Skip to content

Has Arctic Ice Extent Reached Its Minimum?

September 4, 2013

By Paul Homewood




Its not clear from the chart, but the data from NSIDC is very clear:


  Arctic Ice Extent – million sq km
29th Aug 5.398
30th Aug 5.373
31st Aug 5.319
1st Sep 5.277
2nd Sep 5.340


It is still quite possible that there may be a few more days of melt, but effectively there has been no significant melt for the last 5 days, so it is unlikely there will be any significant losses.

The earliest minimum on record was 2nd Sep 1987.

To put the numbers into perspective, the minimum in 2006 was 5.749 million sq km. The next highest minimum since was 5.054 in 2009.

Things should become clearer in the next couple of days.


Update – 6th Sep

Ice extent has dropped again in the last couple of days. It looks like the minimum will be close to the 2009 figure, but still well above all other years since 2006.

I will be doing a full update tomorrow, so watch out for it.

  1. Joe Public permalink
    September 4, 2013 10:30 am

    “To put the numbers into perspective, the minimum in 2006 was 5.749 million sq km. The highest figure since then was in 2009, when it fell to 5.054.”

    Transposition of minima & max/min figures.

  2. September 4, 2013 10:47 am

    That figure for Sept. 2nd doesn’t seem to be reflected in the graph.
    According to IARC-JAXA, the extent fell to 5.24 million km^2 on the 2nd.
    Up until then, the rate of decline was falling but there was a relatively large decline
    on Sept. 3rd, of 111875 to 5.129 million km^2, so I would guess it hasn’t
    reached a minimum yet.

    • September 4, 2013 1:35 pm

      QV, IARC-Jaxa is a different dataset.

      • September 4, 2013 2:26 pm

        Yes, I knew that – I was comparing them.
        I haven’t done a long-term comparison but they seem similar.
        Actually the NSIDC figure for the 3rd shows a fall to 5.266 million km^2, so a new minimum.

  3. September 4, 2013 4:06 pm

    Looking at the daily figures for this year so far, it appears that NSIDC runs between 0.6 and 1.0 million km^2 higher than JAXA, until late June, after which the figures are much closer.
    Individual days may vary by +/- 200,000 but over 7 days the average difference is almost zero.
    The current difference is unusual but then so was the fall in JAXA on Sept. 3rd.

  4. September 4, 2013 8:42 pm

    Warmo BBC slant on it
    30 August 2013 Last updated at 18:07
    Summer sea ice in the Arctic Ocean is not expected to reach a record minimum this year. The record minimum was set in 2012, when Arctic sea ice cover shrank to 3.41 million square kilometres (1.32 million square miles).This year cooler than average conditions have prevailed. The extent of sea ice is greater than this time last year but it is still below the long term average and further melting is expected in the next few weeks.The National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado says that the pattern of unusually low pressure centered near the pole in 2013 has helped to spread the ice out. This is consistent with generally cool conditions over much of the Arctic Ocean, inhibiting the melting. BBC Weather’s Jay Wynne explains more.

  5. September 5, 2013 4:24 pm

    Dane Wiggington over at geoengineeringwatch is scaring everyone that this “arctic melt” will have dire consequences. He writes —

    “…the Arctic ice implosion is in uncharted territory. The melt rate is virtually in “free fall”. It is very likely we will have an “ice free” Arctic this year or next. This will be the first time in at least 3,000,000 years and perhaps as much as 13,000,000 years. Media is completely ignoring this issue in spite of the extremely dire ramifications for all life on earth….”

    • planet8788 permalink
      September 6, 2013 12:14 pm

      I think they posted his after some bad data or a computer glitch…
      But, yes, they are still very very wrong.

      • September 6, 2013 2:57 pm

        He actually fell in to the “missing data” trap, probably because he wanted to believe it!
        Let me get this straight, at geoengineeringwatch they actually believe in “chemtrails” do they?

  6. September 6, 2013 4:18 pm

    “…..Let me get this straight, at geoengineeringwatch they actually believe in “chemtrails” do they?……”

    QV — you ask this question as to imply that chemtrails is a hoax. What evidence do you have to support this belief?

    The government (federal agencies) have admitted to “geoengineering”. They admit that they spray particles into the sky.

    So what evidence do you have to support your theory that this is all a hoax?

    Just because Dane Wiggington is falsely reporting on ‘artic ice’, doesn’t necessarily mean that the rest of his research is a hoax.

    This is the Straw Man approach to discrediting facts.

    • September 6, 2013 5:08 pm

      I haven’t any evidence that chemtrails are a hoax.
      I think he probably does believe in them, but I don’t.
      What is the evidence that they exist?
      I watched part of a video showing “vapour trails”, which was supposed to convince me.
      Is that the best evidence?
      I wasn’t using a “straw man” argument because by disbelief is nothing to do with his false report on arctic ice.

      • September 6, 2013 7:12 pm

        Fair Enough. I apologize if I insinuated that you were purposefully creating a ‘straw man’.

        There is evidence out there. Dane Wiggington has provided much in his interviews. Clint Richardson is another researcher who has uncovered documents indicating that Federal Agencies have in fact sprayed particles in the air in the attempts to modify/control weather.

        “Weather Modification” is not new. I think this goes back to ww2.

        Certainly not PROOF, but here is an interesting YouTube video of a weather reporter admitting particles in the air placed there manmade —

        This should hopefully motivate a person enough to then dig deeper. The information is out there. Just have to wade through some of the nonsense.

        Navigate Dane’s site. Try to hear him speak. He does various radio interviews on a regular basis. Clint Richardson’s site I believe has documentation as well. Perhaps watch the video — what on earth are they spraying. I hear it is well done.

  7. September 8, 2013 9:22 am

    I previously posted that NSIDC figures were much higher than JAXA for the first 6 months of the year but were much closer at this time of the year.
    However, now that JAXA have switched to version 2, which has increased extent figures in the winter and reduced them in the summer, while the difference in winter has been reduced, NSIDC is currently about 250,000 km ^2 higher than JAXA.
    This is reflected in the reduction in the JAXA 2012 minimum of about 300,000 km ^2.
    Neither dataset appears to have reached minimum yet.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: