This is John Christensen's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following John Christensen's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
John Christensen
Recent Activity
Regarding the lack of growth of Arctic ice these past days, I would not put the positive AO as a reason, but rather as a consequence of the primary reason. The AO is closely interlinked with the jet stream, but what is currently causing the strong winds from west to east along the Siberian north coast is the unusually early and strong cold in Siberia. As you see on weather maps the jet stream moves south of the Siberian cold, so the winds are caused by the Siberian high and not the jet stream. It is then correct that the Arctic Ocean is dominated by low pressures countering the Siberian high and it would seem like this situation could stay stable for a while, unless something will disrupt the strong Siberian high. North Atlantic moisture north of the jet stream path will move into Barents from eastern Scandinavian peninsula and then into Kara and across into the central Arctic and Laptev - the seas where we are seeing the reduction in sea ice coverage in the past week. DMI has a great forecasting tool showing the surface current and ice convergence level, where you see this situation causing ice to move east (From Barents/Kara towards central AO and Laptev) and ice compacting across the western Arctic (Viewed from the Canadian side): We will see what this means, but at least it helps building thicker ice in the central Arctic and the inbound moisture is not as warm as if it had arrived directly from the northern Atlantic..
I was merely trying to make a glaciological reference, so that my note would go undetected by Neven, but I am sure that is ruined by now.. ;-) I probably should have used 'gorge' or 'couloir' - the French have great words..
Abbottisgone, The Cryosat image does not look very accurate and seems to ignore the areas of thicker ice. Also, the star shape of the ice seems to be erroneous. The US Navy and DMI have thickness charts that resemble each other reasonably well (DMI with more generous estimates than hycom):
P-maker, I was amazed by the crevasse - though it did not look very cold..
First; thank you Neven for another great PIOMAS update, even if nothing specular could be reported for October. And yes, Arctic Nev, I certainly have noticed. If you have been watching DMI's 60N surface pressure charts the past few days, you would notice the simultaneous LPs originating out of the North Pacific - a very intense and compact storm - as well as the North Atlantic, where the entire area between Greenland, Norway and Scotland was under a broad LP. As Cato points out the strongly positive AO indicates a compact polar vortex, allowing ice to expand well within the boundaries of the vortex. 2013 and 2014 saw little ice expansion right at this time in comparison. My main point in earlier posts was that a negative AO in wintertime allows the broader area defined in the AO index to be a more effective heat sink, while the broader cloudiness of a positive AO limits the heat sink effect. The impact of AO on the sea ice depends on the extent of the ice versus the extent of the vortex, as well as certainly the specific distribution of LP and HP areas, which drives the movement of air masses.
Toggle Commented Nov 11, 2015 on PIOMAS November 2015 at Arctic Sea Ice
I have noticed a weak low pressure area around the Pole, which seems to stay with us a few days: It seems odd to me that the LP is quite cold (-30 to -40C at 2 meters), so I wonder if this is a regular occurence that I just have not paid attention to?
Toggle Commented Nov 4, 2015 on PIOMAS October 2015 at Arctic Sea Ice
The largest oil and finance corporations are very well represented at "Founder" and "President's Circle" corporate membership level of CFR: Founders Abraaj Group, The Bank of America Merrill Lynch Chevron Corporation Citi Exxon Mobil Corporation Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. Hess Corporation JPMorgan Chase & Co McKinsey & Company, Inc. Morgan Stanley Nasdaq OMX Group, The PepsiCo, Inc. Shell Oil Company President's Circle Alcoa, Inc. American Express Barclays Bennett Jones LLP BlackRock Bloomberg BP p.l.c. Bridgewater Associates, LP Coca-Cola Company, The Credit Suisse Dell Inc. Deutsche Bank AG Eni Fluor Corporation Fortress Investment Group LLC Generali Glenview Capital Management GoldenTree Asset Management Google, Inc. Johnson Controls, Inc. Kingdon Capital Management Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. Lazard Lockheed Martin Corporation McGraw Hill Financial MetLife Moody's Corporation Newmont Mining Corporation Noble Energy Inc. Parsons Corporation Pearson Pitney Bowes Inc. Prudential Financial Reliance Industries Limited Soros Fund Management Standard Chartered Bank Thomson Reuters Toyota Motor North America, Inc. Veritas Capital Fund Management LLC Zurich The only larger US oil company not listed here is ConocoPhilips and that is because they have an 'Affiliate' membership level of CFR.. To me, the profile of the typical Republican voter is about a sentimental longing for 'the good old days' with guns, independence/little government or regulation, and no contraception.. The large oil and finance companies are interested in economic markets and therefore have a strong interest in the establishment of central institutions, regulations, and market places in the broader sense. Check out how JP Morgan was caught in manipulating the California and Midwest energy market in 2013 and was fined $410 million: This is why JP Morgan and Rockefeller supported the creation of the League of Nations, the CFR, UN, NATO, as well as of course the plans for cap and trade of CO2 and energy. That said, these corporations provide strong support for both US political parties, so they can maintain influence whoever get to run the country. Just check out the Nixon/Rockefeller relationship in the 60s if you are in doubt.
