The National Snow and Ice Data Center just announced a news release, that the winter of 2014-15 had the lowest maximum sea ice extent since satellite records were started in 1979.
So what? This is yet another indicator of the effects of ongoing warming of the planet as part of the current trend in global climate change. If you look at the map above you may not think that the difference between the 1981-2010 average is that compelling, but the bottom line is that the winter maximum sea ice extents and the summer minimum sea ice extents in the Arctic continue to drop as the years go on.
This means that we continue to slide farther and farther down the climate change chute - impacts have always been predicted to be most extreme and obvious in the Arctic than anywhere else on the planet. But if this is happening in the Arctic we should not be surprised to see other effects elsewhere...increasing temperatures, increasing intensities of storms, shifting weather and precipitation patterns, sea level rise, etc.
Oh, and a few more tidbits of information...the first time the Arctic maximum winter sea ice extent dropped below the 1981-2010 average was in 1995, and the last year the Arctic maximum sea ice extent matched or exceeded the 1981-2010 average was in 2003. Every year since 2004 has had Arctic maximum winter sea ice extents below the long-term average...that's 11 years running!
Click on the link below for more detailed information from the NSIDC:
Every year in October the National Snow and Ice Data Center (www.nsidc.org) releases a report on the minimum sea ice extent for the current year. This year the NSIDC announced that the minimum summer sea ice extent for 2014 was 5.02 million square kilometers. OK, so what?
NASA satellites started monitoring sea ice extent in the Arctic Ocean back in 1979. Satellite data are downloaded each day and sent sent to the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado, Boulder, for analysis. Thirty-five years of these data are now painting a sobering picture. Though there is a significant amount of year-to-year variability among the data, a strong trend is emerging.
Average Monthly Sea Ice Extent September 1979-2014.
Data courtesy of NSIDC.org
The data show that there is significantly less sea ice in the Arctic now than there was only a few decades ago. The upper end of the trend line tops out around 7.9 million square kilometers of sea ice, and the bottom end of the line reached about 4.9 million square kilometers of sea ice. The difference? About 3 million square kilometers of sea ice gone missing. How much is that? That's about the same surface area as India, the 7th largest country in the world.
NSIDC also reports that we are currently losing on average 13.3% of sea ice cover per decade and that the ten Septembers with the lowest extents happened in the last ten years!
Bottom line? We are progressively losing more sea ice in the Arctic.
10 for 10? The last ten years, the ten lowest sea ice extents, and sadly at this rate it's not likely to get better before it gets even worse.
I know I just posted on the Arctic Ocean sea ice melt, but, well, that was three days ago. And three days ago it looked like an acceleration of sea ice melt might have been on the way, but I'd say that now it's official! Look at the difference between the 1981-2010 baseline trend and the observed sea ice melt between the latter half of June and July 4th. Wow!
I did a little math, and here's what I came up with.
On June 21st the historical baseline (1981-2010) showed sea ice extent at about 11.4 million km2 and 10.55 million km2 on July 4th. That's a difference of 850,000 km2 of sea ice, or a melt rate of about 65,400 km2 of sea ice per day.
By comparison, the observed time period between June 21st and July 4th 2013 showed a sea ice extent of 11.1 million km2 on June 21st and an extent of 9.6 million km2 on July 4th. That's a difference of 1.5 million km2 over that time period for a daily sea ice melt rate of about 115,400 km2 per day.
The observed melt rate for 2013 over the past two weeks or so is therefore nearly double the baseline melt rate for the same time period. It's doubtful that this melt rate can be maintained for long, but the next few weeks will give us a good indication about whether the 2012 sea ice minimum extent record is in jeopardy. That is, if the current sea ice melt rate will be sustained, at least over the short term.
So, it's true, things are really starting to warm up in the Arctic.
Stay tuned...it's going to be an interesting summer!
Record sea ice melting in the Arctic Ocean receives a lot of attention from the media - as far as climate change news goes - but you don't hear that much about what is happening in the Antarctic.
First of all, a quick reminder about sea ice in the Arctic Ocean:
Sea ice melt in the Arctic Ocean in 2012 smashed the previous record by 750,000 km2. The map below shows the observed sea ice extent in Sept 2012 (white area) compared to the 1979-2000 average extent (pink line) Wow!
Sea ice extent is defined as the area of the sea with at least 15% sea ice cover. The graph below shows the Arctic sea ice extent for the years 2007-2012 and the 1979-2000 average. Sea ice melt for all individual years shown (2007-2012) have minimum sea ice extents that are significantly (statistically) less than the 1979-2000 average (dark gray line; lighter gray area is + 2 standard deviations around the 1979-2000 average). The bottom line for the Arctic is that it is warming significantly, and much faster than even the fastest climate models developed to date.
