scholarly journals Arctic sea-ice morphological characteristics in summer 1996

2001 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 165-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Wadhams ◽  
N.R. Davis

AbstractA sea-ice thickness profile obtained in September 1996 from the Greenland Sea and the Eurasian Basin, extending as far as the North Pole, has shown an unusually open ice cover with low mean drafts, large amounts of open water and little deep pressure ridging. Comparisons with data obtained from the same region in October 1976 show that mean ice draft has declined by 43% and that the decline can largely be ascribed to a loss of the thickest ice.

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Bathiany ◽  
B. van der Bolt ◽  
M. S. Williamson ◽  
T. M. Lenton ◽  
M. Scheffer ◽  
...  

Abstract. It has been widely debated whether Arctic sea-ice loss can reach a tipping point, beyond which a large sea-ice area disappears abruptly. An important argument for this scenario is the destabilising role of the ice-albedo feedback. The theory of dynamical systems predicts a "slowing down" when a system destabilises towards a tipping point. In simple stochastic systems this can result in increasing variance and autocorrelation, potentially yielding an early warning of an abrupt change. Here we aim to establish whether the loss of Arctic sea ice would follow these conceptual predictions, an d which trends in sea ice variability can be expected from pre-industrial conditions toward an Arctic that is ice-free during the whole year. To this end, we apply a model hierarchy consisting of two box models and one comprehensive Earth system model. We find a consistent and robust decrease of the ice volume's annual relaxation time before summer ice is lost because thinner ice can adjust more quickly to perturbations. Thereafter, the relaxation time increases, mainly because the system becomes dominated by the ocean water's large heat capacity when the ice-free season becomes longer. Both trends carry over to the autocorrelation of sea ice thickness in time series. Also accounting for the geometric effect of increasing open-water formation efficiency for thinning ice, we obtain an increasing variability in sea-ice area fraction, but a decreasing variability in sea-ice thickness. These changes are robust to the nature and origin of climate variability in the models and hardly depend on the balance of feed backs. Therefore, characteristic trends can be expected in the future. As these trends are not specific to the existence of abrupt ice loss, the prospects for early warnings seem very limited. This result also has implications for statistical indicators in other systems whose effective "mass" changes over time, affecting the trend of their relaxation time. However, the robust relation between state and variability would allow an estimate of sea-ice variability from only short observations. This could help one to estimate the likelihood and persistence of extreme events in the future.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. L. Tilling ◽  
A. Ridout ◽  
A. Shepherd

Abstract. Timely observations of sea ice thickness help us to understand Arctic climate, and can support maritime activities in the Polar Regions. Although it is possible to calculate Arctic sea ice thickness using measurements acquired by CryoSat-2, the latency of the final release dataset is typically one month, due to the time required to determine precise satellite orbits. We use a new fast delivery CryoSat-2 dataset based on preliminary orbits to compute Arctic sea ice thickness in near real time (NRT), and analyse this data for one sea ice growth season from October 2014 to April 2015. We show that this NRT sea ice thickness product is of comparable accuracy to that produced using the final release CryoSat-2 data, with an average thickness difference of 5 cm, demonstrating that the satellite orbit is not a critical factor in determining sea ice freeboard. In addition, the CryoSat-2 fast delivery product also provides measurements of Arctic sea ice thickness within three days of acquisition by the satellite, and a measurement is delivered, on average, within 10, 7 and 6 km of each location in the Arctic every 2, 14 and 28 days respectively. The CryoSat-2 NRT sea ice thickness dataset provides an additional constraint for seasonal predictions of Arctic climate change, and will allow industries such as tourism and transport to navigate the polar oceans with safety and care.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francois Massonnet ◽  
Sara Fleury ◽  
Florent Garnier ◽  
Ed Blockley ◽  
Pablo Ortega Montilla ◽  
...  

<p>It is well established that winter and spring Arctic sea-ice thickness anomalies are a key source of predictability for late summer sea-ice concentration. While numerical general circulation models (GCMs) are increasingly used to perform seasonal predictions, they are not systematically taking advantage of the wealth of polar observations available. Data assimilation, the study of how to constrain GCMs to produce a physically consistent state given observations and their uncertainties, remains, therefore, an active area of research in the field of seasonal prediction. With the recent advent of satellite laser and radar altimetry, large-scale estimates of sea-ice thickness have become available for data assimilation in GCMs. However, the sea-ice thickness is never directly observed by altimeters, but rather deduced from the measured sea-ice freeboard (the height of the emerged part of the sea ice floe) based on several assumptions like the depth of snow on sea ice and its density, which are both often poorly estimated. Thus, observed sea-ice thickness estimates are potentially less reliable than sea-ice freeboard estimates. Here, using the EC-Earth3 coupled forecasting system and an ensemble Kalman filter, we perform a set of sensitivity tests to answer the following questions: (1) Does the assimilation of late spring observed sea-ice freeboard or thickness information yield more skilful predictions than no assimilation at all? (2) Should the sea-ice freeboard assimilation be preferred over sea-ice thickness assimilation? (3) Does the assimilation of observed sea-ice concentration provide further constraints on the prediction? We address these questions in the context of a realistic test case, the prediction of 2012 summer conditions, which led to the all-time record low in Arctic sea-ice extent. We finally formulate a set of recommendations for practitioners and future users of sea ice observations in the context of seasonal prediction.</p>


Sensors ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (24) ◽  
pp. 7011
Author(s):  
Feng Xiao ◽  
Fei Li ◽  
Shengkai Zhang ◽  
Jiaxing Li ◽  
Tong Geng ◽  
...  

