Thursday, October 22, 2020

2020 Could Be the Worst Year for Arctic Ice Ever (and Joe Biden Won't Ban Fracking)

>

The Laptev Sea, part of the Arctic Ocean

by Thomas Neuburger

        "Joe Biden will not ban fracking."
        —Kamala Harris, October 7, 2020

This is your friendly, periodic reminder that while Joe Biden dithers about fracking and support for fossil fuel, the planet is changing rapidly as we speak.

How rapidly? The planet is changing so fast that Biden may still be alive when the error of his ways becomes obvious to us all.

2020 Is Looking Like the Worst Year for Arctic Sea Ice Ever

Above is a map of the Laptev Sea, a part of the Arctic Ocean. The Laptev Sea is suffering the same fate as the rest of the Arctic — it's losing its ice at an alarming rate. As you can see from the graph below, 2020 is shaping up to be an unprecedented year — even surpassing in icelessness the previous worst year, 2018, marked in yellow. (Chart courtesy of climatologist Zach Labe.)

The same things is happening in the Siberian Sea (again the previous worst year, 2012, is marked in yellow):


 

This is, of course, a natural result of record high air temperatures over the Arctic:

 

 

Not only is the extent of sea ice rapidly diminishing; the volume of ice — which takes into account its thickness — is also shrinking to a shadow of its former self:


 

Climate Deniers Push Biden to Stay With Fracking for "Strong Environmental" Reasons

While this is going on, Team Biden is being lobbied (or quietly encouraging others to lobby them) to stay the course on fracking because fracking "could actually help the climate." You read that right. As a recent Politico piece argues, "abruptly ending fracking today would make [the] decarbonization process harder, not easier."

The Politico piece is propaganda (of course) written by two men associated with the Breakthrough Institute, an energy company-friendly think tank founded by known climate denier — and Republican-invited witness at the most recent House science hearing — Michael Shellenberger.

A sample from Shellenberger's House testimony: "If the Greenland ice sheet were to completely disintegrate, sea levels would rise by seven meters, but over a 1,000-year period. And for that to happen, temperatures would have to rise far more than anyone imagines." 

No, Mr. Shellenberger; if the Greenland ice sheet were to completely disintegrate — and it's disappearing 600% faster than models have predicted — global sea level would rise by seven meters within a few years or less, not ten centuries. If you fill a bathtub, it doesn't take a week for new water to reach the back. Water doesn't get stuck like that — it flows.

The end of winter Arctic ice is coming. Ten bad years could do it. Joe Biden may even live to see that day, especially if he helps cause it.

 

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, December 23, 2016

North Pole 50 Degrees Warmer Than Normal in December

>

Temperatures over the Arctic ocean are as much as 50 degrees F (30 Celsius) above normal. It's above freezing in places that are normally 20 below zero in degrees F. Arctic sea ice collapse on the Atlantic side has allowed warm storms to penetrate the central Arctic. This extreme heat is destabilizing the northern hemisphere's atmospheric circulation all the way up to the top of the stratosphere. (Full-size image here.)

by Gaius Publius

No, this is not a Season of Merry and Bright post, despite the phrase "North Pole" in the headline. It's a climate post, to keep you up on the news.

Nick Visser writing at the Huffington Post:
North Pole Forecast To Be 50 Degrees Warmer Than Normal This Week

For the second year in a row, the Arctic is way hotter than it's supposed to be.

Temperatures in the Arctic are predicted to soar nearly 50 degrees above normal on Thursday [December 22] in a pre-Christmas heat wave that will bring the frozen tundra scarily close to the melting point.

It’s the second year in a row the North Pole ― now in perpetual darkness after saying goodbye to the sun in late October ― has seen abnormally high temperatures around the Christmas holiday. It’s also the second time this year. In November, temperatures in the region skyrocketed 36 degrees above normal.

