Search for: All records

Abstract Many modern sea ice models used in global climate models represent the subgrid‐scale heterogeneity in sea ice thickness with an ice thickness distribution (ITD), which improves model realism by representing the significant impact of the high spatial heterogeneity of sea ice thickness on thermodynamic and dynamic processes. Most models default to five thickness categories. However, little has been done to explore the effects of the resolution of this distribution (number of categories) on sea‐ice feedbacks in a coupled model framework and resulting representation of the sea ice mean state. Here, we explore this using sensitivity experiments in CESM2 with the standard 5 ice thickness categories and 15 ice thickness categories. Increasing the resolution of the ITD in a run with preindustrial climate forcing results in substantially thicker Arctic sea ice year‐round. Analyses show that this is a result of the ITD influence on ice strength. With 15 ITD categories, weaker ice occurs for the same average thickness, resulting in a higher fraction of ridged sea ice. In contrast, the higher resolution of thin ice categories results in enhanced heat conduction and bottom growth and leads to only somewhat increased winter Antarctic sea ice volume. The spatial resolution of the ICESat‐2 satellite mission provides a new opportunity to compare model outputs with observations of seasonal evolution of the ITD in the Arctic (ICESat‐2; 2018–2021). Comparisons highlight significant differences from the ITD modeled with both runs over this period, likely pointing to underlying issues contributing to the representation of average thickness. 

Abstract The “surface scattering layer” (SSL) is the highly‐scattering, coarse‐grained ice layer that forms on the surface of melting, drained sea ice during spring and summer. Ice of sufficient thickness with an SSL has an observed persistent broadband albedo of ∼0.65, resulting in a strong influence on the regional solar partitioning. Experiments during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of the Arctic Climate expedition showed that the SSL re‐forms in approximately 1 day following manual removal. Coincident spectral albedo measurements provide insight into the SSL evolution, where albedo increased on sunny days with higher solar insolation. Comparison with experiments in radiative transfer and global climate models show that the sea ice albedo is greatly impacted by the SSL thickness. The presence of SSL is a significant component of the ice‐albedo feedback, with an albedo impact of the same order as melt ponds. Changes in SSL and implications for Arctic sea ice within a warming climate are uncertain. 

Abstract. The melt of snow and sea ice during the Arctic summer is a significant source of relatively fresh meltwater in the central Arctic. The fate of this freshwater – whether in surface melt ponds, or thin layers underneath the ice and in leads – impacts atmosphere-ice-ocean interactions and their subsequent coupled evolution. Here, we combine analyses of datasets from the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition (June–July, 2020) to understand the key drivers of the sea ice freshwater budget in the Central Arctic and the fate of this water over time. Freshwater budget analyses suggest that a relatively high fraction (58 %) is derived from surface melt. Additionally, the contribution from stored precipitation (snowmelt) significantly outweighs by five times the input from in situ summer precipitation (rain). The magnitude and rate of local meltwater production are remarkably similar to that observed on the prior Surface Heat Budget of the Arctic Ocean (SHEBA) campaign. A relatively small fraction (10 %) of freshwater from melt remains in ponds, which is higher on more deformed second-year ice compared to first-year ice later in the summer. Most meltwater drains via lateral and vertical drainage channels, with vertical drainage enabling storage of freshwater internally in the ice by freshening of brine channels. In the upper ocean, freshwater can accumulate in transient meltwater layers on the order of 10 cm to 1 m thick in leads and under the ice. The presence of such layers substantially impacts the coupled system by reducing bottom melt and allowing false bottom growth, reducing heat, nutrient and gas exchange, and influencing ecosystem productivity. Regardless, the majority fraction of freshwater from melt is inferred to be ultimately incorporated into upper ocean (75 %) or stored internally in the ice (14 %). Comparison of key source and sink terms with estimates from the CESM2 climate model suggest that simulated freshwater storage in melt ponds is dramatically underestimated. This suggests pond drainage terms should be investigated as a likely explanation. 

Precise measurements of Arctic sea ice mass balance are necessary to understand the rapidly changing sea ice cover and its representation in climate models. During the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition, we made repeat point measurements of snow and ice thickness on primarily level first- and second-year ice (FYI, SYI) using ablation stakes and ice thickness gauges. This technique enabled us to distinguish surface and bottom (basal) melt and characterize the importance of oceanic versus atmospheric forcing. We also evaluated the time series of ice growth and melt in the context of other MOSAiC observations and historical mass balance observations from the Surface Heat Budget of the Arctic (SHEBA) campaign and the North Pole Environmental Observatory (NPEO). Despite similar freezing degree days, average ice growth at MOSAiC was greater on FYI (1.67 m) and SYI (1.23 m) than at SHEBA (1.45 m, 0.53 m), due in part to initially thinner ice and snow conditions on MOSAiC. Our estimates of effective snow thermal conductivity, which agree with SHEBA results and other MOSAiC observations, are unlikely to explain the difference. On MOSAiC, FYI grew more and faster than SYI, demonstrating a feedback loop that acts to increase ice production after multi-year ice loss. Surface melt on MOSAiC (mean of 0.50 m) was greater than at NPEO (0.18 m), with considerable spatial variability that correlated with surface albedo variability. Basal melt was relatively small (mean of 0.12 m), and higher than NPEO observations (0.07 m). Finally, we present observations showing that false bottoms reduced basal melt rates in some FYI cases, in agreement with other observations at MOSAiC. These detailed mass balance observations will allow further investigation into connections between the carefully observed surface energy budget, ocean heat fluxes, sea ice, and ecosystem at MOSAiC and during other campaigns. 

Leads play an important role in the exchange of heat, gases, vapour, and particles between seawater and the atmosphere in ice-covered polar oceans. In summer, these processes can be modified significantly by the formation of a meltwater layer at the surface, yet we know little about the dynamics of meltwater layer formation and persistence. During the drift campaign of the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC), we examined how variation in lead width, re-freezing, and mixing events affected the vertical structure of lead waters during late summer in the central Arctic. At the beginning of the 4-week survey period, a meltwater layer occupied the surface 0.8 m of the lead, and temperature and salinity showed strong vertical gradients. Stable oxygen isotopes indicate that the meltwater consisted mainly of sea ice meltwater rather than snow meltwater. During the first half of the survey period (before freezing), the meltwater layer thickness decreased rapidly as lead width increased and stretched the layer horizontally. During the latter half of the survey period (after freezing of the lead surface), stratification weakened and the meltwater layer became thinner before disappearing completely due to surface ice formation and mixing processes. Removal of meltwater during surface ice formation explained about 43% of the reduction in thickness of the meltwater layer. The remaining approximate 57% could be explained by mixing within the water column initiated by disturbance of the lower boundary of the meltwater layer through wind-induced ice floe drift. These results indicate that rapid, dynamic changes to lead water structure can have potentially significant effects on the exchange of physical and biogeochemical components throughout the atmosphere–lead–underlying seawater system. 

The microstructure of the uppermost portions of a melting Arctic sea ice cover has a disproportionately large influence on how incident sunlight is reflected and absorbed in the ice/ocean system. The surface scattering layer (SSL) effectively backscatters solar radiation and keeps the surface albedo of melting ice relatively high compared to ice with the SSL manually removed. Measurements of albedo provide information on how incoming shortwave radiation is partitioned by the SSL and have been pivotal to improving climate model parameterizations. However, the relationship between the physical and optical properties of the SSL is still poorly constrained. Until now, radiative transfer models have been the only way to infer the microstructure of the SSL. During the MOSAiC expedition of 2019–2020, we took samples and, for the first time, directly measured the microstructure of the SSL on bare sea ice using X-ray micro-computed tomography. We show that the SSL has a highly anisotropic, coarse, and porous structure, with a small optical diameter and density at the surface, increasing with depth. As the melting surface ablates, the SSL regenerates, maintaining some aspects of its microstructure throughout the melt season. We used the microstructure measurements with a radiative transfer model to improve our understanding of the relationship between physical properties and optical properties at 850 nm wavelength. When the microstructure is used as model input, we see a 10–15% overestimation of the reflectance at 850 nm. This comparison suggests that either a) spatial variability at the meter scale is important for the two in situ optical measurements and therefore a larger sample size is needed to represent the microstructure or b) future work should investigate either i) using a ray-tracing approach instead of explicitly solving the radiative transfer equation or ii) using a more appropriate radiative transfer model. 

The rapid melt of snow and sea ice during the Arctic summer provides a significant source of low-salinity meltwater to the surface ocean on the local scale. The accumulation of this meltwater on, under, and around sea ice floes can result in relatively thin meltwater layers in the upper ocean. Due to the small-scale nature of these upper-ocean features, typically on the order of 1 m thick or less, they are rarely detected by standard methods, but are nevertheless pervasive and critically important in Arctic summer. Observations during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition in summer 2020 focused on the evolution of such layers and made significant advancements in understanding their role in the coupled Arctic system. Here we provide a review of thin meltwater layers in the Arctic, with emphasis on the new findings from MOSAiC. Both prior and recent observational datasets indicate an intermittent yet long-lasting (weeks to months) meltwater layer in the upper ocean on the order of 0.1 m to 1.0 m in thickness, with a large spatial range. The presence of meltwater layers impacts the physical system by reducing bottom ice melt and allowing new ice formation via false bottom growth. Collectively, the meltwater layer and false bottoms reduce atmosphere-ocean exchanges of momentum, energy, and material. The impacts on the coupled Arctic system are far-reaching, including acting as a barrier for nutrient and gas exchange and impacting ecosystem diversity and productivity. 

During the Arctic melt season, relatively fresh meltwater layers can accumulate under sea ice as a result of snow and ice melt, far from terrestrial freshwater inputs. Such under-ice meltwater layers, sometimes referred to as under-ice melt ponds, have been suggested to play a role in the summer sea ice mass balance both by isolating the sea ice from saltier water below, and by driving formation of ‘false bottoms’ below the sea ice. Such layers form at the interface of the fresher under-ice layer and the colder, saltier seawater below. During the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of the Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition in the Central Arctic, we observed the presence of under-ice meltwater layers and false bottoms throughout July 2020 at primarily first-year ice locations. Here, we examine the distribution, prevalence, and drivers of under-ice ponds and the resulting false bottoms during this period. The average thickness of observed false bottoms and freshwater equivalent of under-ice meltwater layers was 0.08 m, with false bottom ice comprised of 74–87% FYI melt and 13–26% snow melt. Additionally, we explore these results using a 1D model to understand the role of dynamic influences on decoupling the ice from the seawater below. The model comparison suggests that the ice-ocean friction velocity was likely exceptionally low, with implications for air-ice-ocean momentum transfer. Overall, the prevalence of false bottoms was similar to or higher than noted during other observational campaigns, indicating that these features may in fact be common in the Arctic during the melt season. These results have implications for the broader ice-ocean system, as under-ice meltwater layers and false bottoms provide a source of ice growth during the melt season, potentially reduce fluxes between the ice and the ocean, isolate sea ice primary producers from pelagic nutrient sources, and may alter light transmission to the ocean below.