PDA

View Full Version : Arctic Sea Ice Continues Decline



CWSmith
10-04-2011, 11:29 AM
This was just released from NASA. Make of it what you will, but it gets harder and harder each year to stick your head in the sand and deny climate change:


Oct. 4, 2011

Steve Cole
Headquarters, Washington
202-358-0918
stephen.e.cole@nasa.gov


Patrick Lynch
Goddard Space Flight Center
301-286-3854/757-897-2047
patrick.lynch@nasa.gov

RELEASE: 11-337

ARCTIC SEA ICE CONTINUES DECLINE, HITS SECOND-LOWEST LEVEL

WASHINGTON -- Last month the extent of sea ice covering the Arctic Ocean declined to the second-lowest extent on record. Satellite data from NASA and the NASA-supported National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) at the University of Colorado in Boulder showed that the summertime sea ice cover narrowly avoided a new record low.

The Arctic ice cap grows each winter as the sun sets for several months and shrinks each summer as the sun rises higher in the northern sky. Each year the Arctic sea ice reaches its annual minimum extent in September. It hit a record low in 2007.

The near-record ice-melt followed higher-than-average summer temperatures, but without the unusual weather conditions that contributed to the extreme melt of 2007. "Atmospheric and oceanic conditions were not as conducive to ice loss this year, but the melt still neared 2007 levels," said NSIDC scientist Walt Meier. "This probably reflects loss of multiyear ice in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas as well as other factors that are making the ice more vulnerable."

Joey Comiso, senior scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., said the continued low minimum sea ice levels fits onto the large-scale decline pattern that scientists have watched unfold over the past three decades.

"The sea ice is not only declining, the pace of the decline is becoming more drastic," Comiso said. "The older, thicker ice is declining faster than the rest, making for a more vulnerable perennial ice cover."

While the sea ice extent did not dip below the 2007 record, the sea ice area as measured by the microwave radiometer on NASA's Aqua satellite did drop slightly lower than 2007 levels for about 10 days in early September, Comiso said. Sea ice "area" differs from extent in that it equals the actual surface area covered by ice, while extent includes any area where ice covers at least 15 percent of the ocean.

Arctic sea ice extent on Sept. 9, the lowest point this year, was 4.33 million square kilometers (1.67 million square miles). Averaged over the month of September, ice extent was 4.61 million square kilometers (1.78 million square miles). This places 2011 as the second lowest ice extent both for the daily minimum extent and the monthly average. Ice extent was 2.43 million square kilometers (938,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average.

This summer's low ice extent continued the downward trend seen over the last 30 years, which scientists attribute largely to warming temperatures caused by climate change. Data show that Arctic sea ice has been declining both in extent and thickness. Since 1979, September Arctic sea ice extent has declined by 12 percent per decade.

"The oldest and thickest ice in the Arctic continues to decline, especially in the Beaufort Sea and the Canada Basin," NSIDC scientist Julienne Stroeve said. "This appears to be an important driver for the low sea ice conditions over the past few summers." Climate models have suggested that the Arctic could lose almost all of its summer ice cover by 2100, but in recent years, ice extent has declined faster than the models predicted.

NASA monitors and studies changing sea ice conditions in both the Arctic and Antarctic with a variety of spaceborne and airborne research capabilities. This month NASA resumes Operation IceBridge, a multi-year series of flights over sea ice and ice sheets at both poles. This fall's campaign will be based out of Punta Arenas, Chile, and make flights over Antarctica . NASA also continues work toward launching ICESat-2 in 2016, which will continue its predecessor's crucial laser altimetry observations of ice cover from space.

To see a NASA data visualization of the 2011 Arctic sea ice minimum as measured by the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer - Earth Observing System (AMSR-E) on Aqua, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2011-ice-min.html


For more information about NASA and agency programs, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov (http://www.nasa.gov/)

-end-

Tylerdurden
10-04-2011, 11:42 AM
Just prepping for the pole shift. No big deal.

John Smith
10-04-2011, 12:06 PM
As Pogo once said, "I've met the enemy, and he is us."

It has always been my view that if we were to proceed as if Global Warming was a threat and we had more fuel efficient homes and cars, were less dependent on foreign energy, etc., what would be the downside even if Global Warming is not a threat.

On the other hand, if we proceed as if it's not a threat, what's the upside whether it is or not?

brad9798
10-04-2011, 12:14 PM
No doubt there is climate change ... just like when the ice was gaining GREAT amounts per year in the early 1970s ...

