Most Arctic Sea Ice Could Melt In 30 Years

Comprehensive New Government-Backed Study Shows Trend Much More Advanced Than Feared

(AP)  Arctic sea ice is melting so fast most of it could be gone in 30 years.

A new analysis of changing conditions in the region, using complex computer models of weather and climate, says conditions that had been forecast by the end of the century could occur much sooner.

A change in the amount of ice is important because the white surface reflects sunlight back into space. When ice is replaced by dark ocean water sunlight can be absorbed, warming the water and increasing the warming of the planet.

The finding adds to concern about climate change caused by human activities such as burning fossil fuels, a problem that has begun receiving more attention in the Obama administration and was part of the G20 discussions in London.

"Due to the recent loss of sea ice, the 2005-2008 autumn central Arctic surface air temperatures were greater than 5 degrees Celsius (9 degrees Fahrenheit) above" what would be expected, the new study reports.

That amount of temperature increase had been expected by the year 2070.

The new report by Muyin Wang of the Joint Institute for the Study of Atmosphere and Ocean and James E. Overland of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, appears in Friday's edition of the journal Geophysical Research Letters.

They expect the area covered by summer sea ice to decline from about 2.8 million square miles normally to 620,000 square miles within 30 years.

Last year's summer minimum was 1.8 million square miles in September, second lowest only to 2007 which had a minimum of 1.65 million square miles, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center.

The Center said Arctic sea ice reached its winter maximum for this year at 5.8 million square miles on Feb. 28. That was 278,000 square miles below the 1979-2000 average making it the fifth lowest on record. The six lowest maximums since 1979 have all occurred in the last six years.

Overland and Wang combined sea-ice observations with six complex computer models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to reach their conclusions. Combining several computer models helps avoid uncertainties caused by natural variability.

Much of the remaining ice would be north of Canada and Greenland, with much less between Alaska and Russia in the Pacific Arctic.

"The Arctic is often called the Earth's refrigerator because the sea ice helps cool the planet by reflecting the sun's radiation back into space," Wang said in a statement. "With less ice, the sun's warmth is instead absorbed by the open water, contributing to warmer temperatures in the water and the air."

The study was supported by the NOAA Climate Change Program Office, the Institute for the Study of the Ocean and Atmosphere and the U.S. Department of Energy.

[j_mcdonald-2009]

By the way, louiville2, you apparently claim to be an environmental engineer.

Would that be in the employment of Exxon or Chevron, by any chance? (After all, the tobacco companies did hire real MD's to push their products in the 50's.)

Also, are you paid by the post, or by the word, or do you simply suffer from OCD?

Just curious.

[j_mcdonald-2009]

louiville2, you claim that NSIDC is for profit, but 5 minutes of research turned up the following:

NSIDC is part of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

The Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) is an interdisciplinary administrative unit (organized research unit) of the University of Colorado at Boulder whose purpose is to foster research, teaching, and service in the environmental sciences.

As an institute of the University of Colorado at Boulder, CIRES is governed by the Laws of the Regents of the University of Colorado and by the administrative policies and regulations of the University of Colorado system and the Boulder Campus.

Moreover, one can max tax-deductible gifts to NSIDC via the University of Colorado Foundation, and ...

The CU Foundation is a tax-exempt organization under Internal Revenue
Code 501(c)(3), and a public charity under Internal Revenue Code
509(a)(1) and 170(b)(1)(A)(iv). Its federal tax identification number is
#84-6049811.

Sure looks non-profit to me.

[au_fait]

For us with sciece and engineering backgrounds, 5% ice loss (maximum recorded loss) in 30 years is not a large difference. .27 M sq miles of 5.8 M sq miles. Considering there was not an accurate way of measuring this before then, I will take it as it seems. There is a trend, we do not know the cause. There is a hypothesis. We can live responsibly. Unless the idiots screaming about this are willing to stop having children and enforce mandatory B/C on the population, I don't want to hear a word you have to say. The crisis is not what we are doing to our environment, but why. Reduce the population and we do not need the level of industrialization we have. Also I would like so someone tell a developing nation that they need to limit their emissions. Keep dreaming and screaming as that is all you ever do.

