Massive Increase In Oldest Thickest Ice Next Week

MYI-Week37-38-2015

Next week is the week when NSIDC celebrates their Arctic birthdays. I generated the animation above showing that the amount of 4+ year old ice will more than double next week, spelling further disaster for climate alarmists.

All of the four year old ice will become five year old ice, three year old ice will become four year old ice – etc.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Massive Increase In Oldest Thickest Ice Next Week

  1. oldbrew says:

    Looks like the inconvenient truth😉

  2. Gail Combs says:

    Don’t expect the government criminals and their MSM enablers to make this information known.

    It would be fun to send this information to EVERY newspaper you can find the address of with “Disaster avoided — no Arctic Death Spiral detected this summer!”

    Death Spiral Details

    • Snowleopard says:

      We probably won’t hear about increasing Arctic ice from MSM until towns and villages experience serious resupply problems caused by the ice, likely a few years away yet.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Just think, cold weather coming and an unreliable, reduced capacity power grid thanks to Obummer. OH Joy!

        The NIMBYS are preventing natural gas pipelines. link

        and Natural gas power plants link
        That Shell Oil and BP hoped would replace coal.

        The proposed nuclear plant here in NC got killed and up to 1/3 may go off line and the idiot Econuts are destroying river dams.

        So UNICORN FARTS TO THE RESCUE!

        This EcoNut site is hilarious as they twist the facts. “–(Significant brown-outs were avoided only because of demand response management—clean power to the reliability rescue again)—“ RIGHTTttttt. Break the power grid and then blame coal.

        On Aug. 1, 2011, a feral heat wave grasped Texas by its drought-parched throat. Temperatures remained over 100 degrees for 40 days—dozens of people died. Air conditioners all over the state struggled valiantly to cool buildings—much of their effort leaked out into the hot Texas sky. Then, one by one, twenty power plants–primarily natural gas peaker plants—winked out because of the temperature. The cost for a kilowatt (kWh) of electricity during the afternoon peak reached $5,000. While inland wind was also low during the heat wave, coastal breezes kicked up. Wind power barely kept the grid operator from having to black out neighborhoods. Grid operators conceded that equipment failures in such heat were to be expected. The irony here is that the power plants which failed—inefficient peakers with a high cost per kWh—are justified on the basis that they will be required only occasionally, during extreme weather—but apparently are not designed to be available in those very circumstances!….

        …former Motorola CEO Bob Galvin and former Edison Electric CTO Kurt Yeager, describes the grid as “Aging, unreliable, inefficient, insecure and incompatible with the needs of a digital economy … each day roughly 500,000 Americans spend at least two hours without electricity. Brownouts, power spikes and even minor blips can bring high-tech production lines to a halt. Such impurities and failures cost business and consumers an estimated $150 billion a year. Moreover, the system is vulnerable to terrorist attack, major storms and even moderately turbulent weather.”….

        During last year’s three day freezing U.S. polar vortex, with temperatures 20-30 degrees lower than normal, demand soared across the Midwest and East. Simultaneously, more than 35,000 megawatts of electricity capacity failed; about half was due to inadequate fuel supply, either frozen coal piles or natural gas supply shortfalls; the other half was due to equipment freezing in the severe cold….
        http://ecowatch.com/2014/12/29/carl-pope-grid-reliability-myth/

        • Andy DC says:

          If retirees are going to flock to extremely hot places, like Texas and Arizona, they are going to drop like flies when the AC fails. In places like that, AC is not a luxury for the elderly, it is an absolute necessity. But these environmental whack jobs don’t care about humanity as much as they care about some snail or some snake.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Andy, that is why we picked NC instead of further south. The heat is not a killer and it is not all that cold either. Also there is no water problem.

        • Latitude says:

          Gail, I read the other day that clouds and the solar eclipse were the worst things for solar…the instant ramp down in the shade…and instant ramp bakc up in the sun

          ..I hadn’t thought about that

        • Jason Calley says:

          Hey Gail! “On Aug. 1, 2011, a feral heat wave grasped Texas by its drought-parched throat. Temperatures remained over 100 degrees for 40 days—dozens of people died.”

