Antarctic Ice: Where Are We Heading?

[stewfox]

The Arctic change is vastly larger and more important than the Antarctic.

Too who and why make such an assumption ?

Its in the news more of course but..

Edited October 1, 2012 by stewfox

[BornFromTheVoid]

Too who and why make such an assumption ?

Its in the news more of course but..

The change has been and is vastly larger, I don't think that can be argued really.

It's more important in terms of the effects it will have, on things from local Arctic ecosystems to northern hemisphere circulation patterns.

[stewfox]

The change has been and is vastly larger, I don't think that can be argued really.

It's more important in terms of the effects it will have, on things from local Arctic ecosystems to northern hemisphere circulation patterns.

Short term of course yes but long term 50yrs plus what happens in the Antarctic with 90% of the Worlds fresh water ice I think will be could be important

[BornFromTheVoid]

Short term of course yes but long term 50yrs plus what happens in the Antarctic with 90% of the Worlds fresh water ice I think will be could be important

You don't think the loss of Arctic sea ice will have any long term effects either? Rapid Antarctic ice sheet changes should certainly make the news, but that's not happening now.

But we were discussing the sea ice importance and media coverage, weren't we?

[Methuselah]

Short term of course yes but long term 50yrs plus what happens in the Antarctic with 90% of the Worlds fresh water ice I think will be could be important

I partly agree, Stew. But, in 50yrs time, the ramifications of the problems in the Arctic will already be causing disruption...

[Gray-Wolf]

I'd have to agree with both Stew and BFTV and do not find it unacceptable to do so? Any rapid changes to the ice in Antarctica will have instant impacts for humanity In some ways the 'costs' will far outweigh the disruption to N.Hemisphere weather patterns that the Arctic meltdown is ,and will ,bring to us (try and cost out re-siting a major city and it's infrastructure not to mention ports and their infrastructure!) but the Arctic will eventually drive the changes in Antarctica (both by temp and sea level hikes from Greenland)

To me the planet finds itself yet again with the time to mitigate such changes but with a track record of procrastination whilst it observes the changes to a point of undeniable acceptance (some folk are still in denial about the dire nature of the changes to the Arctic and the impacts this will drive in Greenland?).

It would appear that history will repeat itself and that humanity does not learn from it's past mistakes?

[Nights King]

I'd have to agree with both Stew and BFTV and do not find it unacceptable to do so? Any rapid changes to the ice in Antarctica will have instant impacts for humanity In some ways the 'costs' will far outweigh the disruption to N.Hemisphere weather patterns that the Arctic meltdown is ,and will ,bring to us (try and cost out re-siting a major city and it's infrastructure not to mention ports and their infrastructure!) but the Arctic will eventually drive the changes in Antarctica (both by temp and sea level hikes from Greenland)

To me the planet finds itself yet again with the time to mitigate such changes but with a track record of procrastination whilst it observes the changes to a point of undeniable acceptance (some folk are still in denial about the dire nature of the changes to the Arctic and the impacts this will drive in Greenland?).

It would appear that history will repeat itself and that humanity does not learn from it's past mistakes?

The Ozone hole has got along time to really start healing properly so we may have a while to 'fix' the artic before we really start to damage antarctica but only way would be to geo engineer it or remove c02 from atmosphere to get it back down to 350ppm? I'm not sure we will ever see anything proactive done about it in our life times?

[Gray-Wolf]

I wish I had your confidence M83!

When science first started to measure the circumpolars response to the hole , 30 or so years ago, we were at much lower CO2 forcings and still had a functioning Arctic. How powerful is the 'cage' around the Antarctic going to prove to be?

We already know that the ocean has found a way through and stand to witness one of the biggest calving events yet seen this southern summer (up to ten times bigger than the Peterman2010 berg!!!) judging by the propagation, over winter, of the cracks first noted last year. it will be a berg 30 odd miles by about 27 miles? Should my Ross crevasse also show new development (the images currently are a bit 'sun-washed' with the low angle sun so it's hard to judge?) then I believe we will be seeing the first signs of the planet breaking through 'the cage'

Edited October 2, 2012 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

Sorry to bring my normal 'cloud' to the party but let's try and stay grounded during re-freeze and be mindful how the past 5 years has altered the ice remaining at ice min. A look at the volume figures for ice min in 07' and 2012' should clue you up as to why?

