SALT LAKE CITY — Recent dramatic changes in the Arctic will have a significant effect on our weather in Utah. That’s the conclusion of a top scientist studying Arctic sea ice.
Arctic sea ice is disappearing in summer much faster than scientists expected. That’s not just evidence of climate change; the ice itself is changing the climate, and it may be affecting weather as far away as Utah.
Scientists predicted summer sea ice would shrink, but they underestimated the trend. Now in late summer, much of the Arctic Ocean is open water; summer ice covers about half what it did 30 years ago.
On a recent visit to Utah, Professor Hajo Eicken, one of the leading experts in the study of Arctic ice melt, explained some of the findings of his research.
Professor Hajo Eicken is one of the leading experts. On a speaking visit to Utah, he said recent losses are especially dramatic.
“We had a big drop in 2007, and since we’ve seen that decline continue,” Eicken said.
Less publicized is that it could affect us all. The disappearing ice itself is accelerating global warming.
“Ice and snow reflect up to 90 percent of the sunlight,” Eicken said. “The ocean without any ice absorbs about 90 percent of the sunlight.”
This guy is truly a leading, leading expert.
- Strike one : No one measuring ice extent or area shows a decline since 2007.
- Strike two : Summer ice (June, July) is 80-90% of what it was 30 years ago, not half.
- Strike three : Even at the minimum summer ice is two thirds of what it was 30 years ago, not half
- Strike four : 30 years ago ice was at its maximum for the century due to the ice age scare. Walt Meier at NSIDC has specifically warned not to use 1981 as typical.
- Strike five : During September when the minimum occurs, the Arctic receives almost no sunlight.
- Strike six : Utah has been receiving record snowfall in recent years, and winter temperatures have been plummeting
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/ut.html
real ice age
Not only the fact that it receives little sunlight in september, that sunlight is at a very low angle of incidence. And as anyone who has watched a sunset across water will know, water is very reflective at these low angles of incidence. So:
Strike seven: The arctic doesn not absorb 90% of sunlight at the low angles of incidence in the arctic.
Strike Six: His hair(brain?).
Oops! Seven. But who’s counting? Certainly not me.
Hajo Eicken, Ph.D. 1990, University of Bremen: Sea ice geophysics
The University of Bremen was behind that statement about the summer minimum extent being lower than 2007 that nobody else could find proof of. Considering his casual grasp of the facts that is no longer surprising.
Lets handle the balls and strikes using me as an Ump!
First pitch: [ Strike one : No one measuring ice extent or area shows a decline since 2007. ] This one’s on the extreme edge of the plate – still a strike, but barely, as by many measures (and during some months, even exceeding 2007), 2011 almost equalled the open water area of 2007.
Second pitch: [ Strike two : Summer ice (June, July) is 80-90% of what it was 30 years ago, not half. ] This one’s a ball, as the crucial measure is September ice (or lack of ice). June, July are transition months and vary based on prior year’s albedo of surrounding land mass. It is the September lows that set up “Lake (i.e. Ocean) effect” snows that change albedo towards reflectivity and subsequent cooling of the polar air mass.
Third pitch: [ Strike three : Even at the minimum summer ice is two thirds of what it was 30 years ago, not half ]. Right over the plate! However “open water” is more than double of the 30 year’s prior measure.
Fourth pitch: [ Strike four : 30 years ago ice was at its maximum for the century due to the ice age scare. Walt Meier at NSIDC has specifically warned not to use 1981 as typical. ] Not even near the plate. Ya gotta get cause and effect right here, and Ya blew it. The “ice age scare” never caused anything, except excessive use of newsprint by Time and Newsweek, and they were plagiarizing Ewing and Donn without giving them any credit either!
Fifth pitch: [ Strike five : During September when the minimum occurs, the Arctic receives almost no sunlight. ] Out of the strike zone!!! At best, during 2/3 of September, more sunlight than darkness falls on the Arctic, and the remaining 9 days sees the split about 50/50 as a result of atmospheric refraction. Oceanic absorption hangs (is this a pitch?) on the high side, as almost horizontal insolation still is seen (from under water) to enter the ocean about 45 degrees from the vertical.
Sixth pitch: [ Strike six : Utah has been receiving record snowfall in recent years, and winter temperatures have been plummeting ]. Right on the money and dead center over the plate! Yet a colder Utah (and the rest of the Northern hemisphere) are a consequence of the early albedo increase in the polar region, setting up less heat content retained in the polar high, and when fingers of that high sweep across Europe, Asia, and North America, moisture entering into it can fall as snow, changing albedo of more southern reaches. The rest is current climate history. Get some more insight at the colderside lectures
Enjoy the cold, and the climate ball game!
Tomwyse:
A suggestion: If you used your logic at a little league game the parents of both teams would lynch you due to your lack of knowledge of the game.
You are doing a great job of regurgitating the mantra of the Chicken Little Brigade however! No matter how wrong the claims are!
Tomwyse:
I must add that your contribution to the game resulted in errors being called against your team and drove them out of the league!
So if the Arctic goes ice free, we could have an Ice Age. Or on the other hand, we could have a ten degree temperature rise. So anything is possible. Come to think of it, anything is also possible if the Arctic isn’t ice free. So why should anyone give a rats behind one way or the other?
This umpire needs new glasses.
Yet a colder Utah (and the rest of the Northern hemisphere) are a consequence of the early albedo increase in the polar region
Funny how all the experts were forecasting less snow a few years ago then.
Ice and snow reflect up to 90 percent of the sunlight,” Eicken said. “The ocean without any ice absorbs about 90 percent of the sunlight.”
Of course the extra snow that falls in Utah won’t reflect sunlight.
Paul:
You are in the UK so can not comprehend how “Special” Utah is and how normal weather does not apply!
I thank you!
“Arctic sea ice is disappearing in summer much faster than scientists expected. That’s not just evidence of climate change; the ice itself is changing the climate,……”
Here’s the effects of all of that missing ice….. http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:2001.75/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2001.75/plot/gistemp/from:2001.75/trend/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2001.75/trend
“the ice itself is changing the climate” – How can disappeared ice change anything?
He’s fulla crap -
“Ice and snow reflect up to 90 percent of the sunlight,” Eicken said.
Sea ice albedo is 0.5 to 0.7. Snow on top of the ice may reflect up to 90% (depends on snow age), but not the ice itself. He said “Ice and Snow” – Strike seven
“The ocean without any ice absorbs about 90 percent of the sunlight.”
At high solar zenith angle certainly. Not in the Arctic. – Strike eight
I get “ad hominem” curve (& snow) balls tossed my way every day. Some even pretend to have substance! (Ice & Snow???).
Tommy
Take a look at this graph.
When it was warm in the last decade, was that because the Arctic was cold, even though it was not?
When it was cold in the 90′s, was that because it was warm in the Arctic, which it nearly was?
When it was cold in the 60′s and 70′s, was that because it was warm in the Arctic, when it was not?
Stay with us kidda, and you might learn a thing or two.
Rock on Tommy!
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/ut.html
Apparently, Hajo doesn’t know his Arsch from his Eisdicken.
And I suppose the snow Utah used to get, before they did not get any and then did again, was due to a cold arctic …. or something?
1. Solar inout is only a minor melting factor as at its peak solar input is <3% of normal sunlight. It's the warm wind and water from the lower latitudes that do the melting and they vary with the conditions.
2. He clearly makes up his own independent data and does not check with other sources.
3. He is unaware of his surroundings let alone the Arctic.
4. I'll bet he a computer model to help him make decisions.
5. His funding is in jeopardy!!!!!