This is David Klein's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following David Klein's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
David Klein
Recent Activity
After an early posting when I discovered this site, I've been content to just read and learn more about the complexity of arctic ice. I came here via Patrick Lockerby's site and I can only express admiration for his (and Neven)'s informed determination and lateral thinking. I thought I knew a lot, only to discover how little it really was. My take on the present situation is an ongoing melt masked by spreading. This may well be a recurring phenomenon because as the ice is thinning and more exposed to wave action, the late melt season's lower daily melt figure is easily overtaken by the spreading of thinner and more fragmented ice. This is somewhat in line with quite a few comments here. It will follow the freezing season with interest to see if the maximum will stay on trend. Thanks for a great site, much appreciated.
On my spreadsheet I decided to do a comparison between 2010 and 2009 checking how long it took to melt the 1st, 2nd etc melt of a million Sq Km in terms of days. It came out as follows; in brackets 2009. 1st million; 2010 26 days (48) 2nd million; 2010 13 days (23) 3rd million; 2010 15 days (16) 4th million; 2010 15 days (16) 5th million; 2010 15 days (14) 6th million; 2010 13 days (14) 7th million; 2010 16 days (9) The comparison shows, in my view, that 2010 encountered a lot of 1st year ice which melted rapidly. When it had to melt the 7th million, two factors came into play (1) having to attack ice volume rather than extent and (2) an extended period of unfavourable weather. Over the remaining 2009 melt season 23 July to 13 September, the ice extent reduced by 2.31 million Sq Km at a rate of 44,500 per day. By comparison 2008 melted 3.06 million Sq Km over 48 days at a rate of 64,000 Sq Km/day. If 2010 were to melt at an inbetween rate of 54,000 Sq Km/day over say 52 days (2,800,000 million Sq Km), 2010 would end up to have a minimum extent of 4.86 million Sq KM's. If the melt rate acellerates, we could still come close to 2007. Whichever way, it is clear that the arctic sea ice extent is not fully recovering from 2007. While 2010 has slowed on the extent side, I am convinced that it is doing huge damage to the volume. In that context it will be interesting to see how 2011 pans out. I predict that it may leave a lot of people gasping. Can't wait for Cryosat 2 to make the volume less of a guessing game. PS 2009 and 2010 drew level today with just 1 day difference.
Lord Soth | July 10, 2010 at 16:23 I am not so concerned about 2010 crossing of the 2007 graph, because the extent will probably be somewhere between 2007 and 2008. After 2007 the arctic gained ½ million KM2 in 2008 and another ½ million KM2 in 2009 approx. The first year ice in 2008 became 2nd year ice in 2009. The late melt start of 2010 (26 days compared to 2009) did not basically alter the extent; 13.96 KM2 on March 5 and 14.41 KM2 on March 31 i.e. 45,000 KM2. Both 2009 and 2010 started with an extent of 14.41 million KM2 but by the time 2010 started its melt, 2009 had melted 440,000 KM2 at a rate of 17,000 KM2/day, which gave 2009 a head start of 440,000 KM2 on March 31. Between 31 March and 12 July, 2010 has dropped from 14.41 million KM2 to 8.16 million KM2, a drop of 3.44 million KM2 @ 61,000 KM2/day. For the same period 2009 dropped from 13.97 million KM2 to 8.69 million KM2, a drop of 5.28 KM2 @ 51,000 KM2/day. (103 days) So far, 2010 has had 9 100K+ days and 2009 had 7. After today, 2009 had another 7 100K+ days, of which 5 sequentially, starting 21 July. Between July 12 and September 13, 2009 melted an additional 3.44 KM2 @ 55,000 KM2/day. Assuming that 2010’s remaining melt season will average 2009, including 5-7 100K breaks, averaging 55,000 KM2/day and assuming the same end date of 13 September, then 2010 will come out similar to 2008 and likely less. I think that Lord Soth is right, we are likely to see some spectacular melts. In my view, 2010 quickly disposed of all 1 year ice and a lot of 2 year ice. Even though the extent rate of decrease has slowed, the loss in volume is not, which will predict the near future scenario. If there is no spectacular collapse this melt season, then 2011 is bound to have. I'm less optimistic but still do not rule out breaking the 2007 record.
Toggle Commented Jul 13, 2010 on What's happening here? at Arctic Sea Ice
I noticed that the DMI graph shows a marked dip back to 2007. Since they use the 30% criteria could this mean that there is a lot of ice between 30% and 15% waiting to emerge?
@Neven | July 09, 2010 at 05:46 My gut feeling is that when conditions swing, the melts will be quite big. It is obvious that at present there is no one year ice left to melt. I think that there is a transition to melting thicker ice, which is happening now, hence the slow down. I think that this year the transition is less gradual than in 2008/9 when much of the in between ice thickness was lost.
@Anu | July 08, 2010 at 19:06 Thanks for that, it confirms my thoughts. I remain baffled when some at WUWT gleefully claim lower drops in sea ice extent, with less melting. They are decidedly uncomfortable with sea ice volume, searching for 'data' that 'proves' ice volume increasing. Unfortunately for them it is not proxy data, it is here and happening right now. I hope that Cryosat will soon establish sea ice volume as the one and only true measurement. After all, without multi year ice, the arctic will be seasonal.
Lord Soth | July 08, 2010 at 12:50 I think you are right that sea ice volume is declining at a high rate. Even if this melt season stays within the boundaries of 2007 - 2009, we are bound to see 2007 type melts, or even larger from 2011 onward. I sense a kind of tipping point, where multi-year ice has lost the battle, happening now. A lot of ice volume can be lost without a proportional area decline. Does anyone know why 15% or more was chosen to represent full ice cover? Did ice volume uncertainty play a role in the determination? If an 80% concentration area becomes 60% through wind/current driven spreading, the actual melt is surely masked, similar to aerosols masking the real CO2 warming effect.
Thanks for the comment.I've forgiven myself, I was a novice blogger after all. Then again I should have felt at home there, in terms of novices that is. It feels good to share common grounds.
Toggle Commented Jul 8, 2010 on Animation 6: Vilkitsky Strait at Arctic Sea Ice
Oops forgot, just for the curious, I posted on WUWTas Curious Yellow.
Toggle Commented Jul 8, 2010 on Animation 6: Vilkitsky Strait at Arctic Sea Ice
Hi, I am new here from down-under. A couple of months ago I decided to visit Wattsupwiththat, to get a feel of how they work. No high expectations. Last night I was censored and invited to re-write a comment without using the d... word. Actually there were two d... words, denier and distortion. Not sure if both were off limits. It also included a few words of appreciation for R Gates and ANU, I admire their persistence, but that too was censored. Since I wasn't going to be there for long, I posted a final comment. I've been interested in climate change for some 25 years and the arctic has my special attention. I am glad to have discovered this site through Patrick, it has taught me a lot about arctic ice behaviour. My projection is 4.33 based simply on averages and a notion that unusual years like 2007 are not about to become serial. Thanks for your efforts, much appreciated.
Toggle Commented Jul 8, 2010 on Animation 6: Vilkitsky Strait at Arctic Sea Ice
David Klein is now following The Typepad Team
Jul 7, 2010