We are seeing other changes continue across the basin. Some of the heat gained over summer remains in the water column leaving temps capable of melting ice if the waters are mixed by swells (as we saw in the Oct 2010 storm over Bering). Surface mixing is also allowing the N.A.D. to penetrate further into the basin at the surface allowing for the changes we see in Barrentsz/Kara? We have seen the 'Laptev Bite' occur fro a few years now, does this also hint at an emergent surface current?

As I posted above let us see how the re-freeze goes in Beaufort and East Siberian seas (and the depth it manages) and how Baffin does this year?

We know the basin will freeze over winter but it is no longer clear as to how deep that ice will make nor how much of the ice off Greenland will survive this time.

So lets hope to catch 07' soon and that this is not just going to trap heat below the ice that will be brought into play as soon as next years swells mix it back to the surface?

[quest4peace]

Sorry to bring my normal 'cloud' to the party but let's try and stay grounded during re-freeze and be mindful how the past 5 years has altered the ice remaining at ice min. A look at the volume figures for ice min in 07' and 2012' should clue you up as to why?

We are seeing other changes continue across the basin. Some of the heat gained over summer remains in the water column leaving temps capable of melting ice if the waters are mixed by swells (as we saw in the Oct 2010 storm over Bering). Surface mixing is also allowing the N.A.D. to penetrate further into the basin at the surface allowing for the changes we see in Barrentsz/Kara? We have seen the 'Laptev Bite' occur fro a few years now, does this also hint at an emergent surface current?

As I posted above let us see how the re-freeze goes in Beaufort and East Siberian seas (and the depth it manages) and how Baffin does this year?

We know the basin will freeze over winter but it is no longer clear as to how deep that ice will make nor how much of the ice off Greenland will survive this time.

So lets hope to catch 07' soon and that this is not just going to trap heat below the ice that will be brought into play as soon as next years swells mix it back to the surface?

Take each day as it comes in other words,which is a fair statement to be honest. Bit like a game of snakes and ladders the ladder part is ice extent climbing to ever higher extents in certain areas (winter) but the snake in the equation is the strength and thickness of the ice, which come the next melt season is thinner and more likely to melt out. Also as you say if the water trapped is still abnormally warm underneath at winters end it has a head start and we end up in a catch 22 cycle?. I would like to be pleasantly surprised at the end of this freeze season which is always my motivation, but that doesn't mean i'm blind to the fact it may be even more dismal either next year unfortunately. Meanwhile i feel like were wishing our lives away at the moment and hope that it may settle down again in the next decade, so that we can just enjoy our lives and seasons again My hopes may realistically be dashed, or i might be pleasantly surprised, but for the sake of the human race, we need to get some re-balance up there, this might not happen anytime soon admittedly but we all need hope, and i think this is why some people are holding on to each and every increase that appears above the norm as far as extent increases go but maybe overlooking the thickness issue at the same time

Edited October 11, 2012 by quest4peace

[Gray-Wolf]

Hi Q4P!

I have even deeper concerns about where our climate is headed. If we take it that up to 50% of our warming is currently hidden by Asian Sulphate emissions (as NASA Suggest)then we have a heck of a lot more 'warming' already in the system just waiting to appear? to think that with a PDO and AMO actively dragging temps down then you can see the scale of things esp. if the Asian issue gets cleaned out of the system in time for phase shifts in the current cold drivers?

We know the impacts the coal boom in Europe/the U.S. had on global temps post WW2 and how quickly we saw an uptick once we'd cleaned up our acts and scrubbed out the sulphate's so what have we already in store once Asia cleans up it's production? We saw Chinese coal use double between 2002 and 2005 and only recently have they engaged on a program to clean up their emissions (up to 2 million premature deaths a year due to sulphate pollution).

