This is LRC's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following LRC's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
LRC
Toronto
Stuck in a rut
Interests: Very eclectic
Recent Activity
An interesting blog on working on the Arctic ice. http://rawahranger.com/2014/11/thin-ice/ Shows I think how poor our best guesses really are.
Found a recent study about Arctic fire prevalence. Article on it. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/arctic-forests-are-on-fire-now-more-than-at-any-point-in-the-past-10000-years-17175680/ PDF study. http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/07/19/1305069110.full.pdf+html So the big question is not whether it actually is increasing. The big question is how bad it will get. How many hydrocarbon seams are close enough to surface that once a fire starts will burn for years? Could the tundra dry out enough and have enough built up vegetation that once a fire starts could burn for years such as has happened in Irish peat bogs? Can trees grow back fast enough to replace what has been burnt to hold soil and water before it turns to desert? Lastly can human based infrastructure depended on permafrost as foundation be replaced fast enough before an ecological catastrophe happens as there are a lot of pipes up there? The last question is somewhat of a side issue, but currently the ecosystems in the north are very fragile and damaging that has huge ripple effects on what happens potentially to ice and snow. It would also make it harder for new flora and fauna to establish itself.
Toggle Commented Jul 17, 2014 on ASI 2014 update 5: low times at Arctic Sea Ice
Ran across this study which seems to indicate Arctic temps higher then thought on average. Report: http://news.mongabay.com/2014/0115-hance-gap-arctic-temps.html Study: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.2297/pdf
Toggle Commented Jul 6, 2014 on ASI 2014 update 4: high times at Arctic Sea Ice
Lennart: I like that illustration. Paints the picture perfectly for me.
Toggle Commented Jun 30, 2014 on ASI 2014 update 4: high times at Arctic Sea Ice
What I find interesting is that other then 2007 which had the perfect storm of events to a melt season (transport weather etc) since then the Arctic has shown has different ways to bring about a melt. Even in 2012 if my memory servers its was mainly transport. If all these elements ever got together in one season, I do not think the ice is strong enough nor there is enough of it to make it all go. The MYI maybe thick, but I always remember reading back in 2009? scientists blogging about the fact that they were about to setup equipment on what appeared to be a very large strong MYI floe and it disintegrated before their eyes by a wave traveling 100ks under the pact that was not supposed to be able to occur. I keep saying folks. MYI of today is not the MYI of 1980. This is different ice that can turn into a slushy very easily. I also call to mind the mathematician (also an expert on ice) saying that the structure of sea ice is such that it is almost impossible to tell from satellites how thick that ice really is. And definitely do not know how strong it is.
Toggle Commented Jun 30, 2014 on ASI 2014 update 4: high times at Arctic Sea Ice
Bill Another option is that you have a plugin in your browser (or something your ISP does for you) such as you antivirus or firewall software installed, or some other extension added to your browser that automatically redirects you to a generic page when you try and enter a https site. In this case you need to going into whatever extension or softwares options tab and add link to white list. Have had that happen to me on occasion with both my firewall and antivirus software. Very easy to fix once you know how, but every one of them does it somewhat differently so best idea to find out how is to google whatever is redirecting you and add white list. you should get your answer. Either nevens or this should fix your problem.
Toggle Commented Jun 30, 2014 on ASI 2014 update 4: high times at Arctic Sea Ice
@wayne Could it be that sunny at this time of year works really well because other melting forces have weakened ice conditions in such a way that sun can do optimum damage?
@Bill I know you understand about same song sheet, I was just pointing it because I tend to google queries and quite often it appears they are saying current CO2=current temps, and rarely do I see stated that in fact it is (current yr - 30)get CO2 level=current temp, and that RF can either be immediately impacting or a delay (such as desertification has both immediate and delay amplification). I do know that most of us understand this I just wanted to point it out as I see so little of this explained. You get that in political discussions, they definitely do not understand the song sheet most of us are sing from.
@ Rob & Bill: a few points I ponder about in your formula. 1) our current temp forcing levels are based according to CO2 levels 30 years ago based on what I have read. 2) the albedo impacts I presume are more immediate. 3) is rising CO2 levels = rising temps or could it possibly be geometric or exponential 3) could we not have a CO2 burst when ocean CO2 levels reach saturation and regurgitate CO2? Do we have any idea when that could occur? This means we are at 347.55ppm affects now not the current 401.85ppm. That comes in 2044. Scary thought that is.
In my case I really low balled the guess. 3.25-3.5. I have no education per say in it, but here is my reasoning. The best ice needs time to squeeze out air and salt. It also needs cold. The average winter temps in the Arctic are going up, in fact, other them May it was a very warm winter by Arctic standards. Not only that, it is my conclusion that most if not all ice that has stayed around until winter since 2007 has been routinely been broken up into smaller pieces. Although every winter they are frozen back together, salt and air have infiltrated and not allowed to get pressed out because it needs more then 1 winter to do that. So in conclusion, although you may start the melt season with big single sheets of MYI, it IMO can not really be put into the category of MYI, because it is full of air and salt. What you really have is very thick FYI. Combine that with the fact it has been very warm in the winter, you end up with very wet FYI. This means IMO the weather in May really is not as important as it was before 2012 (remeber '12 up until GAC2012 really was not conducive to a big melt up until that storm weather wise), the big factor is weather at the end. Case in point, last year the melt earlier in the year was going beating 2012 then July/August the winds really did nothing other then move it around and fragment it some more, it remained cool and cloudy for the most part. Now the SSTA were on the high side in Aug. This was not long enough to cause the ice to melt out entirely, but I do think it cased farther deterioration to the ice quality. Putting this all together, IMO Aug weather this year will be the decider as to how much ice we have left. That is a roll of the dice. By then we could possibly be seeing the effects of El Nino starting which could mean warmer then normal (above new norms) with the polar jet stream pulling south. That brings in the second roll of the dice. The jet stream is far weaker then in the past and therefore far more erratic. This behaviour really causes difficulties in forecasting because it is primarily the jet that defines weather boundaries. Not really scientific, but my reasoning.
