Of course I can "work it out" as you say.  However, I think this is supposed to be the ARCTIC ICE thread and talking about snow cover over parts of the northern hemisphere is somewhat irrelevant.  You are supporting Stephen who is suggesting that a cold spell of weather is somehow relevant to the state of the Arctic sea ice?   The latter has been in decline for years and yet somehow it's all suddenly OK because of some cold weather in parts of the northern hemisphere?

Let's just stay focussed on the facts shall we, rather than one of Stephen's elaborate hoaxes stories.... The fact is that the Arctic ice is virtually at a record date low, despite all of the hype about cooling.

Feel free to discuss the albedo issues in an appropriate thread but its just a distraction here.

When do you expect the ice to show signs of recovery?  Robertski was making a big deal of the recovery earlier in the season but it seems to have got rather quiet recently...

 

---

Yes, it is the Arctic ice thread. But this thread is being used by some as a proxy for AGW, whilst it is but part of the system. It can't be treated in isolation when it is being used as such. Others are saying the ice is recovering, implying that everything is relatively normal. Whatever, - the cold spell in parts of the NH could well be relevant. Haven't some scientists said recently that reduced Arctic ice cover could lead to more snow cover and cold weather in the NH temperate regions? But this idea is not new - it's been around for donkey's years.

Stephens position on this has not suddenly changed. The way I have seen his position for some time, is that he thinks that when warm winds flood into the Arctic region more heat is lost there, to the global system, than if the Arctic stayed cold. This makes sense, despite the sea smoke red herring (Sea smoke was thought to be one of the factors which maintained the ice through summer) Additional to this, is, that if the Arctic is relatively warm the adjacent lands become relatively cold. And more heat is lost there because of increased albedo. What we see is an Earth system thermostat in operation - one of many checks and balances.

If the jet remains south in the N. Atlantic region for several years, snow cover to the NH will remain high and, yes, the Arctic ice will recover. That's the way I see it anyway.

---

A fair summary polarwind.

I see melting of the Arctic ice during a global warm spell as being quite rapid because warm water with a very high energy content flows into the Arctic Circle.

Then during a global cooling spell the sea ice will recover over time but meanwhile inflows of warm air whilst not containing such a high energy content as warm water will slow the ice recovery whilst outgoing cold air exports cold to the mid latitudes.

The system just doesn't turn on a sixpence. All changes take variable lengths of time to work through the system.

It is only 10 years since the jets started responding to the falling solar output. There was lots of energy in the system from two 30 year periods of strong solar induced warming during the 20th century and only 30 years of mild cooling when the oceans were negative and the sun paused for a bit during cycle 20.

The cooling process is only now beginning after a period of plateau yet already we see regional effects in the mid latitudes.

The development of dominant La Nina is the next step and after a few ENSO cycles we will really see the downturn unless the sun suddenly fires up again AND the jets move poleward.

The AGW crowd made a judgement in a rush and now they expect it to be discredited (or not) in a rush. Entirely deluded.

Well the thread seems to have been invaded by AGW sceptics, but we will let that pass. 

Reality is still reality, spin is still spin and dubious unproven theories remain dubious unproven theories.

 

We have hit a new date low - yesterday's provisional value shows a fall of 20k sq km on Tuesday's value and there would have to be an unprecedented upward revision for this not to be the lowest December 8th value.

Latest: 10,684,063 sq km.   Previous low was 10.8m - normal for today is around 12.6m

 

If this suggested change of pattern is real and sustained I wonder how long before that translates into some sort of recovery in the Arctic?  Would someone like to stick their neck out and give a year when we will have restored the ice to pre-2000 levels?

I would be very happy to see a solid rebound, the restoration of multi-year ice and the return of very limited transport of ice out of the Arctic basin. 

 

---

Sadly it'd take as long as it took to destroy the old Arctic to re-build it afresh (and the old one took and ice age to build some aspects like the shelfs on Ellesmere Island/halocline layer etc.

As I (and the Arctic report card) see it recovery is unlikely. No matter what the ice extent it will still melt come spring (as we saw last spring) as any 'extra' extent is made outside the basin and soon ablates once spring arrives (as we saw last spring midst some quarters looking forward to the 'albedo' impact N.H. temps...LOL)

Cryosat2 is now commissioned and in the hands of the agencies running its programme so I'm sure we'll have the all important ice thickness data soon enough and it will be with this data that we'll see 'how the Arctic is doing'. If we find similar to the 02/08' study (basin wide 3m or less) then the 'new Arctic' is here to stay (esp. after a cold summer beyond 80N ....as we were constantly told about) and the 'old Arctic just a thing of history.

I believe we'll find the 'new Arctic' doing quite splendidly with thinner ice plumped up by snow cover across most of the basin. I'm looking forward to the data around N.Greenland/Canadian Archipelago as this is where the old Paleocrystic used to grow and build into huge ice structures.

