The early trends in this arctic melt season have caught a lot of people’s attention, but it’s way too early to make any bets.
For a complete rundown, see Nevin Acropolis’ account at Climate Progress, or at Nevin’s Arctic Sea Ice Blog.
Nutshell version here:
A few months ago some strong winds stretched the boundaries of the winter ice further than usual, particularly in the Bering Sea area, and a thin sheen of ice froze in behind the wind-blown leading edge. The Denia-sphere did the usual round of high fives about the “return to normal”.
Now as the melt season has begun, that thin ice has disappeared even faster than expected.
In addition, large areas of melt water are ponding on the ice. This causes satellites to read the melt ponds in some cases as open water, giving a bit of an exaggerated read on the melt – however, this also means that large areas of ice are getting some serious insolation, and this pattern of large meltwater areas was characteristic of the record 2007 summer.
Important to keep in mind. The mass of perennial (multi year, thick) ice is much diminished from what it was 5 or 6 years ago. Watch the NSIDC video animation below – you can see the progressive disappearance of the thick, multiyear ice over 3 decades. Watch the dates in the lower left corner, and you’ll see how 2005 and 2007 just knocked the stuffing out of the ice thickness. It has not recovered.
So, in 2012, we start with a much lower baseline than in previous years. Summer weather like we saw in 2010 or 2011 could very likely result in a new record low. If we see a set-up like 2007’s perfect storm, all bets are off.
Bottom line, its too early to tell, we’ll know more as we get into the peak months of July and August. I’ll be getting some regular briefings on this and will share what I find out.
It’s fun to poke fun at ‘skeptics’, yes. Hopefully, though, people don’t take this the wrong way and do exactly what we tell ‘skeptics’ not to do, that being taking a single years occurrence and judging the long term trend on that single year. It is kind of an in-your-face type of argument though to those that were pointing toward the slow melt season in earlier months and attributing that to cooling.
A common contrarian tactic is to accuse people of the very same errors and distortions that they engage in all the time. Looking at a single year or set of recent years in the context that it corroborates the long term trend is a world different from continually predicting a recovery where no rational person would gather any such thing from the data. I agree, we must be wary of making mistakes like this ourselves, but in this case the more rational track record and scientific backing is far in our favor.
this is a trend that is decades long. maybe much longer if you can believe the graphs at cryosphere today.
anyone that says the arctic is recovering has a very high bar to clear over a number of years before they can be taken seriously.
I completely agree. I’ve debated with a lot of these so called ‘skeptics’ time and time again though and they always like to point out when I say something similar to the above when, at the same time, telling them not to take a single year out of a trend. Oddly some of them like to point out things like the slow melt season, false claims that it has been cooling for the last decade, and advancements in cherry-picked glaciers while, at the same time, claiming that no one in their right mind does not believe it’s warming and it’s the cause of warming that is in question when in reality it is not. There’s really no sense in dealing with these types of people. I do agree that the fast melt season is just another symptom of a warming atmosphere and I am aware of all that AGW entails but I am still rather alarmed at the loss experienced 2007 onwards. Makes it seem like 2035, the most recent baseline for a summertime ice free arctic, isn’t that far out of reach and possible will occur sooner.
Jeff. Although 2007 started at a lower base line, for much of the ‘spring’ it tracked within the lower limits of the two-point margin of error line, from April right up to late June. This year, although it has tracked within the margin of error line for most of the year & started within the track… we’re seeing that break away from the lower limit of the margin of error track line, a full month earlier. It could bounce back of course, but as Peter says, it’s too early to call it, but with ‘pools’ forming the trend is usually more rapid melting caused by these dark areas absorbing more solar energy..
Nonetheless, if it turns out to be yet another record low year, then that is on top of all the other records & 1000 year storms & droughts & floods etc which we’ve seen around the globe in recent years.
It’s the ‘trends’ that matter in climate science & the trends globally (as predicted decades ago) have been towards more eratic seasons & more ‘extreme’ weather events… and imo one of the more worrying ‘extreme’ trends is that of the ice-melt at the top of the world.
The Arctic Methane Emergency group set up by concerned scientists in the U.K. are getting really worried about the rapidly accelerateing loss of ice in the arctic.
The latest PIOMASS data on ice volume leads to a a projection that arctic will be ice free at the september minimum by 2015!!!
http://ameg.me/
HA! Being a gambling woman and not a scientist, I have no problem betting that we will hit a new record low this year.
Last week I got an interesting perspective as a stowaway on a Greenpeace tour of the Esperanza, which was docked in Seattle. The crew was taking on provisions for a 3-month trip to the Arctic where they are going to monitor Shell’s exploratory drilling and use their submarines to establish a baseline study of the ocean floor (while maintaining a court-ordered kilometer distance from Shell’s equipment!).