If we are looking at Geo-engineering solutions that include the use of a 'sulphate parasol' then we should be in no doubt of the ability for it to moderate temps and if Asia's 'dirty coal' has now been providing one for over 15yrs then how will the long lived CO2 impact once the short lived sulphate's are cleaned out? Even earlier melt-out dates? faster ice melt? later re-freeze? faster snow melt?

This is not somewhere we are headed, the warming potential is already there. this is just a waiting game until those sulphate's are washed out.

[quest4peace]

Hi Q4P!

I have even deeper concerns about where our climate is headed. If we take it that up to 50% of our warming is currently hidden by Asian Sulphate emissions (as NASA Suggest)then we have a heck of a lot more 'warming' already in the system just waiting to appear? to think that with a PDO and AMO actively dragging temps down then you can see the scale of things esp. if the Asian issue gets cleaned out of the system in time for phase shifts in the current cold drivers?

We know the impacts the coal boom in Europe/the U.S. had on global temps post WW2 and how quickly we saw an uptick once we'd cleaned up our acts and scrubbed out the sulphate's so what have we already in store once Asia cleans up it's production? We saw Chinese coal use double between 2002 and 2005 and only recently have they engaged on a program to clean up their emissions (up to 2 million premature deaths a year due to sulphate pollution).

If we are looking at Geo-engineering solutions that include the use of a 'sulphate parasol' then we should be in no doubt of the ability for it to moderate temps and if Asia's 'dirty coal' has now been providing one for over 15yrs then how will the long lived CO2 impact once the short lived sulphate's are cleaned out? Even earlier melt-out dates? faster ice melt? later re-freeze? faster snow melt?

This is not somewhere we are headed, the warming potential is already there. this is just a waiting game until those sulphate's are washed out.

Blimey Just when i thought there was enough going on to mess things up, we have the chinese revolution of development coming into play I'm kind of hoping the speed of technology advances in places like china and japan etc might see some solutions in the future, to the arctic and wider global problem, but as ever we'll have to wait and see. We seriously need to get some halt on the chopping down of c02 drinking trees in our rainforests and more locally, as our global forests do provide an answer of sorts they are the "lungs" of the planet afterall , and the main regulator of our climate system. More trees, less c02 in the air= less co2 to make unatural warming? that is if c02 is the only factor .

Edited October 11, 2012 by quest4peace

[Gray-Wolf]

This is why I tend to keep quiet about sulphates since the end of the 90's when I saw them making impacts (in my own mind). The 2011 Nasa calcs were far above what I thought you could claim for the impacts, I thought it must be long cycle natural variability coming into play (PDO/AMO)? As it is I have to wonder just how effective the 'naturals' will be if we slip into AGW proper with the 'cleaning up' of the Asian pollution?

With so many agencies now talking of a thousand years of warming already locked in due to CO2 levels we have to wonder just how warm we should be? Are we already beyond 2c? Will the added heat lead to 'natural' GHG feedbacks from permafrosts? I just does not bear thinking about really.

[Gray-Wolf]

The rapid growth period of Chinas development seemed to peak 7 years ago and ,since then with the west's help, they have been hacking into their pollution issues? If , like the west when it introduced it Sulphate legislation, we see a similar uptick in global temps then surely this will make things even worse across the Arctic?

If we've seen this level of meltdown under an Asian 'sulphate parasol' then what are we to expect now they are taking steps to end emissions?

With so many folk now interested in the problems I feel it only fair that they have as much information to mull over as possible and , to me , this side of things has not seemed to get much airing since the initial round of 'global dimming' was noted post WW2? We know the 'health issues' that go hand in hand with this type of pollution (respiration issues and acid rain) and i think it is those immediate issues that Asia is seeking to offset but what will their 'cleanup' lead to around the globe if we are not seeing the level of heating we ought with the GHG levels at present?

We always hark back to the heating trend in the 80's and early 90's but that was at those GHG levels under 'clearing skies' what kind of heating rates are we now going to inherit esp. across the regions that are to face the brunt of AGW?