The weather forecast adds to a string of climate change-related indicators setting off serious warning bells in 2016. Polar sea ice is at record lows, and during last month’s heat wave, the region lost 19,000 square miles of it in just five days. The National Snow and Ice Data Center called the melt an “almost unprecedented occurrence.”
And it's not just the North Pole: "The World Meteorological Organization has said it expects 2016 likely will surpass last year as the hottest year in recorded history."

Changes in the Jet Stream

If you're thinking, "Well, we don't live in the Arctic, so it doesn't affect us ... yet," you'd be wrong. All of these changes to atmospheric temperature in the Arctic are affecting global air circulation, including the jet stream.

From a highly technical post at Daily Kos by "FishOutOfWater," a geochemist by profession (emphasis mine):
The lack of sea ice has dramatically affected the northern hemisphere’s atmospheric circulation for months. The heat this fall has formed a warm dome over the Arctic ocean and provided moisture for deep, early Siberian snow. A record deep Siberian snow pack for October pushed south of normal developing a deep pool of cold air over central Siberia.

The much larger than normal temperature contrasts (gradients) across Central Eurasia have intensified the polar jet stream across Asia and the north Pacific Ocean. This is a predicted consequence of intense early snowfall in Siberia associated with warm water entering the Arctic seas. This fall has had all time record minimum sea ice extent in the seas north of Eurasia and this unprecedented weather pattern is the atmospheric response to these warm waters so deep into the Arctic.

Intense atmospheric waves, associated with intense storms have whipped across both the Pacific and Atlantic. When intense storms approached the Arctic from both the Pacific and Atlantic in late October the stratospheric polar vortex was pinched from both sides, a 2 wave pattern, and split in two.

This stratospheric polar vortex split is unprecedented for so early in the Arctic winter season as far as I know. The stratospheric polar vortex is now unstable and may undergo a major midwinter warming in the next ten days [posted in mid-November]. It may be the earliest major midwinter warming ever seen.
More about the "polar vortex" and the jet stream:
When the vortex of the arctic is strong it is well defined, there is a single vortex and the arctic air is well contained; when weaker, which it generally is, it will break into two or more vortices; when very weak, the flow of arctic air becomes more disorganized and masses of cold arctic air can push equatorward, bringing with it a rapid and sharp temperature drop....

When the polar vortex is weak, high pressure zones of the mid latitudes may push poleward, moving the polar vortex, jet stream, and polar front equatorward. The jet stream is seen to "buckle" and deviate south. This rapidly brings cold dry air into contact with the warm, moist air of the mid latitudes, resulting in a rapid and dramatic change of weather known as a "cold snap".[3]
This is what happens when the jet stream is destabilized and wanders ("meanders") due to a weak Arctic polar vortex.

Meanders of the northern hemisphere's jet stream developing (a, b) and finally detaching a "drop" of cold air (c); orange: warmer masses of air; pink: jet stream (click to enlarge; source)

It's beyond doubt that changes in the jet stream are changing our weather. And a "meandering jet stream" is more and more in our future, perhaps a permanent addition. Welcome to the anteroom of the Palace of Climate Chaos.

Is it an emergency yet? (Click the link for something you can do about it.)

GP
 

Labels: , , ,

Friday, September 16, 2016

Gallego & Lieu to Obama: Do the Right Thing. Ban All Arctic Drilling Before You Leave Office

>

Change in Arctic sea ice from 1990 to 2015. You can see that almost all of the older ice, ice that persists across multiple years, is gone. At some point in the next few years, perhaps next year if we get an especially warm one, the Arctic will be ice-free in the summer (source; click to enlarge).

by Gaius Publius

"The question now is whether we will have the courage to act [to preserve our climate] before it’s too late."
–Barack Obama, 2013

