No Change In Arctic Sea Ice Extent For 13 Years

Arctic sea ice extent is essentially unchanged since January 2006.

Spreadsheet      Data

However, experts fear London may become ice-free during summer within a generation.

Blocks of Arctic ice are melting in the heart of London | LifeGate

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to No Change In Arctic Sea Ice Extent For 13 Years

  1. gregole says:

    Shouldn’t there be no Arctic ice by now? It’s 2019. Whatever happened to the disappearing Arctic ice?

    • Adam says:

      If it won’t go away naturally, they’ll burn thru tons of fossil fuel to send ships north to break it up and haul it south.

    • Anon says:

      NASA says not for a few decades more, or until the end of the century:

      Wintertime Arctic Sea Ice Growth Slows Long-term Decline: NASA

      These model simulations showed that in the 1980s, when Arctic sea ice was on average 6.6 feet thick in October, about 3.3 extra feet of ice would form over the winter. That rate of growth has increased and may continue to do so for several more decades in some regions of the Arctic; in the coming decades, we could have an ice pack that would on average be only around 3.3 feet thick in October, but could experience up to 5 feet of ice growth over the winter.

      “This negative feedback mechanism increasing ice growth is unlikely to be sufficient in preventing an ice-free Arctic this century,” Petty and his colleagues concluded.

      https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/wintertime-arctic-sea-ice-growth-slows-long-term-decline-nasa

      So Al Gore was wrong it seems, as were many other AGW alarmists. The Arctc won’t be ice free anytime soon.

      • Johansen says:

        Anon… I am struggling to keep up, here. What is a “negative feedback mechanism” in this context (increased Arctic ice growth)?

      • Johansen says:

        Thanks, I found it…

        They’re calling it a negative “conductive” feedback (i.e. thinner ice grows faster).

        But the atmosphere should warm a lot faster than the oceans; thus, isn’t this grasping at straws in essence?

  2. Jimmy Haigh says:

    If the greens were that worried about it they would be taking chinks of ice TO the Arctic. Not taking the little they believer there to be left to melt in London for a photo op…

  3. Robertv says:

    Ice blocks with a carbon footprint.

  4. arn says:

    In a bizarre world where this is called art
    AGW can be called science for sure.

    There are some very sneaky “philantrophs” out there who are very skilled in
    making money by selling shit like that.

  5. Gator says:

    Wow lefties are stupid! Paying money to watch blocks of ice melt? There is no bottom to their idiocy.

  6. Steven Fraser says:

    DMI Sea Ice Volume report for Jan 12: Volume rose from yesterday by 93 cu km, to 19,093, which is 98.26% of the day’s value in the 17-year series, and 98.25% in the DMI-charted 10-year reference period 2004-2013.

    The latent heat released in the formation of the new ice is 2.85167E+19 Joules, or 2.8517E+07 TeraJoules.

    • Mr GrimNasty says:

      It’s often noticeable that the temperature goes up when ice formation is quickest under stable conditions (i.e. excluding weather system transient warm air segments). That fact will probably blow Griff’s mind.

      • Squidly says:

        It is an awesome phenomena to see how much energy is released and how much the temperature rises at the moment water freezes.

        If you take a typical drinking glass size of container, place a temperature probe in it while cooling the water, you will see the temperature continue to drop as the water cools to 32°F (0°C) .. just at the moment when the water turns to ice, you can see the temperature spike up to as high as 39°F (3.89°C) for as long as a minute before dropping back to 32°F (0°F). It is really quite interesting to watch.

        • Steven Fraser says:

          Squidly: Excellent point. Freezing water converts latent energy to sensible heat, which is measurable (sensible) as temp… just what you did.

          What is amazing to me is the ability of the arctic to get rid of this massive amount of heat… it does not stick around, it gets sent on a space trip.

  7. Psalmon says:

    I have several colleagues that had great difficulty flying out of Germany and some out of Czech Republic. Europe is a mess with snow. No doubt this will be the warmest year in the history of Earth.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6584305/Europe-blanketed-snow-following-deaths-21-people-winter-whiteout.html

  8. MrZ says:

    Griff,
    Steven is of course right stating 19.093 as the current DMI volume total (as of January 12)
    But I am curious who is right comparing all January 2019 figures, PIOMAS or DMI?
    I believe you stated DMI can not be trusted. I wonder why?

    • Steven Fraser says:

      Just looking at it, and without reviewing the PIOMAS methodogy, I’d say some things to look at would be any differences in the spacial coverage, % threshold, averaging method and gridding.

      Some interesting things:

      The positions of the two at the start and end are nearly identical, even with the variations between.

      The places where the two lines go in opposing directions, for example 2004, 1010, 2014, 2017 and 2019 might be clues to the underlaying differences.

      Sometimes the similar motion is greater in one or the other, for example, the decline to 2005, (greater in DMI) or the rise to 2008 (greater in PIOMAS).

      From 2008 to 2010 spread, and then move in parallel to 2011, spread to 2012 and 2013, and then converge 2014-present. Analysis of what caused the divergence may provide insight.

      • MrZ says:

        Yes,
        I did yearly averages in a previous thread. Look like the 2009-2010 season is to blame for most of the difference. Without that PIOMAS is fairly close. I read somewhere PIOMAS has better snow detection. Strange if that can explain the constant offset. In any case the trends are pretty clear in both sets. Ice is growing.

