December 1. Except for a few tiny patches the Arctic Ocean is now completely frozen over—we can see this on the first map. There is no sunshine at all, just one long night, 24/7. What could possibly cause temperatures to change from one day to the next, or to differ from place to place over the broad expanse of the frozen ocean? We might consider the possibility that an atmospheric rivers (AR) could do so, if it could extend its length all the way into this zone within a limited amount of time, before all of its contents expired. A full river would never make it, but perhaps a little rivulet could find a way to branch off, spread out, and survive for a few extra days. Today we will see this happening at the tail end of two different rivers. First, let’s make sure about the sea ice coverage:
Next, we’ll turn to the PW map, where we can see if any ARs have been able to breach the Arctic Circle and dispatch rivulets that can sneak their way in the heart of the polar zone, all of which is dominated by the ice-covered ocean. This map shows evidence of two separate happenings of this type. One rivulet is seen making an entrance over the eastern tip of the Siberian land area. The other has taken an all-maritime route parallel to eastern coast of Greenland. Their presence on the map is distinguished by nothing more than measured differentials in the atmospheric weight content of the PW they are composed of. They both have regular totals of more than 2kg per square meter, contrasting with the lesser weights, all below 2kg, in air columns off to the sides of both rivulets. You may need magnification and a real close view of your screen.
As a general rule, I have learned that it pays to follow the principle that wherever you see an AR in action, even if it just a remnant, you should look for a warm temperature anomaly at the surface directly below. There are a few standard exceptions to the rule, but never in a deep-cold and sunless situation like we have here.
That’s pretty close to a perfect match-up of overlay imagery in both cases, and there is nothing puny about the size of the anomalies. Let’s see if actual recorded temperature differences will support anomalies of this size. We’ll need to check them directly below the AR streams and also off to the sides, where almost all of the PW in the overhead atmosphere is contained within the low level of air that lies close to the surface. Sources of humidity are indeed hard to come by, down low, at this time of year.
No problem. The U-shaped body of native cold air, seen shaded in magenta, contains temperatures in its central parts that go as low as -35C in places. In the warm places that have AR cover the readings are more like -18 to -20C in their central parts. That’s a considerable difference of no less than 15C in close-neighboring places where there is no reason to look for any difference at all on most 24-hour periods. AR activity, loaded with anomalous PW content, is the one high-powered exception. When we look at this in terms of temperature anomalies, as depicted on the previous map, what I see in the warm places is mostly +5 with some spots above +6, and in the closest cold places mostly -5 with one large area below -6, for a total difference of something more than 10C. Under the logarithmic rule for PW’s greenhouse effect (10C per double), a temperature spread of this size calls for a little more than a plain double in the relative kg numbers in order to get the proper outcome. Precision is lacking in a place like this, where all we have is these ultra-low kg numbers, but I can see how the cold places in the comparison could be running near 1.25kg while the warm places are averaging something a bit more than 2.5kg. All we know for sure from the imagery is that the difference is probably not less than 1.0kg and could be a fair bit more, enough to reach beyond a double. Any way you look at this situation, it is evident that PW produces a genuine greenhouse energy effect, which is my basic argument, and the effect must be extraordinarily powerful while it lasts.
Carl