          Of course way back in 1980 when I was in Dallas we had 52 days straight of 100 degrees or over. 40 days? Luxury by comparison. Maybe the CO2 is cooling things down.

          “The cost for a kilowatt (kWh) of electricity during the afternoon peak reached $5,000.”

          I think that the ecowatch people have no intuitive feeling for what a kWh is. $5,000 for a kWh? Really? On the other hand, maybe they know what a kWh is, but just have no idea what a dollar is.

        • Jason Calley says:

          Hey Latitude! “Gail, I read the other day that clouds and the solar eclipse were the worst things for solar…the instant ramp down in the shade…and instant ramp bakc up in the sun”

          I have not heard of that as a problem in large arrays, but in smaller home units it can be an issue if not designed properly. My understanding is this (but someone please correct me if you have a more clear understanding). In very large panels or in arrays that do not have appropriate blocking diode to prevent reverse current, the sunlit part of the array can feed current backwards through the shaded panels. If the reverse current flow is large enough it can damage the shaded panels. A proper design will have diodes to prevent the back feed. In an odd turn of fate, less efficient panels (those which have a higher internal resistance) are less susceptible to damage. Of course the higher internal resistance also means that the panels are less productive during normal usage.

        • Latitude says:

          Jason, what I was reading was specifically about the solar eclipse and the solar in Germany..they mentioned clouds too though….the fear was that it would destroy the entire solar system somehow and do something to the grid too…I forget exactly, but it could have destroyed the whole thing and they didn’t know enough about it….what saved them was it was cloudy in Germany when the eclipse hit…so it wasn’t a on (sun) off (no sun) back on (sun) thing…they still don’t know if the system can handle that

        • Gail Combs says:

          latitude,
          I don’t know enough about electricity, but yes I could see that might be a problem.
          Something like surge currents.
          >>>>>>>>>>>>
          Jason, I though you guys would like
          “The cost for a kilowatt (kWh) of electricity during the afternoon peak reached $5,000.” Maybe a “gigawatt [GW]” and not a kilowatt?
          (1,000,000 kW = 1 GW)

          Journalism certainly seems to be dead. Zero checks on the data are made.

        • Snowleopard says:

          Yes Eco-Nut is a much better name for the ecowatch site. Some folks who argue with me like to use it as a source, so I’ve been there before.

          I’m in NH and we have our own little anti-pipeline circus along the south central border with MA. I’ve several supposedly libertarian acquaintances in that area and they are all against the pipeline. One is a real NIMBY, ie. the proposed route IS through his back yard. I can understand that, but not the out of state activists.

          One thing Kinder-Morgan did that was smart was to propose many NE projects at once to split up the traveling activists.

          There are a few things they do wrong though. They could approach and survey the landowners earlier, before announcing the route, especially when considering multiple routes. That could communicate concern for landowner wishes.

          Landowners usually met anti-pipeline activists many times before seeing anyone from the pipeline, and then usually at a public meeting with the activists present. The company, once they decide on a route, should talk to the abutting landowners privately and develop support before announcing projects.

          Most of the towns the pipeline would go through here have no natural gas access and Kinder-Morgan is not offering to arrange for any, that is a mistake. They could have made those towns partners if they convinced a utility to distribute to the towns along the route. Lots of folks using expensive propane and oil would be happy to switch to natural gas, save money and not have to worry about deliveries in snowstorms. Perhaps landowners abutting the pipeline could be offered a lower rate? These folks would then be pressuring their town planning boards to approve and support the project.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Snowleopard,

          As I recall the southern part of NH was invaded by MA Progressives who voted for all sorts of Progressive social programs and then were horrified when handed the bill. They therefore moved to NH to escape MA taxes and then complained about the lack of social programs and services.

          Progressives are truly too dumb to add 1 and 1 and come up with 2.

