This is wayne's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following wayne's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Jim, Kevin Thanks but I am looking for how the thermistors are installed.. On a simple wire string? Or from what it seems, in a vertical plastic tube , where as at installation water fills a vertical pipe and freezes thereafter. The schematic was nice but was for O' buoy's.
Does anyone have a schematic of string thermistors as installed with current mass buoys?
JIm, I hope they plan to come back with kayaks as well, since pilots may refuse to land at the Pole if the ice is too thin. In the recent past, NP pick ups were always preferred on multi-year pans, now is only Borneo. The reason for thick ice make-shift runways may be understood by the DeHavilland plane which sank at the Pole when it landed on First year ice in the 80's. So one day, someone will film a plane at the bottom of ocean very near a Russian flag.
Returning to 2015A in fog brings out reality, with top 5 shielded by cloud thermistors measured an inversion a 260800 and 261200. Note the small temperature differences especially with the surface reading, this small difference is enough to raise the horizon. Buoy thermistors readings in the sun become very suspect when the temperature differences between surface measurement and above ice string thermistors are very large. But the visual observation is prime and is not affected by instrumentation artifacts. This is why its important to be as correct as possible when verifying with models. On a sunny day, if top string thermistors did not have solar induced artifacts they would measure very close to an isothermal profile as observed when the sun is high enough. When the sun lowers to midnight an inversion is created because the ice is colder than the air. This is not quite the same as air being cooled by land in the morning after night time at Southern latitudes. The ice cools the air at first chance it gets. For those who drive on a hot summer day right after twilight on a highway, you can still see road mirages by distant car red back lights doubling on pavement, if the road was ice, it would not be seen likewise, the red lights would be raised without cognizance.
Jim , correct I couldn't reconcile the thermistors data with sonar for the longest time. I suppose they decide thickness by sonar rather temperatures. However In A's case consider the top point where the ice was just below zero at 08:00 UTC which is thermistor 6, and thermistor 22 where -1.8 C has been recorded likely the bottom. Which was not always the bottom warmest thermistor of record, most times is thermistor 19. I think the bottom is messed up, although we need a visual confirmation, its the the time when krill must work harder to get din din. Yes Bill, Brasi buoy is more apt!
And here you have it, 2015A will swim with the fishes soon, if its loss of 30 cm at bottom, from 05/23/2015 20:00 to 05/24 04:00 UTC, was accurate. At about 1 C outside temperature not much more. The rot at bottom makes it so, for quite a while the bottom melted and refroze, a process that can be seen if you drill through the ice. The continuous phase changes created mushy soft ice boom layers likely more porous, where micro-creatures hide from krill. The tides played a role as well with likely warmer water moved in. I think the speed of sea ice melt is set in no small part by pre-existing conditions, which are not favorable for sea ice to last when insolation spans long periods.
I offer this article: to the hard working sea ice model physicists in particular to check if their temperatures profiles match what is observed by the refraction method. I have not seen any similar figures in the literature. I would useful to see one for verification purposes...
Jim, was wondering if you can pin point exact location of snow and ice interface, as well as water and ice interface given that official buoy ice depths are somewhat difficult to reconcile with official thicknesses, especially with respect to "A" and "D"....
Neven , I would have defined the cooling, but otherwise a very good synopsis. My yearly projection of a month ago is on track, and I don't see anything breaking the momentum already in place. Every season has different features, this one had a cold Arctic North American start driven all winter by a pan continental heat engine, in its wake is drier air because it snowed less and the Pacific is unusually warm causing a greater temperature dew point spread. There is more potential insolation in polar regions summers compared to anywhere else ascalculated by Tamino: With less clouds there is automatically warmer temperatures and a greater melt.
2015A @ 0800 UTC shows definitely signs of water, even Polar bear tracks show top of ice water mixed with snow... The key for thermistors is to read them as much as possible at the lowest sun position.
Toggle Commented May 18, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Thin sea ice, however trivialized, has one important feature, it can almost give the same thermal profile as with older ice: But for different reasons. I guess my dissertation explains why recent winters can be just as cold although short lived. But for the greater part a refreeze after a minima of 0 extent may not mean the planet would warm much faster instantly, at least for the first few years.
