Good news for Arctic, as sea ice volume up by half

Dec 16, 2013
An undated image released by the Marine Ice Automobile Expedition shows expedition trucks crossing the North Pole

Arctic sea ice last month was around 50 percent higher in volume compared with a year earlier, following a recovery in area this summer, the European Space Agency (ESA) said Monday.

This is some good news for the Arctic, but does not reverse a longer trend of decline, it said.

Data from ESA's high-tech ice-monitoring satellite CryoSat found that in October this year, there was about 9,000 cubic kilometres (2,100 cu. miles) of sea ice in the Arctic.

A year earlier, the volume was 6,000 cu. kms (1,400 cu. miles).

When measured over a timescale of several years, ice in October 2013 was about 30 centimetres (19 inches) thicker than last year's—a rise of about 20 percent.

Sea ice is ocean water that freezes in extremely low temperatures.

In the Arctic, this ice goes through regular swings, contracting in the northern hemisphere's summer and expanding in its winter.

As a result, the changes are considered a bellwether of global warming, although experts also warn that only decades-long data can show whether something is a trend—meaning a man-made shift in climate—rather than a blip in the weather.

The sharp recovery in is a surprise given the Arctic's loss of ice in terms of area in recent years, said Rachel Tilling, from Britain's Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling.

In 2012, the area of sea covered by ice in the Arctic during the summer reached a record documented low.

But in 2013, this recovered somewhat, to the sixth record low.

"We didn't expect the greater ice extent left at the end of this summer's melt to be reflected in the volume," she said in a press release issued by ESA.

"But it has been, and the reason is related to the amount of multi-year ice in the Arctic."

The increase in volume is welcome, but does not reflect a reversal in the long-term decline, the scientists said.

"It's estimated that there was around 20,000 cubic kilometres (4,800 cu. miles) of Arctic each October in the early 1980s, and so today's minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years," said Andrew Shepherd, a professor at University College London, a co-author of the study.

The data was presented last week at a meeting of American Geophysical Union (AGU) in San Francisco, California, the agency said.

Explore further: Arctic ice shrinking in volume, too, ESA reports

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Arctic sea ice avoids last year's record low

Oct 04, 2013

This September, sea ice covering the Arctic Ocean fell to the sixth lowest extent in the satellite record, which began in 1979. All of the seven lowest extents have occurred in the last seven years, since ...

Mild 2013 cuts Arctic a break, warming woes remain

Dec 12, 2013

The rapid melting in the Arctic eased up this year. But the government says global warming is still dramatically altering the top of the world, reducing the number of reindeer and shrinking snow and ice, while increasing ...

Recommended for you

Cordilleran terrane collage

8 hours ago

In the August 2014 issue of Lithosphere, Steve Israel of the Yukon Geological Survey and colleagues provide conclusions regarding the North American Cordillera that they say "are provocative in that they b ...

NASA sees Tropical Storm Halong's 'best side'

10 hours ago

NASA satellite data showed Tropical Storm Halong's "best side" or most powerful side was east of its center. That's where the coldest cloud top temperatures and strongest thunderstorms appeared on satellite ...

User comments : 44

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

larrydalooza
3 / 5 (14) Dec 16, 2013
not possible... *fingers in ears* .... NO NO NO... light bulbs are evil.... nothing to see here.... arrrrrggghhh
Shootist
3.3 / 5 (16) Dec 16, 2013
Hooray for all the happy polar bears (who are fine).
Maggnus
3.9 / 5 (14) Dec 16, 2013
Shootist, your playing whack-a-mole.
goracle
3.1 / 5 (15) Dec 16, 2013
In march the army of denialist cherry-pickers, ready to take a one-year fluctuation as far out of context as they can.
goracle
3 / 5 (15) Dec 16, 2013
not possible... *fingers in ears* .... NO NO NO... light bulbs are evil.... nothing to see here.... arrrrrggghhh

"It's estimated that there was around 20,000 cubic kilometres (4,800 cu. miles) of Arctic sea ice each October in the early 1980s, and so today's minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years," said Andrew Shepherd, a professor at University College London, a co-author of the study.