D said: "The basics of global warming were known long before it became a political issue. The denial of climate change by English speaking politicians is the direct result of the corruption of politics by fossil fuel interests." D - you need to wake up, the fossil fuel interests are all over this already.. The CFR is known as a strong supporter of AGW. The Honorary Chairman of CFR is David Rockefeller - the Rockefellers who founded Standard Oil. You also find at the executive level of CFR, people with background (or who have later joined) Goldman Sachs, Boeing, Unilever, Google, JP Morgan, in particular from investment banks that specialize in funding debt for the largest corporations and governments. When these guys are in the game it is not because they are concerned about the global temperature - it is about money, lot's of money.. I am not trying to discount AGW here, but just saying that the largest energy and financial corporations are not closing their ears, they are pushing the agenda for their own gain.
AbbottisGone; On FYI and melt ponds, Yes, there are more melt ponds on FYI due to: 1. FYI more often than second year or MYI has a flat structure, as it has not yet been compacted. However, far from all FYI is flat, as it is subject to the same forces compacting MYI and when the pack is pressing against e.g. the Laptev coast or some of the Arctic islands you will very quickly see the FYI gaining in thickness, as it is being compacted. To what degree the FYI is flat therefore depends on weather and when the FYI was created. 2. Secondly, due to FYI being thinner, when melt ponds are created, the water on top of the ice will be more dense and therefore create a convex surface (bowl shape), so that more water can be contained on the ice. I have heard this argument from measurement of melt ponds, where larger melt ponds tend to be slightly deeper in the middle due to the pressure. For these reasons, back in the 80s and 90s, when melt ponds developed during summer months, they were likely to be less extensive in size and volume compared to today (weather conditions being equal), but I have seen no actual comparison.
Toggle Commented Oct 21, 2015 on PIOMAS October 2015 at Arctic Sea Ice
Hi wayne, High pressures in the Arctic come and go as is the case in other parts of the World. I have not seen any data or other reference that a HP will actually stabilize over the pack once it has consolidated. Denmark had a record high air pressure for September one of the last days of the month (1041,9), but with no ice in sight, so please share some data or other reference for the correlation between Arctic ice consolidation and presence of a high pressure.
Toggle Commented Oct 14, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 2 at Arctic Sea Ice
If the ACE index does not go back to normal next year I will sell my house in Denmark and buy property at the foothills of Toubkal in the Atlas Mountains - while prices are still reasonable.. ;-)
Toggle Commented Oct 13, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 2 at Arctic Sea Ice
And this is my own favorite Doomsday scenario (Making me wonder why we as a species are so engulfed by tales of our own demise..): What if the extremely low ACE index indicates the onset of a separation between the tropical and Arctic atmospheric zones (Either caused by AGW or whatever natural phenomenon would cause this), and that this separation allows ice to accumulate and spread, leading to the next cold period of our current ice age? If so, it would be truly disastrous to our modern civilization, so again, I hope someone have noticed and are looking into the ACE..
Toggle Commented Oct 13, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 2 at Arctic Sea Ice
Related to the Arctic heat sink effect and how this may change in the future, another item has puzzled me for a while - the ACE.. The ACE is an index for Accumulated (tropical) Cyclone Energy. This index is calculated based on the number, strength, and duration of tropical cyclones around the world. What is puzzling is this: In recent years the index has dropped precipitously: 2012, 2013, 2014, and no doubt also 2015 will have the lowest annual, global ACE index since these started getting calculated globally around 1970. This could mean: 1) AGW has no impact on the number, duration, or strength of tropical cyclones, or the impact is countered by another factor stronger than AGW. This would be surprising. 2) AGW has a negative correlation with tropical cyclones, due to an increase in wind sheer at altitude that breaks down the tropical cyclones ( This seems most plausible. If scenario 2 is correct, does this mean we still will have the same level of energy exchange between the tropical and sub-tropical zone, or could this cause the energy exchange between tropical and sub-tropical (and in the end the Polar regions) to be reduced, so that less heat energy will enter the Polar region? If that happens, will it cause the Polar region to expand (I know this sounds crazy) and the tropics to become even warmer, or will it just accelerate the overall global warming due to reduced heat sink effect? With four years of extremely low ACE, one would think the scientific organizations would notice and start researching.
Toggle Commented Oct 13, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 2 at Arctic Sea Ice
Secondly, I will add that the AO index has been largely negative since the last week of June, and the forecast for the next two weeks is for the AO to stay negative: The consequence of this pattern is that the jet stream moves further south and becomes more wobbly, enabling cold Arctic air to move further south. The predominance of high pressure in the high north (I deliberately say 'high north', as we know the AO index covers a large area) enhances the heat sink effect and therefore should cause NH temperatures to stay on the average or slightly colder than average. The relative lack of sea ice evidently counters the effect of the AO index, so the favorable atmospheric conditions are likely to be balanced out by above-average degree of open waters in the Arctic region.
Toggle Commented Oct 13, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 2 at Arctic Sea Ice
Hi wayne, As is often the case, I have a hard time understanding your argument, which is probably caused by the lack of reference to something substantial - and the use of capital letters doesn't help much. Regarding temperatures and consolidation of the main pack: DMI 80N temps were on average for the whole month of September, enabling the main pack to consolidate to a normal degree. Cyclone activity starting about 14 days ago then brought in warmer air from the Atlantic, thereby causing the spike in DMI 80N temps, but with only a few days of temps higher than -10C, I do not see how this could have delayed the consolidation of the pack by a month. Please elaborate, as I may be missing your concept of consolidation.
Toggle Commented Oct 13, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 2 at Arctic Sea Ice
Slightly OT, but very much Arctic sea ice: I am noticing from SST and sea ice concentration charts that sea ice is becoming present in areas, where the air temperature is not low enough to support freezing of the sea surface. In fact it seems like this is happening in more of the adjacent seas right now. So I am speculating that sea ice right now is primarily generated deeper within the ice pack and then as leads freeze over and the central pack increases in thickness, the ice pack spreads from the center (Either by the increase in ice thickness or by winds moving it into areas of open water) rather than growing at the edges. Does anyone know if this is normal for this time of year and also if this is actually what is happening?
Toggle Commented Oct 13, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 2 at Arctic Sea Ice
L. Hamilton, The behavior of the conservatives is politically motivated.. Conservatives often argue that scientists also are politically motivated. And anyone who cares from a purely scientific perspective can find many examples that the behavior of scientists is politically motivated as well. Try polling people with a degree in 'climatology' to see how they vote. The conservative argument would be that people chose to study climatology because of their political views and then use it to reinforce their political values. This is how I got interested in studying the Ice - I want to know for myself.
bobcobb said: "There's not much more that can be done politically than what's being done already to advance climate change action in the U.S. unless people elect Democrats in both houses and the presidency." I wouldn't be so sure about that: Who just signed for having more heavy ice breakers in the Arctic? Knowing doesn't mean doing anything good.. I read an article in National Geographic in July about a certain kind of people.. The kind of people, who don't believe in Darwin, who don't believe man has been on the Moon, or who don't believe in man-made Global Warming. Although I could follow the article most of the way it seemed very hollow given that the same issue of the National Geographic had a competition with prizes taking you around the world on a photo safari, or the adds for turist excursions to the Antarctic, or the insanely expensive custom excursions you can make with the NG. Seems like they know, but they behave as if they didn't.. And that seems to happen a lot.
Agreed Ghoti; I have (only once) attempted to ascend a glacier in Northern Sweden mid-August, and it was impossible with the deep slush resulting from months of thaw. For the same reason, any serious attempt on ascending mountains are timed to be around the end of the freezing period, where temps are milder, but the ice and snow has not yet been exposed to too much sun or heat. Enough of that, though, and back to the current and the ice: What a massive cyclone that has appeared over Svalbard, and then a smaller one in the Western Arctic. It seems like these were not forecast, but you clearly see the spike in DMI 80N temp, as the winds are from south and strong.
