Gandalf The White:

Michael:

Gandalf The White:

jtwigge:

 Extent is now higher than at the same time in 2005.

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

There is now a chance that it will be higher than the equivalent time of year for the past six years (see link) before the end of october.

 

Good. But before we break open the champagne, let's remember that we are still a long way below the 1979-2000 average:

http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20080924_Figure2.png

And as noted elsewhere, the 1979-2000 average is likely to be below the historic levels.

Surely you welcome the 1.2 million km extra ice compared with last year though? It's hardly likely to have gone back up to the climatic average is it?

Why not welcome every bit of good news even if it's only small? Why not?

 

Michael, the first word of my post was "Good" - which translates as.... good..... which means I do welcome it.

What I don't accept is some of the comments above that somehow suggest that there isn't a problem any longer with the extent of sea ice. Of course an increase is good news.  It would be even better news if we got the graph consistently back above the 1979-2000 average, which might mean something more significant.

Every journey starts with the first step not a jump straight to the finish line. Whether we're on that journey or not only time will tell I suppose.

TomC:

Michael:

Gandalf The White:

jtwigge:

 Extent is now higher than at the same time in 2005.

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

There is now a chance that it will be higher than the equivalent time of year for the past six years (see link) before the end of october.

 

Good. But before we break open the champagne, let's remember that we are still a long way below the 1979-2000 average:

http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20080924_Figure2.png

And as noted elsewhere, the 1979-2000 average is likely to be below the historic levels.

Surely you welcome the 1.2 million km extra ice compared with last year though? It's hardly likely to have gone back up to the climatic average is it?

Why not welcome every bit of good news even if it's only small? Why not?

Every silver lining has a black cloud.

A recognition of the silver lining is a start

Gandalf The White:

likely

AIMSIR:

Gandalf The White:

likely

likely

Quite possibly, or not probably, but either way, as likely as it is unlikely...

like.

Patrick :

AIMSIR:

Gandalf The White:

likely

likely

Quite possibly, or not probably, but either way, as likely as it is unlikely...

like.

  And how is the Guinness tonight?

Seriously, given that there has been warming during that period it is likely that the average before 1980 was higher than the 1979-2000 average. That doesn't seem too contentious, does it?

Gandalf The White:

Patrick :

AIMSIR:

Gandalf The White:

likely

likely

Quite possibly, or not probably, but either way, as likely as it is unlikely...

like.

 

  And how is the Guinness tonight?

No idea Gandalf, as I am stictly top shelf.

Gandalf The White:

jtwigge:

 Extent is now higher than at the same time in 2005.

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

There is now a chance that it will be higher than the equivalent time of year for the past six years (see link) before the end of october.

 

Good. But before we break open the champagne, let's remember that we are still a long way below the 1979-2000 average:

http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20080924_Figure2.png

And as noted elsewhere, the 1979-2000 average is likely to be below the historic levels.

 Yes, still a long way to go to average.  But, quite a bit less than that chart shows - its about 20 days out of date during which time extent has surged and made up around 700,000 on the average - if my eyes are working right.  Or to put it another way, statistically speaking:  It's gone from being at about 60% of normal to about 80% of normal in just three weeks.  I can see the headlines:

     Arctic ice deficit slashed by half in just three weeks !

And on a very slightly different  subject i found the following image while trying to see if there was a newer version of your link.

http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20080924_Figure3.jpg

This has me really puzzled.  How does 1 year ice stay as one year ice the following year?  Or 6 year ice turn into 5 year ice?  What is this really showing, ice thickness or something?

http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20080924_Figure3.jpg

Basically Jon the ice moves around. The main way for old ice to disappear is not for it to melt in situ but to be advected by wind and ocean currents out of the gap between Greenland and Iceland, where it becomes fragmented and eventually melts away in the north Atlantic. So on those charts there's really no way of knowing how the ice has moved over the last year unless you see a video of it There was one posted some way back in this thread that showed the last decade or so, and it really did look like old ice was being vacuumed out down the east coast of Greenland.

That said, it does look as if 2nd year ice (purple in 2007) moved towards Greenland and it's now 3rd year ice (green). Also, if you mentally 'tag' the small areas of 1st year ice that survived in 2007, they are now 2008's 2nd year ice. They've moved quite a lot. Hopefully that gives you an idea of what's going on.

Snock:

The main way for old ice to disappear is not for it to melt in situ but to be advected by wind and ocean currents out of the gap between Greenland and Iceland, where it becomes fragmented and eventually melts away in the north Atlantic.

Thanks Four, that's exactly what I was looking for. 

I had this site book-marked but hadn't looked at it for a while. The charts and the ability to change dates and years are very useful for seeing the change in ice extent.  Certainly the 2007 picture looks extraordinary but it shows that 2008 is still below the norm for this time of the season.

http://www.abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk/north.htm

Gandalf The White:

I had this site book-marked but hadn't looked at it for a while. The charts and the ability to change dates and years are very useful for seeing the change in ice extent.  Certainly the 2007 picture looks extraordinary but it shows that 2008 is still below the norm for this time of the season.

http://www.abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk/north.htm

A great link that.

It also shows the speed of the refreeze over the last week - let's hope that continues for the next few months!

Gandalf The White:

I had this site book-marked but hadn't looked at it for a while. The charts and the ability to change dates and years are very useful for seeing the change in ice extent.  Certainly the 2007 picture looks extraordinary but it shows that 2008 is still below the norm for this time of the season.

http://www.abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk/north.htm

Thats a great chart, thanks.

The snow cover seems very slow to build up this year, does anyone know why or is it normal. I have gone back to 1979 and does seem very low.

 Still the refreeze accelerates...

 The latest value : 6,695,000 km² (October 12, 2008)  

Funny that, given the area is heading into winter