[tngreen]

Why is it that any article presenting clear evidence of catastrophic global climate change always brings out the loonies? Everybody here with an advanced degree in a hard science, raise your hand. The rest of you, please go tinker with your aluminum foil antenna-hats and finish reading your "Amazing Tales."

What a waste of bandwidth.

[rf35]

"...complex computer models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change..."

That in itself is enough to make me distrust the predictions. I'll believe an ice-free arctic summer when I see it. Until then, I'll go on doing all I can to reduce the amount of fossil fuel I use, not because of doom and gloom AGW nonsense, but because it save me money and helps free America from depending on Muslim terrorists to provide us with our energy.

[dkhorse11]

I got place inland with the intent that it would be valuable beach front property soon. Oooh, I can't wait.

[prohb]

I agree we must do something. We must act responsibly and strive to be a resilient people. Some ideas: :
1) Reduce, Reuse, Recycle
2) Time-Banking and community/local coordination of resources to get thru these tough economic times (check out Time Banking - its more than just bartering and it?s a great idea)
3) Grow Vegetable Gardens - both individually and community.
4) Invest in energy efficient products and industries - so they become the jobs for the future and way of life....not just a fad.
5) For health care - focus on Wellness and getting into shape. It reduces energy costs!
6) Also for health care - take a First Aid/CPR/AED course to deal with little emergencies yourself and work more efficiently with EMTs to deal with major the crisis in your life. Again, this reduces energy costs.
7) And finally, instead of finger-pointing, have a can-do, problem-solving attitude.
We can be a Resilient People!

[cs4466]

Who cares, that is, except for liberal loonies, who don't matter?
Posted by bsrasmus at 2:33 PM : Apr 5, 2009

The ones who "don't matter" and yet somehow managed to gain majorities in congress twice in a row and put their own president into power? Oh yea, THOSE loonies that "don't matter". Lol... poor poor bitter neocon. Why are the neocons so bitter and hateful? Why do they sound like terrorists?

Let's do a checklist.

1. President Obama. Check.
2. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Check.
3. Solid Democratic majorities in Congress. Check.
4. Palin exiled to Alaska. Check.
5. Bush exiled to Texas. Check.
6. Rush Limbaugh crying. Check.

Oh. That's why. :)

[ubrew12]

bsrasmus said: "Who cares, that is, except for liberal loonies, who don't matter? "

Oh, those liberal Polar bears!!

[ubrew12]

ErnstStavroBlofeld said: "Governments of the World, I want 1 million dollars! "
I'd say its time for the British Secret Service to send its finest after you.

[bsrasmus]

"No, again actually the entire world cares -- ALL those around the globe except for the CONStipated CONServitards in America calling themselves republiCONS!

Over the past few days, all of the G20 leaders have been praising President Obama and his new approach to world problems looking for collaboration -- a completely different approach than the bush monkey's arrogant and combative demeanor. Even the conservative French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, said "It feels really good to be able to work with a U.S. President who wants to change the world and who understands that the world does not boil down to simply American frontiers and borders," he said. "And that is a hell of a good piece of news for 2009."

Less reflective ice and snow in the Arctic and Antarctic merely relates to more heat gain for our planet as the seas warm, and the republiCONS will continue their anti-science rhetoric and campaign -- all the while continuing to support BIG OIL/COAL and all the finite fossil fuels producing more carbon dioxide emissions! What boneheads!"

No, you moron, the entire world does not care. Except for liberal loonies like you, most people live their lives just fine knowing that the Arctic will melt during the summer. Who cares if the average temperature increases a few degrees. Who cares, that is, except for liberal loonies, who don't matter?

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

Governments of the World, I want 1 million dollars!

[the74blaster]

Nothing we can do will stop global warming, it's a pointless exercise.

Posted by hdc77494 at 2:26 PM : Apr 4, 2009

I agree. So all you liberals move away from the coast now cause I am not paying for your move later when the ocean swallows it up. We can't fix it we can only prepare for what is coming. We do not posses the technologies to prevent it from happening even if all automoblies and factories shut down today forever. The oceans will continue to rise so get used to it and prepare!
Posted by littlebuddyd at 9:06 PM : Apr 4, 2009

There is some truth to this statement. The fact is any response is going to have a lag time associated with it. The truth is is might take 50 years or more for the process to reverse itself if we stopped emitting CO2 into the atmosphere today.

