Antarctic Sea Ice on Cusp of Record Winter Low For Second Year Running (theguardian.com) 28
Sea ice surrounding Antarctica is on the cusp of reaching a record winter low for a second year running, continuing an "outrageous" fall in the amount of Southern Ocean that is freezing over. From a report: The Antarctic region underwent an abrupt transformation in 2023 as the sea ice cover surrounding the continent crashed for six months straight. In winter, it covered about 1.6m sq km less than the long-term average -- an area roughly the size of Britain, France, Germany and Spain combined. Scientists at the Australian Antarctic Program Partnership said the latest data showed this had been repeated in 2024. On 7 September the amount of frozen ocean was less than on the same date last year. While the winter record is not yet complete, and it is therefore not clear if the extent of sea ice for the season will be less than last year, the scientists said it was part of a body of evidence that the Antarctic system had moved to a "new state."
"What we're really talking about are two incredible extreme events," said Dr Will Hobbs, a sea ice researcher at the University of Tasmania. "Last year was outrageous and it's happened again." Hobbs said at monthly and yearly timescales the atmosphere was the main driver of regional variability. "What's different now is that warmer Southern Ocean temperatures are really having an impact on the sea ice," he said. "We know that the past two years have been the warmest on record for the planet, with global temperatures more than 1.5C above pre-industrial for extended periods. This global warmth is now reflected in the oceans around the Antarctic." On Saturday, Southern Ocean sea ice covered 17m sq km, less than the previous low of 17.1m sq km last year. The long-term average for 7 September based on satellite data is 18.4m sq km.
"What we're really talking about are two incredible extreme events," said Dr Will Hobbs, a sea ice researcher at the University of Tasmania. "Last year was outrageous and it's happened again." Hobbs said at monthly and yearly timescales the atmosphere was the main driver of regional variability. "What's different now is that warmer Southern Ocean temperatures are really having an impact on the sea ice," he said. "We know that the past two years have been the warmest on record for the planet, with global temperatures more than 1.5C above pre-industrial for extended periods. This global warmth is now reflected in the oceans around the Antarctic." On Saturday, Southern Ocean sea ice covered 17m sq km, less than the previous low of 17.1m sq km last year. The long-term average for 7 September based on satellite data is 18.4m sq km.
Re:Predictable (Score:5, Insightful)
Nice hallucination you got there. Yes, Hunga Tonga has some effect, but it is comparable minor. But I get it, any lie is welcome to people like you in order to deny climate change. Does not make it go away, though.
Re:Predictable (Score:4, Interesting)
you didn't even read that "scientific publication", did you?
it clearly says in the "plain language summary" for you:
Enhanced tropospheric warming due to the added stratospheric water vapor is offset by the larger stratospheric aerosol attenuation of solar radiation.
you probably picked the wrong paper, one that actually questions the one you were looking for, as is revealed further down:
Given the observed climate sensitivity to stratospheric water vapor (Dessler et al., 2013), it is logical to assume that HT might have a climate impact. Jenkins et al. (2023) used a parameterized climate-response model to investigate the impact of the HT water vapor plume. They neglected the impact of aerosols and only considered the radiative forcing due to the water vapor. Jenkins et al. (2023) computed a 0.12 W/m2 increase in tropospheric radiative forcing. M22 arrived at a similar number, 0.15 W/m2. On the other hand, Sellitto et al. (2023) and Zhu et al. (2022) added the direct aerosol forcing and estimated that the plume would produce a peak forcing of 1 to 2 W/m2. This exceeds the estimated H2O IR forcing. Clearly, both the net warming due to the H2O and cooling due to the aerosol layer need to be considered.
Re: (Score:3)
you probably picked the wrong paper, one that actually questions the one you were looking for, as is revealed further down:
This is the bit I find far more disturbing than the fact that we are clearly going towards killing ourselves. It's the fact that you look at the papers and you know that a group of people that has seen one has to see the other one. Somewhere (and I'm not accusing the commenter here or even their source; rather the original source) there has to be a person who looked at these two papers; understood that the means that the first is wrong and still decided to start pushing that message from the first paper.
Thi
Researchers paying their way (Score:2)
The, "we did research and are now running the air raid siren" without doing any building of solar panel farms, hydroelectric dams, etc. is not helpful.
If you are not part of the solution, no matter how many 'research articles' you post, you are part of the problem.
Please list the solar panel farms or hydroelectric dams built by the researchers and their organizations in the last 5 years. If none, then are you going to build any this year or next year?
This is the classic 'we have a crisis, which someone els
Re: (Score:2)
Sooo, you also want the ambulance driver do the open-heart surgery? Do you know how stupid you sound?
