This is wayne's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following wayne's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Case in point today D:
Hi D, "The question is, how much solar heat got into the ocean under the stormy conditions?" Very good question, a lot where the Highs were, but the cyclones are not entirely rich with clouds as we can often see sea ice where they linger.
Toggle Commented 10 hours ago on ASI 2016 update 4: breaking point at Arctic Sea Ice
Thanks Jim Dowling I give an example of what very little wind can do to current sea ice spread, very little does a lot of damage, if this GFS strong Low comes through the consequences are easy to imagine, but the final layout of sea ice not so.
Toggle Commented 10 hours ago on ASI 2016 update 4: breaking point at Arctic Sea Ice
Jim, The latest little cyclone causing such damage so easily should do some convincing. John Blisky, Correct indeed, the illusion of melting sea ice is similar to the easier latent heat of evaporation, placing a thermometer into boiling water leaves the temp reading unchanged at 100 C. There is a lot of heat transferred but none so immediately apparent, unless a water volume reading is done. So DMI North of 80 always has the same temperature within +.5 C great or small melt season. What is left to do is to be objective, to look ar the over all appearance of the ice in the glass? Still in cubes or broken up badly?
Goedemorgen Werther, We can always study the effects from a scalpel, ie Cyclone over a small area of sea ice already weak and very fluid. 2013 had Cyclones, but none had these effects until much later if memory serves. Most who think that 2016 will not be top 3 forget our current date, with respect to present condition of sea ice, well in advanced stages of melts similar if not greater than 2012 in many areas.
Hi D, Our experience with multiple cyclones impacting sea ice is limited largely to expecting that it will be cooler over the sea ice. I blame 2013, a really surprising melt following greatest minima in 2012. But 2013 had no circulation to speak off. Very unlike 2016. There is also other factors such as storm surges, breaking up the ice not only horizontally but vertically, along with what Jim was recently studying, winds and waves. The net result was extent grids saturated with broken sea ice with much larger areas of water. The 15% extent threshold poorly represents this fact, say 25% of the ice is spread out over a grid with 75% water, consider 800 of these grids, mentally compact them, thus instead of having 90% ice extent, you'll have about 30%, about 300,000 km2 less ice than what the 15% threshold implies. Therefore using extent must be qualified with the melt potential of those little ice islands numbering in the thousands, all surrounded by warm water, they should be just about to be considered gone by mid-September just like we do for Hudson and Baffin Bay.
Thanks Jim, I don't know if it is within Beaufort area, because there was a substantial loss of small ice pans, likely decreasing the 15% per grid threshold. Perhaps to the North of Beaufort in CAB.
Abbottisgone I did not imply, but it is a plausibility, 2012 and 16 have similar numbers, although the complete picture looks quite different. However, numbers diving must be dissimilar to 2012 which seemed to have had more compaction.
although JAXA has not published 25 July results, it seems obvious that the melt was big: Today is time of the year when sea ice core temperatures become critically vulnerable. Especially near open water.
Latest AMSR2 extent loss numbers are robust at a pace of 66k a week, with a huge caveat : Beaufort area ice is receiving a huge flow of CAB ice daily, most of it melts on its way westwards, but some remain and inflate Extent numbers due to 15% requirement: There may be huge extent drop numbers in the cards. Even so, 2013 melt rates bring from now 2016 minima to 4,768,124 Km2, 6th place finish. Using latest week melt rate of about 67K a day, a modest number considering huge extent numbers potentially at play, minima should be about 3,673,038.6 km2 2nd place finish.
Jim - If they have the luxury of time, they may reconsider, give it a few weeks or so. But the sea ice is doing movement I seldom observed, many different scenarios may happen.
Speaking of the Pole, there is mind boggling movement of sea ice North of Laptev Sea, the bite towards the Pole is not as full as it use to be:
Next 2 weeks of scrubbing the deck and avoiding likely very starved Polar bears and we shall see if the eagle can moor at the N. P. .
"And if so, does that mean that the CAB north of the Beaufort is currently is much worse shape than it was in 2012 ?" Rob Correct, and if you look more carefully at animations, weather circulation is equally dramatically different. With a steady pervasive low centred North Pole in 2012, driving the entire pack counterclockwise, while cyclones whisking by the periphery in 2016. "MYI blocks in the Beaufort" These are forged by the metal of the greatest darkest winter, they have climate unto themselves, the slowness of the current clockwise gyre, always stalled by contrarian winds makes them more apparent and not returning quickly to the main pack. Jim What a good idea, but the smart yachtsman would wait for the all clear, sail to Spitsbergen for a visit and wait a little. Contrarians keep on talking about ordinary boats at the Pole. Pre July 1969 landing buzz. Thank You don't let us down now.
Hi Rob, In 2016 the Gyre current was slow but steady, it carried megatons of ice to melt from the CAB, therefore the illusion of less a melt. Very unlike 2012 which appears to have had a flipped current. At least during the same 10 day period. CAB ice was smooth in 2012. with that we can roughly outline in advance the melt season finale at minima. If we do the same outlining for 2016, we get a small uniform pack in a pie slice about 150 W longitude to the Pole to Fram Strait.
2016 vs 2012 NASA pictures animated outlook: The weather and icescape patterns are radically different. I expected this, but not as much as what we see now. This increases predictability complexities even further. Conservative projection methods are out of the proverbial window. We are definitely in unstable prediction waters.
Jim Wow, that says it all, hereditary Lord's can say anything and keep their title. Unfortunately for him there were communists, Stalin sent a couple of chaps to an ice base at the North Pole amongst other Arctic bases in the 30's. And there was all sorts of people throughout the Polar world, missionaries, especially Anglican missions always in sight of the Ice pack, let alone solid records from ships namely whalers who dreaded the term "Northwest passage" because there was no easy routes at the time. No sea ice would have prompted a huge "last frontier" rush, because the Arctic has enormous resources, kept safe by the bitterly cold weather throughout the year. Of Which the few near or at Arctic weather stations or trading posts kept indirect records available at the Scott Research Polar Institute or the Hudson Bay Company, data accessible to his Lordship. But his mind has created an alternate Earth historical timeline. The man is a shinning example of the hereditary process becoming eventually incompetent.
Jim The Viscount said that? Note the "not likely", a politician by all accounts. All words have a double meaning. I think the contrarians are bracing for an onslaught of negative feedback, although never likely admitting wrong. Susan Hurricane Sandy awaken the giant for 15 minutes, now captivated by Kardashian Swift feud seems like ever since. Lack of Hurricanes are an interesting bit of science though. Not as difficult as sea ice, but very hot interest for those reading the science -instead of gossip - columns
Hi Susan The Arctic is such a distant place, I doubt that a significant number of people in the US, outside Alaska, care very much about it, let alone its sea ice. I have always said that it would take a man on the moon event. This would be a simple small boat reaching the iceless North Pole. It can be this year, but no one is getting their yacht on the ready,
The larger question for 2016 as always been whether sea ice may be spared huge collapses in extent due to the lack of 2007 style dipoles caused by a change in Arctic circulation pattern reflecting sea ice thinning conditions. What most commenters tend to forget so far, is that 2 of the main sea ice melt mechanisms: compaction and export through Fram, have not played a larger role typical of a great melt summer, yet the extent numbers are very competitive with 2012. This answers one of the main questions: can sea ice simply melt away without the help of dipoles? the answer is yes, and I am sure there are further surprises ahead as the state of sea ice simply becomes more and more vulnerable.
Bien sur Alais: The current status of a lot of sea ice consists of a much diluted quality. I rather expect big extent drop numbers, as well as smaller ones at times, as the disintegration shattering melting process continues.
Yes, I always forget to mention to sea ice model programmers: Rem subroutine about surface temperature with respect to sea ice If SAT < TOSIT, then SAT=TOSIT end subroutine If surface air temperature is colder than top of sea ice, Make SAT = TOSIT, run and see if that will make a difference in model outputs. This advice comes with a price, please show your outputs before and after making this adjustment.
Cato "We remember how hot was July 2015, well, up to now the temperature chart from DMI shows quite a different situation" Check 2012 and see heat smashing ice to melt to an all time low extent.....:) DMI 80N is a model calculation, in my opinion (and I have proof), over sea surface temperature model calculations are slightly too cold.
Succinct Graph Viddaloo The state of 2016 sea ice is clearly exposed this way.
"There will be a huge dip in overall extent coming soon" ......... substantially bigger than JAXA just released 111,030 for July 20 1 day off 2012....
Toggle Commented 7 days ago on Iced lightning at Arctic Sea Ice