You may remember the 2015 drama around the Obama administration's approval of drilling in the (rapidly melting) Arctic Ocean. The timeline is this, in headlines:
  • "Obama Administration Approves Shell's Drilling Plan For The Arctic" (Huffington Post, May 11, 2015)
  • "Shell says it will end Alaska offshore Arctic drilling" (USA Today, September 28, 2015)
  • "Obama administration strengthens Arctic drilling restrictions" (LA Times, July 12 2016)
While this looks good, especially for the administration, the subject is not closed. According to a recent op-ed written by Reps. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) and published in The Hill:
new Arctic lease sales are contemplated in the Interior Department’s draft offshore drilling plan for the years 2017–2022, and the oil industry is pushing hard to retain those leases when the plan is finalized later this year.
The "ask" from Reps. Lieu and Gallego is simple (my emphasis):
Removing Arctic leases from the five-year plan would take away the near-term threat, but it would not preclude a future administration from moving forward with drilling in the region. The president can align our government’s policy with the latest climate research by using his authority to permanently withdraw the Arctic Ocean from oil and gas development, sending a powerful market signal that the era of ever-expanding fossil fuel production into frontier areas like the Arctic is over.
In other words, don't just rewrite the five-year plan — permanently ban fossil fuel extraction in the all parts of the Arctic that the U.S. controls.

It's a simple request, and one that would not only make Obama appear to be on the side of climate solutions, but actually be on that side as well. (I've written about Obama's climate dilemma here: "Climate Change and Barack Obama's Legacy." This is another instance of that tension, but it's also an opportunity for the president to prove the cynics wrong.)

Shorter Gallego and Lieu: Do the right thing. Ban Arctic drilling.

This is one to watch. If Obama doesn't ban all Arctic oil extraction, the door will be open for the next president to grant more leases. Remember the timeline above: Obama granted the leases originally, but Shell found the project economically unfeasible, especially given the low selling price of oil, and abandoned it. Only afterward, by almost a year, did the administration issue new safety rules. The subject is not closed until President Obama permanently closes it.

The main part of Gallego and Lieu's argument is below. They make an excellent case. Note their appeal to his "legacy" (my emphasis):
In the Arctic, Obama faces a pivotal climate decision before he leaves office. The temperature in the region is warming at about twice the rate of the rest of the globe, and the resultant loss of sea ice has spurred oil companies in recent years to seek to drill in America’s portion of the Arctic Ocean. Although Shell and other companies have halted their efforts over the past year, new Arctic lease sales are contemplated in the Interior Department’s draft offshore drilling plan for the years 2017–2022, and the oil industry is pushing hard to retain those leases when the plan is finalized later this year.

While there are many reasons to oppose Arctic drilling, from preserving the pristine environment to the alarming lack of infrastructure needed to contain or clean up a spill, a key one is that Arctic drilling represents a long-term investment in more fossil fuels, a path that cannot be reconciled with successfully addressing climate change.

Because the Arctic Ocean is such a remote and unforgiving place, oil produced there won’t reach consumers for two or three decades due to the long lead times required to make the necessary infrastructure investments. That’s well past the point when the world needs to have transitioned toward cleaner fuels to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. In addition, new research published in the leading journal Nature specifically calls out Arctic drilling as incompatible with the Paris Agreement’s goal of keeping average global temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. It’s one reason why the Democratic Party platform and Hillary Clinton both oppose Arctic drilling.

Obama has already taken significant steps to combat climate change, and he has a unique opportunity to cement his legacy in the coming months. Removing Arctic leases from the five-year plan would take away the near-term threat, but it would not preclude a future administration from moving forward with drilling in the region. The president can align our government’s policy with the latest climate research by using his authority to permanently withdraw the Arctic Ocean from oil and gas development, sending a powerful market signal that the era of ever-expanding fossil fuel production into frontier areas like the Arctic is over.

As we saw in Paris, when the United States leads, other nations join us in elevating their climate ambitions. That’s why we hope for the sake of our national security that President Obama will seize the opportunity to continue his climate leadership and permanently ban drilling in America’s Arctic Ocean. We have an urgent responsibility to take the necessary steps today that will allow future generations to avoid climate chaos and the security threats it poses.
The fact that oil drilled in the Arctic won't reach the market for "decades" is itself a compelling reason. If we're still burning oil and gas two or three decades from now, it really is over, and I think Obama understands that, at least intellectually. What I don't think he gets is that he's going to be held responsible if, with his great power and responsibility, he fails to act.

