Sugarloaf1989 Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 The webcam at Barrow shows no sea ice, in fact I have not seen any in the last 3 months I have been checking the cam. Is this normal? http://www.alaskawebcams.org/barrow.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisf97212 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 When the Arctic becomes ice free, can we expect Summer bombogenesis events? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxUSAF Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Ooof. Holy shi-t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stadiumwave Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Anyone know where GlobalWarmer poster is? I figured he'd be all over this. Kind of concerns me he's not posting. I believe he was previously named frivolous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 21 hours ago, WxUSAF said: Ooof. Holy shi-t. Does that main max in the late part of the year happen because the Antarctic sea ice is just passed its max plus the Arctic is supposed to be rapidly freezing up? If so, I'd wager this is a combo of the wholesale lack of sea ice in the Arctic plus a paltry (relative to normal) level in the Antarctic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxUSAF Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I think that's the idea, yes. So low southern ice and the ridiculously low Arctic ice gives you that insane figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chubbs Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 Currently Antarctic sea ice is even more unusual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophisticated Skeptic Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 9 hours ago, stadiumwave said: Anyone know where GlobalWarmer poster is? I figured he'd be all over this. Kind of concerns me he's not posting. 9 minutes ago, chubbs said: Currently Antarctic sea ice is even more unusual. good thing Trump isn't president yet , gives him some more time to flip-flop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 It's so warm up there that we actually just had a small daily loss in extent on NSIDC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csnavywx Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 IJIS extent has opened up a huge lead. Down 46k yesterday (biggest drop in Nov in 10 years), which puts it about 750k behind 2012. 2012 rockets away shortly and is replaced by 2006 for previous lowest (which was the 2nd warmest winter behind last year). I suspect we'll get pretty close to 1M below the record before closing later in the month (2006 had quite the slowdown in Nov before speeding back towards the pack). Anomalies look to "revert" back to +10C above 80N and +6C over the Arctic Ocean as a whole, so we should see some resumption of freezing, if at a somewhat sluggish pace. The real story is the continuing lack of decent freezing degree day totals, which if it continues to be sustained, will put the hurt on spring thickness. Last year was a -650 anomaly (above the Arctic Circle) and -1075 (above 80N) or about 800 overall. A doubling of that anomaly to -1300/-2150 puts us in striking range of near ice-free conditions by summer's end as it causes thickness gains to drop below the critical ~1.7m threshold. I'm far from convinced that we'll get a doubling of those anomalies, but with the way it is going, it might get somewhat close. Speaking of which, there's another strat PV split forecasted in the medium range. Edit: My numbers are a bit off. Ice thickness growth= sqrt(FDD/804) Normal for the Arctic Ocean is 4500 FDD (5500 north of 80N). This equals about 2.2m of thickness growth overall (a bit more at the pole/near Greenland). A -1300 anomaly would drop this to 2.0m of thickness growth. A -2000 anomaly would drop this to 1.7m, which is where you would need to be to get ice-free conditions at the end of summer assuming a normal melt year. A 2007 or 2012 style melt year would require quite a bit less, of course. To achieve a 2500 FDD total for 1.7m of average thickness growth, the average temperature during the freezing season (Sept 15-April 15) would need to average -13 to -14C. That's the number we need to watch. If we keep getting crazy bursts of periodic warmth through say... February, I'd be worried. If it finally mean-reverts and gets closer to normal for a while, it won't be so bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazwoper Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 17 hours ago, Bacon Strips said: good thing Trump isn't president yet , gives him some more time to flip-flop. I was thinking the same thing. This departure from normal in global sea ice has really blown up on social media and I'd expect the mainstream media to pick it up really soon. Be curious to see what the Trump admin. would have to say about this, especially if we don't see a sizable shift in the winter months for the artic and the melt season come Spring starts off really bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 On 11/16/2016 at 11:50 AM, skierinvermont said: You're right it doesn't exaggerate it as much as I thought. But I think it does still exaggerate it somewhat. The area of Russia is 6.6 million square miles. The area of the arctic ocean including the Kara, Barents, Hudson and the seas on either side of Greenland is 5.4 million. Probably around 4 million if looking just at the high arctic ocean. There was an article on this recently... How distorted maps are versus reality. The arctic is in a world of sh-t right now, but the global anomaly is still sitting around +0.5C above the 30 year moving average. That Russia cold is insane. We need that cold on top of the planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 On 11/17/2016 at 10:56 AM, stadiumwave said: Anyone know where GlobalWarmer poster is? I figured he'd be all over this. Kind of concerns me he's not posting. I believe he was previously named frivolous. Something happened to him in his life I believe. He checked in and said he didn't have time for this anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 Endless summer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophisticated Skeptic Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 3 hours ago, Jonger said: Something happened to him in his life I believe. He checked in and said he didn't have time for this anymore. MIB ? all in all, I hope he's well .. It was fun seeing him and ORH go at it at times, over the years. Guess I gotta take over and keep the pressure on now. (jk) I learned a lot from both him and ORH regarding the arctic...and others here. Quote This departure from normal in global sea ice has really blown up on social media and I'd expect the mainstream media to pick it up really soon. when pigs fly. Mainstream media is so owned by the Republican agenda, so I highly doubt it. We'll have to wait until ALL ice is gone , or once things start looking like this. then maybe...just maybe there'll be a story or 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 On November 18, 2016 Arctic Sea Ice Extent (JAXA) was 8,320,714 square kilometers. That was a decline of 97,385 square kilometers from the previous day. It is also 948,831 square kilometers below the previous record minimum for the date of 9,269,545 square kilometers, which was set in 2012. The biggest 1-day declines in the October 1-December 31 timeframe: 1. 97,385 sq. km., 11/18/2016 (exceeded the biggest 2-day decline for this timeframe). 2. 54,064 sq. km., 12/25/2011 3. 53,292 sq. km. 12/1/2007 4. 51,274 sq. km. 12/17/2011 5. 48,440 sq. km. 10/25/2009 The November 17, 2016 decline of 46,717 square kilometers ranked 6th biggest for this timeframe. The 11/17-18/2016 2-day decline of 144,102 square kilometers exceeded the previous record of 81,804 square kilometers, which was established on 12/1-2/2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 Wait - we lost nearly 100,000 sq km of ice coverage in ONE day? Also, all those records are within the last decade. Man, we are f*cked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 9 minutes ago, pazzo83 said: Wait - we lost nearly 100,000 sq km of ice coverage in ONE day? Also, all those records are within the last decade. Man, we are f*cked. Yes. It was a huge loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 Setting up for record gains in December! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 Look at the buoys at or above 80N - temps are are in the mid-upper 20s F wtf. http://iabp.apl.washington.edu/maps_daily_table.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 43 minutes ago, tacoman25 said: Setting up for record gains in December! troll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psv88 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 Damn. Not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 FWIW, the November 18 Arctic sea ice extent figure would be equivalent to a November 18 high temperature of about 87° in NYC on a standardized basis. The existing record for the date is 73°, which was set in 1921 and tied in 1928. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 2 hours ago, pazzo83 said: Look at the buoys at or above 80N - temps are are in the mid-upper 20s F wtf. http://iabp.apl.washington.edu/maps_daily_table.html There has been amazing warmth in the Arctic region this fall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugarloaf1989 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 How is the ice cover loss determined? Is this via infrared satellite imaging? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Arctic sea ice extent fell 18,045 square kilometers on November 19. That brings the 3-day decline to 162,147 square kilometers. The daily figure of 8,302,669 square kilometers is 1,102,391 square kilometers below the previous daily record low figure of 9,405,060 square kilometers, which was set in 2012. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 8 hours ago, skierinvermont said: troll Is joking illegal here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenmsav6810 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 9 hours ago, pazzo83 said: Wait - we lost nearly 100,000 sq km of ice coverage in ONE day? Also, all those records are within the last decade. Man, we are f*cked. Important to remember methodology here. It's done by satellite imaging so, measurements are intermittent (depending on orbit) not to mention accurate record history might be difficult for before 1990ish. As with all optical remote sensing, these measurements are prone to occlusion error (in this case by clouds/sea water.) Also, I don't know what technically constitutes a "loss," true melting (calving events [breaks "up]) or just the loss of continuity of the Antarctic ice mass (meaning a large but complete ice shelf breaks "off") . Neabulous but important issues that probably get glazed over in non-scientific journal reporting and clickbait). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 55 minutes ago, tacoman25 said: Is joking illegal here? troll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 1 hour ago, zenmsav6810 said: Important to remember methodology here. It's done by satellite imaging so, measurements are intermittent (depending on orbit) not to mention accurate record history might be difficult for before 1990ish. As with all optical remote sensing, these measurements are prone to occlusion error (in this case by clouds/sea water.) Also, I don't know what technically constitutes a "loss," true melting (calving events [breaks "up]) or just the loss of continuity of the Antarctic ice mass (meaning a large but complete ice shelf breaks "off") . Neabulous but important issues that probably get glazed over in non-scientific journal reporting and clickbait). Given this decline has been persistent and today's value is 160k lower than the value 3 days ago it's not due to cloud cover or measurement error. If we saw a 100k blip down and then it went right back up the next day then a big portion of the dip could have been measurement error. But when the measurement is consistent across 3 days, and in fact just keeps getting lower, it's not measurement error. A calving event or ice shelf breaking off would have no effect on sea ice area. If anything land ice or ice shelves calving would increase sea ice area because previously land bound ice would now be afloat and thus newly within the sea ice boundary area. Nor does an area of sea ice separating from (IE getting blown away from) the rest of the sea ice pack, decrease sea ice area. The resolution of the satellites measurements is such that this separated ice would still be included in the total. Obviously small icebergs would go unnoticed. But 100,000 sq km is several orders of magnitude bigger than what might go unnoticed. Sea ice decreases this time of year are probably largely due to wind compaction. We could also be seeing newly formed ice from the last week or two melting. When it first freezes it would be very thin and then if the weather changes it might melt again. Normally any compaction would be compensated for by the rapid freezing going on elsewhere. The ice area and volume should be exploding this time of year. So what we're really likely seeing is a general arctic-wide lack of rapid freezing combined with either compaction and/or melting of newly formed ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now