solid peach color. 

 

Obviously if feet of snow fell down to 1000M it would have shown up that way. The solid peach color of "dry" snow.  Or freshly fallen snow.

 

 

There is no indication of that.  Which was my point.  That model show's 100MM of snow to the ice pack edge.  Not only is the "peachy" coldor not consolidated at all. 

 

 

It clearly doesn't extend to the ice edge.  As in where the model showed the heaviest snow.  There is red blotches all the way back to the 2000M line. Which obviously wouldn't be the case if feet of snow feel down to 1000M.  If model temps showing the freeze layer never going below 1500FT up to 2200FT which the soundings also showed and the visible sat imagery shows no indication of what the model showed. 

 

I guess I just don't understand it.  Or looking at a ******* map in the real world backing what I said before I even posted about to confirm.  Well I guess I just can't see the feet of fresh snow.  My agenda driven eyes must be playing tricks on me and the snow shows up all the way to the glacier's edge. 

 

So even with a met and models showing and telling you one thing you still think you're right? Wow......

[icebreaker5221]

It didn't show up on visible satellite at 1000M of feet of snow.  I said I checked soundings and the visible sat images.  If there was even 4-6 inches of new snow it would be represented in a solid peach color. 

 

Obviously if feet of snow fell down to 1000M it would have shown up that way. The solid peach color of "dry" snow.  Or freshly fallen snow.

 

 

There is no indication of that.  Which was my point.  That model show's 100MM of snow to the ice pack edge.  Not only is the "peachy" coldor not consolidated at all. 

 

 

It clearly doesn't extend to the ice edge.  As in where the model showed the heaviest snow.  There is red blotches all the way back to the 2000M line. Which obviously wouldn't be the case if feet of snow feel down to 1000M.  If model temps showing the freeze layer never going below 1500FT up to 2200FT which the soundings also showed and the visible sat imagery shows no indication of what the model showed. 

 

I guess I just don't understand it.  Or looking at a ******* map in the real world backing what I said before I even posted about to confirm.  Well I guess I just can't see the feet of fresh snow.  My agenda driven eyes must be playing tricks on me and the snow shows up all the way to the glacier's edge. 

 

 

 

Unfortunately all the surface stations I could find are at low elevation and near the coast.  However, it's pretty clear to me that it was snowing quite a bit higher up and just inland.  I'm not even sure when that satellite image you're showing is even valid at.

 

Here's the closest sounding.  Now imagine further inland, where the boundary layer is naturally colder because it's further from the ocean, plus heavy orthographic precip is falling.  Easy to see how it could be near-saturated at or below freezing down to 1000 m. 

 

 

Next, we see that the ESRL daily analysis has the surface freezing line (273 K, dark blue) all the way to the coast in spots, and clearly below freezing just inland.

 

 

Finally, a 0-84 h forecast change in snow depth from GFS.  This accounts for melting and compaction, and while not perfect (since it is a forecast), it still shows an area of +20-50 cm (I apologize for the size). 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

1.  The sat image is from yesterday at mid-day.  A more clear one from today shows any "solid" snow fall fell about 1500M at the min.  mostly about1800-2000M.

 

2. The model in question shows the heaviest accumulating snow near sea level to under 1500M..  Mostly under 1500M.

 

3. Sat images from today that are even more clear show a consolidated area of snow where the highest mtns are by the coast again around 1800M up from the coast.

 

South and North of this along the coast it didn't snow like the model says.  Those area's were where 100MM+  fell but it's not there,.  Sorry satellite doesn't lie.

 

You can look for yourself.  I am not wasting my time pulling out a custom sized image for you to dismiss the only important evidence.

 

http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?mosaic=Arctic.2013165.terra.367.1km

[LithiaWx]

1. The sat image is from yesterday at mid-day. A more clear one from today shows any "solid" snow fall fell about 1500M at the min. mostly about1800-2000M.

2. The model in question shows the heaviest accumulating snow near sea level to under 1500M.. Mostly under 1500M.

3. Sat images from today that are even more clear show a consolidated area of snow where the highest mtns are by the coast again around 1800M up from the coast.

South and North of this along the coast it didn't snow like the model says. Those area's were where 100MM+ fell but it's not there,. Sorry satellite doesn't lie.

You can look for yourself. I am not wasting my time pulling out a custom sized image for you to dismiss the only important evidence.

http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?mosaic=Arctic.2013165.terra.367.1km

Ok you must be trolling. Ill take the degreed mets opinion over your armchair quarterbacking. I imagine most would as well. You just got schooled, accept it and move on. kicking and screaming that you're right after numerous charts and maps were presented is pretty unflattering. Your evidence is a fuzzy peach colored satellite image.....