NSIDC Scientists On Arctic Melt: "We're About 30 Yrs. Ahead Of Where The Models Say We Should Be"

[hatrack]

EDIT

Ice melt in the summer is a normal phenomenon: As summer temperatures heat up the Northern Hemisphere, Arctic sea ice begins to melt, and its edge retreats and covers less of the North polar region. When temperatures begin to drop again in the winter, the ice reforms. But in recent years, rising air and ocean temperatures, fueled by global warming, have caused more and more ice to melt each summer, with ice extent reaching a record low on Sept. 16 this year, according to the University of Colorado at Boulder's National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). Winter sea ice, on the other hand, had remained fairly steady—until now.

A new study examining satellite measurements of the winter sea ice covering the Barents Sea (located north of Scandinavia) over the past 26 years has shown that the ice edge has recently been retreating in the face of rising sea surface temperatures, said study leader Jennifer Francis of Rutgers University.

Her research, detailed in a recent issue of the journal Geophysical Research Letters, showed that the warming waters in the Barents Sea—which have risen about 3 degrees Celsius since 1980—are to blame for the reduction in winter ice cover. Two factors contribute to the warming of the Barents Sea: warming Atlantic waters funneled in by the Gulf Stream and solar heating of the open ocean as ice melts in the summer, both of which make it harder for new ice to form in the winter.

EDIT

In another study that came out earlier this year, Stroeve compared current measurements of sea ice melt with the predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's models—and what she found gave her cause for worry. "We're about 30 years ahead of where the climate models say we should be," Stroeve told LiveScience. Stroeve, Francis and others will be keeping a close eye on the sea ice this winter, as the new record summer low may mean a record low winter ice extent this year as well, thanks to the ice-albedo feedback. Francis and Stroeve both say that an unusually cold summer or winter in the future could pump ice levels back up, but they aren't optimistic that the ice will ever return to historic levels. "It's hard to imagine seeing it turned around," Francis said.

EDIT/END

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20070924/sc_livescience/multiplestudiesrevealdiremeltdowninarctic;_ylt=Ajut7ZshRjmolSAFUvYTXQWyvtEF

[opihimoimoi]

1. The Pubs keep saying its natural...but they never seek solutions..do they?

[unpossibles]

4. of course not

you know, being consumed by a flesh-eating virus is natural too, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't take steps to avoid it.

Of course, expecting reason from the GCG deniers is pretty strange.

[opihimoimoi]

12. Reason even??? No reason in the GOP from the evidence over 7 years....

[soothsayer]

2. when global warming triggers the next ice age, there will be ice a-plenty!

[depakid]

3. More likely, we're looking at a return to the Eocene

Complete with palm trees and alligators in the arctic.

[tom_paine]

5. No Ice Age as the rate the rest of the Earth is warming, I think.

This is just an opinion but I believe that the overall warming, which is going to go on and indeed appears to be increasing rate suggesting a positive feedback loop, will overwhelm the cooling experienced by alteration or shutodwn of the global system of ocean thermocline currents.

Only time will tell, but I am guessing that it will only serve to keep the Northeast of Amerika coller than it normally would have been.

Then the idiots will look out their wondows and say, "Global Warming isn't happening."

Meanwhile, the Arctic will be 90% oce free in summer in 20 years or less.

But I think the fantasties of an Ice Age happening in a few places whilethe rest of the world roasts are a bit farfetched.

As always, with such an ultra-complex system as global albedo and environment, almost any outcome is possible, however unexpected.

[Javaman]

6. get out the water wings. nt

[Gregorian]

7. People still aren't making significant changes.

Except for a very few.

This is an individual thing. People don't want to accept that. What Al Gore or someone like him will do is get back on the Kyoto protocol, and make people hear what they need to hear. Otherwise, I see the same behavior as I've always seen. There are people who have two cars, one of which is always in motion. I don't know what they're doing. And the planet doesn't care if it's reasonable or significant, or not.

This is about what I am not going to do. I didn't drive a car today. I won't drive a car tomorrow. It's about what we are NOT going to do.

I fully expect no changes from people. And I predict that we will demonize carbon footprints like we have drugs. We'll start penalizing people. I don't know if that's good or bad. I just know that we could have avoided that had people just used their brains. And they won't. I know it. Furthermore, every time you pull the trigger on the nozzle, you support this administration and it's war.

[DLnyc]

10. True, USAians aren't changing very fast

My subjective, but I believe quite verifiable, experience is that French, Germans and other Europeans have cut back on wasteful consumption, have encouraged efficient mass transportation, drive high-mileage cars (if they drive), do not artificially keep the price of gas low and are way ahead of us in installing alternative energy production (mainly wind).

I take as evidence for this the fact that European (and other) signers to Kyoto have apparently kept their commitments to significantly reduce CO2 production, while the US has continued rapid increases.

I don't mean to quibble, but I think the argument that "it's just too hard to change" is easily debunked by the fact that other countries have followed Kyoto without ill effects.

It would, however, take a moderate commitment on the part of our government and society to actively oppose the influence of the oil and car lobbies.

[Gregorian]

11. I was surprised at how frugal the French were in 1971!

I remember no ice cubes in restaurants. And MOPEDS. We hadn't even heard of mopeds yet. And now that I think of it, mopeds are not even in existence in America.

We just plain suck. Energy that is.

I'm so sick of it. And here is why- This goes beyond the environment. This is about power. The power that Americans wield. Each typical American has at their fingertips the equivalent of 300 slaves. This is from a speech I heard from the 70's about peak oil. One of the most revealing speeches I've ever heard. I've searched for it online and cannot find it. It puts into perspective the idiocy that we promote and sustain.

Gasoholics.

I ride a bike. My friend was hit by a car a few weeks ago. The guy didn't even see him. It's typical for this country. Bikes? They aren't even looking. It's a societal thing. A blindness. A sickness.

There. That's enough of my speech making for a day. :) It's too bad I won't live long enough to see a sane world.

[DLnyc]

13. Just how I feel

An insane consumerism that a) doesn't even see it's out of whack and b) actually makes people's lives, often, much LESS pleasant while they assume having more things and power just HAS to make them happier.

But, call it foolish optimism on my part, it seems to me that people can change their attitude towards life quite easily, once they aren't being force fed the wrong message. Seems to me I've seen people change when their environment changes.

Maybe once things get bad enough, there will be the will to change things? I don't know.

[Delphinus]

15. When things are bad enough,

yes there will be the will to change. But, by that time, it will be rather late in the game.

I'd rather go ahead and change NOW.

[Hissyspit]

8. Screwn. n/t

[truedelphi]

9. Said concisely and with enough emotion for me to repeat

Screwn!

[kestrel91316]

14. The climate models are linear. The truth is exponential. TIME TO

REVISE THE GODDAMNED MODELS ALREADY!!!!!!!!