Yes- there IS climate change.

TANSTAF1
10-04-2011, 12:28 PM
Here's a few more "timely" reports of this phenomena:


1922 - Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt (http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/changing-artic_monthly_wx_review.png) (Monthly Weather Review, November 2, 1922)
1923 - Report the arctic is getting warmer (http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00F13F7395516738DDDAC0A94DA405B 838EF1D3) (The New York Times, February 25, 1923)
1923 - Getting warmer in the arctic ocean (http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/access/359137492.html?dids=359137492:359137492&FMT=CITE&FMTS=CITE:AI&date=Mar+01%2C+1923&author=&pub=Chicago+Tribune&desc=GETTING+WARMER+IN+ARCTIC+OCEAN%2C+MAXWELL+SAY S&pqatl=google) (Chicago Tribune, March 1, 1923)
1932 - Soviet Ship Circles Franz Josef Land (http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F60911F73A5513738DDDAC0894DA415B 828FF1D3) (The New York Times, December 5, 1932)
1940 - Ice In Arctic Melting Rapidly (http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/courant/access/862266762.html?dids=862266762:862266762&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&date=Oct+13%2C+1940&author=THOMAS+R+HENRY&pub=The+Hartford+Courant&desc=Ice+In+Arctic+Melting+Rapidly&pqatl=google) (The Hartford Courant, October 13, 1940)
1958 - Ice at the North Pole in 1958 and 1959 - not so thick (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/) (Watts Up With That?)
1969 - Expert Says Arctic Ocean Will Soon Be an Open Sea (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/07/24/nyt-expert-says-arctic-ocean-will-soon-be-an-open-sea/) (The New York Times, February 20th, 1969)

PhaseLockedLoop
10-04-2011, 01:02 PM
This was just released from NASA. Make of it what you will, but it gets harder and harder each year to stick your head in the sand and deny climate change:

If the warming in these year-to-year reports is actually the result of human activity, it's 'way too late to do much about it, and the looking-at-grim-facts-unflinchingly pose and half-assed ameliorative suggestions of most liberals are embarrassing.


On the other hand, burning up the Earth for the sake of war, geegaws, and fabulously wealthy people is stupid, and obviously should be throttled on grounds of decency alone. But decency is in short supply. I, my wife, and two or three of my friends (ex-friends, actually) are the only decent people I know. Or knew, in the case of my ex-friends. But I look at this grim situation unflinchingly, on account of my courage.

Edit to add: Plus my wife often looks at me funny when I talk about this....

TANSTAF1
10-04-2011, 01:07 PM
SEa ice levels change form year to year, decade to decade, millennium to millennium for various reasons. They also change in different regions of the world.

Here's report from just three years aoo:

http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=13834


Thanks to a rapid rebound in recent months, global sea ice levels now equal those seen 29 years ago, when the year 1979 also drew to a close.

TANSTAF1
10-04-2011, 01:15 PM
Here's an analysis of the extent of Artic sea ice 6 - 7,000 years ago.:

http://www.ngu.no/en-gb/Aktuelt/2008/Less-ice-in-the-Arctic-Ocean-6000-7000-years-ago/

"Recent mapping of a number of raised beach ridges on the north coast of Greenland suggests that the ice cover in the Arctic Ocean was greatly reduced some 6000-7000 years ago. The Arctic Ocean may have been periodically ice free."

. . .


”The climate in the northern regions has never been milder since the last Ice Age than it was about 6000-7000 years ago. We still don’t know whether the Arctic Ocean was completely ice free, but there was more open water in the area north of Greenland than there is today,” says Astrid Lyså, a geologist and researcher at the Geological Survey of Norway (NGU).

. . .


”The beach ridges which we have had dated to about 6000-7000 years ago were shaped by wave activity,” says Astrid Lyså. They are located at the mouth of Independence Fjord in North Greenland, on an open, flat plain facing directly onto the Arctic Ocean. Today, drift ice forms a continuous cover from the land here.

"Astrid Lyså says that such old beach formations require that the sea all the way to the North Pole was periodically ice free for a long time.

”This stands in sharp contrast to the present-day situation where only ridges piled up by pack ice are being formed,” she says."

. . .

Tylerdurden
10-04-2011, 01:18 PM
Just the space weather guys. Have any of you guys looked into Scientology? Might be right up your alley.

WX
10-04-2011, 04:03 PM
As Pogo once said, "I've met the enemy, and he is us."