Will Obama have the "courage" (his own word) to act on that understanding? Stay tuned.

GP
 

Labels: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, April 05, 2016

Will the Climate Come Apart Too Fast for the Current Generation's Comfort?

>

Monthly mean global surface temperature since 1996 (source; my annotation; click to enlarge)

by Gaius Publius

I know most of us in the current generation of Americans expect the climate to deteriorate, from a livability standpoint, at some reasonably slow rate over the next century or more. In other words, most people in the U.S. now feel some urgency about climate change (that ship, at least, has left dock), but not so much urgency that they're willing to mobilize the country's resources against it.

Which exposes, I think, an argument that comes from a position of privilege, perhaps the ultimate privilege — the privilege of age. The privilege, in other words, of expecting to die before it's really "my" problem after all. Which allows us, at least in the United States, the option of comfortably keeping our oil- and gas-fired iPhone and happy-motoring lifestyles while pretending there's still time to fix things.

Stop global warming at 2°C above pre-industrial? No problem. That won't happen until the 2030s at the earliest. Stop at 1½°C, as the Paris Climate Conference "wants" to do? No problem. We're not there yet.

What we're really pretending, of course, is that we're not cannibalizing the lives of our grandchildren in order not to be put out too much. But what if we really are cannibalizing our own lives as well? What if the tidal wave will hit before we can leave the beach? Oops.

February 2016 Was the Warmest Month in Recorded History

Scientists are noticing that we're piling record-setting month on top of record-setting month, record year on top of record year, in an explosion of warming that seems to be accelerating.

The Guardian (my emphasis throughout):
February was the warmest month in recorded history, climate experts say

From Alaska to Australia, an unprecedented heating of planet Earth is underway with rising temperatures across huge swathes of land mass and oceans

Our planet went through a dramatic change last month. Climate experts revealed that February was the warmest month in recorded history, surpassing the previous global monthly record – set in December. An unprecedented heating of our world is now under way.

With the current El Niño weather event only now beginning to tail off, meteorologists believe that this year is destined to be the hottest on record, warmer even than 2015.

Nor is this jump in global temperature a freak triggered by an unusually severe El Niño, say researchers. “It is the opposite,” said Professor David Vaughan of the British Antarctic Survey. “This is a catch-up of a recent hiatus that has occurred in rising global temperatures. We are returning to normality: rising temperatures. This is an absolute warning of the dangers that lie ahead.”

Those dangers are now being dramatically demonstrated around the globe: drought in the Marshall Islands in the Pacific, which has forced the government there to issue a state of emergency warning; France observed its warmest winter since records began; while the sea ice that has formed in the Arctic this winter is about a million square kilometres less than its average for this time of year. ...
Which leads to this comment about the Paris "aspirational" target of keeping global warming below 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. We've passed that target, at least for now:
Last month’s jump in global temperatures represents an increase of 1.35C above the average temperature level for the period 1951-80 and 1.63C above pre-industrial levels, taking global temperature for the month above the 1.5C rise that last year’s Paris climate was supposed to prevent.
Temperatures may drop back, though it looks like they won't this year. Look at that graph at the top again (h/t Michael Tobis for bringing it to our attention). The arrow before "you are here" was January. The one before that was December. They are all high.

Are things starting to accelerate out of control? Can we afford to act as if they were not?

A Tipping Point for Sea Level Rise?

When seas permanently rise, it's not enough to remain on shore but higher, on a cliff looking down, for example. A higher sea erodes the cliff you're standing on, and if you've built your house near the edge, that edge will start to move back. If seas rise, steadily and quickly, for a century or more, where do you rebuild the city or town you're going to have to move? And if you don't plan to move the city, what happens, at some point to real estate prices?

