|
Post by thermostat on Jun 30, 2013 3:11:29 GMT
To elaborate, most of the heat in the climate system is contained in the oceans (>90%). Most of the heat being added to the climate system by global warming is going into the oceans. Most of the melting of the Arctic is due to this addded heat.
Arctic amplification also plays a role.
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 30, 2013 3:04:19 GMT
I have. That is, that sea surface atmospheric temperature is not it. The air is not where heat cones from that matters in melting this ice. The heat of most relevance involves solar irradiance in the arctic (this energy goes predominantly into the water up there), but it substantially augmented by heat in the water coming up from the south. Air temps are not a big factor, due to physics. Hope this helps. Dr. T! Thank you for your helpful help! And thanks for your insightful insight in letting us know that "air temps are not a big factor, due to physics."
Man. The things you learn when you're a PhD. Amazing.
A question if I may: I know you're the "Arctic Amplification" guru around here. Does the term "Arctic Amplification" never include air temperatures?
One more question: If Arctic air temps were ABOVE normal (rather than below normal where they have been for a good number of weeks), THEN would air temps be a "big factor?" You know, due to physics?throttleup, The relevant physics here are about a phenomenon known as heat capacity. (Actually throttleup, I learned this very basic physics in high school). But, whatever, we can gather that you never took any course in physics at any level, fair enough. Nevertheless, the heat capacity of water is much higher than the heat capacity of air. I suggest that before you go spouting off to the forum about physics, you get your basic facts straight.
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 28, 2013 4:45:47 GMT
Has anyone noticed temperature is no longer an important metric for Arctic ice melt? I have. That is, that sea surface atmospheric temperature is not it. The air is not where heat cones from that matters in melting this ice. The heat of most relevance involves solar irradiance in the arctic (this energy goes predominantly into the water up there), but it substantially augmented by heat in the water coming up from the south. Air temps are not a big factor, due to physics. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 23, 2013 1:37:04 GMT
Happy Northern Hemisphere Solar Irradiance Maximum everyone. Where I am, the fireflies are having a party outside my window. A great Midsummer night! Looking at the Arctic Sea Ice,the talk out there in the blogosphere is about 'the cliff', which refers to impending steep declines in the sea ice extent and sea ice area numbers. Looking at Cryoshpere today, sea ice area is already showing such declines arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.recent.arctic.pngEven though you guys pretty much ignored my last post on 'The Persistent Arctic Cyclone' ie the 'PAC', satellite observations show extensive sea ice fragmentation in the Arctic Basin. Time will tell what effect this has on the 2013 melt. The buzz now is about the high pressure systems that set up in the Arctic right at solar maximum, allowing a lot of energy to enter the system. (Of course thinking that solar irradiance matters requires thinking that the sun matters.) The immediate thing to watch for is 'the cliff'.
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 21, 2013 4:18:07 GMT
The PAC, "Persistent Arctic Cyclone" of 2013 is duly noted. Satellite images indicate enhanced fragmentation of the Arctic Sea Ice after this persistent storm. At the same time, his storm served to reduce Arctic Temps.
Any bets on how this combination of increased ice fragmentation/reduced current temperatures progresses?
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 18, 2013 4:20:25 GMT
Regardless, the Summer Solstice is about to occur, the maximal solar irradiance. It appears that this event will have maximal effect on the North American side of the Arctic (although it will introduce energy into the system throughtout the Arctic.)
What next?
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 16, 2013 3:58:33 GMT
Regarding context for the 2013 melt, everyone will recall that back in 2007 when that unexpected sea ice melt occurred, an ongoing influx of heat into the Chuckchi Sea via the Bering Strait made a major contribution to the melt. It is curious to see the heat map over there these days; (see 'latest daily product for anomalies, www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/clim/sst.shtml)What is up with that global hot spot in the North Pacific anyway? Atlantic Ocean heat through the Fram Strait is most implicated as a driver of recent Arctic Sea Ice melt. Is this a year where Pacific ocean heat via the Bering will show up?
