Whenever I talk about sea-ice, its Winter growth and Summer melt, even though I do not specifically mention it, I am referring to the ‘Extent’ of the ice coverage as shown in the ‘Sea-Ice Extent Charts’ put out by the NSIDC organisation. I take little notice of the ‘Ice Volume’ statistics for reasons I will explain as we go along.
Although I made something of a January prediction of mine being fulfilled a few weeks ago as we exceeded 15 million Km2 of Arctic Sea Ice build up over Northern Winter this year, I fully realised that this is of no great importance, as we shall see in the month of June – as always. It actually matters little how much northern sea ice builds up in the mid-September to mid-March six month growth period. Nor, equally, how much sea ice melts in the mid-March to mid-September melting season. I will explain why, shortly. But first, and the most obvious reason, is that every year during the month of June, no matter how much ice has been built up in the months prior, nor how much will melt in the subsequent months, during June, which represents the mid point between peak build and peak melt – and this is an every year event – the annual extent lines of the graph show that, for pretty much the whole month, the data values meet together at the same level over the range of a day or two. It is pretty much a given, that last year, this year, next year, and it is fair to say ‘every year’ that (and I hope you see the importance of this) the ice which melts this year will always be replaced by the ice which builds next year.
Actually, it may be clearer to say that the ice which forms merely replaces the ice which melts in any one year. It is a system of complete equilibrium. I can take that thought even further. And this brings into play why I can say that any variability in ice volume is of no consequence at all.
It can be seen, from the NSIDC Sea-Ice Extent graphs, that every year, with minimal variance, Arctic sea ice builds up to around 14-15 million Km2 in extent. Equally, the melt season reduces the ice extent down to between 4-5 Million Km2. So around 10 million Km2 of sea ice extent is both gained and then lost every year. So, that which is gained replaces that which is lost, each and every year. What could be more balanced a system than that?
OK, so it used to be the case, a few decades ago, that both peaks used to be 1 million Km2 or more higher than today’s values. But they were always in balance, and we can expect them to remain in balance far into the future.
You will also notice that every year there are around 4-5 million Km2 of ice which is never touched. That represents the core ice of the Northern Polar ice cap – although it is not a cap in the true sense since there is no land below it. It is around 1-2 metres in thickness and up to around 4 metres in places I believe, from memory. It is also known as multi-year ice. It never melts, and by the same token it never grows – either in extent or thickness. Otherwise it would eventually reach down to the bottom of the rather shallow (average 50 metres depth in many areas) Arctic Ocean – becoming land-based ice. The main point being the ice which grows = (equals) the ice which melts.
I don’t see any problem with that logic. Especially when you consider the facts that there has never been land-based polar ice at Earth’s North Pole. In fact it is more than likely true to say that there has never been polar ice – land-based or sea-based in that whole region (as far as we know) prior to around 8 million years ago as Earth’s average surface temperature fell below around 22°C – which was when our northern ice sheets were formed. Most of that more permanent ice laid down in recent historical times has since been dispersed by non-climate related activity of an external cosmic nature, leaving, in the main, only the Greenland sheet untouched. And that ice cannot possibly melt until that 22°C threshold is passed, going in the upwards direction – an event never likely to occur in any timeframe we would care to think about. There is nothing magic about that 22°C figure. It is a year-round globally averaged measure of surface temperatures known as the Global Mean Surface Temperature or GMST. Meaning that some places are hotter – potentially much hotter – and some are colder – potentially much colder – than the averaged figure. Our current GMST is around 14.7°C with a moving average of around 12°C, and falling. It has been falling for the past 65 million years (and up to 200 million years) and at the fastest rate ever over the past 6 million years. It won’t fall much further, I hope. It has never been below around 10°C. For the preservation of Earth’s climate we need it to begin rising. There are signs of that happening already, but it is not guaranteed. We need it to rise to about 18-20°C.
Coinciding with that, and it occurred to me that people reading this might think “‘”why aren’t I ever concerned about the south pole ‘Antarctic’ situation?”. I will explain why. There is a great difference between the two poles of our planetary magnetosphere. The North Pole is currently situated entirely over oceanic waters. The South Pole is currently situated over the southern continent of Antarctica, although it is unclear whether that was the case some 38 million years ago when the Antarctic Ice Sheet began to form after GMST temperatures fell below 24°C. Our currently observable distribution of continental land-masses began their movements between 50-60 million years ago, finishing only some 5-6 million years ago with the joining of the Americas, with some minor movements still ongoing. The temperature difference between the 22°C for Arctic ice and the 24°C for Antarctic ice formation may be explainable through the land/sea bases of those regions. Although it can’t be certain that Antarctica was situated exactly where we now see it when the ice sheet began to form 38 million years ago, these extra conditions may help to give weight to that idea. Adding to the complexity of polar ice we cannot completely ignore certain evidence of crustal shift which, if it occurred, could only have been executed through external contact/near-contact resulting from a sizable cosmic body. To clarify, if needed, a crustal shift is where the planetary crust (which includes the surface area), as a result of external shock, slides over the underlying magma of the molten planetary core, potentially ending up with surface points now situated in vastly different positions in relation to the poles. That is, that the poles, and therefore the axis of rotation of the planet will remain unchanged but will appear at some other position on the surface layer. If such a move has occurred, and there is potential for that to have happened several times in Earth’s history, the frozen grotto of Santa Claus (fictionally) situated at the North Pole, and the icy kingdom of the King Penguins at the South Pole would have enjoyed vastly different climes in the past – perhaps even equatorially so. But, whatever happened in the past, we are never going to again reach the kind of temperatures at which it becomes possible for the remaining ice sheets to melt from natural climate change.
I think I have said enough. Even though there is vastly more that could be said.
The main message is – Don ‘t worry about melting ice. It’s all natural.
Not Something Else 
Leave a comment