Toggle Commented Sep 30, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 1 at Arctic Sea Ice
Seriously though: To do work on the ice you want the ice to be flat, with no/few leads, and little/no melt ponds. Further south they probably encountered flat ice, but with melt ponds, which is not great for on-ice work, so they had to get close to the pole, before the temperatures were low enough to freeze over the melt ponds. Therefore, the notion that they had to get within a 100 miles of the pole to find solid ice is taken out of context (Or their own logs are completely misleading), as it is really about finding flat, solid, suitable ice to work on, with no/few melt ponds.
Toggle Commented Sep 29, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 1 at Arctic Sea Ice
So the USCG Healy had to back up several hundred yards to gain enough speed to ram through slush.. 10 feet thick slush.. ;-) Amazing, isn't it!
Toggle Commented Sep 29, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 1 at Arctic Sea Ice
Agreed Cato, and hopefully we will have Neven's 'minimum part 2' analysis also, which will focus on ice volume, I believe.
Toggle Commented Sep 28, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 1 at Arctic Sea Ice
Hi navegante, NP at all. I agree that there was a lot of dispersed ice in July due to the heavy melting going on as well as a result of the storm in Chuckchi later on. My argument is just that the ice concerned (Primarily in Chuckchi, Beaufort, the western part of the CAB, and the CAA) nearly completely melted away and therefore did not greatly impact the Sept ice extent minimum number. But even with low area and extent numbers by the beginning of the melting season, with weather favoring compaction in July, COULD it have compacted more, so that concentration rates were not just 100%, but also with much more considerable ridging? Of course it could, but since the extent should have been reduced by more than 1 million km2 (1000x1000 km completely removed simply by ridging) from a number that was low to begin with to pass the 2012 record minimum, I find it very, very unlikely and not "easy" to accomplish, as was mentioned above, due to all of the factors I have mentioned. The USCG Healy log notes seem to summarize the situation fairly well this summer, so let me refer to those again. What the high degree of concentration holds for the freezing season: I would assume the normal logic still holds: 1. Areas of thicker ice will grow slowly and mainly by ridging as result of wind patterns, irrespective of temperature. 2. The large thin ice area around the Pole and towards Laptev should grow relatively quickly due to the low temperatures in this region - which is good for ice volume growth. 3. For the open water regions: It really depends on SST and weather in each region: CAB area for 2015 is fairly equal to 2014, Laptev seems to start freezing, which happened a couple of weeks later in 2014, and for the ESS and CAA I guess we just need to wait and see when temperatures drop.
Toggle Commented Sep 27, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 1 at Arctic Sea Ice
And the last from the USCG Healy on Sept 6, when they had reached the Pole: "Despite challenging ice conditions, we made great time through the ice this week and arrived at the “top of the world” about a week earlier than planned. The cooperation and teamwork between the deck crew and scientists has been a key to our success. HEALY encountered the thickest ice during the 200 mile transit between 82ᵒ and 85ᵒN. It was up to ten feet thick, and demanded three engines and careful ice piloting by the bridge team to keep the ship safe and transiting in the right direction. From time to time, the ice became so thick we were stopped dead in our tracks and needed to back up several hundred yards to give ourselves room to pick up speed and ram into the ice to break it. This so called “backing and ramming” is felt by the entire crew, as the entire ship rocks and rolls, and bounces as it crushes through the ice. Though this area of thicker ice slowed us to 3 knots, we daily progressed toward the pole." This is not an account of thin, dispersed, or slushy ice.. Also, the USCG Healy included in the same weekly report that they encountered two other ice breakers about 100 nautical miles from the Pole, at 88N, which were returning from the Pole, so they had a path of broken ice to follow to the Pole. At the Pole they spotted and joined a German ice-breaker, so that a total of four ice-breakers had made it to the Pole in one week. I did not see any comment about 'slush' ice, but with four large ice-breakers in the area and temperatures not yet low enough to freeze up the broken ice, it seems reasonable that some slush ice is generated.
Toggle Commented Sep 27, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 1 at Arctic Sea Ice
USCG captains log on August 30th, at 86.5N, 250 nautical miles from the Pole: "The ice conditions continue to be lighter than anticipated. The ice is getting thicker as we continue north and there are patches of multi-year ice, but the multi-year big floes are not what they’ve historically been.[] We are now backing and ramming a few times each watch, but HEALY is able to handle the current ice conditions with aplomb" While the ice was not a major concern to the Healy, I would not expect backing and ramming to be required in slush ice.. ;-)
Toggle Commented Sep 27, 2015 on 2015 minimum overview, part 1 at Arctic Sea Ice