Recent Arctic Sea Ice Decline Is Not Accelerating

It is time to return to examining the relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide and the average surface area of northern polar ice in September of the previous year. I therefore once again conducted a regression analysis of the relationship between these two variables—over the period from 1979 to 2025—using carbon dioxide concentrations measured at Mauna Loa and ice area data from the NSIDC.

Since 2018 (using data from 2017), the basic idea underlying the analysis I have carried out annually is derived from the following premises: (1) according to the climate change hypothesis, climate change is an accelerating process; (2) models predict that temperature increases in the Arctic will be faster than in the rest of the globe; and (3) changes in polar ice area serve as a good proxy for temperature changes in the northernmost parts of the Earth.

In the figure below, the years marked in blue indicate those starting points from which annual measurements have demonstrated the existence of such a relationship according to the criterion I use (P < 0.01 in two consecutive years). The height of the bars shows how many years after that starting point this statistical significance was achieved.

The years marked in red are those for which no such statistical significance has been found. In these cases, the height of the bars indicates the number of years available for the analysis.

As my esteemed reader notes, during the early years of the time series the minimum extent of polar ice decreased in such a way that—according to the regression analysis—it exhibited a clear statistical cause-and-effect relationship with atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. Moreover, this relationship strengthened almost year by year up to the time series beginning in 2001.

After that, however, a change occurred: although atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations continued to rise steadily, the change in ice area did not reach statistical significance until last year. At that point, the observational series beginning in 2002 also became statistically significant, but only on the basis of an observational record twice as long as that required for the series beginning in the previous year.

This year, what was new was that the time series beginning in 2003 also reached statistical significance. It can therefore be concluded that northern sea ice has indeed melted in a statistically significant manner in recent years as well, but that the process—at least as measured by its annual minimum extent—has not been accelerating, as climate models have predicted.

* * *

In this respect, it is also interesting that although Arctic sea ice reached a larger minimum extent this year than in six other years (2007, 2012, 2016, 2020, 2003, and 2024), it melted rapidly in October, November, and December, and its surface area reached the smallest December average in the measurement record last month. This is shown in the figure below (the early part of which admittedly raises questions, but for which I am unable to provide an explanation).

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Observations on Arctic Sea Ice Challenge the Notion of Particularly Rapid Melting
Exceptionally Warm July Falls Short of Records
Exceptionally Warm July Falls Short of Records

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Pohjoinen merijää sulaa sittenkin

Observations on Arctic Sea Ice Challenge the Notion of Particularly Rapid Melting

I promised at the end of September, in my Finnish-language blog, to return to the topic of this year’s Arctic sea ice situation. At that time, it was already known—based on NSIDC’s daily measurements—that the annual minimum extent was the eleventh smallest in the history of the statistics. 

Then, at the beginning of October, the data on the average sea ice area for September was released. It appears at the endpoint of the curve below, under which only the points for the years 2007, 2016, 2019, and 2020 fall. Notably, this supports the view that the ice area has remained at the same level since 2007—that is, for 12 years already. The figure also clearly shows how, in September 2012, the ice area was distinctly smaller than in any other year.

This observation supports a recently published research report by Chinese scientists, according to which the phenomenon known as the North Atlantic Oscillation shifted from the lowest point of its negative phase in the early 2010s into a positive phase. As a result, the reduced heat and moisture, as well as the weakened downward longwave radiation, have led to a slowing of Arctic sea ice melting.

According to that study, however, this slowdown in melting would be only an intermediate stage, to be followed in the 2030s or 2040s by a rapid melting of northern sea ice—and subsequently, a series of environmental disasters around the world.

At this stage, of course, it is too early to take a position on that latter risk or its likelihood. Nevertheless, it can be stated that the slowdown in the melting of northern sea ice—at least for the time being—is a fact, one that seems at least partly to challenge the idea that the climate warming responsible for melting the ice is proceeding particularly rapidly in the Arctic region.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Northern Sea Ice Area in 2024 Was Not the Smallest on Record
Can climate models predict the distribution of warming?
Correct minister, ridiculous facts

Stalled Melting of Northern Polar Ice Buys the West Time to Strengthen Arctic Capabilities

One of my greatest interests is the visibility of predicted climate change in the surface area of northern sea ice. Therefore, dear readers, allow me to return once again to this topic, as I have not reported on it for some time in this English-language blog.

According to the August statistics, the average surface area of northern sea ice last August was the seventh smallest in its recorded history, which began in 1979. This was because, over the past year, the ice cover was larger than in August of 2024, 2020, 2019, 2016, 2012, and 2007.