Toggle Commented May 17, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Jim , very helpful CRRL person to acknowledge this flaw. Which brings up a question if top of inside ice thermistors may be equally affected with very little snow on surface? Perhaps much less affected but warmed nevertheless. Reading night time data confirms refraction method where there is always an inversion even when cloudy. So for people here studying sensible thermal fluxes, 08 to 12Z readings are best where you can realize there is practically always an inversion which likely means ice formation at bottom. When surface temperature is equal to op of ice, melting takes place at bottom along with latent heat warming of the ice column. There are complexities here amongst these complications. Refreezing of bottom releases heat which should add to the ice column warming. The ice column warms gradually day by day depending on cloud coverage (precluding above 0 C heat waves). The Arctic always has huge cloud cover from April to about July, once removed there is a great melt no matter how thick the ice is. This melt season has had very little fog , now is the time when fog kicks in from ice fog laced with ice crystals. But a few % less RH will make sea ice much more vulnerable.
Toggle Commented May 16, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Jim, The Gyre is in full in synergy with a stable anticyclone pushing along ice in its normal course, since Banks and Victoria is land, water shows in wake of the circulation about the Beaufort area. The sat pics also look "dry" for this time of the year, there is a lack of fog, which is an indication of heat making temperature to dew point spread too wide. Its by far starting period melt with the most warming inertia closely looking like 2012 and 2010 even though general circulation is similar o 2007.
Toggle Commented May 16, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
For us in the Arctic 1998 was the beginning of something powerfully different. It was the fall when wide open water was seen by mid-October. Sea ice usually set mid-September. It was the first bleeding of the multi-year ice to water. El-Ninos afterwards were never as strong, In fact immediately after there were La-Ninas, which eventually made 2001-02 look somewhat like pre 1998. If this year has an El-Nino like 97-1998 it will shred any advances made by the dynamical melt of 2013, when ice melted in place without compaction and caused a respite from 2012 wide open Arctic Ocean. Predictions are part of science, like estimating what gravity will do if you drop two balls having different weight. If our understanding of climate science is advanced, we should be able to predict not only how massive each years melt is , but also caution caveats about the variances caused by weather. Comparing a prediction with actual observation reveals either the perfection in the model used, or its flaws needing improvement. Any one can practice science, but must be ready to explain a forecast, not only throw a number out and wait for the result, Similar to guessing what card will come out next during a game of blackjack. The annoying guy who predicted no melt further past Wrangel Island because the ice is really "thick" will hopefully realize that Pacific water is nearing this Russian Island now, It was the last standing place of Woolly Mammoths, a place when elephant sized animals used sea ice as a road. Wait a bit longer and see the road vanish to blue.
Toggle Commented May 14, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Some may have surely noticed: 10/02/2012 04:00"," 85.3482"," -142.8109","GPS"," -22.93"," 1016.58"," 0.18"," 1.41"," 0.00"," -1.41"," -23.10"," -23.10"," -23.05"," -22.94"," -22.32"," -14.84"," -6.60"," -3.53"," -2.50"," -2.41"," -2.16"," -1.86"," -1.65"," -1.54"," -1.54"," -1.54"," -1.51"," -1.54"," -1.56"," -1.57"," -1.52"," -1.53"," -1.56"," -1.58"," -1.54"," -1.54"," -1.54"," -1.54"," -1.56"," -1.58"," -1.51"," -1.58"," -1.52"," -1.52"," -1.53"," -1.51"," -1.54"," -1.58"," -1.55"," -1.54"," -1.50"," -1.56"," -1.55"," -1.54"," -1.61" It was twilight while ice camp 40 buoy 2012G recorded the above. Of interest, the ice was not so thick, the thinner, the better, because something absolutely interesting was observed by horizon studies. There was an inversion from surface of ice to mini weather station thermometer. This inversion has been seen many times with the thinnest ice imaginable. This thinnest layer will be the subject of my next post out this weekend.
Toggle Commented May 13, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Many thanks Jim and Ghoti, We figured out no water on 2015A a few days ago, but seeing is double believing. Someone very smart is reading Neven's great webpage. What is more fascinating , the refraction method is also confirmed and may be used as one of the most potent methods to analyze sea ice thermodynamics over huge areas at once. There was great deal confusion between what I saw and what some buoys data were suggesting. Now is a matter for those doing buoy work to come up with something better, or at least in the mean time posting a warning that strong solar short wave radiation affects top of ice thermistors. Furthermore, of great scientific interest, a reasonably good webcam from the coast of Alaska towards 2015A would evaporate many thermal flux mysteries. Especially before melt ponds season.
