Arctic sea ice extent just dipped below January 2007 levels in the last few days, according to the daily time series from the National Snow and Ice Data Center(NSIDC):
The NSIDC notes that they are showing the data from 2007 on this figure since that year “went on to reach the lowest summer minimum in the satellite record” (see “Arctic Ice shrinks by an Alaska plus a Texas“).
The NSIDC also has an interesting 2008 Year-in-Review for cryosphere buffs. It explains why the ice stopped growing for a week in mid-December. It also has an interesting graphic comparing the Arctic sea ice extent in 2008 with 2007 :
The day by day meanderings of Arctic sea ice extent are not overly meaningful yet, but I think they are worth reporting because it bugs the deniers to see any evidence whatsoever that the world is not undergoing global cooling.
More seriously, we may well be on track to set a record this year, especially given that, according to NSIDC, 2008 was a year of “Likely Record-Low Volume.” We are literally on thin ice.
We are also figuratively on thin ice because what happens to the Arctic ice has serious implications for the whole planet. Thanks to polar amplification, the loss of the highly reflective ice accelerates the warming in the entire Arctic (via increased absorption of sunlight) and that in turn threatens the most potentially volatile carbon sink — the tundra (see “NOAA’s arctic report card shows stronger effects of warming in Greenland and permafrost” and “Tundra 4: Permafrost loss linked to Arctic sea ice loss“).
As always, I’m still trying to get more bets that the Arctic won’t be ice free by 2020 (see “Another big climate bet — Of Ice and Men“).
[Note: I have put a big graphic file on the front page, which I normally don't do. Let me know if that causes anyone problems loading this site. If it does, I won't do it again!]
Related Posts:
- NSIDC: Arctic melt passes the point of no return, “We hate to say we told you so, but we did”
- First commercial ship sails through Northwest Passage: “I didn’t see one cube of ice”
- Despite cooler weather, Arctic ice retreat just misses last year’s mark
- NYT editors confused about Arctic warming
- Arctic shrinks by an Alaska and 3 Arizonas in August
- What drove the dramatic retreat of arctic sea ice during summer 2007?
- Must See TV: Ice Ice Maybe (not)
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Language Intelligence: Lessons on persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga
Let me understand this, in the beginning centuries of global shipping, nations were obsessed with finding the Northwest Passage – the fabled open ocean route from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Numerous explorers froze and crunched in the ice then, in areas now an open Arctic ocean.
This should be the biggest story of our time – for shipping and exploration alone – much less climate change. Momentous.
We underestimate denialism.
I wouldn’t read too much into a few days of below-2007 levels. If it’s still below 2007 levels in the second week of February, THEN start worrying.
Richard: Murmansk and Churchill (MT – Canada) are already working on developing an “arctic bridge”. Give it a couple more years, and they won’t be able to run enough trains up there to haul the stuff back and forth on the Canadian end of the route. (At least, not without beefing up the infrastructure significantly.)
correction: Churchill is in Manitoba (MB), not Montana (MT). My bad.
Still above where it was in 2005 and 2006 though:
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png
I think the missing ice is down here! Brrrrr.
Off-topic, but most appropriate for ClimateProgress.
“Prescription for the Planet – Part III – Renewable atoms and plasma-charged waste”
http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/01/25/prescription-for-the-planet-part-iii-renewable-atoms-and-plasma-charged-waste/
Quite remarkable, including some of the comments.
@P. D. Dudda:
The Murmansk-Churchill link is an idea that has been kicking around for years, so I’d wait a while before starting to clink glasses. For a start, there is one single, solitary surface link leading to Churchill–a rail line that, for quite a bit of the way, is built on permafrost. We all know what’s starting to happen to permafrost as the climate warms: It thaws, buckles, heaves (and emits methane as the frozen vegetation slowly rots in the warmer temperatures). In fact, if you’ve ever ridden the train dubbed the Polar Bear Express, you’ll know it gives a whole new meaning to “rock ‘n roll.” It’s a long time and many dollars away from being a viable commercial link.
Big difference is a lot more new/young ice this year than 2007-8, which means that it can melt fast
3 degrees Celcius up 2100 makes 0,03 C per year.
The last decade in the Arctic shows that we are going much more faster, perhaps 0,1 C per year in this moment. And the pace is accelerating.
@Will Korluk: Yes, that’s part of what I meant about “beefing up infrastructure”. Sorry I wasn’t more explicit about that. There’s also not enough people *IN* Churchill (only 1,000 – give or take) to handle the kind of loads Murmansk would like to see. But the thawing of Arctic Ocean ice has them salivating at the possibilities…
Earlier post by Will K. makes excellent point about the “reverse of the coin”: as Arctic ice thins and recedes and opens Churchill/Hudson Bay to a longer shipping season, the warmer weather will also soften the tundra permafrost and throw the railroad tracks out of alignment. Perhaps all of the unemployed auto workers can get jobs as gandy dancers for OmniTrax, straightening the rails? The whole “Arctic Bridge” is a marketing concept pitched by a company-owned town (Churchill) and the Murmansk Shipping Company. Exporting wheat out of Churchill is the easy part: finding cargo for in-bound ships is the tricky part. Murmansk is not necessarily the best route in/out of Central Asia and the ‘Stans.
Wait… It’s all wrong. The NSIDC now admits the sensor on the satellite used to make those figures has been faulty for perhaps two months and finally broke. The sea ice extent is increasing as JAXA data shows. Even the NSIDC admits the sensor used by JAXA is much more accurate. The only reason they do not use it is because they want to compare data to past data which also was not as accurate as JAXA. There is no denying the growth of 2009 arctic sea ice. It’s time to start looking at the real pssiblity of global cooling. The Russians surely are.
This chart has evolved some. It did seem as if the 2009 sea ice extent wanted to flirt with the 2007 levels a few times. Now it seems to want to go flirt with the 1979-2000 average.
Hmm! “The day by day meanderings of Arctic sea ice extent are not overly meaningful yet, but I think they are worth reporting because it bugs the deniers to see any evidence whatsoever that the world is not undergoing global cooling”
The situation up in the Arctic seems to have changed somewhat since your comment in January 2008.
To ensure reporting balance would it not be appropriate to run a headline “Arctic sea ice extent approaching 1979 – 2000 average”
The NSIDC April report states
“Arctic sea ice extent declined quite slowly in April; as a result, total ice extent is now close to the mean extent for the reference period (1979 to 2000).”
“The decline rate for the month of April was the third slowest on record. The Arctic lost sea ice cover at a rate of 27,300 square kilometers per day (10,500 square miles), compared to an average of 41,600 square kilometers (16,000 square miles) per day for 1979 to 2000.”
Maybe should take that bet that the arctic won’t be ice free in 2020.