EDIT: NSIDC Nov report;

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

---

Quick Update, SSTs have fallen to 2c to 3c in Skagerrack, just across North sea from Britain

http://www.smhi.se/oceanografi/istjanst/produkter/arkiv/sstchart/sstchart_20101209.pdf 

---

[quote=Surrey John;95217]Quick Update, SSTs have fallen to 2c to 3c in Skagerrack, just across North sea from Britain

http://www.smhi.se/oceanografi/istjanst/produkter/arkiv/sstchart/sstchart_20101209.pdf[/quote]

that'll calm down the convective snow come the next northerly blast!!

---

Hi same time last Year 2009, any difference Lol naa just 5ºC in the W side of N Sea what1

2009/12
http://www.smhi.se/oceanografi/istjanst/produkter/arkiv/sstchart/sstchart_20091210.pdf

This year 2010
http://www.smhi.se/oceanografi/istjanst/produkter/arkiv/sstchart/sstchart_20101209.pdf

Actual global
http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2010/anomnight.12.9.2010.gif

P.S. _ I' tghink is more importante the snowcover then the Ice in helping the loss of energy... but who i'm for...

---

May be the more experience the L.a.'s gain (in laying in salt etc.) the less disruptive such events will prove? If our 'model' threads are chattering for weeks before a cold plunge event then why should they not?

Thing's are different this past 3 years?

 

---

Amazing, just look at latest chart, Ice in Denmark in mid-December

http://www.smhi.se/oceanografi/istjanst/produkter/arkiv/sstcolor/sstcolor_20101215.pdf 

---

Yes the weather sure has been cold these last 4 weeks John!

Climate still seems to be warming though?

---

Has been below freezing here for 4 weeks now. The lakes near my apartment are frozen more solid now, that at any stage during last winter and that was considered a hard winter.

---

Not at the moment - the stonking La Nina has seen to that!

---

Behind the 'cuddly polar bears in danger' story an interesting comment on Arctic tipping points:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11986236

---

"There are a number of other thermodynamic factors, such as the rapid freeze that results when you go from open water to cold conditions which reappear in the Fall," he says."


The meaning of that is not too clear but I think it means that when the air above the open water cools down in the autumn the amount of energy lost to the air from that warmer unprotected water is so large that it wipes out any previous summertime gain from extra sunlight on the water.

Just as I've been saying in fact.

However I'd go further. If there is open water for longer the energy lost is likely to be far more than any extra energy injected from more summertime insolation.

In fact the Arctic ice reduction is most likely caused by inflowing warm water from more southerly regions after an El Nino or a run of El Ninos such as we saw during the late 20th century. Thus reduced ice cover just accelerates that former El Nino warmth faster to the air and then to space as a wholly negative cooling response.

Not too clear, as you say, but something like you what you describe happens IMO.

The way I see it atm, is that in winter, in addition to what you describe happening early in the season and with persistent synoptics demonstrated by a southerly jet stream, the increased loopiness of the jet pushes warm air over the Arctic ocean where that heat is lost very quickly to the system by radiative cooling. I've watched the process happen by just observing the air temperatures in such areas over a couple of days.

At the south end of the loopiness, the cold cut off pools of arctic air warm up, but in winter, do so more slowly than the rate of cooling down of the warm air incursions into the Arcic basin.

The overall trend would be for temperatures to drop, if the the north and south incursions of the jet balance each other as TomC indicated.

 

---

You have a different definition of climate to me!

Hmmmm? Posting losses at this time of year? Seems our Northerly has also washed ice out of barents (via Fram?).

Plenty of ice on the east coast of Greenland right now and lots of 'melt' visible at its southern most tip.....

---

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent_L.png

Where are the guys preaching 'recovery' now? Where is the 'imminent cooldown'?

---

Wait till the end of winter and we'll see if the trend of the moment persists.

I understand there is a lot of ice in Europe atm - doesn't that count?

---

It is relevant in a sense, but it is not arctic sea ice. The synoptic pattern which has persisted for about a month now would be expected to cause arctic sea ice to be below normal and mid-latitude snow cover to be high.

Indeed it would. It's almost impossible to consider one parameter of the weather system, without taking into account another.

---

There were some pretty strong Northerly winds last week which would presumably have flushed some old ice through the Fram Strait. In fact the pattern was ideal for 'flushing' with Westerlies along the North coast of Greenland and Northerlies along the East coast. Whether that accounts for the recent short term decline I've no idea.

---

Probably and I think that is what Grey Wolf has been saying?

What this also does is lower the temperatures of the seas where the ice goes and adds to general cooling and affects synoptics. This happened in 1972?. I was on holiday in S Wales and for a fortnight in June, the temperature never exceeded 13C. The amount of ice in the western N. Atlantic was very high with shipping exercising great care.

---

At this time of year the range of Arctic ice quantities is pretty narrow.

Strange how a tiddly bit of ice is somehow supposed to be more significant than tens of thousands of square miles of anomalously cold continental northern hemisphere.