The last paper , prior to 2010, on Greenland told us we had seen the last of major mass loss there and that a cycle had been spotted. Then came 2010's record losses, now we have this years record losses from Greenland. Is it coincidental that, even with cool drivers in play we are beggining to see 'warming behaviours' from the northern polar regions or are we to see warming re-start at 80's speeds over the coming decade as the Asian parasol is removed?

To my cynical mind it appears that folk with vested interest have made great inroads, via funded lackeys, to spread doubt about AGW whilst fully aware of both the cool natural drivers presence and also the impacts their industries would have over the period? As with the tobacco industry before they have gained another few decades of profit and growth for their selves and their shareholders but at what costs?

I'm sorry that this is overlong so to finish if you look back to the 80's and the masses of ice lost to Fram over that decade it becomes apparent that something had altered in the Arctic. How was so much ice now able to be mobile? Loss of mass due to rapid melt is the only answer. Things may have then slowed through the 90's and noughties but losses continued due to the slower warming until the point where the volume was so impacted that Extent and Area also had to reduce. And here we are!

[quest4peace]

Found this, i think it's about an eruption in 2009 that enveloped the whole arctic region with sulphates any link to the poor performance in ice this year? do you think?

Properties of Sarychev sulphate aerosols over the Arctic

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 117, D04203, 21 PP., 2012

doi:10.1029/2011JD016838

http://www.agu.org/p...016838.shtml

Points

• Stratospheric summer aerosols over the Arctic had effective radius ~0.28 um
  
• Stratospheric summertime AODs at 500 nm were between 0.03 and 0.05
  
• The e-folding times of stratospheric aerosols were ~4 months
  

Aerosols from the Sarychev Peak volcano entered the Arctic region less than a week after the strongest SO₂ eruption on June 15 and 16, 2009 and had, by the first week in July, spread out over the entire Arctic region. These predominantly stratospheric aerosols were determined to be sub-micron in size and inferred to be composed of sulphates produced from the condensation of SO₂ gases emitted during the eruption. Average (500 nm) Sarychev-induced stratospheric optical depths (SOD) over the Polar Environmental Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL) at Eureka (Nunavut, Canada) were found to be between 0.03 and 0.05 during the months of July and August, 2009. This estimate, derived from sunphotometry and integrated lidar backscatter profiles was consistent with averages derived from lidar estimates over Ny-Ã…lesund (Spitsbergen). The Sarychev SOD e-folding time at Eureka, deduced from lidar profiles, was found to be approximately 4 months relative to a regression start date of July 27. These profiles initially revealed the presence of multiple Sarychev plumes between the tropopause and about 17 km altitude. After about two months, the complex vertical plume structures had collapsed into fewer, more homogeneous plumes located near the tropopause. It was found that the noisy character of daytime backscatter returns induced an artifactual minimum in the temporal, pan-Arctic, CALIOP SOD response to Sarychev sulphates. A depolarization ratio discrimination criterion was used to separate the CALIOP stratospheric layer class into a low depolarization subclass which was more representative of Sarychev sulphates. Post-SAT (post Sarychev Arrival Time) retrievals of the fine mode effective radius (r_eff,f) and the logarithmic standard deviation for two Eureka sites and Thule (Greenland) were all close to 0.25 μm and 1.6 respectively. The stratospheric analogue to the columnar r_eff,f average was estimated to be r_eff,f⁽⁺⁾ = 0.29 μm for Eureka data. Stratospheric, Raman lidar retrievals at Ny-Ã…lesund, yielded a post-SAT average of r_eff,f⁽⁺⁾ = 0.27 μm. These results are ∼50% larger than the background stratospheric-aerosol value. They are also about a factor of two larger than modeling values used in recent publications or about a factor of five larger in terms of (per particle) backscatter cross section.

