Arctic Sea Ice Update
July 16, 2017
By Paul Homewood
Quick Arctic update.
DMI have now issued the June sea ice data, which shows a steady recovery in extent since the low in 2010.
Significantly, this year’s extent of 11.52 million sq km is greater than in 2006, which was 11.50. (Full data here).
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover_30y.uk.php
Temperatures across the Arctic have been consistently below average since the end of April.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
And with the melt season nearly at an end, the Greenland ice sheet has been growing at close to record levels.
http://www.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/
29 Comments
Trackbacks
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
NOAA’s monthly global temperatures in 2017 have each been below their respective 2016 value.
NOAA saying June 3rd hottest on record…so much for the hottest…of course this is all subject to how much they want to change historical data…that said..i wish they would let the public understand the margin for error in the data and the true probability that June is the 3rd highest…recall the big USA Today story last year about 2016 being the hottest year..yet given the margin/data it turns out statistically it was 72% likely NOT the hottest year…of course this is on top 2015/2016 being under influence of El Nino
https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/earth-had-its-third-warmest-june-record-noaa
If any of my Engineers brought a graph like the Arctic Ice cover to me to show that the trend had reversed I think he would have a difficult half hour and perhaps find him/herself going for some statistics training/revision. Hopeful maybe but one data point means nothing – yet.
The other plots do look positive. Good.
If one of my engineers was hooked on straight lines and did not suggest the idea of a possible inflection point, I’d fire him/her.
Click to access chem.pdf
The evidence that a change in Arctic sea-ice trend is taking place comes from multiple indicators and has been published in at least three scientific articles. When the only tool of some climatologists is extrapolation they go from being alarmed by cooling to being alarmed by warming, when a lot of phenomena in climate is cyclical or chaotic, and thus extrapolation is a sure way of being wrong.
Evidence that multidecadal Arctic sea ice has turned the corner
That was last year, and this year it will be one more year with more September Arctic sea-ice than 2007. It will be ten years this September. This is already an Arctic melting pause. 28 years of melting, 10 years of not melting. And those ten years are the years with higher CO2 and higher temperatures. I guess the story we were told about decreasing ice albedo feedback increasing melting in a spiral of death was not true after all.
“…albedo feedback…”
was always 100%, unscientific, horse-sh*t since extra sunlight falling INTO the Arctic Ocean during the brief period the sun is sufficiently high for the light not to be simply reflected away, is completely incapable of warming its huge mass by any detectable amount. Open water at 273 C RADIATES much more energy to space than ice-covered water. The net effect of less ice-cover would be cooling – but, likewise, this would also be undetectable during a human’s lifespan.
dave,
let us not forget:
(1) a particular amount of “permanent” extra, open water would radiate extra (at 273 C, approx a third more intensely) for almost the WHOLE year and could only absorb extra (whatever, who knows?) for three months;
(2) the reduction in ice-cover over the last two decades is, in effect, no more than the extension of summer by two weeks and the reduction of winter by two weeks
(3) each year we seem to get the same “new normal.”
The same – not a spiral of death.
“…the new normal…”
Each full year, there is a dance involving 2nd year ice, new ice, and an exodus of ice through the Fram Strait. There IS no old ice in the Arctic anymore, except for some “fast ice” (stuck) on the Canadian side. The Arctic has got used to this situation, it seems, with a modest reduction year-round in extents anhd total sea-ice-volume.
Agreed. The trend in ice extent is undisturbed as far as my eyeball judgment goes. Always look at the noise level to judge typical fluctuations (e.g. 1980-1995); then check your latest blip to see if it’s significant. Can’t say this one is.
Greenland accumulation a quite different story though.
Predicted Demise of Arctic summer ice is one of the big things that will take CAGW down. Satellite ice coverage onset accidentally coincided with a natural peak in what appears to be a 60-70 year full Arctic ice cycle. Lots of qualitative evidence for a previous ice low circa 1942-1944 provided in essay Northwest Passage in ebook Blowing Smoke. Arctic sea ice is now naturally recovering rather than disappearing. Evidence is growth of multiyear ice.
Last years Northabout stunt escaped being ice locked for the winter at Prince Regent Inlet by exactly one day. They bought that day by turning a planned three day provisioning at Barrow into a one day scramble.
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.
Reblogged this on Roald J. Larsen.
I can’t believe how consistent the summer temperature is, as it almost never gets above the green mean temperature line from 1958. Maybe a temperature anomaly plot might show something.
a mixture of ice and water will always have the freezing temperature and therefore the air above it can not diverge significantly from that.
Have a look at news.com.au, a story in it now of a new super chill period coming. , The SCIENTISTS aren’t sure what’s going on,
I hope the house of cards they have built their reputation on is about to crumble, along with the politicians that backed them.