The bad news was they thought they might not be able to penetrate the ice – the good news was maybe Shell wouldn’t be able to do any exploratory drilling at all.
Perhaps that expectation is changing.
pictures here: http://witsendnj.blogspot.com/2012/06/esperanza.html
USS Skate (SSN-578) made submarine history on 11 August 1958 when it became the first submarine to surface at the North Pole.
The officer who had climbed to the bridge with Calvert called the skipper’s attention to the port side of the ship. There a full grown polar bear was climbing slowly out of the water and up onto the ice.
The date was 11 August 1958 and the Skate had just become the first submarine to surface at the North Pole.
http://www.navalhistory.org/2011/08/11/uss-skate-ssn-578-becomes-the-first-submarine-to-surface-at-the-north-pole/
openings in the arctic ice are well known. They result from local dynamics of ice movement, or upwellings of deeper water.
To suggest that there was some equivalent ice decline in the 1950s is either grossly ignorant, or deliberately deceptive.
Which are you?
“To suggest that there was some equivalent ice decline in the 1950s is either grossly ignorant, or deliberately deceptive.
Which are you?”
None of the above Peter. I see enough of what you accuse me of on your blog to know the difference.
You can take a look at the photo of the USS Texas surfacing and read some about it to understand that my post attempted to deceive no one. I will point out to you that the USS Texas was at the North Pole in October while the first vessel to surface there all those years ago did so in August but just look at the photos.
“Last week, it was reported that an American submarine, the USS Texas (SSN 775), surfaced near the North Pole in mid-October. The submarine, part of the Virginia class, was the first ship in its kind to do so. It was taking part in an ICEX, or ice exercise. After surfacing, the submarine stayed moored to the ice for 24 hours. Ens. James Robinson, Supply Officer of USS Texas, said in the Navy press release:”
http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/2009/11/16/american-submarine-near-north-pole-worries-canadians/
uh huh. so you just thought you’d throw this meaningless drivel into the discussion. thanks for playing.
I’m losing patience with the cut and paste jobs from WUWT. Please try to be original, appropriate, and germane.
Well, this year is on pace to have as much or more melting than any on record:
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2012/06/20120619_Figure2.png
Neil
Neil Blanchard: Do you think that there will be as much decline as in 1922? “The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen, Norway. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.”
who reported this ? the IPCC, the Meteorological Office…. No, that was the US Weather Bureau in 1922.
“The source report of the Washington Post article on changes in the arctic has been found in the Monthly Weather Review for November 1922. It is much more detailed than the Washington Post (Associated Press) article. It seems the AP heaviliy relied on the report from Norway Consulate George Ifft, which is shown below. See the original MWR article below and click the newsprint copy for a complete artice or see the link to the original PDF below:”
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/200389-Flashback-1922-Extra-Extra-Read-all-about-it-Arctic-Ocean-Getting-Warm-Seals-Perish-Glaciers-and-Icebergs-Melt-
again. deliberate attempt to mislead from press reports describing regional changes.
See the University of Illinois graph for northern hem sea ice extent back to 1900.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seasonal.extent.1900-2010.png
“again. deliberate attempt to mislead from press reports describing regional changes.”
Please explain how what I presented could be construed to be simply a regional occurrence and do you think that it occurred in just one season? If you want some misleading and erroneous information, take a look at what I present for your consideration below.
‘Frightening’ projection for Arctic melt
The Arctic Ocean could be free of ice in the summer as soon as 2010 or 2015 – something that hasn’t happened for more than a million years, according to a leading polar researcher.
By CanWest News Service November 16, 2007
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=c76d05dd-2864-43b2-a2e3-82e0a8ca05d5&k=53683>
Arctic sea ice ‘to melt by 2015’
Arctic sea ice could completely melt away by the summer of 2015, destroying the natural habitat of animals like polar bears, one of Britain’s leading ocean experts has claimed.
6:30PM GMT 08 Nov 2011
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/8877491/Arctic-sea-ice-to-melt-by-2015.html>
You bring up the University of Illinois and the link below doesn’t make it appear that the ice is rapidly disappearing, but I’m sure you can give me your expert view on this also.
http://www.real-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/ScreenHunter_208-Mar.-10-06.08.jpg
Do you think that what is below is another: “again. deliberate attempt to mislead from press reports describing regional changes.”?
Saturday 31 May 1947
“ARCTIC PHENOMENON Warming Of Climate Causes Concern LOS ANGELES. May 30.-The possibility of a prodigious rise in the surface of the ocean with resultant widespread inundation, arising from an Arctic climatic phenomenop was discussed yesterday by Dr. Hans Ahlimann, a noted Swedish geophysicist at the University of California Geophysical Institute.”
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/46315572