This is's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Wasn't there some sort of notification that this is a scheduled maintenance operation? Give it time.
Toggle Commented Mar 29, 2017 on Lowest maximum on record (again) at Arctic Sea Ice
I think there was almost similar configuration during the cold spell in Florida a couple of years back (jan-2010 it seems to be), only a bit more east.
jdallen: yes, but 'Hiro''s definition is much too consentrated, so why not use a more spread out method of energy use? One could of course use only the undeveloped land areas for the calculation, this should diminish the amount of US houses powered by some 60% still, further reductions could be 'only when it's day', 'only when it's sunny', what else, calculations could become cumbersome if practicality is taken into account. Some people may state that it was practical to use one 'Hiro' to end WWII faster. I agree the current unit has some shock value to some, but for people like Bob and me there could be another widget with a different unit. 'Millions of miles driven with a 1960s truck'?
Yes, Bob, I too think the Hiro-measure is too small. The widget would be more dramatic if the number would go up once in, say 15-20 seconds so an energy of ~60*'Hiro' would be a nicer measure. This is close to one Megaton of TNT which would be the energy usage of some 100000 US households per year. This though is a misleading number since much of the extra thermal energy cannot be used as a source of electricity as it goes in to the ocean, the number should be at most 27% of that. Then one would probably have to add in the conversion loss in thermal -> electricity. Can't remember now what it is, maybe something like 40%, so now the landfalling extra heat in a minute would power only ~50000 US houses for a year. So 2 billion (10exp9)(american style) households could be powered by the extra heat. Assuming 3 persons per household this is most of the world. That sounds a bit too much. (this would though require solar power plants everywhere on land) Maybe I did some error in there. There might be a better equivalent in the transportation sector. Please check the calculus before citing, I've been known to make errors.
an other interpratation:
Toggle Commented Dec 13, 2013 on And the wind cries methane at Arctic Sea Ice
via Tenney Naumer, likely a quite objective article on this contestissue with methane:
Toggle Commented Nov 29, 2013 on And the wind cries methane at Arctic Sea Ice
some maybe relevant reading: but in the hopes someone has read much of this already, has the NA subpolar cycle as a whole moved towards north during the 20th century?
Congratulations to Guardian and ok, to you too, if you wish. But can't you see, what you do makes it harder for the international conspiration of scientists to impose Tatcherian climate laws for the benefit of renewables, because you expose all the things arctic! I wish the continuation of well-mannered discourse on arctic ice and other things in the forum, no matter how many denialists you have to block from access.
Great catch Derek! I'm sure someone can tell if that's a Kittiwake or Fulmar, or am I completely wrong?
Then there's the issue of size, as in . There might be some Polar lows ( that last for long enough.
Toggle Commented Jul 23, 2013 on The Naming of Arctic Cyclones at Arctic Sea Ice
It's a bit difficult for me to think these events by human names. Naming them by f.e. former environmental disasters/extinctions/pollutants would be more appropriate for me (Cyclone Aral, Bhopal, Chixulub, DDT, Enron, Fukushima, Great Auk, Harrisburg, I..) . But this might indeed be a regime change and there might be only 1 or two of them per year. Not totally opposing the idea though.
Toggle Commented Jul 23, 2013 on The Naming of Arctic Cyclones at Arctic Sea Ice
the attempt (2011) (IJIS extent) (I've lost the file in the recent crash of the computer) true 4663594 vs. predicted 4015554
Toggle Commented Jul 2, 2013 on Problematic predictions at Arctic Sea Ice
Note that the resolution in area measurements gives possibility to a situation where numerous small leads amount to some albedo decrease. I can't come up with a proper measure for these. But great to see some advance in forecasting. My attempt failed badly in not taking the snow amount in consideration. Thanks Rob Dekker.
