This is wayne's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following wayne's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Neven, always heard about those very shy ice models, they are not very public, its a mistake, to err is human for a computer to fail its bad physics. Hope they can publish their projections, its extremely helpful both ways, to the model designers and also to the reviewers.
Toggle Commented yesterday on EGU 2015, my impressions at Arctic Sea Ice
Studying the cryosphere is important in more ways than we can imagine, for instance we can eventually move to Mars because it has a permafrost! But let's literally see how much permafrost there is on Mars first.
Jim, have they worked out the near surface thermistor/sun ray induced temperature error? This is important, otherwise the data analysis from buoys is much more difficult. Which top thermistors are considered too warmed up by solar radiation? I think we haven't discussed this subject enough.
Jai, very little chance of a repeat, current temperatures are way to warm,. But you have a good point about the clouds.
Sam, they appear way off, things are getting very prone for melting as we write, all time low extent is rather the right projection.
Jim, I agree! very bad resolution, under he is radiometer is a superb idea! kudoos to the science group making it so. But with he resolution at hand, look carefully, I see some activity , its there and faint compared to other more stable thermistors at about the interface.
Chris, "2007 was a weather driven event, how is this relevant?" Sure was weather, but also very thick ice melting extremely rapidly. No , that is still not a good excuse, the model was certainly coupled and definitely included sea ice physics. I like your idea about sea ice being colder than air and water, but that does not explain why sea ice with less snow cover and colder air did not expand more if thermal fluxes are all that matters. However this said, I observed the horizon line at true astronomical horizon lasting longer when it was colder, this implied less accretion than when it was warmer with greater snow cover. I knew there was more accretion during the greater snow cover period, but I still cant explain why within the confines of present theories. What likely happened was sun rays penetrated the ice core deeper (than with more snow) and gave a negative flux from top of ice. This cancelled flux to air, and focused the bottom for melting or stalling. The only problem is that I observed about 4 hours of flux cancellation. I cant explain the 20 hours when radiation escaped to the atmosphere as per theories . there should have been some ice gain during the said period because of 1/6 negative top of ice flux doesn't compute, unless there is a complexity not quite understood, what better place than the interface where no one sees? very good comments nevertheless!
Chris, very nice to read the standard theory, but don't forget that this theory modeled 2007 melt was suppose to happen in 2038. The interface appears to be complex. What is observed sometimes goes like this: Accretion happens when it is warmer outside , and no accretion happened with same ice at colder surface temperatures, even more the no accretion period occurred with less snow cover, all this contradicts the theory so skillfully presented. Also by description from divers, the sea ice bottom can be very complex in texture and or fragility, I dwell with complexities at present. I am thinking that sea ice has many facets o be discovered. So we must look for them.
Hi Jim. Great stuff, but resolution is not expanded enough, I am looking for small variations at bottom of ice/water limit. If you take out 3/4 's of top, there should be small very interesting variations.
Very good discussion Bill and and Navegante, that is like Susan suggests worth our time. I know very well about latent heat of fusion being released upwards the ice column , I should come back on this soon. In fact it may very well be the process slowing accretion which I am looking for. If the ice warms , the total process of accretion should slow down same as ice thickness does not build up linearly over the long night by its own insulation. Top of water column also responds to temperature change of the ice either by conduction, or its own convection. And so I look for what slows accretion when Lebedev should dictate 20 cm more ice at -20 C in one week, when no ice gain has been noted. No heat transfer towards water would be a surprise to me , given ice direct contact, Not necessarily ice which melts at -1.8 , but purer in water ice say which melts at -1.7 C. or even greater temperatures, this I noted with the buoys at end of melt season. We did have ice warmer than water , so its complex, and usually good discussions makes things clearer.
Jim - What I didn't write, because its very new and a bit perplexing, is that about 4 hours under-melt a day stalls accretion fully (verified manually). The way I see this is that when ice forms it releases 334 KJ/Kg , this heat should "stall" or slow further ice reforming quite a lot by warming sea water. Too bad buoys have a resolution of 10 cm. there should be sea water underside temperature increase But I wonder if that makes sense? Can you see underside warming after the sun lowers?
Toggle Commented Apr 19, 2015 on CryoSat-2 sea ice thickness maps at Arctic Sea Ice My 13h or more annual April summer/fall climate projection based on refraction methods is the most comprehensive one ever done. Less sea ice extent than 2012 is foreseen, would have been worse if La-Nina was rising instead of El-Nino. I also agree, all eyes on the North Pole!
Toggle Commented Apr 19, 2015 on CryoSat-2 sea ice thickness maps at Arctic Sea Ice
Very educational subjects Neven, but none more if data comes strait from the sea ice itself, perhaps all these experts may be interested in knowing we can literally see when sea ice starts to melt: I like it a lot when nature draws a significant line.
I know Peter Wadhams, and he was sure about the rapid decline in sea ice by at least the early 90's. Way before most of us noticed it. Predicting its total disappearance is a matter of time, but first the Pole must be clear blue. It may have been a bad prediction, considering the subject though, the model predicting 2007 melt in year 2038 was far worse. There are reasons to overestimate melting, one of which is the lack of projection skills, the subject is so vast, has so many variables that it is easy to fail. We hone our skills not because it shows prowess but because it helps understand all the mechanisms of sea ice. The more precise the projection, the more accomplished in the subject, in this case the greatest peer is not a school or institution but the future.