It's not just that the seas are going to rise by some date. It's that before they do, property values will price in the future collapsed value of that city as well as its present uncollapsed value. Once that process starts, pricing in the future collapse in value, it rarely stops, and as you have probably observed, market collapses can happen very quickly. Again, collapsing property values could be a big potential problem for the current generation of Americans.

The Greenland glacier, for example, holds more than 20 feet of sea level frozen in its ice. The Guardian, but a different article:
Greenland's ice melt accelerating as surface darkens, raising sea levels

Winnowing away of the ice, exacerbated by soot blown on to the ice from wildfires, means Greenland’s ice sheet is stuck in a ‘feedback loop’

Greenland’s vast ice sheet is in the grip of a dramatic “feedback loop” where the surface has been getting darker and less reflective of the sun, helping accelerate the melting of ice and fuelling sea level rises, new research has found.

The snowy surface of Greenland started becoming significantly less reflective of solar radiation from around 1996, the analysis found, with the ice absorbing 2% more solar energy per decade from this point. At the same time, summer near-surface temperatures in Greenland have increased at a rate of around 0.74C per decade, causing the ice to melt.

This winnowing away of the ice, exacerbated by soot blown on to the ice from wildfires, means that Greenland’s ice is stuck in what is known as a “feedback loop” that will make it ever more vulnerable to warming global temperatures. The study predicts that the ice surface reflectivity, or albedo, will drop by 10% or more by the end of the century, which will trigger further melting.

“It’s melting cannibalism, basically – it’s melting that’s feeding itself,” said lead author Marco Tedesco, of Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. “Rising temperatures are promoting more melting, and that melting is reducing albedo, which in turn is increasing melting.
Again, the rates are all accelerating. At some point, people alive today will have to worry ... for themselves.

The Arctic Is Rapidly Changing...

About the Arctic generally, here's the excellent Chris Mooney on the large and rapid changes happening there:
Scientists are floored by what’s happening in the Arctic right now

New data from NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration suggest that January of 2016 was, for the globe, a truly extraordinary month. Coming off the hottest year ever recorded (2015), January saw the greatest departure from average of any month on record, according to data provided by NASA.

But as you can see in the NASA figure above, the record breaking heat wasn’t uniformly distributed — it was particularly pronounced at the top of the world, showing temperature anomalies above 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than the 1951 to 1980 average in this region. ...

This unusual Arctic heat has been accompanied by a new record low level for Arctic sea ice extent during the normally ice-packed month of January, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center — over 400,000 square miles below average for the month. And of course, that is closely tied to warm Arctic air temperatures.

“We’ve looked at the average January temperatures, and we look at what we call the 925 millibar level, about 3,000 feet up in the atmosphere,” says Mark Serreze, the center’s director. “And it was, I would say, absurdly warm across the entire Arctic Ocean.” The center reports temperature anomalies at this altitude of “more than 6 degrees Celsius (13 degrees Fahrenheit) above average” for the month.

The low sea ice situation has now continued into February. Current ice extent is well below levels at the same point in 2012, which went on to set the current record for the lowest sea ice minimum extent[.]

“We’re way down, we’re at a record low for this time of year right now,” says Serreze. When it comes to the rest of 2016 and the coming summer and fall season when ice melts across the Arctic and reaches its lowest extent, he says, “we are starting out in a deep hole.”
The Arctic is heating a lot faster relative to the rest of the globe because the northern hemisphere is where most of the industrialization — the burning of fossil fuels — is occurring. The Arctic, including Greenland and its glaciers, is changing rapidly, and it won't be changing back for a long long time.

What You Can Do

I have two suggestions, and only two. One, it's absolutely essential that people know that there's a solution, and that's to engage on a WWII-style emergency mobilization. We have the resources, and we have the need. We just need the will, and you can help with that. Click here for more information, and here to sign the pledge. Then tell your friends, all of them.

Two, elect Bernie Sanders. I can't be more clear. We need someone in the White House who will move with all speed, not all "campaign finance supporter-approved" speed. That's Bernie Sanders, and only he.