Re: (Score:2)
How can you be so uncharitable? Never assume stupidity when it could just be unfamiliarity with a topic through lack of exposure. In this case the topic of job specialization which probably began about 300,000 years ago but didn't really become explicitly recognized until 10,000 or so years ago with technologies like metal working. Could our friend be not entirely stupid, but just a time traveller from before then? (See my other comment - I hope he reacts well).
Re: (Score:2)
Hehehe, nice one! You are perfectly right, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Hi time traveller from the deep pre-history. Welcome to third millenium AD. Since about the middle of the first millenium BC*, we have had some changes in humanity. There is now this thing called "specialization". A bit like in your day people used to have a shaman and a chief in the tribe, we now have different jobs. Also, since about the third millenium BC we have the concept of "money" which kind of represents resources.
A researcher does research and does not build things. They use the money the get fro
Nice, but research org needs sacrifice budget 1st (Score:2)
These research organizations, talk and research. So when are they going to take 5% of their annual budget and
contract out to a construction firm to build all or part of a solar power installation?
They have been talking, researching and proving for 40 years since the 1980s yet never ever will contribute part of their budget to pay some construction firm to build all or part of the solution.
It should be the first question to ask when these talk-only organizations speek, "Are you committing $500,000 in 2024 t
Re: (Score:2)
See below for some nice explanation by some other people why you are clueless.
Why are they leading us to human extinction? (Score:3)
And why did you propagate the troll's vacuous Subject? And no, I'm not even going to look to see what it wrote.
My Subject is some sort of hint about what kind of FP (I imagine) might have been more "productive" of rational discussion of the problems. Unfortunately, I think that line of analysis is rather short, like the planning horizon of most political and business leaders these years. The politicians can't think past the next election and most of the CEOs are thinking on a quarterly basis. In terms of ge
Re: (Score:2)
Not much of a prediction, published September 26, 2023 after last year’s summertime (their winter) record low was occurred, as well as overall record daily low by a wide margin for many months running
https://www.climate.gov/news-f... [climate.gov]
https://www.copernicus.eu/en/m... [copernicus.eu]
Re:Predictable (Score:4, Informative)
Like climate change has been predicted for decades and which is well accepted at this point?
Re: (Score:3)
This is predictable, and was thoroughly predicted as the likely outcome, of the Hunga Tonga eruption in 2022: we would have a number of years of 'severe' extreme weather across the globe due to disruptions in various oceanic streams.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2023GL104634
No, it's not AGW. It's really disingenuous to not mention this, given it's had such a significant impact on... literally all weather for the last 2 years.
You have it backwards. The article you cite predicts cooling, not warming, which is the topic here.
Lag's an issue (Score:3)
The atmosphere is massive (citation needed?)
Increase the insulation with more CO2, it takes a while to heat up the air. And the air is transferring heat to the oceans which are even more massive.
It takes time to heat them up, even using a giant multi-billion year fusion bomb exploding only a few light-minuted away.
The flip side is... Remove that insulation and it'll take just as long to cool down. If we're seeing global warming causing extreme melt in the antarctic, it's going to continue to get worse. And as it does, there's less ice to reflect sunlight back into space before it is converted into heat. Which will cause more moisture in the air to trap even more heat. People have earned PhDs tracing all the various feedback mechanisms and they're all pointing to 'hotter'.
Re: (Score:2)
They pointed to BOE in the Arctic as the same as adding 25 years of emissions (trillion tons CO2)
I hate to think what the Antarctic ocean (note: not the Antarctic itself, but the ocean), which is far closer to the equator and much more sunlight throughout the year will do as an additional emissions equivalent.
Iâ(TM)m guessing about 75 years equivalent warming if it goes ice free in the winter. 3 trillion tons CO2.
And itâ(TM)s not an all or nothing feedback loop. Last year it was almost 2,000,000
Re: (Score:2)
Well, yes the atmosphere is massive, but it receives an enormous -- in fact truly staggering -- quantity of solar energy.
None of which is here nor there as far as I can see, because we're talking about *winter* polar sea ice changes. The polar regions receive very little solar energy in the winter, and changes in Antarctic winter sea ice extent are, I more a matter of changes in wind patterns than air temperatures.
Those wind changes, however, are likely related to AGW mediated changes in the jet stream.
Re: (Score:2)
Just to clarify -- those "anomalously warm" temperatures in the antarctic are still very cold; cold enough to form sea ice. They're just indicative of unusual weather patterns which *may* include unusual wind conditions that could affect sea ice extent.
Re: (Score:2)
unit pedant (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So? (Score:1)