"...today's minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years"

Where were your fingers when the researcher was saying that?
julianpenrod
3.1 / 5 (15) Dec 16, 2013
Those determined to insist climate change is not occurring will tout this as "proof" that things are the way they always were. In fact, it's only the ice thickness that has increased since last year, and not even back to historical levels, but the total area covered is still much smaller than it was before, say, a decade and a half ago. It's as if a third of all total continental land mass on the planet disappeared and the remainder was much closer to sea level than it used to be, leaving it more prone to being inundated and washed away by wave action.
It does bring up a point, though. We can approach the deniers' stance from another direction. What will finally convince them climate change is occurring? What will they accept as "proof"? If they are anything more than craven, obsessive nay-sayers, it is reasonable they will have a level at which they will agree. If not, they are denying it only out of what can be described as obsessive sociopathy.
shavera
3 / 5 (14) Dec 16, 2013
What will finally convince them climate change is occurring? What will they accept as "proof"?


This is ultimately the best question to ask any science denier.
Maggnus
3 / 5 (10) Dec 16, 2013
PS - Shootist, why are you avoiding the questions posed here: http://phys.org/n...firstCmt ? What is it about climate change that causes you to be so obsessed with trying to deny it?

Why won't you give an answer?
radek
2.9 / 5 (9) Dec 16, 2013

"It's estimated that there was around 20,000 cubic kilometres (4,800 cu. miles) of Arctic sea ice each October in the early 1980s, and so today's minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years," said Andrew Shepherd, a professor at University College London, a co-author of the study.

"...today's minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years"

Where were your fingers when the researcher was saying that?


"although experts also warn that only decades-long data can show whether something is a trend—meaning a man-made shift in climate—rather than a blip in the weather."

CryoSat was launched in 2010. It`s the begining of collecting data and only data gives us a proof not estimations.

data about global sea ice area show we are around the mean value: http://arctic.atm...rend.jpg
goracle
3.9 / 5 (11) Dec 16, 2013

"It's estimated that there was around 20,000 cubic kilometres (4,800 cu. miles) of Arctic sea ice each October in the early 1980s, and so today's minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years," said Andrew Shepherd, a professor at University College London, a co-author of the study.

"...today's minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years"

Where were your fingers when the researcher was saying that?


"although experts also warn that only decades-long data can show whether something is a trend—meaning a man-made shift in climate—rather than a blip in the weather."

CryoSat was launched in 2010. It`s the begining of collecting data and only data gives us a proof not estimations.

data about global sea ice area show we are around the mean value: http://arctic.atm...rend.jpg

To counter an article about VOLUME, you link to an image of a chart that is about AREA?
MandoZink
3.7 / 5 (11) Dec 16, 2013
The entire climate data set consists of a changing trend (warming) within natural cycles (seasons) that are subject to random noise (deviations and anomalies). Unpredictable fluctuations in the trend are inevitably anticipated, all while the overall picture of late remains one of historically unprecedented increase in temperature.

It is quite natural and completely expected that the noise produces deviations. Unfortunately these anomalies are wrongly trumped as prime climate evidence whenever they spontaneously emerge.

The deniers need to understand a collection of anomalies is not picture of anything - except noise.
ubavontuba
3.2 / 5 (13) Dec 16, 2013
the overall picture of late remains one of historically unprecedented increase in temperature.
Why do AGWites so consistently lie?

The global climate has been warmer (and greener) in the past.

ubavontuba
3 / 5 (12) Dec 16, 2013
Aha! Now it's becoming clear why AGWites lie so much. ...It's about the money!

NBC News: Climate change expert's fraud was 'crime of massive proportion,' say feds

obama_socks
2.7 / 5 (9) Dec 16, 2013
the overall picture of late remains one of historically unprecedented increase in temperature.
Why do AGWites so consistently lie?

The global climate has been warmer (and greener) in the past.

- Uba

That is correct. With or without human intervention, there is, has been, and will always be climate change which is a natural and normal process of a dynamic Earth.

Wind action, radiative effects from the Sun, cloud cover, heat and ash from volcanoes, heat from decaying radioactive processes underground, decay of vegetation, and particulates and other matter that enter Earth's atmosphere all contribute to changes in climate...including freezing and heat and everything in between.

As long as mankind exists on this planet, there will be a need for energy/power for home heating, cooking, etc. Take away that energy that sufficiently enables our existence and comfort zone, and we will freeze to death. Many have frozen to death already from lack of that energy, i.e. oil,gas
Maggnus
2.9 / 5 (12) Dec 16, 2013
The usual misrepresentations from UbaMoron. First, it's about the speed of change, not the change itself. He has been told that over and over and over.

Whack-a-mole.

As for Beale, his lies were about him being a spy and therefore avoiding doing his job. SPin much ubamoron?
MandoZink
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 16, 2013
Aha! Now it's becoming clear why AGWites lie so much. ...It's about the money!

NBC News: Climate change expert's fraud was 'crime of massive proportion,' say feds


Exactly my point. An anomaly as evidence.
ubavontuba
3 / 5 (12) Dec 16, 2013
The usual misrepresentations from UbaMoron. First, it's about the speed of change, not the change itself. He has been told that over and over and over.
Watch out! Here comes the speeding climate change!

http://www.woodfo....8/trend

..or not. LOL

Whack-a-mole.
This is an example of the best "science" Maggnus has to offer. LOL

As for Beale, his lies were about him being a spy and therefore avoiding doing his job.
Which seems to be a problem with AGW supporting "scientists" in general. They have been so profoundly wrong again and again, we must presume none of them actually bother to check the data!

radek
2.5 / 5 (8) Dec 16, 2013

To counter an article about VOLUME, you link to an image of a chart that is about AREA?


yes because we have measurments of ice area and we don`t have such data about volume. Longterm series of volume data come from models.
obama_socks
2.6 / 5 (10) Dec 16, 2013
Good catch, Uba. Interesting that Mr. Beale had made a career of climate change.

"Kern, Beale's lawyer, declined to comment to NBC News. But in his court filing, he asks Judge Ellen Huvelle, who is due to sentence Beale Wednesday, to balance Beale's misdeeds against years of admirable work for the government. These include helping to rewrite the Clean Air Act in 1990, heading up EPA delegations to United Nations conferences on climate change in 2000 and 2001, and helping to negotiate agreements to reduce carbon emissions with China, India and other nations."

As with AlGore and other AGWite phonies, Mr. Beale preferred to live "high on the hog" at the American taxpayers' expense.

I don't buy his problem being a psychological one. He just wanted to live like the richest 1%.

By the Bee...I am going to buy as many incandescent 60W light bulbs as I can before January 1, 2014 when these bulbs will be considered illegal. They have no mercury. I like that.
freethinking
3 / 5 (12) Dec 16, 2013
Come on you Global Warmest Deniers, I was told 13 years ago by really smart people that no one will remember snow. Repeat after me, there is no snow, ocean levels are up, polar bears are dead.

long live Profit Al Gore. May he continue to live high on the Hog on Carbon Credits, may he buy more private jets, monster cars and ocean front mansions to house and transport his four children. It's us dumb ones that need live in one room unheated apartments lite by mercury contaminated bulbs to raise (in guilt) our one child.
obama_socks
3.1 / 5 (12) Dec 16, 2013
Yes...AlGore and other rich 1 percenters of the AGW school of thought need not worry about their own carbon footprint. Their mantra is "do as I say, not as I do".
AlGore acts like his sh_t don't stink and he and his kind are up there in the clouds, away from the common human riffraff who need to stay warm and comfy, paying high government taxes to buy that warmth.

"Oh, woe is me", says AlGore, as he quaffs another glass of expensive champagne while flying aboard one of his Lear Jets. "Those climate change deniers refuse to pay homage to our superior intellect, and the lowlifes continue to use fossil fuels for power and heat and to fuel their stupid Chevy pickup trucks", as he puts down the latest copy of Wall Street Journal.

AlGore goes on to say, "We will just have to keep drumming the AGW lies into their heads until they cave, then we we will be able to control these stupid human beasts of burden. Just a little while longer until we have them in our grasp", says he.
Whydening Gyre
2.3 / 5 (8) Dec 16, 2013
I've a sneaking suspicion Mother Earth doesn't really care what a species believes. She will react to the situation according to her own rules of self preservation. If that should happen to include "starting over" - no prob. Kinda like an ex-wife...
So - we're fucked, regardless.
obama_socks
2.4 / 5 (11) Dec 16, 2013
@Gyre
No, we are NOT fucked. We are the children of Mother Earth and we will go back to her sooner or later. The Earth nourishes all living things and this fact makes it necessary to respect and care for our source of nourishment. Common sense tells most of us that we should avoid polluting our Earth because there are grave consequences for such stupidity. But, at the same time, it is necessary to understand that our Earth Mother makes certain allowances...up to a point...before she punishes us for being willfully stupid. Some of those allowances is the recycling of old soil for new, as in magma from active volcanoes, subduction and slow continental drift. Another is that oil spills from an oil tanker gets cleaned up by microscopic ocean life eating the oil.