Toggle Commented Jul 2, 2013 on Problematic predictions at Arctic Sea Ice
3,500000 Mkm2 , illustrating the difficulty of choosing categories. the longer ice stays dispersed the more surface area it has. expecting clouds over the arctic to reach temperatures high enough for rain after a fortnight (normal fog not ice fog)
Isn't it this way: Under a low pressure the ocean rises a bit and this causes dispersion. The winds would work in the opposite direction, but the draft in ice is larger. This, with the coriolis force results to a sea ice movement at an angle (was it pretty exactly 45 degrees?), away from the low pressure centre. Just to make this thing clear for newcomers. On melt pools I've no comment, but the gray rotten ice floes can be as small as 100m in diameter (all the snow turned in to slush on top of the proper ice) Once these break up they become apparently whiter, I guess the slush loses water in the breakup. (this about the Baltic ice)
Toggle Commented Jun 4, 2013 on If this is real... at Arctic Sea Ice
Rob Dekker: that's interesting as there could be a physical mechanism too. Early snow melt may lead to warmer river waters, as the permafrost regions are more likely to be on upland, so very small changes on tributary river areas could converge at the outlet.
Toggle Commented May 28, 2013 on ASI 2013 update 1: a slow start at Arctic Sea Ice
one of the most peculiar ones would be 'ice under water, attached to the bottom' that has found modern use in hydroelectric plants where it sometimes reduces the outflow and thus output, not a very serious problem but anyway a thing that must be counted in. Can't translate it now to finnish since I've forgotten the word :-D. But still, there are glacier/mountain words and some permafrost words that finnish has taken as loanwords. 'lavine', 'yedoma' and the 'snow accumulation that hangs on the leeward side of ridges' (now what was that word) come to mind.
to add, we have verbs for 'heavy sleeting', 'fast cold snowing' and 'visibility reducing snowing' , I love this language sometimes.
if one counts in the compounds, there are hundreds of those in finnish but a quick search through the list ( produces 28 different words used solely of solid forms of H2O and not on anything else. There are a couple more I didn't list in there so 35 specific words might be a good round number. Anyway, we do not have the verb 'to snow' I guess because the intensities of snowfalls have been deemed more relevant than simply the fact that it snows.
right Neven, the shallow strait in southern Panama is thought to have let the el Nino warmth to Atlantic and then north, or that's how I have understood it. Anyway Pacific gathers more heat than Atlantic even nowadays, or so I've understood the role of AMOC.
Toggle Commented May 16, 2013 on When the Arctic was 8 °C warmer at Arctic Sea Ice
whoopsie, now that I've actually done the maths, I must inform it's the september MINIMUM in CT area which is pretty close to September 11th. The September AVERAGE is pretty close to August 31st or September 21st so the area calculation is also wrong. Maybe the organizers will calculate this from the correct data (NSIDC extent) too. (correcting....) 92550km2/day would be the amount of melt to August 31st, thank you for your patience.
currently there are 104 entries by my count, I may have missed one or two if they're not clearly presented (embedded in long posts with lots of numbers). Average is now pretty close to 2,97Mkm2 with +/- 0,6 (this is the average of the entries that have the error bar included, f.e. 2-2,5 is interpreted as 2,25 +/- 0,25). For this to be correct, the daily melt required now (may 11th to september 11th, which is pretty close to the september average) is now at 84200km2. The melt should of course start speeding up shortly after snow has left N.Siberia and CAA.
Thanks Rob Dekker for getting the scale of the problem right... Meanwhile the crowd-source estimate has again risen a bit (82 entries) and is now at 2,9031499 Mkm2 with +/-0,636875 and the the size of circular slab of 2m thick ice to melt per day has shrunk to 260 km (162 miles) of diameter. Ain't maths fun done correctly, one could almost think this situation is out of our hands?
The average has risen a bit, it's currently at 2,865896 Mkm2 with 74 entries. Kevin McKinney's revision is included.
you're correct. *blushes* 26% it is. forgot to add one kilo- (m3 of water -> 1000kg). so the peta-J should be exa-J , pretty massive amount.