Amazing Graph of AMO vs Arctic Sea Ice vs Antarctic Sea Ice

Update: In an earlier version the legend on the graph had blue labeled as Antarctic even though it was Arctic. The body of the post had it right (thanks Tom,Hugh,Tom,Anthony,Mike and Sundance for noticing ).

I decided to graph the AMO vs Arctic Sea Ice Extent vs Antarctic Sea Ice Extent. AMO data comes from NOAA, Sea Ice data comes from NSIDC.

The green is the AMO – Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. The red is Antarctic Sea Ice Extent. The blue is the Arctic Sea Ice Extent.

The dashed lines are the liner trends for each.

There are three amazing things:

1) The AMO trend is identical to the Antarctic trend even though the AMO is the sea surface trend of the North Atlantic Ocean! The trend are so close it is hard to see the AMO and Antarctic trends as separate items.

2) The Arctic trend is almost a mirror image of the Antarctic trend.

3) The cross over point is around 1997 which is when the AMO went officially positive (it sometimes goes opposite to the main trend for a few months)

The AMO is cyclic and will return to negative soon enough and this graph implies that sea ice trends will just reverse in a few years.

Click on the graph for a larger size.

Impact of more Antarctic Sea Ice

What is the impact of more Antarctic Sea Ice? Many warmists claim that less Arctic Sea Ice will have a more dramatic effect on earth’s albedo than increasing Antarctic Sea Ice.

Poster RACookPE1978 at WUWT disagrees and I hope he does not mind me reblogging  his comment here.

“The Antarctic Sea Ice at its 16.5 million km^2 maximum near the equinox in mid-September is a near crown-shape: A circular ring whose edge is between 62 south and 60 south latitude. During its mid-winter GROWTH range – that period BEFORE its maximum extent when its will reflect the most solar energy – it will have about 50% of its area between 66.5 south (the Antarctic Circle) and 60 south latitude.

Now, at that latitude, EVEN AT MID NH SUMMER (darkest time of the year for the Antarctic continent in mid-winter) the Antarctic sea ice WILL be reflecting light energy … for the simple reason that the Antarctic sea ice is exposed to southern hemisphere sunlight every day – even at the shortest day if the winter at June 22.

BUT … Antarctic Sea Ice is NOT at its maximum at mid-winter (the darkest days), but rather, Antarctic Sea Ice is at its maximum at the equinox when there IS sunlight for 12 hours per every latitude on the planet. Further, Antarctic Sea Ice at its maximum IS exposed to strongly absorbed sunlight at solar incidence angle between 15 and 30 degrees for 10 of those 12 hours. Worse, from a cooling world standpoint, a DECREASE in Arctic Sea ice from its present “circular cap” up between 81 north latitude and the pole DOES NOT result in increased solar absorption into the exposed sea surface, but rather an increased LOSS of heat energy from the exposed water due to evaporation and radiation.

The difference? The angle of the incidence sunlight. In the Antarctic, the light is inbound on the newly freezing sea ice at 30 degrees angle: At 30-25 degrees incidence angle, open water absorbs 90-95% of the inbound energy, sea ice reflects about 98 percent of the incident energy.

in the Arctic, at 4-8 degrees incidence angle, open (rough) water reflects 95% of the solar energy. Ice reflects about 98% of the incoming solar energy. Open water loses another 117 watts/m^2 compared to ice-covered water.

Thus, “simple” physics and geography shows that an increase in Antarctic Sea by 1.5 million km^2 ABOVE its previous “average” of 15.0 million km^2 SIGNIFICANTLY increases heat loss from the planet. An (potential) loss even of the entire remaining sea ice of 3.4 million km^2 increases heat loss from the planet.

And NO IPCC report nor ANY climate model predicts ANY increase in Antarctic sea ice at the same time as a Arctic Sea Ice decline. They only predict sea ice declines due to “a warming world” and “prove” a warming world by that same sea ice decline.”

 

WOW!!!! Antarctic Sea Ice Extent All Time Records Set in 2012

Update: Take at look at the amazing AMO vs Arctic vs Antarctic graph here.

As you may know, I have been using Cryosphere’s Antarctic Sea Ice Area data to show the record levels of Antarctic Sea Ice.

But I just found another data set, NOAA’s Sea Ice Extent here. (thanks to commenter HaroldW at the Blackboard)

And it turns out day 265 set an all time record, and then day 266 broke that record. Days 265 through 270 are now the 6 highest Antarctic Sea Ice Extent’s of all time!!!!

11 of the top 15 are now 2012.

Anyone wonder why NOAA isn’t making a fuss about this?

Year Day of Year Ice Extent
2012 266 19.45418
2012 268 19.4478
2012 267 19.44631
2012 270 19.4433
2012 269 19.41601
2012 265 19.36135
2006 264 19.35934
2012 257 19.35567
2012 271 19.35207
2006 267 19.34999
2012 264 19.34204
2012 259 19.33522
2006 265 19.3289
2006 268 19.32669
2012 258 19.31503

HADSST2 Southern Hemisphere Aug 2012 – Cooling For 15 Years

Using data from the Climate Research Unit of the UEA , it appears sea surface temperatures may explain Antarctic Sea Ice at record levels.

SST in the southern hemisphere have a cooling trend of -0.068C / decade.over the last 15 years.

Antarctic Sea Ice – Could it get any closer without breaking the all time record?

Update: While Ice Area came super close to a new all time record, 2012 broke the Ice Extent All Time Record Twice!!!!!  Read about it here.

Antarctic Sea Ice is now only 10,652.5 sq km from breaking the all-time, end of the world, a new ice age is coming , CO2 is making the world freeze!!!!!

The current sea ice is  2,126,841 sq km higher than the lowest amount on this day which occurred in 1986.