Ok, let's take a look at what's happening in the Antarctic:
The map below shows the Antarctic maximum sea ice extent (white area) for 2012 compared to the 1979-2000 average sea ice extent (orange line). 2012 sea ice extent in the Arctic set a new sea ice maximum record. The graph below the map shows the sea ice extent for 2012 compared to the 1979-2000 average.
The graph below shows average sea ice extent for the month of Sept for 1979-2000 and for selected individual years. Interestingly sea ice extent is increasing on average around Antarctica. When we look at data of sea ice cover in recent years in the Antarctic we see that 2006, 2007, 2011, and 2012 all had higher than average sea ice extent maxima but only 2006 and 2012 maximum extents were statistically higher (different) than the 1979-2000 average. With that being said, sea ice extent did exceed the + 2 standard deviation range in 2006 and 2012. So, what is going on in the Antarctic that is leading to increased sea ice cover?
Here's a brief summary of their report together with some additional information to increase clarity:
Temperatures are warming in the Antarctic, just not as fast as in the Arctic (the NSIDC cites references you can refer to if you want more info on this.)
Warming of the Pacific Ocean and ozone depletion over Antarctica combine to strengthen circumpolar winds.
The strongest of these circumpolar winds blows east to west, and Coriolis Effect causes these winds to deflect to the left (north).
The northerly flow of air around most of Antarctica causes sea ice to be pushed farther north than usual, spreading it out and increasing sea ice extent (remember, sea ice extent = 15% ice cover or more)
It would be very interesting to know whether the total amount of sea ice being formed in the Antarctic is increasing or decreasing. All we know right now is how the ice that is being formed is being dispersed.
In summary:
Sea ice extent around Antarctica is increasing, but it is not increasing because it is getting colder. It is increasing because winds blowing toward the north are dispersing sea ice farther away from the Antarctic coastline than usual. Don't forget that sea ice formation in the Antarctic winter is followed by nearly 100% sea ice melt in the Antarctic summer - this is different than in the Arctic where multiple-year sea ice has historically accumulated.
I know, I know, ANOTHER posting on Arctic sea ice!? No, it's more than that.
I guess I just can't help myself, plus the sea ice melt is currently on record pace. The all time record Arctic sea ice melt so far occurred in 2007, but right now there is somewhere between 250,000 and 500,000 square kilometers more open water in the Arctic today than there was at this time in 2007!
The melt is really taking off north of Siberia, in Baffin Bay west of Greenland, and in the Beaufort Sea north of the Canadian Yukon, Northwest Territories, and eastern Alaska. Plus Hudson Bay will soon be ice free, well ahead of historical average melt dates. If this keeps up we will see a new record for ice melt in the Arctic later this summer.
This graph shows the comparison between the area of sea ice cover in the Arctic Ocean between historical averages (1979-2000 - dark gray line), the 2007 record sea ice melt year (dotted green line) and current sea ice cover (blue line).
OK, so what? What can we do to mitigate what is going on with global climate change. While I encourage everyone out there to drive less, walk or bike more, and emit as little carbon as possible, the bottom line is that as individuals we can do little to mitigate the problem. What is desperately needed NOW is for everyone to put pressure on their local, state, and national leaders to take steps to mandate change. It's clear that the small grassroots effort that has been going on for the past few decades is not going to do the job. We need large-scale investment in cleaner, more efficient energy, reductions in carbon emissions, and transportation options.
The science is in, and no matter how much nay-sayers or skeptics want to think or say otherwise, humans are driving the current trend of global warming.
The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administrations's Climatic Data Center just released data showing that the months of January through June of 2012 was the warmest ever in the 118 year history of national weather statistics.
This map shows state-by-state rankings of average temperature compared to all other years of Jan-June temperature averages since the late 1800s. A score of "1" means it was the coldest average temperature in the record. A score of "118" means it was the warmest in the temperature record.
This map shows that only two states, Washington and Oregon, showed near normal average temperatures, while the rest of the country experienced above normal to record warmest temperatures. In fact, 30 states reported record warmest temperatures for this 6-month period.
Washington and Oregon were kept cool by Pacific storms that moved onshore, brought cooler temperatures, and much higher than average precipitation. The rest of the country baked.
The national average for precipitation for Jan-June 2012 scored a "16", which means that it was the 16th driest Jan-June on record. A few areas had near record precipitation, such as Coastal Washington, Oregon, northern California, and Minnesota. The Pacific storms explain the rainfall in the NW, and if you recall, there were torrential rainfalls and massive flooding in MN in June. Nevada, the four-corners states, and Wyoming in the meantime experienced near record low precipitation. That's not that surprising - it's an arid part of the country anyway, but look at the Ohio River Valley. These states routinely enjoy storm front after storm front bringing rain needed for agriculture, etc. This Jan-June, however, rainfall was WAY down.
When are we going to wake up? The individual action of a few people here and is simply not enough to make a difference when it comes to mitigating climate change.