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 16, 2013 3:44:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 14, 2013 5:46:59 GMT
Radiant, Are you suggesting that solid pack ice is just as mobile as fragmented ice? Are you saying in particular you think the degree of fragmentation has no effect on sea ice mobility? It has been known for hundreds of years that pack ice is not solidified. Pack ice is jumble of ice debris that only has a very poor ability to freeze to become a solid mass. It is also well know that the pack can open and close in very short periods of time with no warning at all and no sign of wind. However an ice bridge in pack ice can form where a current of almost entirely open water passes away from the pack by flowing under it - hence the stories of an open arctic sea when travellers came up the West coast of Greenland. However when you have very long ice edges such are found at the top end of the eastern end of Greenland there is no way for the poorly frozen and fractured summer pack ice to resist the southward current. The nature of the Arctic is that it is difficult for the ice to flow out rather than it having been frozen solid previously Radiant. A fascinating perception, quite unique. Well, we will see. Only time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 14, 2013 3:20:54 GMT
Radiant, Are you suggesting that solid pack ice is just as mobile as fragmented ice? Are you saying in particular you think the degree of fragmentation has no effect on sea ice mobility? When was the central pack solid and not mobile 365 days a year Tstat? I pointed out in an earlier post that explorers learned to get off the ice before the beginning of May from experience over 100 years ago. I know I must be patient though as there seems to be a definite trend towards many more youngsters just falling off the turnip truck in their later years than days bygone. icefisher, Fair enough. I would suggest that is a matter of degree. Is it possible for you to imagine a condition in the Arctic where highly fragmented and much thinner ice behaves differently that less fragmented, thicker sea ice? Or not? Or would you propose that sea ice area is the only measure that matters; sea ice volume and composition is irrelevant?
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 14, 2013 2:39:09 GMT
Clearly, fragmented sea ice is expected to be more mobile compared with a more solid ice pack. Clearly, when Nansen sailed fairly deep into siberian arctic waters and then sailed into the pack on the expectation he would drift to the North pole neither Nansen or the rest of the crew were expecting a more solid ice pack. All this crackabollockopolis is a bit silly. The nature of pack ice is that it is broken ice packed together floating on a moving sea Radiant, Are you suggesting that solid pack ice is just as mobile as fragmented ice? Are you saying in particular you think the degree of fragmentation has no effect on sea ice mobility?
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 14, 2013 1:43:58 GMT
Introduced a special lower level for Cuttydyer Added greywolf and radiant's forecasts With this span available somebody must be right 2.6 greywolf 3.0 or less Cuttydyer 3.1 birder 3.5 steve, throttlup 3.7 karlox, sigurdur 3.85 Thermostat 3.9 phydeaux 3.95 radiant 4.1 dontgetoutmuch 4.25 hrizzo 4.5 trbixler, neilhamp 4.9 zaphod I see we are still waiting for a few ice forum regulars to weigh in; Numerouno? Icefisher? ... Magellan? What do you guys foresee?
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 14, 2013 1:33:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 10, 2013 4:57:29 GMT
But looking at the Arctic Sea Ice, the effect of the ongoing Arctic Cyclone is of most interest. In particular, the persistent Arctic Cyclone off of Siberia appears poised to drive sea ice exit via the Fram Strait, see the US Navy projections; www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arc_list_arcticicespddrf.htmlIn addition, weather forecasts indicate that clear skies and warm temperatures will coincide with the summer solstice over important regions of the arctic.http://www.wetterzentrale.de/topkarten/fsecmeur.html Given the accumulated loss of Arctic Sea Ice volume, it is difficult to see any significant recovery in 2013.
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Jun 10, 2013 4:38:10 GMT
It is your theory that requires the tipping point to be a few moments ago in geological terms. Given there is a natural chaotic process of climate change anyway, a tipping point in the Arctic could have occured thousands of years ago without it becoming obvious to humans. But it did not. it happened in the 1990s. You better get some sleep by now so you will be able to work all day, young lad. numerouno, You're back, I see. Welcome! Welcome back numerouno. It is most interesting to have outspoken individuals with a mind of their own join the thread.
|
|