I am a Creationist - therefore, I believe that the Creator planned it this way and made it so. Apart from that, I think that it would be wise to teach people to recycle, avoid polluting bodies of water, etc. Educate the young.
Whydening Gyre
2.4 / 5 (7) Dec 16, 2013
I am a Creationist - therefore, I believe that the Creator planned it this way and made it so. Apart from that, I think that it would be wise to teach people to recycle, avoid polluting bodies of water, etc. Educate the young.[\q]

I am in agreement on all of your first paragraph. However, I find it rather funny that faced with obvious self-destruction, we - as a species - continue to self destruct...
davidivad
1.5 / 5 (8) Dec 16, 2013
we are face to face with our intellectual limits now. we are living in an age where math has rendered its answers to us and we are left only with statistics. this brings our final answers to be only an opinion. the world is simply how we see it. imagine that.
obama_socks
3.3 / 5 (8) Dec 17, 2013
@Gyre
It is not irreversible. There is still time, but all the leaders of each nation need to end their corruption that is so prevalent and demand adherence to the planet-saving methods, not only from their citizens, but also from the leaders themselves. That includes the rich, poor and middle-class where all groups can come together and think of ways to improve their country's environmental future...and take up the cause for saving Earth and all life immediately.

Polluting of the air, waters and soil is, IMO, the biggest problem of human existence. The Earth cannot cope with it fast enough, so it is up to humans to make a difference. We don't have to wait for the U.N., the EPA (USA) or any other national or international environmental agency to give us a warning or wait for legislation. We can take it upon ourselves and demand that schools teach good environmental methods such as recycling, and we have to reach the adults who may be unaware of proper procedures of avoiding pollution.
obama_socks
3.3 / 5 (8) Dec 17, 2013
we are face to face with our intellectual limits now. we are living in an age where math has rendered its answers to us and we are left only with statistics. this brings our final answers to be only an opinion. the world is simply how we see it. imagine that.
- david

What intellectual limits? There is no limit to our intellectual capacity for discovery, learning, deduction from factual data, theory, analysis, methodology, etc. Statistics is the result of an analysis of a given number utilizing a formula by a tracking method where percentages are involved.

Math is simply a tool that encompasses all the above, and more...but it is still analysis of a given number(s) requiring the use of a formula of equations to render a result.
Math is beautiful in its purity.
Final answers should not be merely opinion or an educated guess. If it were, our existence and reality would prove to be pure chaos and we would, indeed, have reached our limits intellectually.

Too sleepy to fix this.
goracle
3.4 / 5 (5) Dec 17, 2013
"The Earth cannot cope with it fast enough, so it is up to humans to make a difference. We don't have to wait for the U.N., the EPA (USA) or any other national or international environmental agency to give us a warning or wait for legislation. We can take it upon ourselves and demand that schools teach good environmental methods such as recycling, and we have to reach the adults who may be unaware of proper procedures of avoiding pollution."
obama_socks may appear to have 'changed his tune' in some of the posts above, but really is just advocating inadequate measures for recycling and pollution reduction based on individual actions, to distract from larger societal measures that are required. Teach recycling in schools? What backward place does he live in where this does not already happen? Where recycling bins are not noticeable? Where waste reduction hasn't been promoted for years? The key part of his quote is the dismissing of climate change, legislation, regulation and the UN.
davidivad
1 / 5 (5) Dec 17, 2013
to obama socks;

math is beautiful indeed. However it is stifled by our own comprehension of the world we live in. we now live in a world where there is so much known that an individual is limited to knowing one or two precise areas. the advancement of any one area is governed by it being combined with advancements of another area. the result is that science is left in the hands of management. productive science funds itself to the tune of special interests.

in truth, we cannot know if we are the cause of global warming because we must look at data only readable by specialists of the field. I do not wish to discredit the scientist of this field, but i realize that this information is sculpted legally, politically, and financially by management who must be responsible for the information. both ends of the global warming issue stand to make money. we are face to face with our inability to cope with the situation. our limits stand before our very eyes.
Zephir_fan
Dec 17, 2013
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
sennekuyl
3.7 / 5 (6) Dec 17, 2013
http://www.woodfo....8/trend

Come on, Uba. Doing this still? You can see it is dishonest when others deliberately (or even inadvertently) misrepresent the data; are you really not able to see when you do it?

