Greenland - What Do We Know, What Is The Long Term Future And Is There Any Evidence Of A Melt Out?

[keithlucky]

In your usual rush to accuse everyone of fudging data you forgot this. Quite important when considering albedo

 

ome parts of Greenland have gained more than a metre of ice over the past 365 days, and more than 90% of the ice sheet has seen a net gain (accumulation minus melt) in surface ice.

Map of the accumulated surface mass balance (in mm water equivalent) from September 1st (2013) to now.

Edited January 20, 2015 by keithlucky

[knocker]

 

In your usual rush to accuse everyone of fudging data you forgot this. Quite important when considering albedo

 

ome parts of Greenland have gained more than a metre of ice over the past 365 days, and more than 90% of the ice sheet has seen a net gain (accumulation minus melt) in surface ice.

Map of the accumulated surface mass balance (in mm water equivalent) from September 1st (2013) to now.

 

 

Lets leave aside you have accused NOAA of fudging data without a shred of evidence.

 

Also we are talking albedo that isn't necessarily just correlated with mass of ice. .

 

But once again you have taken one years data and also only tell half the story. From your own link.

 

For an ice sheet that neither grows or shrinks, there is at all points averaged over the year a balance between

• the amount of snow that falls and is compressed to ice
• the amount of snow and ice that melts or evaporates (sublimates) and
• the amount of ice that flows away due to the ice motion

The two first contributions make up the surface mass balance. For the ice sheet as a whole, there is a balance between the surface mass balance and the amount of ice that calves into the ocean as icebergs.

 

If climate changes, the surface mass balance may change such that it no longer matches the calving and the ice sheet can start to gain or lose mass. This is important to keep track of, since such a mass loss will lead to global sea level rise. As mentioned, satellites measuring the ice sheet mass have observed a loss of around 200 Gt/year over the last decade.

 

Greenland Climate Research Centre collaborates with Danish Climate Centre at DMI on research in both atmospheric impact on the Greenland Ice Sheet and the ice flow itself and its interaction with the rest of the climate system.

 

And finally could you now have the courtesy to tell us why you think the data in Blessed Weather's original post is fudged.

Edited January 20, 2015 by knocker

[knocker]

Greenland Ice: The warmer it gets the faster it melts

 

Melting of glacial ice will probably raise sea level around the globe, but how fast this melting will happen is uncertain. In the case of the Greenland Ice Sheet, the more temperatures increase, the faster the ice will melt, according to computer model experiments by Penn State geoscientists.

 

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-01/ps-git012015.php

[Gray-Wolf]

- A team of scientists led by Cornell University Earth and Atmospheric Sciences researcher Michael Willis, has published a new paper showing for the first time that meltwater from the surface of an ice cap in northeastern Greenland can make its way beneath the ice and become trapped, refilling a subglacial lake. This meltwater provides heat to the bottom of the ice sheet.

 

 

 

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-01/cu-awh012015.php

 

Good Job KL tells us there is only growth out there......... we'd be in real trouble if only half the data we provide on Greenland  is not 'fudged'.............

[keithlucky]

Greenland just gained 12 billion tons of snow in one day, and is approaching  a record amount of mass gain.

This is the part where alarmists say “glaciers are calving faster than new ice is forming.†They don’t understand that glacial flow is a delayed response to the accumulation of excess snow.

Greenland just gained 12 billion tons of snow in one day, and is approaching  a record amount of mass gain.

This is the part where alarmists say “glaciers are calving faster than new ice is forming.†They don’t understand that glacial flow is a delayed response to the accumulation of excess snow.

Edited February 4, 2015 by keithlucky

[knocker]

Greenland just gained 12 billion tons of snow in one day, and is approaching  a record amount of mass gain.

This is the part where alarmists say “glaciers are calving faster than new ice is forming.†They don’t understand that glacial flow is a delayed response to the accumulation of excess snow.

Greenland just gained 12 billion tons of snow in one day, and is approaching  a record amount of mass gain.

This is the part where alarmists say “glaciers are calving faster than new ice is forming.†They don’t understand that glacial flow is a delayed response to the accumulation of excess snow.

 

This gets very boring as it appears just about every two weeks. Of course snowfall rates very but the important point is this from the same website that you didn't link.