N. T. O'Neill

CARTEL, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada

C. Perro

Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

A. Saha

CARTEL, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada

G. Lesins

Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

T. J. Duck

Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

E. W. Eloranta

Space Science and Engineering Center, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA

G. J. Nott

Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

A. Hoffman

Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Potsdam, Germany

M. L. Karumudi

CARTEL, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada

C. Ritter

Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Potsdam, Germany

A. Bourassa

Institute of Space and Atmospheric Studies, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

I. Abboud

Science and Technology Branch, Environment Canada, Wilcox, Saskatchewan, Canada

S. A. Carn

Department of Geological and Mining Engineering and Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, Michigan, USA

V. Savastiouk

Full Spectrum Science Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Edited October 11, 2012 by quest4peace

[4wd]

To my cynical mind it appears that folk with vested interest have made great inroads, via funded lackeys, to spread doubt about AGW whilst fully aware of both the cool natural drivers presence and also the impacts their industries would have over the period? As with the tobacco industry before they have gained another few decades of profit and growth for their selves and their shareholders but at what costs?

The principal reason for ice melting is not due to temperatures being half degree warmer than 50 years ago but due to cyclical changes in currents which have introduced warmer than normal water into some parts of the Arctic.

The enhanced warming we see in the Arctic is a consequence of less ice not the cause of it.

As for your obsession with conspiracies I think you spend too much time on hate and hysteria blogs.

China and the rest of the developing world need to use every avenue to help their populations out of grinding poverty, and those who wish to block development on the basis of environmentalist holier-than-thou hysteria should hang their heads in shame.

Edited October 11, 2012 by jethro
The swear filter is there for a reason.

[Gray-Wolf]

I think every eruption placing enough sulphate's in the atmosphere will impact temps in the region? Didn't we have a few of the sub arctic 'ring of fire' volcano's erupt in 09/10?

The major point (for me) being that we have a continuous 'eruption' spewing sulphate's into the atmosphere but far more diffuse and long lived than any of the major eruptions we point to to show climate impacts?

If the Arctic has become so impacted by the current rise in global temps then what of it when the sun is able to shine without the interference of the 'sulphate parasol'? Unlike the Ozone hole the impacts will be felt over a relatively short period with the sulphate only staying aloft a matter of years? any reduction in them will have immediate impact if current output fails to replace the naturally washed out element and this may be what we are now beggining to feel with the Asian cleanup now ongoing?

As a broader issue folk often ask why we are still posting top 10 temps globally even in the presence of natural cool forcings and the slow reduction in sulphate's may be a significant part of the answer?

If we look at the added warmth the pole now adds to global temps due to open water and the added warmth early snow loss brings to the region then add on top increases in CO2 levels and a drop out of Sulphate's (even before we see permafrosts making their presence felt!) things don't look too good to me?

at the beginning I was brought to believe that global warming was something I'd be leaving my grandchildren to deal with, no mention then of an ice free Arctic. In the late 90's we started to hear of slow ice losses that could bring about an ice free Arctic by the 2100's. now I'm watching the Arctic become ice free in my lifetime. What of the other impacts that were supposed to be so far away in time?

Edited October 11, 2012 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

The principal reason for ice melting is not due to temperatures being half degree warmer than 50 years ago but due to cyclical changes in currents which have introduced warmer than normal water into some parts of the Arctic.

The enhanced warming we see in the Arctic is a consequence of less ice not the cause of it.

As for your obsession with conspiracies I think you spend too much time on hate and hysteria blogs.

China and the rest of the developing world need to use every avenue to help their populations out of grinding poverty, and those who wish to block development on the basis of environmentalist holier-than-thou hysteria should hang their heads in shame.

Who is saying that the East should not join in the party 4? We started this shenanigans and so have no right to sit in judgment of anyone trying to achieve the prosperity we have??

We are even doing our bit to speed them to a 'cleaner' way of being but ,as we found in the 80's, this comes at the cost of revealing the full impacts of the GHG's we also introduced into the atmosphere.

This is the 'Arctic ' thread and as such we are exploring what has caused the impacts there and what we need do to mitigate/adapt to the changes. If we are not yet seeing the full impact of our atmospheric pollution on the area are we not better off figuring what we should expect over the coming years rather than be wrong footed by any rapid developments there (like a rapid Greenland melt and the SL impacts it would drive?).

