Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Arctic Sea Ice II: The Meltdown

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:33 AM
Original message
Arctic Sea Ice II: The Meltdown
I notice that this scenario does not include any "flushing" events caused by arctic oscillation, the last of which drastically reduced the thickness of the sea ice, even starting from a much thicker state.

The loss of sea ice, when plotted on a graph (Figure 1), has roughly followed a straight line over time. There are a few noisy ups and downs, reflecting colder and warmer years than average. A trend that approximately follows a straight line is called a "linear" trend. A continued linear summertime 8% per decade loss of sea ice would leave the summertime Arctic Ocean ice-free by 2100. The ocean would still partially freeze in winter, with about 50% of the ocean covered with ice.



However, there is a distinct possibility that Arctic sea ice loss may show a sudden non-linear decline in coming years. The loss of sea ice with time may no longer follow a nice straight line, but instead suddenly accelerate, allowing the Arctic sea ice to suffer a sudden and complete disintegration in just a decade. The result would be an ice-free Arctic Ocean for the first time since before the last ice age. This possibility was explored in a December 2006 paper (Holland et al.), titled "Future abrupt reductions in the summer Arctic sea ice". The authors ran the Community Climate System Model, one of the top climate models used to formulate the "official word" on climate, the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. The model was run for the years 1979-2006, and successfully predicted the 20% loss of summer sea ice during that period. The model then assumed that levels of greenhouse gases would continue to increase, until a doubling of CO2 levels occurred in 2100. This is considered a "middle-of-the-road" scenario, and assumes a reasonable sequence of events will unfold over the coming decades: humans will make some modest efforts to control greenhouse emissions, but not enough to prevent dangerous climate change. The model found that Arctic sea ice continued to decline linearly until about 2024, resulting in about 60% sea ice coverage in September (Figure 2). During this period, the vertical thickness of the sea ice declined from about four meters to one meter. Beginning in 2025, the rate of sea ice loss suddenly tripled, resulting in the total loss of the summertime polar sea ice by 2040. The authors theorize that once the ice reaches a critical thickness--in this case, one meter--the processes that create open water suddenly become more efficient, resulting in a rapid disintegration of the remaining ice.



http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=626&tstamp=200702
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
1. what's the r^2?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. on the linear fit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. yeah
I'm not buying the linear fit.

The sheer fact of surface:volume changing over time should give us a nonlinear fit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. FWIW, I think that's the point of their prediction. It's only locally linear...
As usual, we readers do not get to see helpful stats like r^2 that would give us more interpretation power. However, there is a link to the original paper (thru my link), which quite possibly includes that good stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. He's giving a 95% confidence interval for the trend
But he would have gotten a C in Dr. Hauxwell's class. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ensho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
2. facts that can't be swept under the rug

tick, tick, tick

(ensho was formally donsu)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC