http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png
The record thin, record rotten ice is melting like crazy in the record heat. Maybe it will get down to 2.0, 1.0. or 0.0 this summer?
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “ready for the next one”
- Combining Science And Religion
- 500 Million Years Of Warmer Temperatures
- “Arctic sea ice is headed toward a historic low”
- “Record winter low”
- Kamala Planning Another Half Trillion Dollars For Ukraine
- “the science is absolutely certain”
- Electricity Is Proportional To CO2
- AI Climate Math
- AI Math
- Al Gore’s Arctic Forecast
- Mann Says He Was Correct
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “carbon emissions may have now peaked”
- Record Arctic Sea Ice Growth
- “4th Hottest Summer”
- Killing Joshua Trees To Save Them
- NASA Sea Level
- “getting smaller”
- “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Rapidly Accelerating Sea Level Rise
- Technology Advances
- “The Hour Of Decision”
- “fair & equitable”
Recent Comments
- czechlist on “ready for the next one”
- czechlist on Combining Science And Religion
- Robertvd on 500 Million Years Of Warmer Temperatures
- Jehzsa on Combining Science And Religion
- Robertvd on 500 Million Years Of Warmer Temperatures
- dm on 500 Million Years Of Warmer Temperatures
- dm on 500 Million Years Of Warmer Temperatures
- D. Boss on 500 Million Years Of Warmer Temperatures
- Gordon Vigurs on 500 Million Years Of Warmer Temperatures
- Bob G on Radical Communist Donald Harris
hmm.. got a long way to go get down to that.
Did it occur to anyone that the heat transfer to melt that much ice has to come from the water and not the air, and there is no circulation pattern or ocean temperature gradient large enough to do it?
The 2007 summer “melt” was largely due to compaction, rather than melt.
I know.
The energy can also come from the sun, particularly if soot aerosols have vastly increased the albedo after dry (or even wet) deposition onto the surface.
-Scott
hmm, I don’t think you’re going to get the soot needed to do that. The cruddiest northern snow there is, around the Arkhangelsk frozen coal electricity operation in Russia doesn’t show that much melting from the soot around it
Last I knew, the effects of aerosol collection on snow/ice melt was poorly understood but seemed to be fairly significant. That came from a scientific workshop/conference I attended just last month. Remember, these things could be collecting on the surface for months/years (whereas Arkhangelsk gets a relatively constant monthly precipitation amount throughout the year).
Additionally, it might just not be soot, a primary aerosol, but it could also be secondary organic aerosol that forms quite a distance away from the source.
-Scott
Hey Steve, are we still tracking 2006? Could we have another of your pretty graphs to check?
It has dipped below 2006. No doubt you are ready to bet on that record low.All the evidence is on your side.
Here is the latest daily figures for melt from 2011
-149375
-168125
-75782
-102968
-81719
-115469
-141250
-133281
-98906
-102500
-129375
-125000
-114063
You can compare this to 2007 for the same time period
-162031
-201875
-130937
-89844
-93125
-81250
-74844
-85937
-135157
-108750
-110000
-133906
-96250
-94687
2007 seems a lot more high and low compared to 2011. 2011 is still going strong on melt but as Steve says lets see what happens in the true Arctic basin rather than the outskirts …
By the way the 2007 was not due just to compaction so I am not sure why Brian thinks it was. It reminds me of WUWT who still cling to all the ice going out of various straights, clinging to this one mechanism when it is obviously a combination of all, not dependent on what you want it to be 🙂
It’s funny because Scott etc have tried to point them in the direction and they still ignore it!
Steve’s analysis of 2007 is far better than there’s, although I say most was melt in situe and he says compaction. One thing is for certain it was not Framm straight or Nares in the main, it all happened on the Russian side, either melt or compaction. Bridges in the Nares strait was a bit player.
Andy
Clearly you want to bet on a record minimum.
And there’s where the heart of the matter is…in attribution, not prediction (though proper attribution would allow very good long-term prediction).
What many people on both sides don’t realize is that it’s not just GHG or winds or SSTs or cloud cover or aerosols, and it isn’t even GHG and winds and SSTs and cloud cover and aerosols. It’s more like a bizzaro mixture of all these above. Say something like:
GHG and winds and SSTs and cloud cover and aerosols and winds*SSTs and cloud cover*aerosols and winds*SSTs*cloud cover….
You get the idea, no single mechanism describes it or even comes close.
-Scott