If the state of the Arctic today is driving food prices up what of when the 'new Arctic ' is in full swing? How long do we have to um and ah about it all?

[knocker]

China and the rest of the developing world need to use every avenue to help their populations out of grinding poverty, and those who wish to block development on the basis of environmentalist holier-than-thou hysteria should hang their heads in shame.

And do you think the Chinese elite are that worried about the underclass.

When the construction of China's Three Gorges Dam was completed in 2006, most Chinese citizens must have hoped it was worth the huge cost: 1.4 million people had to be relocated from towns, cities, and villages to make way for the enormous structure, which would supplement a hungry China's growing energy needs.

But their prayers have not been answered.

Six years later, the government says a further 100,000 people may be displaced over the next few years, including 20,000 this year alone, because of increasing landslide risks in the area around the dam,

http://www.businessinsider.com/chinas-enormous-three-gorges-dam-is-turning-out-to-be-a-huge-mistake-2012-4?op=1

[knocker]

SH sea ice area and extent and GSIAD.

https://sites.google.com/site/allthingsclimatechange/sh-sea-ice---area

Edited October 18, 2012 by knocker

[knocker]

New understanding of Antarctic’s weight-loss

New data which more accurately measures the rate of ice-melt could help us better understand how Antarctica is changing in the light of global warming.

The rate of global sea level change is reasonably well-established but understanding the different sources of this rise is more challenging. Using re-calibrated scales that are able to ‘weigh’ ice sheets from space to a greater degree of accuracy than ever before, an international team including a leading Durham University expert, has discovered that Antarctica overall is contributing much less to the substantial sea-level rise than originally thought.

Instead, the large amount of water flowing away from West Antarctica through ice-melt has been partly cancelled out by the volume of water falling onto the continent in the form of snow, suggesting some past studies have overestimated Antarctica’s contribution to fast-rising sea levels.

Using Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite data, the team calculated ice sheet mass loss by more accurately mapping and removing the mass changes caused by the flow of rock beneath Earth’s surface.

https://www.dur.ac.uk/news/newsitem/?itemno=15633&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

[knocker]

Vostok’s microbes elusive in first measurements of surface water

A first analysis of the ice that froze onto the drillbit used in last February’s landmark drilling to a pristine Antarctic lake shows no native microbes came up with the lake water, according to Sergey Bulat of Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute (Russia). The very uppermost layer of Lake Vostok appears to be “lifeless†so far, says Bulat, but that doesn’t mean the rest of it is.

Bulat reported what he calls his team’s “very preliminary results†on Tuesday, at the 12th European Workshop on Astrobiology (ENEA 2012), in Stockholm, Sweden, at the AlbaNova University Center.

Bulat and his colleagues counted the microbes present in the ice sample and checked their genetic makeup to figure out the phylotypes. They counted fewer than 10 microbes/ml — about the same magnitude they would expect to find in the background in their clean room. And three of the four phylotypes they identified matched contaminants from the drilling oil, with the fourth unknown but also most likely from the lubricant.

Bulat hopes to get clean samples from the ice frozen in the borehole below where the drill bit stopped. That won’t be until next May (2013), if all goes well after the next Russian drilling expedition in December-January. Even if the top of the lake ends up being empty, Bulat suspects microbes will come from lower water depths, or from sediment samples at the bottom of the lake.

Lake Vostok is a stand-in for icy bodies that might harbor life, like Jupiter’s moon Europa. Gerda Horneck of the German Aerospace Center (DLR) said that any result from Lake Vostok is important for astrobiology, and the search for extremophiles that could give hints of what life could be like elsewhere. “Let’s see what comes out next round,†she told me at the end of the meeting on Wednesday.

Edited October 22, 2012 by knocker

[mike Meehan]

Vostok’s microbes elusive in first measurements of surface water

I remain optimistic that if they search hard enough something will be found, though the problem will be avoiding contamination.