Re CryoSat, using differently advanced snow models CPOM and AWI publish deviating results. Have a look at this presentation: http://epic.awi.de/40803/1/1604_Nicolaus_EGU_PK_small.pdf

http://www.polarview.aq/arctic has recent Sentinel-1 SAR imagery in reasonable file sizes.

Is there any data pointing at the Transpolar Drift has speed up in recent years?

The paper was leaked earlier. Here's a slightly scrambled copy (no figures nor formulars) on GDocs: http://goo.gl/uBk7V allowing comments/discussion.

> Nightvid wrote: Our species has survived through a supervolcano 70,000 years ago, and many of their technologies were not lost. If we could make it through that, why not human-made climate change? Although above is true, the position is unsupportable. Right now all I want is to survive, same applies to my kids and I'd never give anybody the right to call it an experiment including acceptable losses.

I've managed to assemble 3 weeks of infrared images into a video: http://www.arctic.io/2013/2/video-arctic-infrared

Rob, any idea how to get these people with a moon perspective on sea ice back on Earth recognizing volume?

Tenney, Youtube awaits your animation ;)

Typepad doesn't support ftp links so here again a link to the folder with latest apprx. 30 high resolution infrared Arctic images: Click me

Tenney, don't rush on the basement: ftp://arwguest:guest@cisclient.cis.ec.gc.ca/HRPT-Resolute--ArcticComposite :)

Chris, NightVid, what would you pay for a search engine introductory workshop? Srsly, here you go: http://bit.ly/12jNTAD

Nightvid Cole, advancing the ice pack by one year happens at different weeks and the selection of this 'anniversary' is result of a human decision. After this decision the images must be reprocessed. I propose you ignore the last image until next update or visualize this step mentally.

opensheart, here is a 30 years overview of sea ice age (week 48) http://dl.dropbox.com/u/354885/Arctic/wz/48/age48.gif and here same thing as video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOgkbtomiuM (all weeks up to 2011)

First year-round ice free region? I think Barents is close. But projecting PIOMAS would assume a static ice sheet without any drift. Isn't Wipneus' chart highly optimistic regarding Fram Strait?

Crandles, don't censor yourself. It just wasn't clear to me, whether you're looking for the month or the region most off the trend.

Crandles, it displays the difference between November 2012 and November 2007. The patch with a positive delta measures between 0cm and 50cm I would explain with the higher SST in 2007, and the ones colored in light blue, possibly represent some scattered floes having survived the great storm in 2012. Do you have a formula for thickness trend over latitude, longitude? FYI thickness in March surely changed, but stays below equilibrium anyway. However, snow load plays a role and I would suspect the more moisture in the Arctic the more snow covers the ice, I don't know how to properly attribute changes in FYI thickness to either snow or available heat. It seams snow is the most nasty unknown appearing everywhere when it comes to sea ice thickness. The GFS model has a variable (analysis) with accumulated precipitation, possibly helpful.

Here this PIOMAS thickness change map complements nicely the ice age images I've posted above. Now that the Beaufort Sea is mainly FYI it will be interesting to see how the melting develops once started in the McKenzie Delta. And yes, PIOMAS models up to 4 meters loss North of the Archipelago and Greenland after 2007.

A4R, you'll find all info here : http://www.arctic.io/sea-ice-charts/

One thing I've learned is there have been multiple drivers of volume loss active at different time. Always present in the background is Arctic Amplification with raising temperatures. Until 2007 it was mainly export of MYI through Fram Strait. The ice got continuously younger and younger and thus doubled overall drift speed. An unknown is the inflow of warm Atlantic water supporting bottom melt, if the halocline mixes. Barents Sea is now still ice free, which might be a sign. In 2007 the Arctic Dipole demonstrated massive melting of MYI as it combined a static wind pattern with clear sky. A new chapter was started then with FYI as the dominant ice type, which absorbs even more heat through melting ponds and is very vulnerable to late season storms, we saw it last year. An Arctic with predominant FYI becomes boring in terms of volume, because max height will be 2m or less. Thickness is then merely a function of month and latitude. Interestingly Chris has already found a max thickness of 3m in latest PIOMAS data. This was the situation Nov 2007 (week 48): This is where we have been last November, same week: I would call this a complete new and unknown setup. Let's see how PIOMAS will model all that seasonal ice. Now more than 60% of the ice cover depends on the weather in Summer _and_ Winter and a whole bunch of new variables step in (e.g. accumulated snow load, SSW events) To summarize, 2013 becomes exciting because the range of possible outcomes is vast and greater than in any year before. Considering 2012 as a normal year in terms of weather and seeing its impact, I don't want to watch an action replay of 2007. The point is nobody can exclude an ice free Arctic this year. The most positive result of such a catastrophe would be the GCM guys undergoing a reality check and recalling all 'mid century' projections.

Wipneus, your map is definitely a highlight this winter. Could you provide an error margin for 2018? Is it more than one year?

Well, the climate report is still a draft. This is so far the key message regarding Arctic sea ice: Summer sea ice is receding rapidly and is projected to disappear by mid-century. This projection is based on sea ice extent, volume is not mentioned. The confidence level is described as high. http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJan11-2013-publicreviewdraft-chap22-alaska.pdf The comment phase starts tomorrow here: http://review.globalchange.gov/ Everybody can register and contribute...

Seasonal volume loss was mostly in the 16 tkm³ ballpark and increased slightly to 18 tkm³ in recent years. Relative loss this year was 85% - another record. http://www.arctic.io/2012/7/yearly-sea-ice-volume-loss I would translate that into a quite constant amount of energy available every year to melt ice. Looking at the Gompertz fitting I wonder what this energy does once ice gets rare in the Arctic. Apparently it's neither heating the ocean nor melting the ice. I think, which ever of the upcoming Winters fails to build ~17 tkm³, next Summer the Arctic is ice free. And the only good looking fit is just a vertical line.

> attempting to get to the menu Don't get it, images with menus? Btw.: Do you have an idea why not thickness data end of 2011?

I found these deep links quite useful: http://data.ncof.co.uk:8080/ncWMS/wms?LAYERS=glo_arctic%2Fiicethic&ELEVATION=0&TIME=2012-09-18T12:00%3A00.000Z&TRANSPARENT=true&STYLES=BOXFILL%2Frainbow&CRS=EPSG%3A32661&COLORSCALERANGE=0,4&NUMCOLORBANDS=254&LOGSCALE=false&SERVICE=WMS&VERSION=1.3.0&REQUEST=GetMap&EXCEPTIONS=XML&FORMAT=image/png&BBOX=-1000000,-1000000,5000000,5000000&WIDTH=256&HEIGHT=256

Richaburton, I'm sorry, if that figure of speech did offend you. However, assuming any government will listen to the people not speaking to them and has 'to wake up', is simply denial of your responsibility as a citizen. And if that offends you too, I can live with.