The record is 16.23238 million sq km and todays sea ice is oh so close at 16.22173 million sq km.

Click on the image for a better view.

Antarctic Sea Ice Area Growing Again!!!

After a few days of shrinking, Antarctic Sea Ice Area is growing again and trying for a new all time record.

The horizontal blue line is the all time record (by warmist standards). Go red go!

Only 112,000 sq km to go!

Year Day of Year Ice Area
2007 263 16.2323818
2007 264 16.2156487
2007 265 16.1711521
2007 266 16.1504288
2012 259 16.1458836
2012 266 16.1204205
2007 267 16.1177235
2012 258 16.1003437
2012 257 16.0984936
2007 262 16.0848694
2007 268 16.0605392
2012 256 16.0570793
2012 260 16.0534458
2010 227 16.0503387
2000 253 16.0354385
2007 256 16.0280628
2007 272 16.0231705
2010 226 16.0212231
2012 255 16.0202618
2012 254 16.0092392
2010 228 16.0086727

Save The Coal – Burn a Forest!

Drax Group Plc (DRX) will spend $1 billion to turn the U.K.’s biggest coal-fired plant into western Europe’s largest clean- energy producer. The utility plans to convert one of the site’s six units to burn wood pellets by June, said Chief Executive Officer Dorothy Thompson. It intends to switch two more units to wood at a later date, investments that if completed will see it harvest a forest four times the size of Rhode Island each year

“While burning biomass releases carbon dioxide, the EU deems the technology carbon-neutral because trees absorb emissions in a similar proportion to what they release in burning. Opponents argue that it’s hard to ensure enough is being planted to compensate for what is burned.”

Opponents? By opponents do they mean sane people? Or do they mean greenies who are slightly less insane than the average greenie?

“Wood pellets are bulkier than coal, need to be kept dry and handled more gently. They can create dust if stored in the open. To deal with this, Drax is building silos out of plastics, foam, steel and concrete, with conveyor floors and capable of holding 700,000 metric tons of biomass.”

This is great … all those jobs and all that plastic and foam and steel and concrete (did you know concrete produces a lot of CO2?)

Green policies are saving the poor unfortunate coal and killing off four forests the size of Rhode Island (which is actually quite small but it sounds scary).

I like trees. I have no objection to trees being cut down to provide useful things like houses and paper.

But to burn vast quantities of trees and to build up a huge new infrastructure to burn wood instead of burning coal (or preferably natural gas) is insane. But thats what green policies do. They distort the market. They rewards people for doing insane things … like burning forests instead of coal or building wind turbines (and backup power plants) instead of reliable natural gas power plants.

Imagine … power plants burning forests will act as the backup power for unreliable wind turbines!

 

 

NOAA vs USCRN July 2012

The USCRN is a new ‘state of the art’ United States Climate Reference Network.

The USCRN “consists of 114 stations developed, deployed, managed, and maintained by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the continental United States for the express purpose of detecting the national signal of climate change.”

This is the monthly Mean from both NOAA and USCRN for July 2012 for the 48 continental states.

9 states show USCRN stations warmer than NOAA (bold) and 39 show NOAA warmer than USCRN.

State NOAA USCRN NOAA_minus_USCRN
Alabama 81.7 80.83 0.87
Arizona 80.3 81.41 -1.11
Arkansas 84.1 84.2 -0.1
California 75 72.32 2.68
Colorado 71.2 71.29 -0.09
Florida 82.2 81.56 0.64
Georgia 82.3 82 0.3
Idaho 70.2 71.96 -1.76
Illinois 81.7 77.54 4.16
Indiana 80.2 81.68 -1.48
Iowa 79.4 80.06 -0.66
Kansas 84.3 84.02 0.28
Kentucky 80.7 80.24 0.46
Louisiana 82.1 82.04 0.06
Maine 68 66.74 1.26
Michigan 73.3 68.9 4.4
Minnesota 74.4 70.52 3.88
Mississippi 81.8 80.15 1.65
Missouri 83.7 82.04 1.66
Montana 71.4 67.89 3.51
Nebraska 80 79.47 0.53
Nevada 73.6 73.52 0.08
New Hampshire 69.6 70.61 -1.01
New Mexico 74.6 72.91 1.69
New York 71.7 71.15 0.55
North Carolina 80.5 76.52 3.98
North Dakota 73.8 73.16 0.64
Ohio 77.6 76.28 1.32
Oklahoma 85.5 84.78 0.72
Oregon 67.4 66.42 0.98
Rhode Island 73.1 71.87 1.23
South Carolina 82.7 81.86 0.84
South Dakota 78.8 77.86 0.94
Tennessee 80.4 75.92 4.48
Texas 83.4 82.76 0.64
Utah 74.2 74.03 0.17
Virginia 79 80.24 -1.24
Washington 66.6 63.44 3.16
West Virginia 75.5 68 7.5
Wisconsin 74.7 76.64 -1.94
Wyoming 71.5 69.98 1.52

Sunshine Up In Switzerland Since the 1980s

I see Martin Wild is still writing papers proving that Surface Solar Radiation (I tend to call it Bright Sunshine)  is higher than in the past. (Thanks HockeySchtick)

Decadal variations in estimated surface solar radiation over Switzerland since the late 19th century – A. Sanchez-Lorenzo and M. Wild

All-sky SSR has been fairly stable with little variations in the first half of the 20th century, unlike the second half of the 20th century that is characterized also in Switzerland by a dimming from the 1950s to the 1980s and a subsequent brightening.

Does this graph of Sunshine changes look like the temperature changes graphs?

The effect of CO2 doubling is supposed to be 3.7W/m^2. In this table, changes in sunshine from 1981 to 2011 produce 5.59W/m^2 in December to 15.25W/m^2 in April.