Satellite altimeters can be used to derive long-term and large-scale sea ice thickness changes. Sea ice thickness retrieval is based on measurements of freeboard, and the conversion of freeboard to thickness requires knowledge of the snow depth and snow, sea ice, and sea water densities. However, these parameters are difficult to be observed concurrently with altimeter measurements. The uncertainties in these parameters inevitably cause uncertainties in sea ice thickness estimations. This paper introduces a new method based on least squares adjustment (LSA) to estimate Arctic sea ice thickness with CryoSat-2 measurements. A model between the sea ice freeboard and thickness is established within a 5 km × 5 km grid, and the model coefficients and sea ice thickness are calculated using the LSA method. Based on the newly developed method, we are able to derive estimates of the Arctic sea ice thickness for 2010 through 2019 using CryoSat-2 altimetry data. Spatial and temporal variations of the Arctic sea ice thickness are analyzed, and comparisons between sea ice thickness estimates using the LSA method and three CryoSat-2 sea ice thickness products (Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI), Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling (CPOM), and NASA Goddard Space Flight Centre (GSFC)) are performed for the 2018–2019 Arctic sea ice growth season. The overall differences of sea ice thickness estimated in this study between AWI, CPOM, and GSFC are 0.025 ± 0.640 m, 0.143 ± 0.640 m, and −0.274 ± 0.628 m, respectively. Large differences between the LSA and three products tend to appear in areas covered with thin ice due to the limited accuracy of CryoSat-2 over thin ice. Spatiotemporally coincident Operation IceBridge (OIB) thickness values are also used for validation. Good agreement with a difference of 0.065 ± 0.187 m is found between our estimates and the OIB results.


2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 152-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mengmeng Li ◽  
Chang-Qing Ke ◽  
Hongjie Xie ◽  
Xin Miao ◽  
Xiaoyi Shen ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 1325-1345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yinghui Liu ◽  
Jeffrey R. Key ◽  
Xuanji Wang ◽  
Mark Tschudi

Abstract. Sea ice is a key component of the Arctic climate system, and has impacts on global climate. Ice concentration, thickness, and volume are among the most important Arctic sea ice parameters. This study presents a new record of Arctic sea ice thickness and volume from 1984 to 2018 based on an existing satellite-derived ice age product. The relationship between ice age and ice thickness is first established for every month based on collocated ice age and ice thickness from submarine sonar data (1984–2000) and ICESat (2003–2008) and an empirical ice growth model. Based on this relationship, ice thickness is derived for the entire time period from the weekly ice age product, and the Arctic monthly sea ice volume is then calculated. The ice-age-based thickness and volume show good agreement in terms of bias and root-mean-square error with submarine, ICESat, and CryoSat-2 ice thickness, as well as ICESat and CryoSat-2 ice volume, in February–March and October–November. More detailed comparisons with independent data from Envisat for 2003 to 2010 and CryoSat-2 from CPOM, AWI, and NASA GSFC (Goddard Space Flight Center) for 2011 to 2018 show low bias in ice-age-based thickness. The ratios of the ice volume uncertainties to the mean range from 21 % to 29 %. Analysis of the derived data shows that the ice-age-based sea ice volume exhibits a decreasing trend of −411 km3 yr−1 from 1984 to 2018, stronger than the trends from other datasets. Of the factors affecting the sea ice volume trends, changes in sea ice thickness contribute more than changes in sea ice area, with a contribution of at least 80 % from changes in sea ice thickness from November to May and nearly 50 % in August and September, while less than 30 % is from changes in sea ice area in all months.


2020 ◽  
Vol 125 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alek A. Petty ◽  
Nathan T. Kurtz ◽  
Ron Kwok ◽  
Thorsten Markus ◽  
Thomas A. Neumann

Eos ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 93 (6) ◽  
pp. 57-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan Gardner ◽  
Jackie Richter-Menge ◽  
Sinead Farrell ◽  
John Brozena

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 521-543 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leandro Ponsoni ◽  
François Massonnet ◽  
Thierry Fichefet ◽  
Matthieu Chevallier ◽  
David Docquier

Abstract. The ocean–sea ice reanalyses are one of the main sources of Arctic sea ice thickness data both in terms of spatial and temporal resolution, since observations are still sparse in time and space. In this work, we first aim at comparing how the sea ice thickness from an ensemble of 14 reanalyses compares with different sources of observations, such as moored upward-looking sonars, submarines, airbornes, satellites, and ice boreholes. Second, based on the same reanalyses, we intend to characterize the timescales (persistence) and length scales of sea ice thickness anomalies. We investigate whether data assimilation of sea ice concentration by the reanalyses impacts the realism of sea ice thickness as well as its respective timescales and length scales. The results suggest that reanalyses with sea ice data assimilation do not necessarily perform better in terms of sea ice thickness compared with the reanalyses which do not assimilate sea ice concentration. However, data assimilation has a clear impact on the timescales and length scales: reanalyses built with sea ice data assimilation present shorter timescales and length scales. The mean timescales and length scales for reanalyses with data assimilation vary from 2.5 to 5.0 months and 337.0 to 732.5 km, respectively, while reanalyses with no data assimilation are characterized by values from 4.9 to 7.8 months and 846.7 to 935.7 km, respectively.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document