 

The figure below shows the total daily contribution from all points on the ice sheet (top) and the same accumulated from September 1st to now (bottom). The blue curves show this season’s surface mass balance in gigatons (Gt; 1 Gt is one billion tons and corresponds to 1 cubic kilometer of water), and for comparison the mean curves from the historical model run are shown with two standard deviations on either side. Note that the accumulated curve does not end at 0 at the end of the year. Over the year, it snows more than it melts, but calving of icebergs also adds to the total mass budget of the ice sheet. Satellite observations over the last decade show that the ice sheet is not in balance. The calving loss is greater than the gain from surface mass balance, and Greenland is losing mass at about 200 Gt/yr.

 

I'm quite intrigued by this as glacier flow is an extremely complicated subject so a more detailed explanation would be helpful. I await with bated breath.

 

 

This is the part where alarmists say “glaciers are calving faster than new ice is forming.†They don’t understand that glacial flow is a delayed response to the accumulation of excess snow.

Edited February 4, 2015 by knocker

[Gray-Wolf]

Massive calve of Jakobshavn in Feb!!!!

 

http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,154.msg45673.html#msg45673

 

courtesy of Espen over on Neven's forum.

 

After the news of the austfonna retreat/ablation we ought all have worries for all the marine terminating glaciers around Greenland. to see this scale of collapse mid winter????

[keithlucky]

This gets very boring as it appears just about every two weeks. Of course snowfall rates very but the important point is this from the same website that you didn't link.

 

I'm quite intrigued by this as glacier flow is an extremely complicated subject so a more detailed explanation would be helpful. I await with bated breath.

http://beta.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/

[knocker]

Massive study provides first detailed look at how Greenland's ice is vanishing

 

BUFFALO, N.Y. -- The Greenland Ice Sheet is the second-largest body of ice on Earth. It covers an area about five times the size of New York State and Kansas combined, and if it melts completely, oceans could rise by 20 feet. Coastal communities from Florida to Bangladesh would suffer extensive damage.

 

Now, a new study is revealing just how little we understand this northern behemoth.

 

Led by geophysicist Beata Csatho, PhD, an associate professor of geology at the University at Buffalo, the research provides what the authors think is the first comprehensive picture of how Greenland's ice is vanishing. It suggests that current ice sheet modeling studies are too simplistic to accurately predict the future contributions of the entire Greenland Ice Sheet to sea level rise, and that Greenland may lose ice more rapidly in the near future than previously thought.

 

"The great importance of our data is that for the first time, we have a comprehensive picture of how all of Greenland's glaciers have changed over the past decade," Csatho says.

 

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-12/uab-msp121014.php

[4wd]

 

The calving loss is greater than the gain from surface mass balance, and Greenland is losing mass at about 200 Gt/yr.

That's about a 0.001% of the total Greenland Ice Mass if I recall correct - a trivial change.

[knocker]

That's about a 0.001% of the total Greenland Ice Mass if I recall correct - a trivial change.

Quantifying whether losing ice at the trivial rate rate of 277Gt/yr, is of significance or not rather depends on one's stance on climate change. For example it has oft been said CO₂ only comprises .04 per cent of the atmosphere; a quite trivial amount.

Edited February 21, 2015 by knocker

[4wd]

You soon get a ton of ice, the mass is only slightly less than water.
Announcing big numbers in an attempt to sound scary should be kept in context. 

[knocker]

You soon get a ton of ice, the mass is only slightly less than water.

Announcing big numbers in an attempt to sound scary should be kept in context. 

 

That is exactly my point. The loss of 277Gt/Yr of ice is the result of the latest scientific evaluation. To translate that into an 'an attempt to sound scary' emanates from a certain political standpoint and suggest the scientists themselves are politically motivated which comes as no great surprise. The context is that it contributes around 20 percent of current annual sea level rise, not the percentage of the total ice cap.

[Gray-Wolf]

Though the numbers are mind numbing the thing we need watch is the 'doubling period' for those losses as it is in this measure that future security rests? Any further reduction in the doubling period really alters the rates of sea level rise further on in the period and so bring serious consequences closer to us.

 

The sight of that massive mid winter calve ( the chasing ice team will have it on camera so we will see it 'up close and personal' by summer? is a concern. normally winter sees a slow down in glacier motion ( as melt ends and lubrication ceases) but something odd is going on at Jakobshavn?

 

We heard rumblings of hastily gathered meetings at the AGU to discuss something 'big' going on at Jakobshavn ? maybe this calve is the start of something very concerning about the rate of ice loss across Greenland?

 

EDIT: The grounding line is very close to the 'lip' so retreats beyond the 2012 line might allow warm Atlantic waters over the lip and down into the basin under the ice sheet beyond. This would lead to massive destabilisation of the ice sheet above and place us into a period of structural collapse that I have discussed before? Maybe the 'news' that was discussed at the AGU was data from this area? Maybe we are already seeing ingress into the basin beyond?

Edited February 21, 2015 by Gray-Wolf

[knocker]

Greenland Reels: Climate Disrupting Feedbacks Have Begun

 

Greenland is warmer than it has been in more than 100,000 years and climate disrupting feedback loops have begun. Since 2000, ice loss has increased over 600 percent, and liquid water now exists inside the ice sheet year-round, no longer refreezing during winter.

 

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/29462-greenland-reels-climate-disrupting-feedbacks-have-begun#

[knocker]

Greenland plays important role in polar ice research

 

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- Melting of glacial ice will probably raise the sea level around the globe, but how fast this melting will happen is uncertain. Greenland is especially pivotal in the study of melting ice sheets and rising sea levels because it experiences 50 percent more warming than the global average. In the case of the Greenland Ice Sheet, the more temperatures increase, the faster the ice will melt, according to computer model experiments by Penn State geoscientists.

 

http://news.psu.edu/story/341384/2015/01/20/research/greenland-ice-warmer-it-gets-faster-it-melts

[knocker]

Greenland’s “Recent Mass Loss†Underestimated?

 

There are a variety of methods used to estimate the present rate of mass loss from the Greenland ice sheet, including satellite altimetry, satellite gravimetry and input-output assessments. All of these methods generally agree that since 2005 the ice sheet has been losing c. 250 Gt/yr of mass (equivalent to 8000 tonnes of ice per second). Partitioning this mass loss into climatic surface balance (i.e. snowfall minus runoff) and ice dynamic (i.e. iceberg calving) contributions is a little more challenging. Partitioning recent mass loss into surface balance or ice dynamic components requires us to look at the changes in each of these terms since a period during which the ice sheet was approximately in equilibrium. Conventionally, the ice sheet is assumed to have been in equilibrium during the 1961-1990 so-called “reference periodâ€.¹

 

http://williamcolgan.net/blog/?p=247

[stewfox]

That's about a 0.001% of the total Greenland Ice Mass if I recall correct - a trivial change.

 

In need the current ice in Greenland is about 110,000 years old and that's a lot of weather.

 

Tiny changes to recent out flow (last 10yrs) which we cant really compare to decades ago ( we didn't have the data) are to be expected. 

 

Nearly 75 percent of the loss of Greenland's ice can be traced back to small coastal glaciers

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet

 

We will need another 30/40 years of data to build some 'recent history'

 

+ seven thousandths of one percent lost annually, at that terrifying rate of loss continues unabated, of course, it will all be gone in a mere 15,000 years to melt out.' (Willis Eschenbach)+ 

 

The 'assumption' that the Greenland ice sheet has been in equilibrium last few hundred years is just plain daft it responds to weather and has the associated lags some seasonal some decades or some even over centuries.

 

 

Edited March 21, 2015 by stewfox

[Gray-Wolf]

Seeing as Greenland is part in the area that had seen a 1,000yr cooldown ( until the reversal in the 1900's) if think you can have a stab at what was occurring over that period stew?

 

The '6 year' doubling period of mass loss noted through the past decade is surely of some concern? Citing ocean terminating glaciers as some kind of 'natural limiter' to ice loss appears just daft? Have you ever considered the size of the mouth of the tap to the size of your bath stew? Still fills up pretty fast doesn't it?

 

 Keep an eye on Jakobshavn this summer stew, with the past months major calve things appear set to see rapid flow rates so just check out how much ice can exit a terminus over an 'average' year ( esp. as it appears set to drop off the 'lip' its sat upon atm and into the bay beyond!).