However, doing nothing certainly will change the coastlines as all the glaciers melt away.

Doing nothing is unacceptable at least if we want our children to enjoy earth as we did.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

GOOD! My plan is working!

[hetup-2009]

The effects of solar radiation on our planet are accelerating at an alarming rate. Place blame anywhere you like and it won't stop the sun's persistence. Better to start now in promoting kindness towards friends and family, enjoy everyday you have left.

[prohb]

CO2 is interesting. If you believe in the ages of the earth and the fact that the earth was warmer during the "Carboniferous" Era when there was a higher concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. And what happened to a lot of this CO2?? It was tied up in decaying organic material that eventually turned into the "fossil fuels" of coal, oil, and natural gas as we know them today. So it makes sense that as we burn them, and release more CO2 into the atmosphere, we are turning the earth back into a warmer world as it was millions of years ago. (And yesss, yesss there are other factors, volcano's etc. that contribute - but the fact can't be disputed that humans are releasing more CO2 into the atmosphere at an unpresidented rate, over a hundred years as opposed to millions,with its' corresponding heat trapping capacity)

Also, The relationship between water vapor and CO2 is actually a synergistic one. It is part of a vicious cycle. As humans emit greenhouse gases such as CO2, the air warms and holds more water vapor, which then traps more heat and accelerates warming. In fact, scientists calculate that changes in water vapor double the climate?s temperature response to increasing CO2.

[j_mcdonald-2009]

hmm -- the bit about quantum effects was actually early 20th century physics, but still over a century ago....

[nazdackster]

More completely overblown computer model rubbish. Sea ice extent is currently at a positive anomaly: http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
Arctic ice is up recently: http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png
Arctic ice retreat is a cyclical phenomenon which has switched polarity recently. Arctic temps are decreasing: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pj0h2MODqj3gAmFVOnSFEWQ&oid=2&output=image
The comment that states a CO2 doubling causes a 3C increase in temps is bogus and dependent on water vapor positive feedback. The feedback is negative and the total effect is more like 0.3C. That is THE issue with ALL currently used GCMs, the feedbacks are overestimated by both sign and direction, which makes EVERY current model FAIL to explain recent temperatures. Furthermore, solar feedbacks are underestimated, resulting in the correct figure of direct heating change of 0.3C for TSI underestimating the true effect which is more than triple that figure. Reduced solar wind and magnetic effects allow more cosmic ray / earth interaction, seeding clouds, increasing albedo, and further reducing solar insolation. Correct the H2O feedbacks, and guess what? AGW alarmists are OUT OF A JOB. The correct non-radiative feedbacks are around -8 due to convective motions in the atmosphere, which are the main drivers of heat transport in the atmosphere, not radiative effects. This is THE FINAL NAIL in alarmist projections of large temperature increases. It ain't happening, ever, folks. Convection & negative feedback dominates.

[j_mcdonald-2009]

hdc77494: "humans don't cause global warming"

Carbon isotope ratios show that 100 ppm of the 380 ppm of CO2 in today's atmosphere comes from fossil sources such as coal, oil, and natural gas that were (prior to being burned) long out of contact with the atmosphere. This is consistent both with the increasing CO2 levels being recorded at Mauna Loa, and with the amount of fossil fuels that has been consumed since 1850. So three independent measurements arrive at the same conclusion.

Even 19th century physics shows that if you increase the CO2, you increase the temperature of the planet. You can learn the math and science involved in a few hours if you are so inclined. It involves grade school math (exponents, logarithms, etc.) , a gross understanding of quantum effects (that molecules have resonant frequencies of photons they interact with), a bit of chemistry (how a few molecules form and move), an understanding of black-body radiation, conservation of energy, and not much else.

And, btw. you provided a link to an apparently non-existent site. And sorry, I'm not going to bother to find links to pre-algebra sites or any of the other easily accessible notions I alluded to above. If you're motivated, there are hundreds (thousands) of easily accessible sites to learn this stuff.

[budmag06]

CBS, it's time for a new story. Half the Arctic has melted since you printed this piece of crap.