          (I have lived in Hudson, Londonderry and Plastow.)

        • Caleb says:

          Just so you know, Gail, I am opposed to a pipeline through my back yard here in New Hampshire , especially when it is for export to Europe and we don’t get any of it. It will totally scar our hills, cut right through the aquifer that supplies my well, and a “pumping station” a mile from my farm-childcare will involve what is a modified jet engine running 24-7 and stinking up our air. It is all done to make some one far away rich and to make Putin poor. I don’t matter a -bleep-.

          Not all NIMBY’s are leftists. It just doesn’t seem constitutional for an oil company to seize the land of private citizens for their own profit, using eminent domain.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Caleb,
          I am with Snowleapord on this. The pipeline companies should ASK the land owners and make deals with the towns to provide CHEAP natural gas to the towns involved.

          The natural gas (and coal) should be FOR the USA and not for the EU who can go drill for their own natural gas. They have plenty! Am I an isolationist? You betcha!

          My comment was about the energy supply for the USA and that we are being crucified.
          SEE: JEFFID: America is voluntarily shutting down its energy production

          In short can the USA survive a 20% reduction (201GW) of generating capacity for three years or are there going to be frequent blackouts sparking riots? The reduction of capacity so far has already brought the grid to the edge. There is no more spare capacity buffering the system from what I can see.

          …Last winter, bitterly cold weather placed massive stress on the US electrical system ― and the system almost broke. On January 7 in the midst of the polar vortex, PJM Interconnection, the Regional Transmission Organization serving the heart of America from New Jersey to Illinois, experienced a new all-time peak winter load of almost 142,000 megawatts.

          Eight of the top ten of PJM’s all-time winter peaks occurred in January 2014. Heroic efforts by grid operators saved large parts of the nation’s heartland from blackouts during record-cold temperature days. Nicholas Akins, CEO of American Electric Power, stated in Congressional testimony, “This country did not just dodge a bullet ― we dodged a cannon ball.”… dailycaller(DOT)com/2014/04/23/americas-power-grid-at-the-limit-the-road-to-electrical-blackouts/

          To expand on what Jeff has said:
          As I said above the new natural gas plants and the pipelines to replace coal are not being built as planned while the coal plants are being shuttered at 5 times the rate expected. Most of the plant closings are on the east coast where it just so happens “George Soros spent $33 MILLION bankrolling Ferguson demonstrators to create ‘echo chamber’ and drive national protests” SEE: (wwwDOT)dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2913625/Billionaire-George-Soros-spent-33MILLION-bankrolling-Ferguson-demonstrators-create-echo-chamber-drive-national-protests.html

          The 1977 riots during a 24 hour blackout will give you a taste for what is being planned.
          SEE: (wwwDOT)brooklynhistory.org/blog/2011/07/07/the-1977-blackout/

          #2. Nuclear plants are not being build fast enough and 1/3 may be shutdown. While there are plans for a number of new reactors, no more than four new units will come on line by 2020. The planned reactor here in NC just got shelved so who knows whether those four units will ever get build amid all the protests and lawsuits. Besides 2020 is much too late to save the USA from the planned blackouts of 2017. link and link

          #3. Instead of building new hydro, dams are being torn down and building new hydro plants is a nightmare. link and link

          #4. The reality is a lot more coal plant capacity is being shuttered than was initially expected. “EPA’s power plant-level modeling projected that Agency regulations would close 14.5 GW of generating capacity.” This was WAY under the actual number of closures. “More than 72 gigawatts (GW) of electrical generating capacity have already, or are now set to retire because of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulations.”

          ..original modeling of the MACT rule and original CSAPR rules estimated that under the worst case, or “strict” scenarios, 16.3 GW of electricity capacity would be closed due to the regulations, and the Department of Energy’s (DOE) “stringent” test showed that only 21 GW of generating capacity would be closed…

          Really underestimated that didn’t they?