A little OT. A friend of mine passed on to me this seriously dangerous weather site. http://weathertemperature.com/weatherforecast/?q=Barrow,Alaska,United%20States%20Of%20America#24June Gives you almost ever bit of info your boss really you rather not take the time to know about.
See http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=2705. Something happened to that no warming happening. 3rd month in a row of tying or beating record temps.
@Tenny The bouys actually do take readings from the to the water. Not sure of the frequency or how far back the archives go. Jim Hunt would know the best. They also do that periodically in the Antarctica. https://nsidc.org/data/thermap/
@Vsaluki Antarctica extent is used as a distraction of the real melt there. Extent for the most part melts off every year. The real melt are the glaciers, and those are thinning and getting smaller every year. It may look like a very small % of the total, but the speed of losses are increasing at an exponential rate. That is the troubling part.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27870459 "Now, it has put out its first open forecast for this September of 5.4 million square km, give or take half a million. It compares with 5.35 million square km averaged across September last year. Their prediction. Their caveat, weather.
Toggle Commented Jun 19, 2014 on ASI 2014 update 1: melt pond May at Arctic Sea Ice
Not sure if this was ever brought up, but came across this just today. Water pours through pores in sea ice ICY CALCULATIONS ON A HOT TOPIC I can not find the paper itself. Now how yo say does this relate to melt ponds? Ken Golden strikes again. Mathematical Patterns in Sea Ice Reveal Melt Dynamics Published article. Transition in the fractal geometry of Arctic melt ponds This I believe gives a better indication and explanation as to how melt ponds work. So in effect it does make sense that the earlier the melt ponds are formed the more melt will occur.
Toggle Commented Jun 19, 2014 on ASI 2014 update 1: melt pond May at Arctic Sea Ice
@Henry1 I am not arguing that it will happen, but JAW has a point. When it comes to climatology they talk in terms of tipping points as an example a full glass that has a little more water added to it. Up until it is full the water never spills and therefore you can say from historical precedence water never spills. but if you add to much then not only does the extra volume of water spill more then that spills. I believe you can say the same for the ASI. At X temperatures the ice has always do Y. Well if X adds just a little more stress on the ice and it gets to the point where the ice gets too much stress then the trends you saw in the past no longer would apply because that stress level had never been reached before. The question then becomes when will that stress point be reached. Are we there now, who knows, but I do think it will happen much sooner then latter.
Not directed at collapse of ice, but at the other parts of the debate. Came across the talk and included in it was dealing with some of the issues brought https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gh9kDCuPuU8
Toggle Commented Jun 13, 2014 on The day the ice cap died at Arctic Sea Ice
Confusing! In past years where things have gone off the rails for us is that of figuring out how long a system would stick around. See 2012, 2013 as examples. In general though we did have a pretty good handle of what was happening at the time and usually 2-3 days out at least. This year I have noticed a lot of difficulty figuring out what is going on presently. Very few times have the models even agreed 2-3 days out, and even what is going on at the time seems to be in disagreement at times. On top of that For example we look at MODIS and see water and extent will say full of ice. If my understanding is right there have been a couple of newish satellites giving us info now. Could it be that there are still some hicups between the raw data being collected and the models giving us the info? And another thing that is different, there seem to be very few researchers up there giving first hand accounts so that we can compare between the two. In the end it would not surprise me in the least that if we are not surprised at what happens in Sept. we will be surprised next years results. I am convinced there is melting going on the we can not see or misinterpreting because this is definitely a confusing year.
Toggle Commented Jun 12, 2014 on PIOMAS June 2014 at Arctic Sea Ice
@Neven I must say for a muddler you have brought together and have kept running the best Arctic Ice forum on the planet. To the point many educational expert sites use many of the things your forum has pulled together. That is an accomplishment that is unique for an open free forum on a topic full of (the name their given escapes me right now) those who like getting forums off the main points. If you google arctic ice your forums are almost always at or near the top and most of the rest have links to you and/or your images. For that you must be heartily commended. Keep up with your muddling we truly need more of you.
@SB point #1 see Re: Jakobshavn Isbræ / Sermeq Kujalleq / Ilulissat Icefjord « Reply #244 on: Today at 05:13:13 PM » here http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,154.200.html#lastPost and it shows you that the calving front equals max last Sept. We could see major calving still with 3 months to go. As for point 2. weather plays a major roll on ice melt. For those interested in how much melt is going to happen in the next few weeks, predicting the weather also involves predicting ice melt.
@Terry Based on my readings what the bedrock is makes little difference as most is below sea level and going down hill.The important part is how strongly bound the ice is at the moment it appears the front line of the glacier is very weak. The longer the goes the more trouble it is going to have to hold back the influence of the warm waters.
@TM: If you check this https://skitch-img.s3.amazonaws.com/20101026-jip6n4px828amdaf2i8ard4k1p.jpg you will see that topography is straight east and that north arm has a hump to work around. Water likes to go down and that is where the heat where the glacier is getting to calve. The scary part we could see the beginnings of the same scenario we were given for the WAIS
Thanks Jim. Still getting used to this. Most times think I am little slow on up take.
If I am wrong sorry , but found this weather report. http://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast?query=69.166664,-49.833332&cm_ven=googleonebox Appears to be within norm but note for today indicates has been a lot warmer.