This is our time. This is our watch. I believe that our children and grandchildren will rightly hold us responsible for our lack of action, regardless of what any other country or people do.
Carbon emissions are a responsibility of the rich. The rich are the only ones with enough wealth to emit significant amounts of carbon. And when I say rich, I mean people who earn more than $40-50K per year. Where did this number come from? This threshold was identified by two researchers, Pacala and Socolo, of Princeton University. You can learn more about their work by watching this seminar by Dr. Pacala, given a few years ago at Stanford University. It's about an hour long, but it's incredibly fascinating, and their conclusions bear consideration.
The people above the $40-50K personal wealth mark are the people rich enough to own a car, own a house, be materialistic consumers, etc. This is not something we want to hear or like to hear, but it's a serious reality. Economists looking at the emissions of anthropogenic carbon have discovered that the richest 500 million people on the planet, and that the poorest half of the global population (now over 3.5 billion people) are so poor that they emit almost nothing.
Carbon emission is a problem generated by the rich. It is a problem that needs to be shouldered by the rich.
I am sadly convinced that based on what we are doing and on what we are not doing right now, we will not be heroes in future history books. We will be branded as the generation(s) who were more concerned with short-term profits, personal wealth, and lavish lifestyle (i.e., greed) than we were with taking responsibility to be worthy stewards and caretakers of the planet for the benefit of future generations.
Scientific predictions, observations, and climate models all lead to the conclusion that signs and effects of global warming will be most extreme near the north pole. I saw some data this morning that made me sit up and take notice.
We are now in the middle of the most rapid sea ice melt of the year. That's not the news. The news is that the most recent data from NASA satellites and the National Snow and Ice Data Center (nsidc.org) show a notable drop in the percentage of the Arctic Ocean and nearby waters over the past few days.
Now a few days do not a trend make, but it is worth keeping an eye on!
This map (courtesy nsidc.org) shows two things. 1) It shows orange lines that indicate the historical average limit of sea ice cover in the Arctic Ocean between 1979 and 2000 for this date, and 2) the white area shows the actual sea ice cover for this date.
Just in case nsidc.org isn't one of your favorite web sites, and you don't routinely follow what's going on in the Arctic (I mean, what normal person does?), here's the scoop. During the winter of 2011-12 there was a larger than average coverage of sea ice in the Bering Sea (west of Alaska and north of the Aleutian Islands) and it hung around longer than usual. Today's map shows that the Bering Sea ice is breaking up - FAST! Also, there is quite a bit of open water showing up north of central Canada and central Russia. So, why the big news?
If you take a look at the graph below (also courtesy of nsidc.org), you will see the historical average amount of sea ice cover (1979-2000 - dark gray line), the area containing 95% of all historical observations (1979-2000), the current extent of sea ice cover for 2012 (blue line), and the extent of sea ice cover in 2007 - the year we observed the lowest sea ice extent ever (green dashed line).
OK, so what!?
The sea ice cover for 2012 fell easily within the normal range for historical sea ice cover all spring...until now. During the past few days the sea ice extent has dropped out of the average range, and even below the 2007 extent.
Does this mean we will see record sea ice melt in the Arctic this year? There's no way to tell at this point, because wind and weather conditions work together to determine the rate of ice melt and where the ice is blown. But, these data show that we should keep an eye on the Arctic. Why? The overall sea ice cover has taken a short-term dip in total cover. That may be temporary or it may be the beginning of a rapid melt. Only time will tell on that one.
Why do I follow what's happening in the Arctic Ocean? The Arctic is the Earth's climate "Canary in a Coal Mine". Coal miners used to take canaries with them into the mines. As long as the canaries sang and were healthy, they knew the air was OK. But when a canary keeled over, passing out or dying, the miners knew it was time to get out. This is because the canaries were more sensitive to air quality changes than humans. Similarly, the Arctic is more sensitive to climate change than other areas of the globe, so when we see changes there - and we ARE seeing changes there, it's time to take notice and make changes to mitigate the problem.
What changes are we seeing? For one, both winter and summer sea ice cover in the Arctic has been dropping significantly for the past 30+ years!
This graph (courtesy nsidc.org) shows the average sea ice cover for the month of May between 1979 and 2012. While there is quite a bit of noise (year to year up and down) in the data, the long-term trend clearly shows that there is on average less sea ice in the Arctic in the month of May in 2012 than there was 30 years ago. The slope showing the overall trend is statistically significant.
By the way, if noise in the data concerns you, you need to realize that EVERY natural system contains noise in the data. This includes everything from local and global average temperatures to your own heart rate. But if you collect data long enough, and scientists have, trends, if they exist in the data, will become apparent. The trend in the Arctic is that it is getting warmer up there, and as a result the sea ice cover is dropping year to year.
In other words, the canaries are having a hard time singing. They may be having a hard time breathing.
