|
Post by acidohm on Feb 28, 2016 17:42:52 GMT
Why would there be a 10 year spacing??? What they found when they looked at the 'perfect melt storm synoptic' , after the surprise of 07', of high melt /high export melt seasons was that there was a 10 to 20 year cycle (with the two events preceding 07' having only 10 year spacing) so , maybe it will be 2027 before it turns up again? The only reason I mention 10 years is a combination of both it being the earliest possible return of the synoptic and the past two showing the low end return spacing? I just can't help but notice, the start years for the previous 4 solar cycles, '76 '86 '96 '08....
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 1, 2016 1:27:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Mar 7, 2016 9:21:19 GMT
Still not reached 14 million then?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 7, 2016 14:00:57 GMT
Not with current measuring tech.
A good thing it hasn't, as the world will benefit from less Arctic Ice. I would personally like to see it another 4-5 million lower. That would potentially allow a Northwest Passage to open to shipping, reducing the fuel consumption load. Would let diesel fuel remain at current levels and the reduced shipping costs would really help Europe start to recover from their stupidity.
Currently, Europe, if the trends continue, will soon not have bread crumbs left.
There will be 2 sets of folks. A very few wealthy, and the rest peasants, once again bowing to their over lords who have fleeced the willing masses totally dry. Death rates will rise because of further energy poverty. Crime will further increase.
Hard to believe how that area of the world has gone to hell in de hand basket.
So..........to lessen the pain, one can only smile when Arctic Ice levels are low, hoping that they continue lower.
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Mar 8, 2016 10:07:35 GMT
More shipping in the Arctic? Well I suppose that is a faster way to 'ice free'? Ships are the dirtiest form of transport on the go with no regulations when they enter international waters. I have seen sat, images of the north Pacific with areas covered in smoke trails from the boats below so how would this pan out in the arctic? Well we worry about the record wildfires we have been seeing in Russia/U.S./Canada and the impacts that the soot has on ice ( by lowering the albedo) so what would it mean for the ice if had had both sea routes in operation 6 months a year?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 8, 2016 14:23:58 GMT
More shipping in the Arctic? Well I suppose that is a faster way to 'ice free'? Ships are the dirtiest form of transport on the go with no regulations when they enter international waters. I have seen sat, images of the north Pacific with areas covered in smoke trails from the boats below so how would this pan out in the arctic? Well we worry about the record wildfires we have been seeing in Russia/U.S./Canada and the impacts that the soot has on ice ( by lowering the albedo) so what would it mean for the ice if had had both sea routes in operation 6 months a year? Graywolf: With all due respect, there have NOT been record wildfires in the USA. As far as Canada, there was a forest manager on CKY last year. He didn't report alarmism, but rather how mismanaged past fires had been. Instead of allowing them to burn, they were put out. That loaded the large boreal forests with not inches, but feet of fuel. Even the dreaded "pine beetle" expansion. Seems pine beetle's attack old sick trees. With no fires, guess what? Lots of old sick trees. He was very clear in his analysis. The old forests that hadn't been allowed to burn have screwed the whole natural cycle up. He was hoping that the fires would continue so that they could correct the current huge imbalance. As far as smoke in the Arctic from shipping lanes being open. I agree, ocean freighters are not regulated and spew copious amounts of soot. Just think how the shortened voyage will reduce the copious amount of soot pollution once the Arctic Northwest passage is open. Not only LESS pollution, but less cost for Europe as well.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Mar 8, 2016 15:15:19 GMT
More shipping in the Arctic? Well I suppose that is a faster way to 'ice free'? Ships are the dirtiest form of transport on the go with no regulations when they enter international waters. I have seen sat, images of the north Pacific with areas covered in smoke trails from the boats below so how would this pan out in the arctic? Well we worry about the record wildfires we have been seeing in Russia/U.S./Canada and the impacts that the soot has on ice ( by lowering the albedo) so what would it mean for the ice if had had both sea routes in operation 6 months a year? Graywolf: With all due respect, there have NOT been record wildfires in the USA. As far as Canada, there was a forest manager on CKY last year. He didn't report alarmism, but rather how mismanaged past fires had been. Instead of allowing them to burn, they were put out. That loaded the large boreal forests with not inches, but feet of fuel. Even the dreaded "pine beetle" expansion. Seems pine beetle's attack old sick trees. With no fires, guess what? Lots of old sick trees. He was very clear in his analysis. The old forests that hadn't been allowed to burn have screwed the whole natural cycle up. He was hoping that the fires would continue so that they could correct the current huge imbalance. As far as smoke in the Arctic from shipping lanes being open. I agree, ocean freighters are not regulated and spew copious amounts of soot. Just think how the shortened voyage will reduce the copious amount of soot pollution once the Arctic Northwest passage is open. Not only LESS pollution, but less cost for Europe as well. well international regulation of soot and other toxic by-products of combustion makes a lot more sense than regulating CO2.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 8, 2016 15:40:56 GMT
Yes they would Icefisher, but that requires actual thinking.
