The image above shows melting of Arctic sea ice extent over the last half of June 2022.  As usual the process of declining ice extent follows a LIFO pattern:  Last In First Out.  That is, the marginal seas are the last to freeze and the first to melt.  Thus on the extreme left of the image, the Pacific basins of Bering and Okhotsk seas are entirely open water.  Meanwhile on the lower right, Hudson Bay ice retreats 400k km2 from north to south.  Note center right Hudson Strait opens up between Hudson Bay and Baffin Bay.  At the top center Barents Sea ice retreated down to 40k km2 or 5% of its last maximum. Kara Sea upper left lost 340k km2 down to 45% of its last max.  Center left Laptev has melted somewhat, but still retains 76% of its maximum ice extent. The central mass of Arctic ice is intact with some fluctuations back and forth, and as well as Beaufort Sea and CAA (Canadian Arctic Archipelago) were slow to melt in June, retaining 97% of maximum ice in each basin.

The graph below shows the ice extent retreating during June compared to some other years and the 16 year average (2006 to 2021 inclusive).

The chart black line shows that on average in June Arctic ice extent goes down 1.8M km2.  2020, as well as 2007 started June above average, but ended the month matching average. SII was higher than MASIE some days, but ended up the same.  Since Hudson Bay melts the most at this time, the dark green line shows the Arctic total excluding Hudson Bay (HB).  The light green is 2022 minus HB, showing that most of the surplus to average ice was in Hudson Bay starting June, and then retreated to average in the second half of June.  Again note that Hudson Bay is outside the Arctic circle and will be open water soon.

The table shows where the ice is distributed compared to average.  Bering and Okhotsk are open water at this point and are dropped from this and future monthly updates. 

Region	2022181	Day 181 Average	2022-Ave.	2020181	2022-2020
(0) Northern_Hemisphere	9732940	9751345	-18405	9164791	568149
(1) Beaufort_Sea	1033264	921004	112260	983906	49358
(2) Chukchi_Sea	717500	723606	-6105	734107	-16607
(3) East_Siberian_Sea	1060947	1006910	54037	879242	181705
(4) Laptev_Sea	690688	700482	-9794	522834	167855
(5) Kara_Sea	416591	550493	-133903	292013	124578
(6) Barents_Sea	48841	121301	-72460	145978	-97137
(7) Greenland_Sea	480208	501184	-20976	422780	57427
(8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence	647844	505146	142698	479013	168831
(9) Canadian_Archipelago	828864	777527	51337	772844	56020
(10) Hudson_Bay	618405	712913	-94508	687820	-69416
(11) Central_Arctic	3181467	3205732	-24265	3235700	-54234

The main deficits to average are in  Kara, Barents and Hudson Bay,  offset by surpluses in  Beaufort, East Siberian, Baffin Bay and CAA.

Illustration by Eleanor Lutz shows Earth’s seasonal climate changes. If played in full screen, the four corners present views from top, bottom and sides. It is a visual representation of scientific datasets measuring Arctic ice extents.

The Arctic ice melting season was delayed this year as shown by the end of May (day 151) surplus of 600k km2 over the 16-yr average.  Since then both MASIE and SII show a steep decline in Arctic ice extents, now matching the average for June 15 (day 166).  The reports show that Barents alone lost 320k km2, Laptev down 200k km2, Baffin Bay lost 165k km2, Chukchi, Kara, Greenland seas all lost around 100k km2 each.

For the month of June Hudson Bay will take the stage.  Above average early in June. Hudson Bay lost 100k km2 the last six days. Being a shallow basin, it will likely lose much of its 1M km2 in a few weeks.

Why is this important?  All the claims of global climate emergency depend on dangerously higher temperatures, lower sea ice, and rising sea levels.  The lack of additional warming is documented in a post Adios, Global Warming

The lack of acceleration in sea levels along coastlines has been discussed also.  See USCS Warnings of Coastal Floodings

Also, a longer term perspective is informative:

The table below shows the distribution of Sea Ice across the Arctic Regions, on average, this year and 2020.

Region	2022166	Day 166 Average	2022-Ave.	2020166	2022-2020
(0) Northern_Hemisphere	10788609	10854645	-66036	10425585	363024
(1) Beaufort_Sea	1054571	964886	89685	1005355	49216
(2) Chukchi_Sea	799723	796983	2740	775535	24188
(3) East_Siberian_Sea	1059777	1050162	9615	1013223	46554
(4) Laptev_Sea	686049	773271	-87221	782244	-96194
(5) Kara_Sea	712542	715202	-2659	513253	199289
(6) Barents_Sea	79046	206557	-127511	164943	-85896
(7) Greenland_Sea	539319	566915	-27596	578130	-38812
(8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence	799919	706060	93859	592090	207829
(9) Canadian_Archipelago	838798	795875	42923	792582	46215
(10) Hudson_Bay	957895	986396	-28501	937993	19902
(11) Central_Arctic	3216668	3220647	-3979	3231087	-14419

The main deficits are in Laptev and Barents Seas, mostly offset by surpluses in Beaufort, Baffin and Canadian Archipelago.

 

 

 

The animation shows Arctic ice extents on day 151 (end of May) from 2006 to yesterday 2022. It is evident that typically there are some regional seas starting to melt by this date, whereas 2022 remains frozen solid.  More detailed analysis is below, but note the 2022 surplus is 600k km2, or 5% above the 16 year average for day 151.  That extra ice extent amounts to 0.6 Wadhams, or 6826 Manhattan Islands, whichever index you prefer.  The graph below shows May 2022 daily ice extents compared to the 16-year average and some other years of note.

The black line shows during May on average Arctic ice extents decline ~1.8M km2 down to 11.7M km2.  The 2022 cyan MASIE line only lost 1.3M km2, starting the month 141k km2 above average and on day 151 showed a surplus of  598k km2.  The Sea Ice Index in orange (SII from NOAA) starter lower than MASIE, then ran over in later weeks, ending May nearly the same. The dark green line is average Arctic ice, excluding Bering and Okhotsk (B&O), which started melting early in 2022. The light green line is 2022 without B&O.  As of day 151, the 2022 B&O extent matches the average B&O, so the ~600k km2 surplus is entirely in the core Arctic ocean.

Why is this important?  All the claims of global climate emergency depend on dangerously higher temperatures, lower sea ice, and rising sea levels.  The lack of additional warming is documented in a post Adios, Global Warming

The lack of acceleration in sea levels along coastlines has been discussed also.  See USCS Warnings of Coastal Flooding

Also, a longer term perspective is informative:

The table below shows the distribution of Sea Ice on day 151 across the Arctic Regions, on average, this year and 2020.

Region	2022151	Day 151 Average	2022-Ave.	2021151	2022-2021
(0) Northern_Hemisphere	12281289	11682840	598449	11605537	675752
(1) Beaufort_Sea	1060171	1003588	56582	1034779	25392
(2) Chukchi_Sea	894077	865036	29040	900868	-6792
(3) East_Siberian_Sea	1085478	1064424	21054	1051959	33520
(4) Laptev_Sea	877340	824419	52921	738294	139047
(5) Kara_Sea	870898	829705	41193	824068	46831
(6) Barents_Sea	421071	305918	115153	325745	95326
(7) Greenland_Sea	665639	562229	103411	615174	50465
(8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence	976116	897470	78647	812548	163568
(9) Canadian_Archipelago	854703	810848	43855	811040	43663
(10) Hudson_Bay	1122388	1088994	33395	1084892	37496
(11) Central_Arctic	3245183	3216568	28615	3232324	12859
(12) Bering_Sea	116552	115657	895	89124	27428
(13) Baltic_Sea	915	199	717	0	915
(14) Sea_of_Okhotsk	89260	96309	-7049	83572	5688

The overall surplus to average is 598k km2, (5%).  The surplus is found in every region, except for a slight deficit in Okhotsk

Illustration by Eleanor Lutz shows Earth’s seasonal climate changes. If played in full screen, the four corners present views from top, bottom and sides. It is a visual representation of scientific datasets measuring Arctic ice extents.

My previous Arctic ice report was limited by technical difficulties, now resolved as shown by the animation above.  So this update comes a week into May, with the animation covering the last three weeks from mid April.   The dramatic melting in the Pacific basins of Bering and Okhotsk (left) sets them apart from the rest of Arctic sea ice. As noted before, those two basins are outside the Arctic circle, have no polar bears and are the first places to become open water in the Spring. Elsewhere sea ice persisted, actually growing in Barents and Greenland seas.

[The staff at National Ice Center were extremely helpful, as usual.  Their work is distinctive, valuable and deserving of your appreciation.  See Support MASIE Arctic Ice Dataset]

The melting effect on NH total ice extents during this period is presented in the graph below.

The graph above shows ice extent mid-April through May 7 comparing 2022 MASIE reports with the 16-year average, other recent years and with SII.  2022 ice extents have tracked the average, going surplus for the last 10 days. .Both 2021 and 2007 are well below average, on day 127 lower than 2022 by 318k km2 and 443k km2 respectively. The two green lines at the bottom show average and 2022 extents when Bering and Okhotsk ice are excluded.  On this basis 2022 Arctic ice was nearly 400k km2 in surplus on May 7, and prior to yesterday, the horizontal line shows little loss of ice extent elsewhere than in the Pacific.

Region	2022127	Day 127 Average	2022-Ave.	2007127	2022-2007
(0) Northern_Hemisphere	13272388	13096082	176306	12954671	317717
(1) Beaufort_Sea	1053640	1059642	-6001	1056022	-2382
(2) Chukchi_Sea	959821	949409	10412	955497	4324
(3) East_Siberian_Sea	1087137	1085912	1225	1081248	5889
(4) Laptev_Sea	897845	892770	5075	870216	27628
(5) Kara_Sea	928813	897443	31370	883059	45754
(6) Barents_Sea	642899	476820	166079	430155	212745
(7) Greenland_Sea	732835	616488	116347	639861	92974
(8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence	1185073	1140285	44787	1076913	108159
(9) Canadian_Archipelago	854685	845807	8879	845091	9594
(10) Hudson_Bay	1216867	1212411	4456	1192270	24597
(11) Central_Arctic	3248013	3223344	24669	3241053	6960
(12) Bering_Sea	275935	401584	-125649	398914	-122980
(13) Baltic_Sea	14465	13264	1201	10416	4050
(14) Sea_of_Okhotsk	172221	278245	-106023	269684	-97463

The only deficits to average are in Bering and Okhotsk, more than offset by surpluses everywhere else, especially in Barents and Greenland seas, along with Kara and Baffin Bay.  At this point, overall NH sea ice is 88% of last March maximum (15.1M kim2).  All regions are well above 90% of their maxes, except for Barents (81%), Baffin Bay (66%), Bering (33%) and Okhotsk (20%).

 

April 1st Footnote:

It has been a long hard winter, requiring overtime efforts by Norwegian icebreakers like this one:

In addition, cold Spring temperatures led to unusual sightings of Northern creatures:

 

Arctic ice extent changes for the last two weeks are shown in the MASIE animation above. Note that the Pacific basins of Bering and Okhotsk (upper left) melted dramatically.  Meanwhile on the Atlantic side ice persisted, actually growing in Barents and Greenland seas.

The strangeness concerns weirdness in Google Earth Pro treatment of kmz files from MASIE.  Previous I have used these to produce animations like the one below for the month of March.

Today when attempting to do the same for April, this is what was shown.

That is a screen capture since Google Earth could not render an image.  I hope it is just a temporary technical difficulty.  But I can’t help but imagine this depicting some kind of military map with a two-pronged attack by red forces with a single resisting force in red and blue. Is it more virtuous canceling of all things Russian at the expense of scientific inquiry? (The mask with colors was only imposed on the Northern Hemisphere)

The melting effect on NH total ice extents during April is presented in the graph below.

The graph above shows ice extent through April comparing 2022 MASIE reports with the 16-year average, other recent years and with SII.  On average ice extents lost 1.1M km2 during April.  2022 ice extents started slightly lower, then tracked average, ending slightly above average. Both 2021 and 2007 ended  below average, by 200k km2 and 400k km2 respectively. The two green lines at the bottom show average and 2022 extents when Bering and Okhotsk ice are excluded.  On this basis 2022 Arctic was nearly 400k km2 in surplus at end of April.

Region	2022120	Day 120 Average	2022-Ave.	2007120	2022-2007
(0) Northern_Hemisphere	13623874	13507670	116204	13108068	515806
(1) Beaufort_Sea	1070776	1067739	3036	1059189	11587
(2) Chukchi_Sea	963424	955654	7770	949246	14178
(3) East_Siberian_Sea	1087137	1085485	1652	1080176	6961
(4) Laptev_Sea	897845	889961	7884	875661	22184
(5) Kara_Sea	932842	911757	21084	864664	68178
(6) Barents_Sea	654813	547685	107129	396544	258270
(7) Greenland_Sea	777073	640123	136950	644438	132635
(8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence	1243689	1205315	38374	1147115	96574
(9) Canadian_Archipelago	854685	848564	6121	838032	16653
(10) Hudson_Bay	1240262	1238267	1995	1222074	18188
(11) Central_Arctic	3247307	3229654	17652	3241034	6272
(12) Bering_Sea	334929	482018	-147089	475489	-140560
(13) Baltic_Sea	22696	20622	2074	14684	8012
(14) Sea_of_Okhotsk	294259	381697	-87438	295743	-1484

The only deficits to average are in Bering and Okhotsk, more than offset by surpluses everywhere else, especially in Barents and Greenland seas. 2007 extents were lower by 516k km2 (half a Wadham)

 

April 1st Footnote:

It has been a long hard winter, requiring overtime efforts by Norwegian icebreakers like this one:

In addition, cold Spring temperatures led to unusual sightings of Northern creatures:

 

Previous posts showed 2022 Arctic Ice broke the 15M km2 ceiling in February, followed by a typical small melt in March.  Climatology refers to the March monthly average ice extent as indicative of the annual maximum Arctic ice extent.  The graph above shows that the March monthly average has varied little since 2007, typically around the SII average of 14.7 M km2.  Of course there are regional differences as described later on.

The animation shows ice extent fluctuations during March 2022. Bering Sea (lower left) gained ice over the month, while ice in Okhotsk (higher left) retreated. At the top Kara and Barents seas lost and then gained ice.  Baffin Bay lower right lost ice during March.  The main changes were Baffin losing ~360k km2 of extent and Okhotsk losing ~260k km2.

The effect on NH total ice extents is presented in the graph below.

The graph above shows ice extent through March comparing 2022 MASIE reports with the 16-year average, other recent years and with SII.  Hovering around 15M km2 the first week, 2022 ice extents dropped sharply mid month, then stabilized and at March end matched the average. Both 2020 and 2021 ended nearly 400k km2 below average. The two green lines at the bottom show average and 2022 extents when Okhotsk ice is excluded.  On this basis 2022 Arctic was nearly 400k km2 in surplus, then declined mid month before ending nearly 200k km2 in surplus to average, except for the ice shortage in Okhotsk.

Region	2022090	Day 90 Average	2022-Ave.	2021090	2022-2021
(0) Northern_Hemisphere	14563095	14616765	-53670	14266634	296461
(1) Beaufort_Sea	1070776	1070116	660	1070689	87
(2) Chukchi_Sea	966006	963906	2100	966006	0
(3) East_Siberian_Sea	1087137	1086102	1035	1087137	0
(4) Laptev_Sea	897845	896958	887	897827	18
(5) Kara_Sea	935023	918083	16941	935023	0
(6) Barents_Sea	748326	645014	103311	602392	145934
(7) Greenland_Sea	616239	652388	-36148	620574	-4334
(8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence	1441014	1400528	40486	1243739	197275
(9) Canadian_Archipelago	854685	852982	1703	854597	88
(10) Hudson_Bay	1260903	1254217	6687	1260903	0
(11) Central_Arctic	3245216	3232275	12941	3192844	52373
(12) Bering_Sea	785874	720525	65348	549939	235935
(13) Baltic_Sea	52068	63446	-11377	33543	18525
(14) Sea_of_Okhotsk	596190	849221	-253031	942085	-345895

The table shows that the large deficit in Okhotsk is only partially offset by surpluses in Bering and Barents Seas.  All other regions show typical extents at end of March

 

April 1st Footnote:

It has been a long hard winter, requiring overtime efforts by Norwegian icebreakers like this one:

In addition, cold March temperatures led to unusual sightings of Northern creatures:

 

A post last month noted that Arctic ice extent in February unusually exceeded 15M km2 (15 Wadhams).  This was despite slower than usual recovery of ice in Sea of Okhotsk.  That early 2022 peak ice extent has passed and will now stand as 2022 annual maximum. One wonders why the large ice deficit in that basin.  The graph below shows the anomaly.

The 2022 cyan line started March above 15M km2, then declined to day 76 (March 17), ~300k km2 lower than the 16 yr. average.  The dark green line shows Arctic ice extent average after Okhotsk is excluded, while the light green is 2022 Arctic extent without Okhotsk. The table below shows that Okhotsk deficit to average on day 76 is 260k km2, almost the entire Arctic deficit.

Region	2022076	Day 76 Average	2022-Ave.	2021076	2022-2021
(0) Northern_Hemisphere	14641084	14935497	-294413	14769906	-128822
(1) Beaufort_Sea	1070776	1070247	529	1070689	87
(2) Chukchi_Sea	966006	965877	129	966006	0
(3) East_Siberian_Sea	1087137	1087107	30	1087120	17
(4) Laptev_Sea	897845	897837	8	897827	18
(5) Kara_Sea	905846	923576	-17730	935006	-29160
(6) Barents_Sea	554036	648194	-94158	849221	-295185
(7) Greenland_Sea	572046	618979	-46934	601423	-29377
(8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence	1784542	1534462	250080	1288815	495727
(9) Canadian_Archipelago	854685	853020	1665	854597	88
(10) Hudson_Bay	1260691	1258149	2542	1260471	220
(11) Central_Arctic	3153037	3223013	-69976	3222708	-69671
(12) Bering_Sea	729277	755358	-26081	547775	181502
(13) Baltic_Sea	59785	81419	-21634	62626	-2841
(14) Sea_of_Okhotsk	739183	998164	-258981	1117615	-378432

Most places are close to average, with a large surplus in Baffin Bay offsetting small deficits elsewhere.  The exception is Okhotsk making up most of the total deficit to average, and even a larger deficit to last year

IOW, had Okhotsk extent been average on day 60 (1.08M km2) instead of 852k km2, the surplus would have been even higher.  So why was ice missing in Okhotsk this year?

Firstly, the animation above shows that Okhotsk (and also Bering) sea ice is quite variable year over year. The MASIE record for day 60 shows Okhotsk at 880k km2 in 2006, up to 1230k km2 in 2012, down to 770k km2 in 2015, up to 1080k km2 in 2018, down to  850k km2 in 2022. Notice Okhotsk 2022 is quite similar to 2015, while Bering is about average this year.  What causes these fluctuations on annual, decadal and longer time scales?

The answer illustrates the complexity of natural factors interacting to produce climatic patterns we observe and measure. In Okhotsk in particular, and in the Arctic generally, changes in ice extents are a function of the 3 Ws: Water, Wind and Weather. More specifically, water changes in temperature (SST) and salinity (SSS); wind changes with changes in sea level pressures (SLP); and stormy weather varies between cyclonic and anticyclonic regimes. Below is discussion of these natural mechanisms.

Background on Okhotsk Sea

NASA describes Okhotsk as a Sea and Ice Factory. Excerpts in italics with my bolds.

The Sea of Okhotsk is what oceanographers call a marginal sea: a region of a larger ocean basin that is partly enclosed by islands and peninsulas hugging a continental coast. With the Kamchatka Peninsula, the Kuril Islands, and Sakhalin Island partly sheltering the sea from the Pacific Ocean, and with prevailing, frigid northwesterly winds blowing out from Siberia, the sea is a winter ice factory and a year-round cloud factory.

The region is the lowest latitude (45 degrees at the southern end) where sea ice regularly forms. Ice cover varies from 50 to 90 percent each winter depending on the weather. Ice often persists for nearly six months, typically from October to March. Aside from the cold winds from the Russian interior, the prodigious flow of fresh water from the Amur River freshens the sea, making the surface less saline and more likely to freeze than other seas and bays.

Map of the Sea of Okhotsk with bottom topography. The 200- and 3000-m isobars are indicated by thin and thick solid lines, respectively. A box denotes the enlarged portion in Figure 5. White shading indicates sea-ice area (ice concentration ⩾30%) in February averaged for 2003–11; blue shading indicates open ocean area. Ice concentration from AMSR-E is used. Color shadings indicate cumulative ice production in coastal polynyas during winter (December–March) averaged from the 2002/03 to 2009/10 seasons (modified from Nihashi and others, 2012, 2017). The amount is indicated by the bar scale. Source: Cambridge Core

Basics of Weather and Ice Dynamics

Wind directions are named by which point on the compass the prevailing wind hits you in the face.  Thus, a southerly wind comes from the south toward the north, typically bringing warmer air north, and displacing colder northern air.

Winds arise from differences in surface pressures. Above every square inch on the surface of the Earth is 14.7 pounds of air. That means air exerts 14.7 pounds per square inch (psi) of pressure at Earth’s surface. High in the atmosphere, air pressure decreases.

Pressure varies from day to day at the Earth’s surface – the bottom of the atmosphere. This is, in part, because the Earth is not equally heated by the Sun. Areas where the air is warmed often have lower pressure because the warm air rises. These areas are called low pressure systems. Places where the air pressure is high, are called high pressure systems.

A low pressure system has lower pressure at its center than the areas around it. Winds blow towards the low pressure, and the air rises in the atmosphere where they meet. As the air rises, the water vapor within it condenses, forming clouds and often precipitation. Because of Earth’s spin and the Coriolis effect, winds of a low pressure system swirl counterclockwise north of the equator and clockwise south of the equator. This is called cyclonic flow. On weather maps, a low pressure system is labeled with red L.

A high pressure system has higher pressure at its center than the areas around it. Winds blow away from high pressure. Swirling in the opposite direction from a low pressure system, the winds of a high pressure system rotate clockwise north of the equator and counterclockwise south of the equator. This is called anticyclonic flow. Air from higher in the atmosphere sinks down to fill the space left as air is blown outward. On a weather map, you may notice a blue H, denoting the location of a high pressure system.

When the suns shines on land the air is warmed and rises. And because the earth is rotating, an upward spiral forms. Additionally, over wetlands and the oceans there is evaporation, which also rises, H2O being lighter than N2 or O2. When the water is warmer, the rising air intensifies and resulting in a lower pressure than surrounding areas.  Arctic cyclones disrupt drift ice, creating more open water, and impede freezing.  Arctic anticyclones (HP cells) facilitate cooling and freezing.

The vertical direction of wind motion is typically very small (except in thunderstorm updrafts) compared to the horizontal component, but is very important for determining the day to day weather. Rising air will cool, often to saturation, and can lead to clouds and precipitation. Sinking air warms causing evaporation of clouds and thus fair weather.

The closer the isobars are drawn together the quicker the air pressure changes. This change in air pressure is called the “pressure gradient”. Pressure gradient is just the difference in pressure between high- and low-pressure areas.

The Okhotsk Sea Ice Connection

Toyoda et al. (2022) explain in their paper Sea ice variability along the Okhotsk coast of Hokkaido based on long-term JMA meteorological observatory data.  Excerpts in italics with  my bolds.

Abstract

Long-term sea ice observation data at the Japan Meteorological Agency observatories along the
Okhotsk coast of Hokkaido were analyzed. The observations at the Abashiri Local Meteorological
Observatory largely explained the variations at other sites along much of the Okhotsk coast on a time scale longer than a few days. Interannually, variations of the maximum sea ice areas in the whole and southern Sea of Okhotsk were largely reflected in the yearly accumulated sea ice concentration (SIC) and sea ice duration variations at the observatories.

A comparison with several indices for the North Pacific climate variability suggested that the North Pacific Index (NPI) is a robust indicator of the recent (after the 1980s) sea ice variations in the Sea of Okhotsk on a decadal time scale. Specifically:

♦  variations in the first sea ice appearance date at the observatories resulted from variations in the Aleutian Low with meridional wind anomalies over the Sea of Okhotsk and the air temperature around Japan in January;

♦  variations in the final disappearance date resulted from the Aleutian Low variations, and,

♦  the resulting sea ice cover variations in the Sea of Okhotsk except for the Siberian coast affected the air temperatures in April. These factors influenced the sea ice duration.

A strong linkage was found between variations in the local sea ice (along the Hokkaido coast) and large-scale fields, which will help improve our understanding of the sea ice extent and retreat variability over the Sea of Okhotsk and its linkage to the North Pacific climate variability.

Among several climate indices, the NPI is a robust indicator of recent (after the 1980s) sea ice
variations in the Sea of Okhotsk. We also examined the differences between the start and end date variations, which determine the durations. Variations in the start date at the Okhotsk coast sites resulted from the variations in the Aleutian Low strength, the air temperature around Japan in January, and partly the SST along the Soya warm current in December. Variations in the end date resulted from the Aleutian Low variations; the sea ice cover variations affected the air temperatures over the Sea of Okhotsk in April, in contrast to the sea ice cover variations in January resulting from the air temperature variations.

Sea Ice Tourism from Hokkaido, Japan

Taking a boat trip from Hokkaido Island to see Okhotsk drift ice is a big tourist attraction, as seen in the short video below.  Al Gore had them worried back then, but hopefully not now.