          And this does not include the temporary 18 month closures for retro-fitting with a three year window so that half the plants needing retrofiting go down and then the other half with a total of three years worth of closures. So thats another 129 GWs shut down for three years. In 2013 the total installed electricity generation summer capacity in the United States was 1,060 Gigawatts(GW), down 3 Gigawatts from 2012. Can the USA survive a 20% reduction (201GW) of generating capacity for three years or is there going to be frequent blackouts sparking riots?

          ..NERC estimates that nearly a quarter of our coal-fired capacity could be off-line by 2018 and that as many as 677 coal-fired units (258 gigawatts) would need to be temporarily shut down to install EPA-mandated equipment.[ii] These EPA regulations must be implemented within a 3-year window and the mandated equipment takes about 18 months to install. Because EPA’s three year timeline is so tight and the regulations affect so many units, utility companies are not sure that they can meet the standards and ensure reliability of the electricity system at the same time….

          instituteforenergyresearch(dot)org/analysis/generating-companies-are-shuttering-coal-plants-at-record-rates-eia-reports/

          http://instituteforenergyresearch(DOT)org/analysis/obamas-war-on-coal-continues-while-global-demand-increases/

          http://instituteforenergyresearch(DOT)org/topics/policy/power-plant-closures/

          Until recently I thought the coal plants were being mothballed. Unfortunately that is not true. They are being DESTROYED! That means if we run out of electric power here on the east coast in winter we are totally screwed. (wwwDOT)powermag.com/tricky-business-taking-down-old-coal-plants/

          On top of that, thanks to the Obama edicts many towns are banning wood burning stoves/fire places and the EPA has put stringent new regs on newer models of wood stoves.

          EPA ban on wood stoves is freezing out rural America: But the larger problem is the Sue and Settle sweetheart lawsuits through which Greens dictate policy.

          …The EPA has recently banned the production and sale of 80% of America’s current wood-burning stoves…

          The impacts of the EPA ruling will affect many families. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2011 survey statistics, 2.4 million American housing units (12% of all homes) burned wood as their primary heating fuel, compared with 7% that depended upon fuel oil.

          Local governments in some states have gone even further than the EPA, banning not only the sale of noncompliant stoves, but even their use as fireplaces. As a result, owners face fines for infractions….

          Only weeks after the EPA enacted its new stove rules, attorneys general of seven states sued the agency to crack down on wood-burning water heaters as well. The lawsuit was filed by Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont, all predominantly Democrat states. Claiming that the new EPA regulations didn’t go far enough to decrease particle pollution levels, the plaintiffs cited agency estimates that outdoor wood boilers will produce more than 20% of wood-burning emissions by 2017. A related suit was filed by the environmental group EarthJustice….

          Utah Proposes Winter Wood Burning Ban to Improve Air Quality“The ban would eliminate solid fuel burning in fireplaces and wood/coal stoves from Nov. 1 to March 15” (wwwDOT)ehhi.org/woodsmoke/utah_proposes_ban_0115.shtml

          Should Canadians have a right to burn wood for heat? “…Across the country [Canada], the burning of wood for heat is under fire. In Montreal, it is already illegal to install a new wood burning stove….” (wwwDOT)cantechletter.com/2015/03/canadians-right-burn-wood-heat/

          The insane in charge of DC are really driving us into a corner. Just in time for it to hit when a REPUBLICAN is president. (Clinton did this by setting up the Foreclosure mess to hit under the last Bush.)

  3. Olde Chris says:

    Was there a massive loss of multi year ice on the pacific side?

  4. Stewart Pid says:

    I’m pretty sure it will be thin, rotten 4+ year old ice ……. sarc

  5. oppti says:

    A study that might interest You:
    http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/9/4205/2015/tcd-9-4205-2015.pdf

    More sea ice is transported buy wind out from Arctic .

  6. cfgjd says:

    We already know that volume is lower than last year since the false recovery has stalled.

    • AndyG55 says:

      YAWN.. you truly are pathetic little little cretin..

      A single cell amoeba would have more intelligence than you.

    • Gail Combs says:

      cfgd “We already know that volume is lower than last year since the false recovery has stalled.”
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

      No you don’t because YOU CAN’T KNOW! The maths just got invented and published this month!

      Solving the problem of sea ice thickness distribution using molecular concepts
      ….Although today’s highly precise satellites do a fine job of measuring the area of sea ice, measuring the volume has always been a tricky business. The volume is reflected through the distribution of sea ice thickness — which is subject to a number of complex processes, such as growth, melting, ridging, rafting, and the formation of open water.

      For decades, scientists have been guided by a 1975 theory (by Thorndike et al.) that could not be completely tested, due to the unwieldy nature of sea ice thickness distribution. The theory relied upon an intransigent term — one that could not be related to the others — to represent the mechanical redistribution of ice thickness. As a result, the complete theory could not be mathematically tested.

      Enter Yale professor John Wettlaufer, inspired by the staff and students at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Summer Study Program at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, in Massachusetts. Over the course of the summer, Wettlaufer and Yale graduate student Srikanth Toppaladoddi developed and articulated a new way of thinking about the space-time evolution of sea ice thickness.

      The resulting paper appears in the Sept. 17 edition of the journal Physical Review Letters.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Just to illustrate that ClimAstrologists DON’T KNOW what the ice thickness is and are pulling the numbers out of where the sun don’t shine:

      Robot Sub Finds Surprisingly Thick Antarctic Sea Ice

      …Not only is the amount of sea ice increasing each year, but an underwater robot now shows the ice is also much thicker than was previously thought, a new study reports.

      The discovery adds to the ongoing mystery of Antarctica’s expanding sea ice. According to climate models, the region’s sea ice should be shrinking each year because of global warming. Instead, satellite observations show the ice is expanding, and the continent’s sea ice has set new records for the past three winters.

      Over the last four years, the international group of researchers has mapped the bottom of sea ice with an underwater robot, or autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV), during two research cruises offshore Antarctica. The AUV can swim to a depth of about 100 feet (30 m) and has upward-looking sonar to survey the bottom of the sea ice.

      Almost all of the sea ice that forms during the Antarctic winter melts during the summer, so scientists had assumed most of the ice never grew very thick. Previous studies suggested the ice was usually 3 to 6 feet (1 to 2 m) thick, with a few rare spots reaching up to 16 feet (5 m) in thickness. For comparison, most of the Arctic sea ice is twice as thick (6 to 9 feet, or 2 to 3 m), with some regions covered with 12 to 15 feet (4 to 5 m) of ice…

      The robot sub surveys, which were spot-checked by drilling and shipboard tests, suggest Antarctica’s average ice thickness is considerably higher than previous estimates. On average, the thickness of the ice was 4.6 to 18 feet (1.4 to 5.5 m). In the three regions it surveyed, the robot sub found that deformed, thickened ice accounted for at least half of and as much as 76 percent of the total ice volume, the researchers report.

      “Our study shows that we’re probably missing some of this thick ice, and we need to try to account for that when we try to compare what we see in models and satellites to what we see in the field,” Maksym said.

      The thickest ice measured during the survey was about 65 feet (20 m) thick, in the Bellingshausen Sea, Maksym told Live Science. In the Weddell Sea, the maximum ice thickness hit more than 45 feet (14 m), and offshore of Wilkes Land, the ice was about 53 feet (16 m) thick….

  7. AndyG55 says:

    Arctic sea ice climbing fast.

    Now level with 2014, 2010 and whatever other year that is from earlier.

    No downward spiral here.

    I hope it crosses over those other lines..

    …that would be very inconvenient for the warmista religion.

    Pity its so, so FAR ABOVE the Holocene average though, the people living up there could sure use a break from all that sea ice. A dip back to the LIA would be a real PITA !!

  8. Caleb says:

    And of course that map doesn’t include the “baby ice” that is swiftly growing, It also doesn’t include the less-than-20% concentration ice that forms the southern boundary of “The Slot” in the Beaufort Sea. Watch how fast that all freezes over.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s