Search

Year‐to‐year forecasts of the Arctic climate conditions have drawn much interest in recent decades. This study investigates the primary drivers responsible for interannual variations (without multi‐decadal trends) of air temperature at 2 m (T2m) and sea ice concentration (SIC) over the Barents‐Kara Seas (BKS) during September from 1950 to 2021. The Arctic Dipole (AD), a leading factor in the BKS variability, plays an important role via influencing large‐scale atmospheric circulations and local thermodynamical feedbacks (i.e., vapor and albedo feedbacks). During a negative AD phase, the positive surface air temperature advection anomalies warm up the BKS region and promote sea ice melting, which in turn maintains the below‐normal sea ice and warmer‐than‐normal conditions via positive vapor and albedo feedbacks. Moreover, our results suggest that the sea surface temperature (SST) variability in the midlatitudes of the North Atlantic in the preceding month could also be an important driver of the SIC variability over the BKS area. The anomalous temperature advections from the surface to the upper troposphere are accompanied by a Rossby wave‐type atmospheric response, which intensifies the energy exchanges between the ocean and the atmosphere. Local SST anomalies associated with the surface heat flux anomalies further persist in the following month and influence sea ice variations due to their long‐lasting memory. A better understanding of the mechanisms of interannual climate variabilities over the BKS region in boreal early autumn is helpful to improving the Arctic regional climate predictions. Key Points: Understanding primary drivers of the interannual climate variabilities over the Arctic is essential to improve the regional prediction skillsThe Arctic Dipole is mainly responsible for driving the Barents‐Kara Seas (BKS) surface air temperature interannual variability in SeptemberThe North Atlantic sea surface temperature variability at 1‐month lead is associated with the early autumn sea ice cover variability in the BKS region [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Arctic sea ice has substantially changed over the past four decades, with a large decrease in sea‐ice area and volume. The exact causes of these changes are not entirely known. In our study, we make use of the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute Large Ensemble. This ensemble consists of 50 members realized with the EC‐Earth3 global climate model and covers the period 1970‐2100. We apply for the first time the Liang‐Kleeman information flow method to analyze the cause‐effect relationships between Arctic sea ice and its potential drivers. We show that recent and future changes in Arctic sea ice are mainly driven by air and sea‐surface temperatures and ocean heat transport. Conversely, changes in Arctic sea ice also considerably impact temperature and ocean heat transport. Finally, we find a progressive decrease in the influence of sea‐ice area and volume on air temperature and ocean heat transport through the twenty‐first century. Plain Language Summary: The Arctic has been warming at a larger rate than the rest of the world, resulting in a substantial loss of sea ice since the late 1970s. This has had and will continue to have an impact on our climate and societies. The exact causes of the ongoing sea‐ice loss are not entirely known, and understanding them is important in order to better prepare our societies for future climate changes. In our study, we apply a relatively novel approach that quantifies the cause‐effect relationships between Arctic sea ice and its potential drivers. We make use of a large range of model simulations performed with the EC‐Earth3 global climate model covering the period 1970‐2100. We find that air temperature, sea‐surface temperature, and the transport of heat by the ocean are important drivers of the ongoing and future retreat of Arctic sea ice. Conversely, changes in Arctic sea ice also affect the three former quantities. Our study demonstrates the performance of causal inference methods in the quest for a better understanding of relationships between climate variables. The geophysical and climate communities could greatly benefit from using these methods more intensively. Key Points: The Liang‐Kleeman rate of information transfer allows quantification of the directional dependence between Arctic sea ice and its driversRecent and future changes in Arctic sea ice are mainly driven by air and sea‐surface temperatures and ocean heat transportThe influence of Arctic sea ice on air temperature and ocean heat transport progressively decreases through the twenty‐first century [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies have indicated that marine heatwaves (MHWs) have had severe impacts on the marine ecosystem in the Pacific, Atlantic, and Indian Oceans, but there have been few studies focused on MHWs in the Arctic. On the other hand, amplified rapid warming in the Arctic region makes it a hotspot strategically and economically worldwide. In this study, we documented that the average intensity of MHWs in the Arctic was comparable with that in the other regions of the global oceans. The annual intensity, frequency, duration, and areal coverage of MHWs have increased significantly in recent decades. The increase of the annual duration is mainly owing to the postponed end time, thus the prolonged periods, of the MHW seasons. Our analysis indicates that the increasing trends of the annual intensity, frequency, duration, and areal coverage in the Arctic are closely associated with the increasing surface air temperature and decreasing sea‐ice concentration under the global warming environment. These features are robust across three different sea surface temperature (SST) products and using different MHW criteria. Plain Language Summary: Events of extremely warm waters in the oceans are known as marine heatwaves (MHWs). Past MHW research has used sea surface temperature (SST) to diagnose MHWs and has focused on the tropical and subtropical oceans. The questions we address here are: (a) Are there any MHW events in the Arctic region where SSTs are generally low? and (b) Are the MHWs weaker or stronger in the Arctic than in the other oceans? Our study indicates that: (a) MHWs do exist in the Arctic, (b) their strengths increase with time, and (c) they are stronger than those in the other oceans in the most recent decades. These MHWs may have a strong impact on the Arctic bio‐ecosystem due to their low heat tolerance since the seasonal variation of SST in the Arctic is small. Key Points: The average marine heatwaves (MHWs) in the Arctic are as strong as in the other ocean basins in 1982–2020The annual intensity are stronger in 2000–2020 than in 1982–2000, which is consistent with changes in air temperature, sea‐ice, and cloudThe increase of annual duration is largely associated with the postponed end time of the MHW seasons [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A model study shows that the decline of Arctic sea ice volume (SIV) slows down during 2007–2020 with increasingly warm atmospheric and oceanic conditions. The slowdown of the SIV decline is because the decrease in ice export from the Arctic exceeds the decrease in net ice production within the Arctic. The relatively strong decrease in ice export occurs when the increase in ice motion is lower than the decrease in SIV. The relatively weak decrease in net ice production is due to strong increases in ice growth as thinner ice grows faster than thicker ice under freezing conditions. The ice growth increases are closely correlated with and benefit from increases in open water creation caused by enhanced ice divergence and shear as thinner ice is easier to deform. Plain Language Summary: Results from the Pan‐arctic Ice‐Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System (PIOMAS) show significant decline of Arctic sea ice volume (SIV) in the past decades. However, the SIV decline is slowing down during 2007–2020 with increasingly higher air and ocean temperatures, which is in line with satellite CryoSat‐2 observations of largely stabilized SIV since 2011. The slowdown of the SIV decline is because of relatively strong decreases in ice export from the Arctic and increases in ice growth in the Arctic. The relatively strong increase in ice growth in 2007–2020 is because thinner and less compact ice, which is the norm in recent years, has much higher growth rates than thicker ice under freezing conditions. Thinner ice also moves faster and deforms more, which tends to create more open water to stimulate ice growth in 2007–2020. Thus, the ice export and growth processes play a role in slowing down the SIV decline in recent years and may continue to play that role in the future. Key Points: The decline of Arctic sea ice volume has slowed down in recent years under increasingly warm atmospheric and oceanic conditionsThe slowdown is due to weak ice export and strong ice growth which serve as a negative feedback to retard the ice volume declineIncreases in dynamic open water creation because of an accelerating thin ice cover play a role in stimulating ice growth in recent years [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]