And amongst the AGW folks, that seems to be getting in more short supply all the time. The gloom and doom of 2.0C has already passed us by. Talk to an ordinary person who doesn't have an interest in this, and the response?
"Gosh, I didn't notice".
Guess what, the made up 2.0C number is turning out not so bad after all.
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Mar 10, 2016 10:12:38 GMT
PIOMAS is out and we are now down to second lowest for the month. We have lost 1900km since the peak rebound month as the warm winter takes toll on ice growth. CT puts us bottom on ice area and IJIS ( which showed losses for today) is also second lowest.
If this is us entering melt season I do not think we are in good shape?
The 'Ozone hole' appears to be worst over our side of the basin with the pole split in two with Beaufort having good cover but The Atlantic side ( and over NW Europe) showing patchy cover?
That in mind are we also seeing the demise of the polar vortex two months early?
|
|
|
Post by graywolf on Mar 15, 2016 12:22:12 GMT
Ice still not reaching the preliminary high of Feb so I'm thinking we can call it now with CT area plumb bottom and IJIS extent in second lowest place. With the sun only a short way from the pole now lower regions must already be feeling the heat?
A quick look at Beaufort shows the results of the current 'crackopalypse' event with wide leads freezing over so some very thin ice there? Should Baffin and Okhotsk be early melters we will find ice levels very low as we move into 'melt pool' season ( first of the 3 melt stages).
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 15, 2016 12:43:52 GMT
The early melt season is a very good thing for most folks.
Horrible thing for AG production in the USA. Another huge crop is on its way, which means more low prices.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 15, 2016 13:59:26 GMT
Graywolf: With all due respect, there have NOT been record wildfires in the USA. As far as Canada, there was a forest manager on CKY last year. He didn't report alarmism, but rather how mismanaged past fires had been. Instead of allowing them to burn, they were put out. That loaded the large boreal forests with not inches, but feet of fuel. Even the dreaded "pine beetle" expansion. Seems pine beetle's attack old sick trees. With no fires, guess what? Lots of old sick trees. He was very clear in his analysis. The old forests that hadn't been allowed to burn have screwed the whole natural cycle up. He was hoping that the fires would continue so that they could correct the current huge imbalance. As far as smoke in the Arctic from shipping lanes being open. I agree, ocean freighters are not regulated and spew copious amounts of soot. Just think how the shortened voyage will reduce the copious amount of soot pollution once the Arctic Northwest passage is open. Not only LESS pollution, but less cost for Europe as well. Sig, Where exactly are you getting your source info on wildfires? In WA state we had a respectable fire season last year, my family was evacuated while traveling thru Eastern WA during a Summer stop due to a wildfire. Those flames may not have been record but they were there. www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/northwest/twisp-wildfire-survivor-says-hes-improving-day-by-day/Code Code: I am talking on a National Scale. The wild fire extent per year is put out by the US Government. I don't remember the link, but I remember what I read.
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Mar 15, 2016 19:12:31 GMT
Code: I am talking on a National Scale. The wild fire extent per year is put out by the US Government. I don't remember the link, but I remember what I read. Perhaps this is what Sig had in mind... Link: www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/nfn.htm
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 15, 2016 20:43:51 GMT
Code: I am talking on a National Scale. The wild fire extent per year is put out by the US Government. I don't remember the link, but I remember what I read. Perhaps this is what Sig had in mind... Link: www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/nfn.htmThanks throttleup!!! I do think that was the link!
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Mar 15, 2016 23:40:05 GMT
Should this topic be renamed "Fire & Ice" ......
|
|