Your chart with additional years: http://www.woodfo....8/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1996.8/to:2013.8/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1996.8/to:2013.8/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1995.8/to:2013.8/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1995.8/to:2013.8/trend
sennekuyl
2.2 / 5 (5) Dec 17, 2013
sennekuyl
2.6 / 5 (5) Dec 17, 2013
Or maybe if we change the dates around we can really emphasise the cooling trend.
http://www.woodfo.../to:2013
MandoZink
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 17, 2013
Additional relevant graphical observations:

Arctic Escalator -
http://skepticals...2012.gif

Climate Escalator -
http://www.skepti..._500.gif

Trends:
http://www.skepti...Fnv2.gif
radek
2 / 5 (4) Dec 17, 2013
Additional relevant graphical observations:

Arctic Escalator -
http://skepticals...2012.gif


it`s better to show data - there is downtrend of course but not so steep (lowest point usually in September so it`s easy to compare graphs)
http://arctic.atm...ctic.png

opposite situation on South Pole
http://arctic.atm...ctic.png

globally we are close to the mean
http://arctic.atm...rend.jpg


kivahut
2 / 5 (4) Dec 22, 2013
Damn it. I'm buying an 8 cylinder. I won't lose this battle for global warming. mwhahahahahahah
ubavontuba
2 / 5 (4) Dec 22, 2013

http://www.woodfo....8/trend
Come on, Uba. Doing this still? You can see it is dishonest when others deliberately (or even inadvertently) misrepresent the data; are you really not able to see when you do it?

Your chart with additional years:
http://www.woodfo....8/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1996.8/to:2013.8/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1996.8/to:2013.8/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1995.8/to:2013.8/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1995.8/to:2013.8/trend
What do you think this changes? This only serves to show there was some warming in previous years. I have not claimed otherwise.

ubavontuba
2 / 5 (4) Dec 22, 2013
Correction to sennekuyl's link:

http://www.woodfo....8/trend
ubavontuba
2 / 5 (4) Dec 22, 2013
Or maybe if we change the dates around we can really emphasise the cooling trend.
http://www.woodfo.../to:2013
So? Now you're showing a limited, but not current, period of cooling.

Currently, according to HadCRUT3 data, even though CO2 continues to rise, there's been no global warming in more than 16 years.
Maggnus
3.3 / 5 (3) Dec 23, 2013
Currently, according to HadCRUT3 data, even though CO2 continues to rise, there's been no global warming in more than 16 years.


Whack-a-mole.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (3) Dec 24, 2013
Currently, according to HadCRUT3 data, even though CO2 continues to rise, there's been no global warming in more than 16 years.
Whack-a-mole.
Just saying, "Whack-a-mole." is not an argument. Try again. Otherwise you're simply admitting there is no valid argument.

Maggnus
3.3 / 5 (3) Dec 24, 2013
Just saying, "Whack-a-mole." is not an argument. Try again ...or are you simply admitting there is no valid argument to bring?
Who's arguing Ubamoron? That would suggest you have knowledge of anything beyond conspiracism, cherry-picking and misrepresentation.

"Never argue with an idiot, they'll just drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience" - George Carlin.

Get it idiot?
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (3) Dec 24, 2013
Just saying, "Whack-a-mole." is not an argument. Try again ...or are you simply admitting there is no valid argument to bring?
Who's arguing Uba?
So then Maggnus does admit there is no valid argument to bring. It's nice Maggnus came back to admit his error.
Maggnus
3.3 / 5 (3) Dec 24, 2013
The conspiracist worldview sees secret plots by tiny cabals of evildoers as the major motor powering important historical events; makes irrational leaps of logic in analyzing factual evidence in order to "prove" connections, blames social conflicts on demonized scapegoats, and constructs a closed metaphysical worldview that is highly resistant to criticism.


Dismissing the conspiracism often found in right-wing populism as irrational extremism, lunatic hysteria, or marginalized radicalism does little to challenge these movements, fails to deal with concrete conflicts and underlying institutional issues, invites government repression, and sacrifices the early targets of the scapegoaters on the altar of denial.
Maggnus
3.3 / 5 (3) Dec 24, 2013
five rules common to the conspiracist worldview in the United States:~3

"The conspirators are internationalist in their sympathies.

"[N]othing is ever discarded. Right-wing mail order bookstores still sell the Protocols of the Elders of Zion...[and] Proofs of a Conspiracy [from the late 1700's].

"Seeming enemies are actually secret friends. Through the lens of the conspiracy theorists, capitalists and Communists work hand in hand.

"The takeover by the international godless government will be ignited by the collapse of the economic system.

"It's all spelled out in the Bible. For those with a fundamentalist bent, the New World Order or One World Government is none other than the international kingdom of the Antichrist, described in the Book of Revelation.


http://www.public...ism.html