This fact fits well with the already established picture that northern sea ice shrank rapidly from the 1990s until 2007, after which its surface area has shown nothing more than random variation. This reality is also illustrated in the figure I have drawn below, where the X-axis shows the ice area in millions of square kilometers and the Y-axis shows the years.

The maximum extent of Arctic sea ice is usually reached in September, so later this month we will see whether the amount of navigable, ice-free water in the Arctic Ocean exceeds that of previous years. Based on the above statistics, this does not seem likely—but neither does it seem entirely impossible.

The size of northern sea ice naturally has its own scientific significance, particularly in the context of the threat of climate change. In addition, it carries major practical geopolitical importance, since during President Trump’s administration the United States has observed that Russia is clearly ahead of others in this respect.

In this sense, the slowdown of ice melting is very good news for the free Western world, as it gives the U.S. and other nations interested in northern maritime regions more time to build up their own capacities for operating in the Arctic. At the same time, this particularly benefits my home country of Finland, which is indisputably the world leader in building icebreakers and stands ready to offer its expertise to other nations as well.

Previous thought on the same topic:

Big Deal in the Cold North: Finland vs. Canada
Northern Sea Ice Area Has Not Responded to Exceptionally High Temperatures
Ice Sheet Losses in Antarctica and Greenland

Exceptionally Warm July Falls Short of Records

This past July was the third warmest on record globally. According to the Copernicus Climate Service, the global average temperature in July was 16.68 degrees Celsius. That is 0.45 degrees higher than the July average for the years 1991–2020, and 1.25 degrees higher than during the pre-industrial period.

In Europe, July was the fourth warmest on record, with an average temperature of 21.12 degrees—1.3 degrees above the reference period.

In Finland, however, no temperature records were approached, as for example, Helsinki’s warmest July on record still remains clearly in 2010, with a 1.2-degree margin. In Northern Finland, Sodankylä experienced its warmest July in 2018.

Finland, however, saw the second longest heatwave in recorded history, with temperatures exceeding 25 degrees Celsius for 26 consecutive days at several weather stations. However, the record remains unbroken: in 2021, a station in Southeastern Finland recorded a heatwave lasting 31 days.

According to these statistics, the average July area of Arctic sea ice was also relatively small—the sixth smallest since records began in 1979. This fits the broader pattern observed since around 2007, where the area of Arctic sea ice collapsed and has since settled into a new, lower range of variability.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Northern Sea Ice Area in 2024 Was Not the Smallest on Record
Northern Sea Ice Area Has Not Responded to Exceptionally High Temperatures
Reevaluating Arctic Sea Ice Melt: A Closer Look at Trends and Predictions

Finland and the USA: Strong Allies with Shared Interests or a Trade Dispute?

Finland has always had excellent relations with the USA. As a sign of this, President Alexander Stubb has refrained from criticizing Donald Trump’s administration and has instead sought to understand its actions—even to the extent that some have speculated he is overly deferential to it.

There is, of course, an excellent explanation for Stubb’s and Finland’s approach: as a neighbor of Russia—and following the era of Finlandization, when the country had to be cautious in its dealings with the Soviet Union—Finland is now heavily dependent on NATO and, consequently, the USA to guarantee its military security. Nevertheless, Finland will remain a state governed by the rule of law, firmly committed to defending the inviolability of national borders against all major powers. This applies to Denmark as well.

In this context, it is extremely unfortunate that President Trump is threatening the EU—and, by extension, Finland—with trade tariffs that would hinder transatlantic commerce. Such measures would be particularly harmful to open economies like Finland’s, whose prosperity relies heavily on foreign trade. It would not be beneficial for the United States either, as it could negatively impact the very positive attitude that Finns generally have toward Americans.

It remains to be seen whether Trump and his administration understand this and seek to balance trade between the USA and the EU through other means. Moreover, in the end, high US tariffs would be paid by ordinary American voters, which is unlikely to increase Trump’s popularity in his own country.

After all, there are plenty of people in the US who struggle to cover their daily expenses. And they certainly did not vote for Trump so that he would plunge their personal finances into even greater hardship.

* * *

Finally, I would like to share a message with my American readers from my country’s Minister for Foreign Trade, Wille Rydman (Finns Party). At the end of last week, he made the following remarks:

"The United States has been focused on utilizing Alaska’s mineral resources. Here, Finland’s world-class geological expertise can offer significant contributions. The U.S. plans for Alaska have also emphasized the development of basic infrastructure, particularly in telecommunications, an area where Finland has strong capabilities."

"The U.S. has also prioritized improving its situational awareness in the Arctic. There is room for development in sensor technology, measurement and monitoring systems, and the utilization of space technology. Finland has expertise in all these fields."

