BTW, how is CRYOSAT-2 doing versus PIOMAS these days. The suggestion is that they're still accumulating data. https://earth.esa.int/web/guest/missions/esa-operational-eo-missions/cryosat

"NSIDC shows the Extent pulling back away from 2012 now and running parallel." As of August 2, there's 251KKm2 Extent difference with 2012... shrinking. Suppose we'll be seeing an update after the weekend.

Was thinking of this Lars B iceberg that broke loose few months ago. Picture this floating in the Arctic Sea, then translate that volume into say 1 meter thick ice and the impact on weather and heat exchange with the atmosphere. Think I much prefer the area over volume. The more area, the more 'seeding ground' there is for new ice as well as putting the breaks and intake in late autumn, winter and spring. Sure, the heat loss from the arctic ocean would be less, but then at least below that ice the cold water layer can build up, instead of having that heavy mixing with deep water. rant end

Less of the (air) pollutants implicitly has a precursor in less CO2 emission, or is that a mistaken 'assumption'?

Dean B, visit Rutgers global snow lab at http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/ Yes, Alaska and NW Canada are substantially snow free.

Still melting away [The Antarctic too], at an accelerated rate... http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31965454

So you are looking for weirdness, Neven? Here's "fishing under ice" http://vimeo.com/34340906 Meantime, Mark Serreze explained why the Antarctic extent was so big this year and all the MSM and syndications of news continue to omit that piece of relevant info. Then, there's news from Aussieland. They lost access to their 46 Million Aus on-ice landing-strip, due melt. Another strip was lost on land, beyond repair, when a shelf broke off causing a wave to wash over the strip. Yes, Antarctic records of note. They're desperately looking for alternate locations to land their jet planes. The Antarctice 4th Ice-Bridge is underway... the're could be a few more wake-up calls packed in there, me thinketh.

Jim Williams | October 12, 2012 at 18:04 Have read a thousand articles the whole LENR/E- Cat business to include articles from NASA personnel how their articles by the peddlers of fiction are misrepresented... hey they're into converting nickel to copper alchemy and the amazing thing is, the isotopic signature of that copper produced is exactly the same as natural copper. Buy that?

Oh boy, someone is thinking LENR [the Andrea Rossi E-cat fraudster science] will work. Sorry Jim, but I think you're being had... they'll be "re-searching" this when SLR has surpassed worst expectations and the Dutch have retreated to the Vaalser Berg [a euphamism for a hill 333 meter at summmit] On olivine mentions, think it was Hansen who postulated that there were huge slabs of it south of India [now Tectonically subducted], that worked big time to weather CO2 out of the atmosphere. Weathering out is a slow process, but if this on large scale could be sped up to help sequester CO2, that would help.

A slightly enhanced monthly anomaly chart for JAXA, adding the percent left of maximum. It was 25% residual for September 2012, off from maximum extent month, which I've assumed to always be March. http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q210/Sekerob/Climate/IJIS_Month_September.png Amazingly, for October 10, MASIE reports 1.048 Million less sea ice than 2011, same day. Just a number, not reflected on why this so much varies from other extent compilers.

Interestingly, MASIE shows "ice free" periods as below: Kara: 2011 Never Ice Free 2012 Sep.10-present Barentsz 2011 Sep.21-Oct.3 2012 Aug.18-Present Absent numerical data, the MASIE plots for 2008-2010 do not show even remotely such conditions as what's now appearing in 2012. Atmos shows just very little in those seas. BTW, read somewhere last week that SHELL, notwithstanding what they said before, is now simultaneously drilling in 2 locations in the Arctic.

Real Climate posted a first of 7 parts topic about a 7-set video on Climate change, evidence and effects. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2012/10/climate-change-videos-part-i/ Already posted the YouTube links in my favorite denialist thread. My posts there always start with something like: Not for those in willed bliss... (It's run by a reli-boy... CO2 is good for [all] plants, and puny man does not know enough)

Snow, the daily [anomaly] chart to follow in a simple "It's on / It's Off" depiction: http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/chart_daily.php?ui_year=2012&ui_day=282&ui_set=2. I've not counted the grid boxes, but on eyeball, there's more off than on for the time of the year.

Spreading thinner... makes perfect sense [all that stuff I'd forgotten about] :D

Lodger, I'm unfamiliar with any of these 40-45 Watts off TOA values you mention of 1322.68 and 1316.74, but take your word for it given the accompanying factoids. Multiple sites are off-line ATM, JAXA, UAH, Washington, Lasp, so cant follow your link. You cite http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/data/tsi_data.htm#summary_table The daily data I use is [see my Solar graphs page] https://sites.google.com/site/allthingsclimatechange/the-sun ] For 6 hourly: http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/tsi_data/six_hourly/sorce_tsi_L3_c06h_latest.txt For daily: http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/tsi_data/daily/sorce_tsi_L3_c24h_latest.txt Curious how 3.28% distance variance causes 7% more [or less] watts to arrive at TOA. For laughs, how Pluto was warming per Goddard going from 7+billion distance to 3 billion over the approach period of 125 odd years [He did not consider that fact [lying by omission is possible too]. Yes per Greg Kopp of SORCE, their numbers are corrected back to exactly 1 AU [using JPL ephemeris VSOP87 it so says] But, I'd consider, outside of Milankovitch, on human lifetime scale, the ellipse to be constant enough, that at any date point in the year, [but for the 1.3-1.4 watts variance over a solar cycle at 1 AU], the TOA for any date of the year to be constant. Computing that against albedo to determine the P/Ejoules is no doubt of major relevance. The 0.8 Watts is already more than the solar cycle TSI variance from median at 1AU. To me discussions such as "how much does the kinetic energy of the Arctic gyres or 6000 tons per second leaking out of lakes top of GIS cause warming" is surreal. Obfuscation, bigtime, compared to the permanent 0.8 Watts/Meter square, humanity has added [well including consequential feed-backs it's more like 3 watts]