A lot of Scientists have based their whole careers on computer moduling of false weather data entries to push the B S on a global scale, hopefully they will be finally outed.
And just down from the EXTREMES of the LIA and late 1970’s
And still WAY above the Holocene average.
Higher than it has been for some 90-95% of the last 10,000 years
Back in the day, I used to argue the toss over sea ice ‘loss’ and whether it was indicative of aught and after much battlng with the loons of green and thus doing much reading into the subject – ‘so bloody what’ – I eventually arrived at.
Arctic sea ice does what it does, it is susceptible to Oceanic currents and wind drift et bloody cetera, we don’t understand fully these influences nor do we comprehend fully their provenance. It is cold up there thats for sure, something to do with lattitude, axial tilt, heliocentric orbit and planet rotation and until that changes, not much else will. And oh yeah, it’s bloody cold in Greenland too but that’s a whole sheet of land deposited snow and ice.
If someone tells me today that if, “summer sea ice melt” winter – eh? approximations, Satellite imagery, graphs and Piomass blah, blah was anything to do with man made CO₂, I cry with belly laughter and tell ’em to go and see a head shrink.
Arctic sea ice does as Arctic sea ice wills.
Javier, which three scientific articles do you mean?
Miles, Martin W., et al. “A signal of persistent Atlantic multidecadal variability in Arctic sea ice.” Geophysical Research Letters 41.2 (2014): 463-469.
Click to access miles_et_al_grl_2014.pdf
Wyatt, M. G., & Curry, J. A. (2014). Role for Eurasian Arctic shelf sea ice in a secularly varying hemispheric climate signal during the 20th century. Climate dynamics, 42(9-10), 2763-2782.
Click to access Curry,%20Wyatt%20paper.pdf
Årthun, Marius, et al. “Skillful prediction of northern climate provided by the ocean.” Nature Communications 8 (2017): ncomms15875.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15875
All three predict less melting, not more melting, going forward, due to cyclical climatic conditions.
Paul, you want a free hit at the Guardian and their in-house alarmists shill John Abraham? Here it is.
——————————
He says:
‘What continually befuddles people who work on climate change is the vehement and indefensible denial of evidence by a small segment of the population. I give many public talks on climate change, including radio and television interviews and public lectures. Nearly every event has a few people who, no matter what the evidence, stay in a state of denial. By listening to denialist arguments, I find they fall into a few broad categories. Some of them are just plain false. Examples in this category are ones like:
There was a halt to global warming starting 1998.
*****Humans are only responsible for a tiny fraction of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.*****
Scientists are colluding to create this fraud.’
——————————–
Plainly there’s been a hiatus or slowdown.
Plainly scientists ARE colluding to fix data sets.
Most egregious of all imo is his middle claim, that humans are only responsible for a tiny fraction of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. That is simply a false assertion.
CO2 0.04%
H2O up to 5%
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/jul/17/surrendering-to-fear-brought-us-climate-change-denial-and-president-trump
Abraham, expostulates breathing fire and brimstone but not much else.
Abraham, he claims his work is pro bono but then he’s not really devoted much brainpower to his prattling and then, because “he works for free” – who could possibly gainsay it? but do we believe it, after all he’s just a simple engineer with ‘no skin in the game’ an’ all but he’s seems highly, very politically motivated. Lordy! doin’ good works in the ‘developing world’ can you see where I am going here and with Paris in mind and ‘agenda 21’/stiffing the western taxpayer………………… or whatever they’ve renamed it.
He’s [Abraham] clearly on something if you look here, most of his stuff and witterings are regurgitated conjecture and scaremongering and wordily, arrogantly claiming ‘consensus’ – I see no effort whatsoever to any evidence of original work, I see no reason why the sum total of his contribution shouldn’t be tossed in the bin.
I class him with Bob the green blobby Ward.
But, but, but…I thought they said it would be ice free by now. Paging Professor Wadhams.
Just quit looking at the damned ice. It makes no damn difference how much Arctic Sea Ice there is. Or isn’t.
Indeed, less would be BETTER.
“…less would be BETTER…”
Back around 1970, there were predictions that the Arctic would warm 20 F (!!) by 2000 and be ice-free every summer. The general attitude in Canada at the time was “That would be marvellous!”
All the sea ice charts start in 1979 when satellite data started in 1974. The reason is because sea ice extent was significantly smaller in 1974, as stated in the IPCC report in1990 (page 224).
That is a clear case of data manipulation to suit the politics. Canny that the IPCC shoot their own messengers!
The temperature and ice extent in the Arctic indicates that temperature is only a minor factor in the variations in ice.Could it be time to look what really determines the ice extent, if it is still concidered a sign of global warming.