[knocker]

Greenland ice sheet mass balance: a review

 

Over the past quarter of a century the Arctic has warmed more than any other region on Earth, causing a profound impact on the Greenland ice sheet (GrIS) and its contribution to the rise in global sea level. The loss of ice can be partitioned into processes related to surface mass balance and to ice discharge, which are forced by internal or external (atmospheric/oceanic/basal) fluctuations. Regardless of the measurement method, observations over the last two decades show an increase in ice loss rate, associated with speeding up of glaciers and enhanced melting. However, both ice discharge and melt-induced mass losses exhibit rapid short-term fluctuations that, when extrapolated into the future, could yield erroneous long-term trends. In this paper we review the GrIS mass loss over more than a century by combining satellite altimetry, airborne altimetry, interferometry, aerial photographs and gravimetry data sets together with modelling studies. We revisit the mass loss of different sectors and show that they manifest quite different sensitivities to atmospheric and oceanic forcing. In addition, we discuss recent progress in constructing coupled ice-ocean-atmosphere models required to project realistic future sea-level changes.

 

http://iopscience.iop.org/0034-4885/78/4/046801/

 

Just to add this paper is behind a paywall and to buy this article you need to fork out £66!! Ridiculous.

Edited March 27, 2015 by knocker

[knocker]

The response of 30 Greenland Glaciers to climate change chronicled individually in one index.

 

 

This is an index of posts on the response of specific Greenland glaciers to climate change.  In the 1980′s when I first worked on Jakobshavn Isbrae, Greenland there was not much research occurring on the glaciers.  Today in response to the dynamic changes discussed below and glacier by glacier in the index links, Greenland is the focus of numerous extensive, ongoing and important research projects. In 2015 scientists are gearing up for the main field season to better identify and understand the current and future response of this critical ice sheet. At the time of each post I reference the specific research relevant, the posts are from 2009-2014.  In the intervening period new research has made some further advances, and I will endeavor to update each post to reflect this.  The posts illustrate the significant response of Greenland Glaciers to climate change regardless of what type of glacier they are. The Polar Portal has developed an online viewer of change on selected glaciers.  Each year the Arctic Report Card updates annual observations of Greenland Ice Sheet Change. The posts have benefitted from the insights and observations of Espen Olsen.

 

http://blogs.agu.org/fromaglaciersperspective/2015/04/02/greenland-glacier-change-index/

[knocker]

Greenland darkening to continue, predicts CCNY expert Marco Tedesco

 

Darkening of the Greenland Ice Sheet is projected to continue as a consequence of continued climate warming, Dr. Marco Tedesco, a City College of New York scientist, said at the European Geosciences Union (EGU) General Assembly in Vienna today.

 

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-04/ccon-gdt041615.php

[Gray-Wolf]

 

As an add on to the above.

 

Does anyone else see a strong resemblance between the predicted sea ice loss and measured sea ice loss over the Arctic? Something is obviously adding into the speed of losses that we do not have a handle on?

[Gray-Wolf]

So what do we think could be behind the ice losses outstripping our modelled losses? 

 

It appears that something 'flipped' as we moved into the new century with both the ice mass reductions across Greenland and the volume crash of Arctic sea ice? So what 'flipped'?

 

From the 40's to the 70's we were both in negative naturals and under high 'dimming' from our pollution so did the 'clean air acts' and the naturals pushing positive cause this massive drop off ( compared to our models) ? Was it the oceans responding to less pollution ( more sunlight making it to them) that lead to ice mass loss?

 

If I'm even in the ball park with this then what will the current rush , by China, to clean up it's pollution? As I see it the first impacts of today's clean up will be across the Pacific ( where as the U.S. and Europe's 'clean up will have impacted the Atlantic more?) with warmer ocean temps across the IPO/PDO regions and the prospects of warm water ingress into the Arctic Basin via Bering?

[stewfox]

 

As an add on to the above.

 

Does anyone else see a strong resemblance between the predicted sea ice loss and measured sea ice loss over the Arctic? Something is obviously adding into the speed of losses that we do not have a handle on?

 

Is there a link to the article re albedo changes in the Artic, cant seem to find it ?