Toggle Commented Apr 5, 2015 on The Ns are calling the maximum at Arctic Sea Ice
Before you may read my next fearless projection about Northern Hemisphere weather/climate events (in 10 days or so) you may want to read how well I did last year: There are fake skeptic contrarian deniers out there (mainly gossiping at WUWT) who no fault of their own, they cant help it, they must ridiculize any science endeavor. But they are the last ones to be precise in long term forecasts or predictions. This is because they ignore the good science readily available to them, very basic science at that. For those who think of following their nonsense. Find out about their prediction skills, if they have none or especially don't try, they are not worth your time to improve an understanding of Climate science.
Toggle Commented Apr 5, 2015 on The Ns are calling the maximum at Arctic Sea Ice Bill , Low solar activity indeed. But How to explain the summary by Kris just above? how to explain 2014 warmest year in history despite fewer watts/m2 from the sun?
Toggle Commented Apr 4, 2015 on The Ns are calling the maximum at Arctic Sea Ice
Voyageur, that is a matter to observe simply by looking at sea water freeze-up surface air temperatures. If the near surface water column is much warmer than present, it will be possible to have no sea ice year round because the total thermal value of the sea surface being simply too warm. I have personally observed low sun but calm sea water (without waves), persist at surface temperatures up to -16 C, because the summer season was without sea ice for months and the sun warmed the water column a great deal. The sea had enough energy stored to keep sea surface temperatures above -1.8 C. There is no freeze up possible with sst's greater than -1.8 C. So the scenario of a wide open Arctic Ocean during the dark long night will happen only with a substantial increase of Ocean surface temperatures along with a complete melt off of the Arctic Ocean sea ice during summer. Once sea ice all gone by at least June, the sun would warm the Arctic Ocean to a point where even in total darkness, with sub zero temperatures, no ice would be possible. But we first must see a rapid melt of all or most of the sea ice , this will take some unknown years difficult to judge by even with the best computer models. Suffices to observe how fast the sea ice currently disappears during summer, this is the metric which would help us determine a more precise date.
Toggle Commented Apr 2, 2015 on The Ns are calling the maximum at Arctic Sea Ice
I wonder if Cincinnatus realize that he looks terribly foolish lashing out insults at very good analysis here while ignoring about all time low extent at present. He Is like what John Cleese has remarkably encapsulated here:
Toggle Commented Apr 2, 2015 on The Ns are calling the maximum at Arctic Sea Ice
Al, freezing between near shore pack ice is always possible at -30! But not over wide open water with sst's way warmer than it takes to freeze sea water. The North Atlantic heat engine broke apart, it is smaller, and carries less heat Northwards because it is too warm in southern latitudes. At any rate a great melt is foreseen for the near future but perhaps not for the entire melt season: More work is needed before the projections are final.
Toggle Commented Mar 28, 2015 on The Ns are calling the maximum at Arctic Sea Ice
Well the N's are experts and have more info than we imagine. Besides it forces us to focus on the regions at hand, Bering and Okhotsk were said to have potential and nothing happened. So we learn. Historically, record low maximums give very low minimas. So it is significant. I must mention that the fascinating and important study to be have comparing 2013-14 maxima with 2014-15. They both were at the same low record point, from that moment 13-14 had more extent than 14-15 now with far less. The atmosphere turns out to be much warmer in 14-15. But there are other reasons for this disparity.
Toggle Commented Mar 25, 2015 on The Ns are calling the maximum at Arctic Sea Ice
I read from CT the following seas increase in extent: Barents, Greenland, Kara and Hudson Bay. Bering and Okhotsk seem out for the count. Barents may have some shore ice increase only on its North side where sst's are said to be 0 C , so its a very slim to no chance of increase there. Greenland sea is same, no chance, sst's are too high and surface air too warm. Kara is the only place with possibility of increase where conditions are still prone to accretion. West Hudson Bay is right by a very warm western Canada and where the coldest air is to its North. Hudson Bay is tough to call, except the sun is too high in the sky to make a serious re-freeze. Basically there is no sign of extent freezing aside from small areas loaded with ice. I'd suggest the sea ice is breaking up and making extent appear larger, but melting will overwhelm this illusion soon.
Toggle Commented Mar 24, 2015 on The Ns are calling the maximum at Arctic Sea Ice
---by 2014-2015 record low maxima sea ice--
Toggle Commented Mar 20, 2015 on Early record, late record at Arctic Sea Ice
And the "elevated SST's in the N Pac " contributed to the "2014 hottest year evah". The greater volume of sea ice is debatable , but not impossible since 2013 summer sea ice melted in place, no real movement, may have meant more ridging, not caused by cooling, however thicker ridged sea ice can cause more arctic cooling - by meteorological dynamics. 2014 warmest year on record was confirmed by 2014-2015 record low minima sea ice, which makes the world temperature record more robust and far less debatable. Following such events, 2005 and 2010, came the lowest sea ice records ever 2007 and 2012.
Toggle Commented Mar 20, 2015 on Early record, late record at Arctic Sea Ice
"2014 hottest year evah" English aside , "the warmest year on record", as I predicted last year in April. And you thought a person would figure out : hotter = less Arctic sea ice But we can always try to teach .....
Toggle Commented Mar 20, 2015 on Early record, late record at Arctic Sea Ice
Hi Artful D, very tough call for ENSO. There were some CCN streaks in the stratosphere polar vortex, but none lately when a cyclone broke its wind pattern. None, absolutely clear twilight sky. Very rare event. A warmer stratosphere does not create PSC's. It rather implies La-Nina than El-Nino. The North Pacific warmer sst's will eventually replace cloud seeding from the Equator in July. So in the interim it looks like a great chunk of the Arctic will be cloud free, especially where he thickest ice is.
Toggle Commented Mar 20, 2015 on Early record, late record at Arctic Sea Ice