  9. Steven Fraser says:

    DMI Sea Ice Volume report for Jan 14: Volume rose in the last 2 days 170 cu km, to 19,262, which is 98.27% of the day’s value in the 17-year series, and 98.21% in the DMI-charted 10-year reference period 2004-2013.

    The latent heat released in the formation of the 2 days of new ice is 5.20826E+19
    Joules, or 5.2083E+07 TeraJoules.

  10. Danny L. Akin says:

    I am very interested in why Google confuses Tony Heller and a Mr. Goddard. Could someone email me the difference between the two men and the credentials of Mr. Heller. I am quickly becoming skeptical of the IPCC , I have enjoyed Mr. Heller’s analyses and I would like to be able to counter ad hominem attacks on Mr. Heller that seem to be based on Wikepedia and Google searches.

    • Steven Fraser says:

      Just fyi,there is no way for a member of this list to get an e-mail address for you. It protects you (and everyone else) from SPAM.

      So, respond to your request, kinda have to do it here, where Tony can chime in if he wants. IMO, Google has not yet learned that Tony Heller and Steven Goddard are two names for the same person. They’re funny that way. (Google, that is) Or, they simply do not care. Or, they are acting with malice. I’ll let you choose.

      I’ve never met him (but hope to someday… I have relatives where he lives), but here (his own site) he posts under his own name. In some other places, for example, Twitter, he uses the Steven Goddard handle, as evidenced by some of the posts here which contain screen snaps of Tweets.

      As to his background, he reveals some of that from time to time here in posts. Take some time and survey posts over the last few years in the archive, and you’ll be able to find those to be very interesting.

    • Disillusioned says:

      Danny,

      Welcome to the world of disillusionment by empirical data.

      As Steven Fraser said, it is the same brilliant man. My (perhaps flawed) understanding is that Steve Goddard was Tony’s nom de plume on some websites at a time when he wanted (or, perhaps needed) some anonymity. He has this account with his personal name and his You Tube account with his personal name – so, clearly he doesn’t hide who he is, as some of the ad hom attacks go. And then there is the Twitter account with the nom de plume. That account has thousands of followers, and I think he just kept it rather than starting anew. Dorothy’s Toto is the same, and connects the Twitter account and this blog together rather nicely.

      I may have a detail or two wrong, and if so would gladly appreciate being corrected. But I believe that’s about the gist of it.

  11. Steven Fraser says:

    DMI Sea Ice Volume report for Jan 15: Volume rose 101 cu km since yesterday, to 19,363, which is 98.34% of the day’s value in the 17-year series, and 98.28% in the DMI-charted 10-year reference period 2004-2013.

    The latent heat released in the formation of the new ice is 3.08306E+19 Joules, or 3.0831E+07 TeraJoules.

    Oh,and I forgot to report last time that the DMI Sea Ice Volume growth this season just passed another milestone: In the report for January 14, the volume growth since the September 10 low stand has exceeded 13,000 cu km. With the report for the 15th, the growth since the low stand is now 13,150 cu km, which is 211.67% growth.

    Regards to all.

    • Steven Fraser says:

      DMI Sea Ice Volume report for Jan 16: Volume rose 98 cu km since yesterday, to 19,461, which is 98.38% of the day’s value in the 17-year series, and 98.32% in the DMI-charted 10-year reference period 2004-2013.

      The latent heat released in the formation of the new ice is 2.99775E+19 Joules, or 2.9977E+07 TeraJoules.

  12. Steven Fraser says:

    DMI Sea Ice Volume report for Jan 17: Volume rose 98 cu km since yesterday, to 19,599, which is 98.43% of the day’s average value in the 17-year series, and 98.37% in the DMI-charted 10-year reference period 2004-2013.

    The day’s average growth in the 17-year series was 88 cu km, and for the reference period 89 cu km. Comparatively, the day’s growth this year was 111.04% and 109.51% of those values, respectively.

    The latent heat released in the formation of the new ice is 2.98926E+19 Joules, or 2.9893E+07 TeraJoules.

  13. Steven Fraser says:

    DMI Sea Ice Volume report for Jan 18: Volume rose 102 cu km since yesterday, to 19,661, which is 98.55% of the day’s average value in the 17-year series, and 98.48% in the DMI-charted 10-year reference period 2004-2013.

    The day’s average growth in the 17-year series was 80 cu km, and for the reference period 82 cu km. Comparatively, the day’s growth this year was 126.20% and 124.11% of those values, respectively. 2018 picked up 21 cu km on the day’s 17-year average, and is now 290 cu km under it.

    The latent heat released in the formation of the new ice is 3.106E+19 Joules, or 3.1060E+07 TeraJoules.

  14. Steven Fraser says:

    DMI Sea Ice Volume report for Jan 19: Volume rose 86 cu km since yesterday, to 19,747, which is 98.61% of the day’s average value in the 17-year series, and 98.52% in the DMI-charted 10-year reference period 2004-2013.

    The day’s average growth in the 17-year series was 74 cu km, and for the reference period 79 cu km. Comparatively, the day’s growth this year was 116.03% and 109.85% of those values, respectively. 2018 picked up 12 cu km on the day’s 17-year average, and is now 278 cu km under it.

    The latent heat released in the formation of the new ice is 2.63654E+19 Joules, or 2.6365E+07 TeraJoules.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.