Rob Dekker, believe in the American language they'd say "check", a "Vinkie". The 3 MC's are one of the least included [relatively simple to understand] points made in public discussion to explain why at other epochs with lower or higher CO2 it was warmer or cooler. We should be cooling [since about AD 0, coincidence ;>), yet we're warming.]

Once again reminds me of the 10-20 yellow duckies that were dropped on top of GIS in hopes that 1 or more would show up at sea somewhere. Never heard if any did float up. http://www.outpostmagazine.com/2010/05/21/rubber-duckies-dropped-into-glaciers/

Yes, the chart was previously commented on... it's a part of a bigger chart as can be seen right top where the normal area plot comes through the top. What we have ATM is that the Jan.1-present joined the 365 rolling average and is now lowest ever [in modern history] since a few days Jan.1-present: http://bit.ly/CTARCA 365 Rolling Avg: http://bit.ly/CTAANM We're kind of waiting on the all time anomaly for the Arctic and Global to happen.

Spam alert

Looks like that latter chart expresses the Milankovitch cycles, per the notes right top. Personally, I've never considered for TOA to vary at any point of earth, given it's relative puniness compared to the sun... it being for instance 1365.1234 Watts/M^2 at any point on the sun facing side at the same moment in time. Never seriously considered the Earth Magnetic Field to work as causing different TOA at different locations. I'd not be surprised though that TSI get's influenced before it get's through to the top of the atmosphere and the earth's surface, ignoring the atmospheric impediment itself. At same time I'd consider this one of these "we don't know enough, therefore..." 8th decimal arguments. Broadly solar irradiation is constant at TOA and by the time it's getting to Earth's surface, a quarter of it is left [global average].

For the spellcheckers: "strengthened" and extent and "to summarize"for myself". Point 1. was recently repeated by Dr. Mark Serreze, as having the function of stronger winds pushing out the extent, spreading it thinner [though the area-extent ratio would not support that]. NSIDC reports proportionally more area for September. That more vapor translates to more snow over the Antarctic, and being less prone to "summer" melt off i.e. somewhere ice the [land] ice sheet is thickening I've got as yet no doubt.

"Record combined territory in about 6 days" Do these chart bare witness of that in extent and area expression? http://bit.ly/NSGL01 http://bit.ly/CTGB01 Were the words "high anomaly" maybe missing in that sentence? Seeing some contradictory information on why Antarctic extent was so large this year, to summary for myself: 1. The Antartic Vortex strenthened [ozone hole origin], which we've known for longer. 2. More mass balance loss [to include increased calving] which adds to extend, noting that the Antarctic is deemed to be a vapor > snow buffer, containing SLR by as much as 80% of what it could have been. 3. More melt water from 2., lowering surface salinity, raising melt point by about 2C. The circumpolar current ripping [extent apart due it's force] or keeping extent together, my reading was that it goes by 2 clicks / hour to 2000 meters depth. I'm not sure of it's "overwhelming" influence on raising or containing the Antarctic SIE as is postulated here and there. Am simply not well read up on the matter.

Posted this in the Snow thread over at Tamino's http://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/snow-2/#comment-71099 The animation is now in 3rd generation, having removed Greenland which so oddly distorts the rest of the hemisphere data and anomalies [10+ meters thickness is considered snow covered] and slowed down the frame speed at end to try allow a little focus on where the Apr-Sep period is heading. Carefully consider that if there's 5% missing in February on 45-50 million, there's a good chance the spring/summer also shows a shortage. Where it's in the last 5 years getting ugly is, that more winter-snow [5% more vapor going around than 3-4 decades ago] it is not helping to stave off summer melt out with the new July record set at 86% anomaly [though it's *only* 2 million off from what there's supposed to be]. Think farmers have been seeing deeper and deeper reduction of soil moisture. One year they could survive, and plants still able to get some, but multiple years and you'll have disaster as was seen in the corn belt (Last I heard from someone in Illinois a week or so ago, it was still dry] Chart added to the Snow page on the ATCC site [see daily graphs like]

Well, already checked the centered before, but with actuals Oct1/2 in, it's still 3.585... same as single day average. Wonder if I can submit an FOAI from Italy to a USA Fed. institution (Just kiddin') :P

Wipneus, As was eluded by Lodger, up in this or other NSIDC thread somewhere, they use a guesstimator at end for Oct1/2 and then compute a centered 5 day average... to publish their number on the 1st. The diff is too small to worry about... but M&M would and issue an FOIA, to "demand" clarification and to code and the whole database and every email ever exchanged on the matter ;O)