Blue America has endorsed Bernie Sanders for president.
Seems so to me. And thanks!

GP
  

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, February 26, 2016

Have We Crossed a Tipping Point This Year in the Arctic?

>

Dr. Michael Mann giving us the latest news about Arctic sea ice (source)

by Gaius Publius

We've covered what's happening in the Arctic before in these pages. For example:
Now comes climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann to tell us it's much worse, and the changes are coming much faster, than we thought even last year. As Hartmann says in his introduction, temperatures in the Arctic in January were 4°C (more than 7°F) higher than average. It's all in Dr. Mann's interview with Thom Hartmann (above).

A few excerpts:

(1:52) "Even I find myself surprised sometimes at the rate at which some of these changes are taking place — taking place faster than we expected, faster than our models predicted would be the case..."

(2:40) "[This year, winter Arctic sea ice] appears to have come to a peak about a month earlier and at a much lower level than we normally see at [winter] peak. And if it continues on this trajectory, we are afraid we will see levels of [sea ice] retreat this summer unlike anything we've seen before."

(4:10) "With all that warmth in the Arctic escaping into the atmosphere, it changes the pattern of the northern hemisphere jet stream ... [which gives us] some of the unusual weather we've seen in recent winters...."

(5:17) "This El Niño has been a very unusual El Niño, and all bets are off...." (I found this discussion fascinating. This is a most unusual El Niño, and global warming has almost completely removed the "heavy rainfall" effect that places like California were counting on to relieve their drought.)

(7:58) The tipping points discussion starts here. Have we passed a tipping point about ice in the Arctic? What other tipping points should we be concerned about?

Dr. Mann's answer begins, "Tipping points are like land mines. You don't know exactly where they lie, and you certainly don't want to step on one. What we're doing with climate change right now is we are risking stepping on more and more of these land mines."

Mann talks about the tipping point we have passed in the Western Antarctic Ice Sheet that commits us to 10-12 feet of sea level rise.

The good news — if we stop emissions, free ice in the Arctic is restorable, unlike ice in the Greenland or Antarctic ice sheets. (Of course, we do have to stop emissions to do that.)

(10:35) "The climate change deniers often like to complain about how much it will cost to reduce our carbon emissions ... and the sad fact is it's going to cost us a whole lot more simply not having acted on this problem soon enough. And we're already seeing the costs..."

To the final question, why doesn't this get covered more in the press, the answer was enlightening. In part, Mann said that is seems this is a slowly evolving problem.

Me: It's not slowly evolving. If you live another 10 years, you'll see the start of the panic.

By the way, the Arctic is heating because the northern hemisphere is where all the, well, hot air is. Take a look at this NASA animation and note which hemisphere has all the industrialization. You can almost watch it rise and then move north.


Time for a mobilization to actually address this? I think it's long past time.

GP
 

Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, October 08, 2015

Arctic Sea Ice Has Lost Two-Thirds of Its Volume Since 1979

>

Animated visualization of the startling decline of Arctic sea ice, showing the minimum volume reached every September since 1979, set on a map of New York with a 10km grid to give an idea of scale. As it plays, note the sudden drops in 1992, 1995, 2006 and 2012. Collapses aren't linear (source).

by Gaius Publius

I've written before about Arctic sea ice and how the area encompassed by ice at the end of summer is shrinking. For example, in this piece, which contained this age-of-ice graphic:

Graphic showing that Arctic ice is getting younger and younger. Today there is much less ice in the Arctic that's older than five years. Note also the difference in total extent (click to enlarge).

Now comes information on Arctic ice volume, with a nice animation (see top) illustrating it. Greg Laden has more at his climate science blog. Fascinating reading (italics mine):
Every year the sea ice that covers the northern part of the Earth expands and contracts though the winter and the summer. The minimum extent of the sea ice is usually reached some time in September, after which it starts to reform.

Human caused greenhouse gas pollution has increased the surface temperatures of the earth, as measured on the land at about heat height with thermometers, and on the sea at the surface, mainly with satellites. Warming of the surface has continued apace for several decades, though with some expected squiggling up and down in how fast that is happening.