Toggle Commented May 13, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
2015D top of ice data may be judged more realistic at present because solar rays are no as strong, as with buoys further South,.D is much more in line with refraction observations under similar conditions. Sea ice appears to melt and refreeze which is reminiscent of weather, cloudy or sunny. While with temperature isotherm immediately off surface appears to help warm the lower part of the ice column. Which seems pretty much how the bottom ice should behave when top of sea water thermal rays are 'blocked' from escaping to air. Buoys data should also be more studied during darkness, as the data seems much more in line with refraction observations; from buoy 2015G: "02/24/2013 16:00"," 82.7697"," -134.4239","GPS"," -29.91"," 1027.67"," 0.35"," 1.89"," 0.00"," -1.89"," -30.30"," -30.30"," -30.41"," -30.62"," -29.45"," -26.32"," -22.03"," -19.30"," -18.02"," -17.03"," -16.03"," -14.99"," -13.98"," -12.88"," -11.86"," -10.12"," -9.06"," -8.00"," -6.95"," -5.88"," -4.75"," -3.68"," -2.64"," -1.70"," -1.58"," -1.63"," -1.63 There is an inversion, as always observed over sea ice in darkness (unless there is low clouds, a subject of steep interest). Say about .4 C/meter, which is 40 C/100 meters lapse rate, this would cause the horizon to be risen. AS the inversion likely continued further above and is maintained by about 50 W/m2 negative flux fueled by the sea. So Its better to compare model profile results (are there any?) with buoy data acquired during the dark season.
Toggle Commented May 11, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Instead of posting a buoy vs refraction dissertation (thanks Jim) , I think that buoy thermistors have likely a serious problem above top of ice, It is kind of redundant to try explaining possible profiles from doubtful data. So what really happens above sea surface when ice forms? I have done first expose on thermal flux interpretations as revealed by the shifting Arctic horizon:
Toggle Commented May 11, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Indeed , very unlikely, I missed that. This leads to questions about what bits of mass buoys data we should accept. Perhaps surface air and thermistors in ice and in sea water. What is left out is very important, and refraction observations may help fill the gap. To be certain, must wait for 2015D to mach water when above ice thermistors indicate temperatures greater than 0 C.
Toggle Commented May 10, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Jim, look at this 2015A sequence: surfaceT, t1,t2,t3,t4,t5,t6, 16:00 UTC morning 0.16 , 1.32, 1.00, 0.56, -1.57, -3.58, -4.14 20:00 UTC almost noon 1.43, 4.57, 4.14, 3.82, 0.69, -3.01, -4.08 Thermistor 4 should be in water Given a much simplified equation .8 (deltaTa)=2(deltaTi) the temperature increase for ice to water should be about 1.32 C, Given the same Heat applied to t4, its temperature should read -0.25C , not turned into water. (Ta is thermistor T3) applied for 00z when said water is next to t5 in ice 4 (deltaTw)=2(deltaTi) 4(2.7)/2=2.7 C where as delta should be T5= 1.32, may be the equation needs be more complexed, but this simplification fails to replicate what is going on. Failing photos we always have equations.
Toggle Commented May 10, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Quite impressive Jim. Almost +6 degrees per 2 meter adiabat at 10 00z, that is +3000 C/km lapse rate, a photo would have been grand. As if ice is a road. I agree with your point, the temperature differences are simply too huge to be an error unless the thermistors are black. . This means there is evaporation along with sublimation, first melt pond for sure if correct.
Toggle Commented May 10, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Jim, A photo a photo , my curiosity wants a webcam on 2015A , because temperatures are reported to have nearly reached +4 C when surface temperature was a mere +.16 C. This is the most intriguing thing at present. I need to know if this is correct....
Toggle Commented May 9, 2015 on 2014/2015 Winter analysis at Arctic Sea Ice
Jim, very good presentation! They cover everything but I suspect that they have trouble with flux matters. Especially since they have not shown one temperature profile simulation, it is something I can help understand instantly by presenting actual observations. I am very interested in studying what the models come up with . Would be nice to see water, ice and air temperature profiles. I can correct any error in a flash if ice/snow top to air interface profiles are presented with various phases of sea ice formation and melting.
Toggle Commented May 8, 2015 on PIOMAS May 2015 at Arctic Sea Ice
Jim, Not only surface hot temperatures, but highest Upper Air temperatures measured optically the refraction way:
Toggle Commented May 7, 2015 on PIOMAS May 2015 at Arctic Sea Ice
Well well, the temperature of the ice core got progressively warmer even when May 1 and May 5 Outside temps got colder. Magnificent find. The isothermal layer may have done the job.
Toggle Commented May 7, 2015 on PIOMAS May 2015 at Arctic Sea Ice