It has always been my view that if we were to proceed as if Global Warming was a threat and we had more fuel efficient homes and cars, were less dependent on foreign energy, etc., what would be the downside even if Global Warming is not a threat.

On the other hand, if we proceed as if it's not a threat, what's the upside whether it is or not?

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/5/6/3/What-If-Its-A-Hoax.jpg

Flying Orca
10-04-2011, 04:27 PM
Here's a few more "timely" reports of this phenomena:


1922 - Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt (http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/changing-artic_monthly_wx_review.png) (Monthly Weather Review, November 2, 1922)
1923 - Report the arctic is getting warmer (http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00F13F7395516738DDDAC0A94DA405B 838EF1D3) (The New York Times, February 25, 1923)
1923 - Getting warmer in the arctic ocean (http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/access/359137492.html?dids=359137492:359137492&FMT=CITE&FMTS=CITE:AI&date=Mar+01%2C+1923&author=&pub=Chicago+Tribune&desc=GETTING+WARMER+IN+ARCTIC+OCEAN%2C+MAXWELL+SAY S&pqatl=google) (Chicago Tribune, March 1, 1923)
1932 - Soviet Ship Circles Franz Josef Land (http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F60911F73A5513738DDDAC0894DA415B 828FF1D3) (The New York Times, December 5, 1932)
1940 - Ice In Arctic Melting Rapidly (http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/courant/access/862266762.html?dids=862266762:862266762&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&date=Oct+13%2C+1940&author=THOMAS+R+HENRY&pub=The+Hartford+Courant&desc=Ice+In+Arctic+Melting+Rapidly&pqatl=google) (The Hartford Courant, October 13, 1940)
1958 - Ice at the North Pole in 1958 and 1959 - not so thick (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/) (Watts Up With That?)
1969 - Expert Says Arctic Ocean Will Soon Be an Open Sea (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/07/24/nyt-expert-says-arctic-ocean-will-soon-be-an-open-sea/) (The New York Times, February 20th, 1969)

Funny how none of those are actual scientific sources...

wardd
10-04-2011, 04:31 PM
Funny how none of those are actual scientific sources...

for some science is way too hard to understand

Dan McCosh
10-04-2011, 04:43 PM
As Pogo once said, "I've met the enemy, and he is us."

It has always been my view that if we were to proceed as if Global Warming was a threat and we had more fuel efficient homes and cars, were less dependent on foreign energy, etc., what would be the downside even if Global Warming is not a threat.

On the other hand, if we proceed as if it's not a threat, what's the upside whether it is or not? Well, how about rationing fossil fuel, and actually cutting consumption. What would be the downside of that?

Tylerdurden
10-04-2011, 04:48 PM
Well, how about rationing fossil fuel, and actually cutting consumption. What would be the downside of that?

None for Al Gore.

Mad Scientist
10-04-2011, 08:24 PM
Well, how about rationing fossil fuel, and actually cutting consumption. What would be the downside of that?

Who gets to decide how the rationing is done?

Tom

TANSTAF1
10-05-2011, 06:36 AM
Well, how about rationing fossil fuel, and actually cutting consumption. What would be the downside of that?

As Mark said, none for HalGore in fact it would make him richer.

I guess the devil is in the details. It depends on how you cut consumption. Insulating my house cut consumption and has a short pay back. Promoting and making ethanol costs more energy than it saves and is therefore counterproductive. Other methods of cutting consumption cause people to lose jobs and products to cost more and therefore decrease our standard of living.

Generally the market is a better way to select ways to cut consumption 9and cost) rather than some pointy headed intellectual bureaucrat who knows better what's good for YOU (as long as it does not also apply to him).

varadero
10-05-2011, 08:21 AM
Arctic sea ice stopped declining after 2007. Arctic temperatures have not caused loss of Arctic sea ice. Arctic sea ice extent and area are not accurate measures of warming, more reflections of wind patterns over periods of time. No one noticed Skuthorps sneaky little post in the other thread. The link explains how the countries above about 45 degrees North are endangered by the lack of ozone due to long periods of very cold air temperature causing the activation of natural ozone depleting compounds. Similar to what has occured with our antipoden cousins, nothing to do with CFCs.
http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/icons/icon1.png Re: Let's have another Global Warming Denial Thread
Big ozone hole over Arctic this year, because it has been so cold!
http://www.theozonehole.com/arcticozone.htm (http://www.theozonehole.com/arcticozone.htm)