Greenhouse gas, mainly CO2, causes warming because of its heat trapping properties, and this warming (and the CO2 itself) set in motion a number of feedback systems that either push against warming or increase warming. Most of these feedback systems, unfortunately, are what we call “positive” feedbacks, though they are not “positive” in a good way. They are effects that increase the amount of warming beyond what would happen from just the CO2. One of the biggest global effects is an increase in the amount of water vapor carried by the atmosphere. Since water vapor is also a greenhouse gas, more CO2 -> more greenhouse effect -> more water vapor -> more greenhouse effect.

One of the bad effects of greenhouse warming is the melting of more ice in the Arctic during the summer. On average, less and less ice is left by the end of the melt season in September. Again, this amount squiggles up and down a bit, but it is a persistent downward trend. Since ice reflects sunlight away from the earth, a decrease in ice cover in the Arctic means more warming. This has both regional effects (such as an increase in melting of land-based Greenland glaciers) and a global effect. The regional effect is very important, because this has resulted in a phenomenon known as Arctic Amplification. This refers to the fact that of all the different regions of the earth, the Arctic is warming more than most other regions. The large scale systems of air movement that make up much of our climate, and thus control much of our weather, are shaped and driven in large part by the redistribution of heat form tropical areas (where the sun has a stronger warming effect) outward towards the poles. This redistribution shapes trade wind patterns and determines the location and strength of the jet streams. The relatively warmer Arctic has changed the basic shape and pattern of these major climatic features in ways that have caused significant changes in weather. The drought in California is caused in part by the persistence of a large jet stream meander caused, almost certainly, by Arctic Amplification and other changes in heat distribution in the northern latitudes. Another change is the increase in large scale precipitation events. Here in the twin cities, for example, the frequency of 3″ plus rainstorm over the year has changed from about one every two years to one every year, on average. Rainfall events of between 1 and 2 inches, and between 2 and 3 inches, have also increased.

There are two major properties of Arctic ice that should be considered. One, just discussed, is extent. Extent matters because of its direct effect on albedo, the reflection of sunlight back into space. Less ice extent, caused by warming, means even more warming. The other property is ice volume. Ice volume builds up over time. Thick ice includes ice from previous years that didn’t melt. The system is complex and dynamic, but a healthy Arctic ice ecosystem has a good amount of thick high-volume ice that persists through the melt season and forms the anchor against which annually re-freezing surface ice forms. The less ice volume, the less stable the Arctic Sea ice is, and the more difficult it becomes to reform. Exactly how this effect works depends on exactly which part of the Arctic one is in.

Over the last several decades, the volume of Arctic Sea ice has reduced by something like 80%. This is not good.
There's more, including charts like the stunner below. I'd like to send you there to read the rest.


Arctic sea ice extent, month by month, for the ten most recent years. September is always the summer low. The dark black line shows the average for the years 1981–2010. The dashed line is 2012. When the September low reaches 1 million square kilometers (left scale), the Arctic is ice-free. (Click to enlarge.)

Notice in the text quoted above the relationship between feedbacks, that they piggyback on each other. For example, this one about water vapor: "Since water vapor is also a greenhouse gas, more CO2 -> more greenhouse effect -> more water vapor -> more greenhouse effect." Reduction in "whiteness" also increases the greenhouse effect.

It's Coming, and It Won't Be Linear

By "it," of course, I mean the chaos caused by climate change, both physical chaos and social chaos. The maker of the video at the top puts complete loss of Arctic summer ice in the next few years:
Based on the rate of change of volume over the last 30 years, I expect the first ice-free summer day in the Arctic Ocean (defined as having less than 1 million km² of sea ice) to happen between 2016 and 2022, and thereafter occur more regularly with the trend of ice-free duration extending into August and October.
Meaning, if you live through the next two elections, you'll see it. So will everyone else.

GP

Labels: , , ,