"We are working to open markets through ICE Pact cooperation, which could allow Finnish shipyards to contribute their capacity to icebreaker construction. North America faces a shortage of shipbuilding capacity, making this a fantastic opportunity for our shipyards... We have the knowledge and capability to build the best icebreakers quickly and at a competitive price. Finnish maritime industry companies have supplied icebreaking technology for the most powerful polar icebreakers, Baltic Sea escort icebreakers, as well as smaller river and port icebreakers. Our expertise is extensive, and the industry operates on a global scale."

I sincerely hope that these considerations reach President Trump’s administration and encourage it to foster cooperation between Finland and the EU—natural allies of the United States—rather than risk a trade war that would harm all parties involved.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Trump’s Tariff Weapon Worked, but Will Finland’s Development Aid Strategy Succeed?
Putin, Trump, and the Prospect of Peace
Greenland's Future: A Battleground of Global Powers?

The Northern Sea Ice Area in 2024 Was Not the Smallest on Record

The year 2024 was apparently the warmest year in recorded temperature history. Therefore, I decided to examine the development of the northern sea ice area this year based on data collected by NASA's National Snow and Ice Data Center.

According to recent statistics, however, the northern polar ice defied my expectations. Its area was not the smallest on record but larger than in 2007, 2016, 2019, and 2020 as seen in the figure below. 

Additionally, its average area was not the smallest in any month of the measurement history. As I wrote earlier, in September, when the ice reaches its annual minimum area, it was the fourth smallest in recorded history.

This past December, however, the northern sea ice was the second smallest on record, so I am eagerly waiting to see what happens in January. Could it possibly shrink further than in previous years, giving hope for the opening of the Northeast Passage for maritime traffic?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Northern Sea Ice Area Has Not Responded to Exceptionally High Temperatures
Russia Pays the Price for Its Foolishness

Reevaluating Arctic Sea Ice Melt: A Closer Look at Trends and Predictions

Northern Sea Ice Area Has Not Responded to Exceptionally High Temperatures

The past October was extremely hot in many places (one, two, three examples), and for that reason, I checked NASA's NSIDC website to see if the northern sea ice might also have started melting. However, this was not the case; rather, it was the fifth largest in recorded history, as shown in the image below, which presents the polar ice area for each October over the years.

The October area of the northern sea ice was at its smallest in 2020, followed in order by 2007, 2016, and 2019. After these years comes the current year, 2024.

Thus, the area of northern sea ice has not responded to the exceptionally high temperatures on Earth’s surface—or, alternatively, there may be inaccuracies in the measurements of either the surface temperature or the ice area. Time will eventually reveal which explanation is correct.

In any case, throughout 2024, the northern sea ice area has not been the smallest on record for any month. In January, it ranked as the 24th smallest, in February the 14th smallest, in March the 25th smallest, in April the 27th smallest, in May the 24th smallest, and even in June it was the 11th smallest. After that, the melting rate of the ice accelerated compared to other years, and in July its area was the 5th smallest on record, in August the 2nd smallest, in September the 4th smallest, and in October the 5th smallest.

I won’t attempt to predict the coming months. Instead, I would like to point out to you - my esteemed readers - that the image above, which I generated based on NSIDC data seems to suggest that the melting of the ice, which began in the early 1990s, may have stabilized around 2007 and is now oscillating around a new equilibrium or is decreasing noticeably more slowly than in previous years.

I wrote earlier this year about a similar phenomenon in the July statistics, and indeed, it is also evident in the statistics for all other months. So, it remains to be seen how the ice area will develop over the last three months of this year.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Reevaluating Arctic Sea Ice Melt: A Closer Look at Trends and Predictions
Climate Model Predictions and the Reality of Arctic Sea Ice
Can climate models predict the distribution of warming?

Reevaluating Arctic Sea Ice Melt: A Closer Look at Trends and Predictions

According to a recent survey, as many as 70 percent of Finnish schoolchildren suffer from mental health issues. A significant cause of this is the news coverage related to climate change and the environment, which has driven even the most gifted young people into deep anxiety.

For this reason, I once again decided to analyze the melting of Arctic sea ice, which has been claimed to result in ice-free waters by the 2030s. Based on the statistics, I created the following image using data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center's dataset "All daily (single day and five-day trailing average) extent values in one file, updated daily," which officially begins in 1987 (prior to this, the dataset only contains data for every second day).

From this dataset, I extracted the minimum extent of Arctic ice for each year and plotted the following image, which shows the annual minimum extent of Arctic ice, its five-year moving average, and a linear trendline generated by Excel, which I manually extended across the entire chart.

From the red five-year moving average, it can be seen that the ice melt can be divided into three phases. From the start of the dataset until the mid-1990s, it was slow, but then accelerated for over a decade, reaching its minimum in 2013. After that, the melting slowed down again.

The black regression curve drawn on the chart for the entire dataset, however, shows that if the trend were to continue as it has in the recorded data, the Arctic sea ice would likely not be ice-free even by 2050. Therefore, the melting predicted by climate scientists for the 2030s must be based on other factors.

To understand this, I drew another image, in which I manually fitted a straight line that follows only the rapid melting phase in the middle of the dataset, aligning with the red five-year moving average. This appears as a green line in the image below.

As my esteemed reader will notice, this line corresponds to the scientific prediction of ice melt in the near future. Thus, it seems that the forecast in question—despite being mathematically and scientifically complex—is ultimately based on a development that would occur if the ice melt follows the trend from the late 1990s to 2013.

But what about the events in Arctic sea ice melting after 2013? To understand this, I performed a similar manual line fitting operation based on the post-2013 data. This is shown as a blue line in the diagram below.

As my esteemed reader will notice, this "data fit" also indicates a downward trend, but a very gradual one. And if this trend prevails in the Arctic, no living person today will witness an ice-free Arctic Ocean. Not even their children.

Therefore, I would hope that media coverage of climate change, and especially the melting of Arctic sea ice, would be less sensationalist and instead highlight the factors that suggest extreme views are unlikely to materialize. These also indicate that the models predicting rapid climate change still involve vast uncertainties, suggesting that humanity most likely has ample time to adapt to the ever-changing environment.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Climate Model Predictions and the Reality of Arctic Sea Ice
Can climate models predict the distribution of warming?
The area of Arctic sea ice was exceptionally large in January

 

Climate Model Predictions and the Reality of Arctic Sea Ice

Climate change caused by humans is expected to be particularly rapid in the Arctic region. As a result, the northern sea ice is expected to melt, perhaps as early as the next decade.

These predictions are based on such complex climate models that even researchers cannot fully understand them, let alone ordinary tax-paying citizens. Therefore, it is extremely interesting to follow the statistics on ice area development published by the National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC).

NSIDC publishes ice area statistics monthly. And now the statistics for June are available, from which I drew the picture below.

As seen in the figure, the ice area in June has varied over the years, but it is not possible to say that it has decreased any further since 2007. It remains to be seen when its development will return to the downward trajectory predicted by climate models—or if it will at all.

In addition to the Arctic ice area, the NSIDC publishes daily statistics on ice extent, which differs from area in a similar way that the surface area of a slice of Swiss cheese including the holes differs from its area without the holes. According to this statistic, the ice extent yesterday was the fourteenth largest for that date in its measurement history.

I have been following these statistics for a long time and have been puzzled by the fact that they are rarely reported in the media aimed at the general public. However, I am sure that many readers would find following the melting of the northern sea ice quite interesting.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
Can climate models predict the distribution of warming?
The area of Arctic sea ice was exceptionally large in January
Does Arctic sea ice melt as atmospheric greenhouse gases increase?

 

Can climate models predict the distribution of warming?

According to climate models, greenhouse gases warm the Arctic region faster than the rest of the world, although there is some discrepancy between their predictions and actual measurements. Therefore, it has been more than interesting to follow the development of the northern sea ice over the years.

The National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC) publishes two statistics on its development: the extent of the ice and its area. Of these, daily data is available for the extent, but only monthly averages for the area.

Now that India has suffered from an unprecedented heatwave and southern Europe has also been reported as one of the areas experiencing the most exceptional temperatures, it has been interesting to note that the latest data on the extent of the northern ice shows it is the 37th largest, or 10th smallest, for this time of year in the measurement history starting from 1979.

The monthly area statistic of the northern polar ice surprises even more, as in May, the ice area was the 23rd largest, or 24th smallest, in the statistics, thus roughly at the median value of the statistics. Therefore, the area of Arctic sea ice does not support the idea that the climate is warming fastest in the Arctic region. And even the estimate based on ice extent supports that only weakly.

All this raises questions about the ability of climate models to predict the distribution of warming caused by greenhouse gases across different parts of the globe. Or alternatively, about the reliability of climate statistics: in this regard, the measurements of the Arctic ice cover, carried out with easily interpretable methods, are surely among the most reliable, even though the two different measurement methods of the NSIDC produce surprisingly divergent views of the size of the northern polar ice cover.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The area of Arctic sea ice was exceptionally large in January
Does Arctic sea ice melt as atmospheric greenhouse gases increase?
The increase in carbon dioxide concentration warms more than anticipated

The area of Arctic sea ice was exceptionally large in January

According to climate models, the world is warming frighteningly fast. And even faster in the Arctic sea ice area, which, according to a fairly recent study, entered a state in 2007 from which its surface area cannot recover through normal climate variability.

Recently, it has also been reported that the temperature of the Earth's oceans during the past El Niño year has been the highest in recorded history. As well as the average global climate temperature.

Based on these premises, one could assume that the current January area of Arctic sea ice would be exceptionally small, and its maximum size this winter would be smaller than ever before in recorded history. Or actually, this assumption could be considered a hypothesis derived from the prevailing climate theory nowadays.

So, I went to check the statistics maintained by the National Snow & Ice Data Center on January sea ice areas. Looking at this data series that started in 1979, I was amazed and decided to list the information it contains in the table below.

From the table, it can be seen that the January sea ice area in the Arctic was the 21st largest in its 46-year (the table only includes 45 years due to missing data for the year 1988) observational history. This is clearly larger than the median value of the dataset. Additionally, we notice that the situation was very similar two years ago in 2022, when the ice extent was even larger than this past January.

Therefore, it is interesting to follow how the northern sea ice will develop by the end of this year's autumn. By then, its area should reach its minimum size and perhaps even melt to a smaller area than in 2012, when it was historically at its lowest. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Does Arctic sea ice melt as atmospheric greenhouse gases increase?

The increase in carbon dioxide concentration warms more than anticipated
The record-breaking warming of the oceans is not visible in the Arctic

Does Arctic sea ice melt as atmospheric greenhouse gases increase?

According to the Finnish Meteorological Institute, the past year in Finland has been somewhat warmer than usual. According to its measurements, "the average temperature for the entire country was about 3.2 degrees, which is 0.3 degrees above the long-term average of the years 1991‒2020. The annual average temperature ranged from a little over +7 degrees in the southwestern archipelago to about -1 degree in the northwestern part of Lapland."

In contrast, the past year in China was the hottest in its entire recorded history. Additionally, according to Helsingin Sanomat, it "experienced several extreme weather events and heatwave periods" last year.

Not surprisingly, December's news reported that the past year was the hottest in the world's recorded history. Therefore, it was intriguing to revisit my old hobby of studying the development of the Arctic ice cover. According to climate models, it should be warming faster than the rest of the world due to the increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide.

The figure below shows the annual variation in the ice cover's average area throughout its measurement history.

It can be seen that despite the exceptionally warm year according to measurements taken at ground-level weather stations, the average size of the Northern polar ice cap has actually been trending more towards growth than shrinkage in recent years.

In the next figure, I drew an even more interesting graph. It represents the average size of the Northern sea ice in September - that is, the area during the month when the ice is at its minimum.

As my esteemed reader may notice, the area of the Northern sea ice was quite small last September. Not the smallest in recorded history, but the second smallest.

Therefore - or despite it - I delved with great enthusiasm into the task that I have been tackling year after year. That is, the statistical analysis of the relationship between the concentration of the most crucial greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, and the average size of the Northern sea ice in September.

In this analysis, I have taken as a starting point the hypothesis of climate models suggesting an accelerating climate change over time, which, according to these models, should be most rapid in the Earth's Arctic zone. As we all know, the ice should indicate this change through both the direct impact of warming in the Northern polar region and the increasing heat energy brought by warmer water from southern currents.

Unfortunately, I was disappointed as the picture was very similar to the previous year's corresponding analysis, as shown in the illustration below.

In the figure, the blue columns represent the number of years for which statistically significant dependence between atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration and the September average size of the Northern sea ice is observed using data from each respective year. As my esteemed reader can observe, this analysis clearly supported the climate models' prediction of global warming from the beginning of the measurement history until the year 2001.

From the year 2002 onward, I have drawn only red columns. Red, because there is no statistically significant dependence between atmospheric carbon dioxide and the Northern sea ice after that year.

The height of the red columns indicates the number of years of data available for each column – for example, for the year 2002, the available data includes the years 2003-2023, totaling 21 years. This is a significant eleven years longer than the statistically significant data starting from 2001.

In simple terms, this means that the annual minimum size of the Northern sea ice did indeed decrease as atmospheric carbon dioxide increased until the year 2001. However, the subsequent increase in greenhouse gas levels has not had a significant impact on the size of this ice cover. Thus, this analysis falsifies or disproves the claim derived from climate models that the Northern polar ice is melting due to the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration – or greenhouse gases in general.

The original thought in Finnish:
Sulaako arktinen merijää ilmakehän kasvihuonekaasujen lisääntyessä?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The increase in carbon dioxide concentration warms more than anticipated
The record-breaking warming of the oceans is not visible in the Arctic
Arctic sea ice contradicts with the climatic model predictions, but is that changing now?

The increase in carbon dioxide concentration warms more than anticipated

I have previously followed with great interest the progress of climate change. In doing so, I have personally observed how ground-level measurement data has been retrospectively altered in such a way that there may not be reality-based justifications, such as changes in the location of thermometer or adjustments for temperature changes due to urbanization.

Therefore, my interest has shifted mainly to monitoring the surface area of the Arctic sea ice because I find its distortion quite challenging or downright impossible. To my satisfaction, I have also noted that there have been no significant changes to these statistics.

Today I read a recent study that measured the impact of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration on the lower atmosphere's temperature. Increasing it (CO₂) has so far been thought to have a direct effect on the global average surface air temperature.

However, this is not the case, as Haozhe He et al. found that doubling the atmospheric CO₂ concentration increases the impact of CO₂-induced growth by about a quarter. In other words, the more anthropogenic CO₂ emissions accumulate in the atmosphere, the more serious the consequences.

In essence, He et al. presented a prediction - or hypothesis - that the lower atmosphere's temperature should rise more rapidly as the climate warms. Therefore, I plan to monitor how this is reflected in the fluctuations of the Arctic sea ice area - above all, whether it begins to melt again after statistically remaining the same size for over a decade despite the increase in CO₂ concentration.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The record-breaking warming of the oceans is not visible in the Arctic
Record low temperature in northern Finland
Arctic sea ice contradicts with the climatic model predictions, but is that changing now?

The record-breaking warming of the oceans is not visible in the Arctic

The most important newspaper of Finland, Helsingin Sanomat, took a stance in its editorial on Minister Kaj Mykkänen's (National Coalition Party) comment, according to which the key climate action in Finland is to plug factory chimneys. A couple of days ago, I also commented on this matter in Finnish, pointing out that human progress is based on science and technology – and reminding that insect infestations threaten forest carbon sinks in a warming climate.

Climate change has also been commented on by Petteri Taalas, Secretory General of the World Meteorological Organization, who says that the problems predicted by climate researchers in the Greek archipelago back in the 1980s are now becoming a reality. This led me to once again look at the development of northern sea ice extent. One might imagine it melting rapidly right now, given that the surface water of the North Atlantic is warmer than ever in recorded history.

My surprise was significant when I observed that the extent of northern sea ice on July 24th, relative to this time of year, was the tenth smallest in the statistics. The years 2007, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2016, 2017, 2019, 2020, and 2021 were surpassed.

However, it is true that the last time I wrote about the subject in English, sea ice was 12th smallest, so its relative extent compared to recent years has decreased. On the other hand, compared to the record year 2012, the extent of northern sea ice is over five percent larger – when I wrote about it in Finnish, the difference was just under five percent – so in that respect, it has expanded rather than contracted. This could, of course, be due to the exceptional anomaly of the year 2012.

So, we'll see if the warm water from the North Atlantic finally flows to the Arctic region and begins to melt the northern sea ice. And thus, would bring closer the day – which climate researchers say is inevitably ahead – when the Arctic ice completely disappears.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
HS katkeroituneen naisen työkaluna

Helsingin sanomat jatkoi valheellista uutisointiaan
Nostaako El Niño maapallon keskilämpötilan uuteen ennätykseen?

The activists sought excitement and a boost to their self-esteem in the Stockholm Diamond League

Climate activists disrupted a star-studded athletics competition yesterday in Sweden by blocking the track with 400-meter hurdles. This upset the competition's winner, Norwegian Karsten Warholm, who said, "it is completely idiotic. It should be allowed to protest, but that is sickeningly bad. That's not the way to do it, no matter what it's about". 

The activists themselves claimed, "we are doing this because people die every day from the climate disaster. Politicians do not act. We need to raise this issue."

However, especially in Europe, politicians have taken significant action to mitigate climate change. The European Union, in particular, has made a decision to become climate-neutral by 2050 at the latest. Additionally, as an interim goal, it has been decided to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 55 percent by 2030.

In other words, the activists' justification is not valid, and there seems to be an entirely different reason behind their actions. It is likely driven by a disregard for others and a search for excitement, as well as a boost to the participants' self-esteem. This is evident considering the significant attention it received worldwide.

* * *

In this context, it is also worth looking at how the climate has evolved in the Arctic region predicted to warm more rapidly than other parts of the world. The timing is ideal as the NSIDC (National Snow and Ice Data Center) has just released data on the extent of Arctic sea ice for the past month.

According to the data, the ice extent surrounding the North Pole was slightly larger this year´s June compared to the years 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2017, 2016, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2007, 2006, and the same as in 2015. To get a better understanding of the situation beyond a series of years, it is helpful to examine the development of ice extent visually.

From the image, we can see that the extent of Arctic sea ice in June has been quite variable but has decreased over the years surrounding the turn of the millennium. In recent years, it has remained stable, and no further ice melt has been observed. 

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
Record low temperature in northern Finland
Arctic sea ice contradicts with the climatic model predictions, but is that changing now?
Advice to participants of the COP27 climate implementation summit

Record low temperature in northern Finland

This spring has been relatively warm in Finland, as expected considering the commonly known predictions of a warming climate.

However, it is worth noting that last night in Kilpisjärvi, located in the northernmost region, the temperature reached a record low for the month of June at -7.7 degrees Celsius. This temperature was 0.7 degrees lower than the previous record set in 1962

It's important to note that this observation does not imply that climate change has been canceled. Instead, it perhaps indicates that the extent of warming is not yet very significant. One possible explanation could be that global temperatures have decreased since 2016, as indicated by satellite data.

The satellite data also aligns with measurements of the arctic sea extent, which currently show a considerable increase compared to the same time in 2012, 2016, and many other years. This hiatus has been attributed to the prolonged La Niña period and the absence of El Niño since 2016.

However, it appears that the long-awaited El Niño may be starting, which makes it extremely interesting to see whether the temperature records from the last decade will be surpassed both globally and locally in the Arctic region. Could it even be possible that next year's summer will set a new temperature record in Kilpisjärvi? 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Arctic sea ice contradicts with the climatic model predictions, but is that changing now?
Availability of coffee in a warming world
Advice to participants of the COP27 climate implementation summit

Arctic sea ice contradicts with the climatic model predictions, but is that changing now?

One of the items I am deeply interested is the development of the climatic change in the Arctic area. For that purpose, I have made statistical analyses on the dependence between the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration and the area of the arctic sea ice.

I published today my most recent analysis in Finnish, and decided also to write a short summary of that in English. I have also previously written a post on this topic into this blog, and recommend reading it in case you - my highly valued reader - are interested in details of this analysis. 

The idea of the analysis is simple: I am using September data (i.e. annual minimum) for arctic sea ice area of the National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC) and carbon dioxide concentration measurements conducted in Mauna Loa. The latter ones are not available for year 2022 due to the eruption of the volcano, and therefore I had to use an estimate based on two previous measurements. The development of the concentration is given in the figure below, where the measured concentrations and estimated value are marked with blue and red color, respectively.

In the next figure I have marked the number of years after which a connection between the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere and the area of the Arctic ice sheet is statistically significant in two consecutive years. In X-axis I marked the year from which each analysis series started.

The left side of the figure (yeasts 1979-2001) is according to the hypothesis, and the blue columns - i.e. number of years needed for statistical significance - are shortening from left to the right as predicted by the climatic models. However, starting from 2002 there are no consecutive two years with statistical significance, and therefore these columns are marked with red color. And their height is simply the number of data years used for each analysis. 

Thus, my analysis suggests that the prediction based on climatic models are supported by data from 1979 to 2001, but thereafter there is a strict contradiction between the models and observations. Normally such a discordance between observations and theory is used to falsify scientific hypotheses. I have, however, not seen that the such a decision would have been made or even discussed among the community of climatic researchers.

* * *

Before ending this blogpost, I would like to point out that the most recent daily measurements of the Arctic sea ice extent have shown an extremely interesting change, where the relative extent of the ice has decreased compared to previous years. As a result, right now (January 5th) the size of the Arctic sea ice is the second smallest ever measured (for the fifth day of each year) despite the fact that e.g. in 5th November it was only at 11th position. 

Therefore it will be extremely interesting to follow how the Arctic sea ice develops in this year. Will its development return back to the development predicted by the climatic change, or will the last weeks´ phenomenon turn out to be only a temporary exception caused by e.g. exceptional weather conditions in the Arctic region. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Advice to participants of the COP27 climate implementation summit
Heat wave in Europe contrasts with the coldness of the Arctic sea
Arctic ice sheet does not support greenhouse gases as the cause of accelerating global warming

Advice to participants of the COP27 climate implementation summit

The climate implementation summit COP27 is starting tomorrow in Egypt. I just want to remind - or advice - its participants on two facts. 

The first one has to do with the climatic change and its scientific basis itself. To do that, I remind that the mathematical models predicting a climate crisis have one clear output: that is, the arctic north of the globe will warm up more quickly than the rest of the world. 

According to that, the area of arctic sea ice can be expected to melt in an accelerating rate. However, the minimum size of the ice was observed already in 2012 - that is ten years ago - and right now its size is largest in relation to time (November 4th) since 2015. Obviously, the arctic north is not warming right now. 

So, before major decisions to restrict people´s life, I would like to see a scientific explanation - compatible to the current climate models - for these observations. Or alternatively, a new model, that predicts a hiatus for the warming of the arctic north right now.  

Second, the threat caused by the climatic change is caused by an increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in atmosphere due to the use of fossilized carbon sources. Therefore, if any action will be decided to stop the warming, we should rather focus on giving up on the use of fossilized carbon than to concentrate on carbon sinks, which will halt the global economy and almost certainly be used by world leaders only to lengthen the fossil-based era. 

With these two facts I wish to the participants of COP27 good luck in finding sensible decisions that - at the same time - reduce the risk of intolerable global warming and allow better life for all people in the world. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Fair policy will build a strong Union
Heat wave in Europe contrasts with the coldness of the Arctic sea
G-index challenges the theory of the global climatic change

Heat wave in Europe contrasts with the coldness of the Arctic sea

Exceptional temperatures have been reported during this year in many locations. During last weeks the focus has been in Europe, where exceptional temperatures were observed especially in southern part of the continent (example).  

The common theme in those news has been that the exceptional heat would have been due to the global change caused by human actions. I am not denying that, but would like to remind that previously any cold weathers have been neglected by climate scientists as climatic change is a global phenomenon and therefore local cold weathers cannot be used as evidence against global change. Therefore, it would be logical, if the same treatment would be given to warm spells. 

However, climatic science has often pointed out that the change is especially speedy in the Arctic region - actually three times as fast as the global average. Therefore I have been following the area and extent of the Arctic sea ice reported by National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC).

Interestingly indeed, the extent of the Arctic ice is right now more wide than in any of the last 13 years at the same date (July 23). That is in accordance with my analyses of correlation between the area of the Arctic sea ice and atmospheric carbon dioxide content: there has been no statistically significant change between them since year 2002 (the link above is in Finnish, but here is an earlier blogpost in English).

Taken together, based on the local temperatures no clear picture on the global warming can be given. However, we may question the extra rapid warming of the Arctic region - and therefore also climatic models predicting that.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
G-index challenges the theory of the global climatic change
Measurements of arctic temperatures and sea ice area agree with each other
Arctic ice sheet does not support greenhouse gases as the cause of accelerating global warming

 

Arctic ice sheet does not support greenhouse gases as the cause of accelerating global warming

In the figure above I have marked the number of years after which a regression between the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere and the area of the Arctic ice sheet is statistically significant at a risk level of one percent (P<0.01) in two consecutive years. In X-axis I marked the year from which each analysis series started.

I used Mauna Loa statistics as the carbon dioxide estimate and the area of Arctic ice sheet as the proxy for the global  temperature in the month when it reaches its minimum size (September). The Arctic ice sheet is used because I have previously noted that estimates based on other types of measurements are under a continuous change, and therefore I do not trust them. However, the minimum area or the Arctic sheet correlates statistically significantly with those estimates.

Using one percent risk level instead of more common five percent was due to the fact that I made a total of 740 regression analyses for this analysis. Therefore using the common five percent risk level, I could have been expected almost 40 "significant" results by chance.

Actually, approximately seven incorrect "significance levels" could be expected also using one percent criterion. Therefore I decided to make calculations until I find significance in consecutive two years. The number of one year significance levels was very close to random expectations, that is five.

The theoretical framework of this analysis is the well known theory stating that the global warming is caused by increasing atmospheric greenhouse concentration (carbon dioxide being the most important), and that the warming is accelerating in time. From that theory it was possible to derive a testable hypothesis, saying that a statistical dependence between the two will be reached more and more quickly.

This means that if the hypothesis is correct, i.e. the climatic warming is caused by carbon dioxide concentration, the columns in the figure above should shorten from left to right. If not, the hypothesis becomes falsified and should be discarded.

It is clear that the left side of the figure (yeasts 1979-2001) is according to the hypothesis, and the columns are shortening from left to the right. Then something happens, and in year 2002 there is a jump higher. Actually, in statistics from 2002 and thereafter there are no consecutive two years with statistical significance. I have marked these columns with red color, and their shortening toward right is only because of the number of years available for the analysis. 

According to this analysis the theory of accelerating global warming due to greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide) should be falsified. It also suggests that the rise of greenhouse concentration in the atmosphere and global warming in 1979-2001 were only correlative and not in a causative relationship.

It remains to be seen how future statistical information affects this kind of analysis. After all, science does not have final truths, but it corrects itself whenever needed. According to this principle, I will continue similar analyses as this in the following years, and report in this blog. Stay tuned!

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A scoop to be kept out of daylight
Climate change raises dishonesty in the Finnish media

The original though in Finnish:
Napajää ei tue yhteyttä globaalin lämpenemisen ja ilmakehän hiilidioksidipitoisuuden välillä