Antarctica’s underwater ice loss is more significant that scientists thought

Sea ice loss remains a concern.

Antarctica’s ice shelves have an “Achilles’ heel,” and it’s the melting that’s taking place beneath the surface, not on the surface, according to an international climate study newly published in the journal Nature Climate Change. The study urges scientists to pay more attention to sub-shelf melting, which in some glaciers accounts for 90% of the continent’s ongoing annual ice loss.

Jonathan Bamber, a professor with the University of Bristol’s School of Geographical Sciences, coauthored the study with colleagues at Utrecht University and the University of California. The researchers relied on a combination of satellite data and computer-model simulations to track the present and future melting that the Antarctic glaciers’ surfaces and undersides are undergoing. The simulations repeatedly showed that what’s going on beneath the surface is as important as—if not more important than—any ice loss that scientists have been witnessing taking place aboveground.

This underwater ice loss affects some ice shelves more than others. Bramber and his colleagues can already pinpoint some of the more affected ice shelves by looking at the current extent of their ice loss. Further research may quantify the underwater melt levels of many more.

That Antarctica is losing ice is certainly not news to climate scientists. Topographic data collected over the last few decades has made clear that surface-level iceberg production and melting has been causing extended trends of continental ice shrinkage in much of the continent.

That shrinkage amounted to about 70 gigatons of the continent’s land ice a year from 1992 through 2011. The continent’s sea ice made some shrinkages in many areas, as well, coupled with a few smaller increases in a few others as a direct result of the melting. This led to some slight increases in a few areas of the continent’s sea ice—increases that, while too small to compensate for the larger losses, still fueled some false claims by a few climate-change skeptics that “Antarctica’s ice is expanding.”

Overall ice loss is not only happening, but there is even more of it taking place sub-surface than researchers may have thought, Bramber and his colleagues conclude. This challenges conventional thinking in that researchers over the last few decades have primarily focused on the surface-level processes of icebergs forming and breaking away from the main ice shelves. This, they believed, was the main driver of long-term ice loss.

Bramber and his colleagues encourage scientists to reconsider. Recognizing the role of subsurface melting, which in many cases may be far larger than that of iceberg breakage, may be critical to a more precise understanding of how ice sheets may interact with oceans and the changing climate in the decades to come.

Commonwealth customers: It’s time to divest

Dear friend,

Have you heard? Prime Minister Tony Abbott wants to change the law so that consumers like you and me can’t run divestment campaigns against companies that engage in environmentally destructive activities.

Over the past six months, Market Forces and 350.org have been working hard to expose the Big 4 Bank’s multi-billion dollar support for the fossil fuel industry.

More than 2800 of you have signed our open letter and you’ve pledged to shift over $42 million of your money if the Big Banks don’t stop funding damaging fossil fuel projects.

Now it’s time to turn these pledges into action. There’s a reason Prime Minister Abbott wants to stop divestment campaigning – he knows it works. It’s time we show him just how well it works.

Starting in October, we’ll be supporting our Melbourne members to close their ANZ accounts. And in early November, we’ll support Commonwealth Bank customers in Sydney, Brisbane, Canberra, Melbourne and Perth to do the same. We’ll be providing information to help you choose a bank that doesn’t invest in the fossil fuel industry.

If you’re a Commonwealth Bank customer and you’re ready to switch banks, then register for one of the following events:

• Melbourne
• Sydney
• Brisbane
• Canberra
• Perth

We’ll be organising activities for other cities and banks in due course. Register your interest here.

It’s time to seize our consumer power for good and show the Big 4 that we won’t stand by as they fund the destruction of our local communities, ecosystems and climate. This will also demonstrate why laws protecting our right to boycott environmentally destructive companies need to be protected.

If you care what your money’s doing, then join us in the growing divestment movement.

Warmest wishes,

Charlie on behalf of 350.org Australia and Julien on behalf of Market Forces

P.S. Here’s the news that the Abbott Government wants to make environmental boycotts illegal. These plans, if they even get up, won’t take effect until at least next year, so you’re safe if you choose to participate in our upcoming activities.

P.P.S. There’s still time to register for our ANZ action in Melbourne. Sign up here.

Fourth in a series

A tipping point may be understood as a step change, or passing of a critical threshold, in a major earth-climate system component, where a small perturbation (a small push or change) unleashes a bigger change in the component.  Potsdam Institute Director, Prof. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, says that tipping points “identify the most vulnerable components (tipping elements) of the Earth System, the critical warming thresholds where the respective Earth System elements flip into a qualitatively new state”.  These elements include ecosystems, major ocean and atmospheric circulation patterns, the polar ice sheets, and the land- and ocean-based carbon stores.

This process is often tied to positive feedbacks, where a change in a component leads to other changes that eventually “feed back” onto the original change to amplify it.  The classic case in global warming (or, in reverse, cooling) is the ice-albedo feedback, where decreases (increases) in the ice cover area change surface reflectivity (albedo), trapping more (less) heat and producing further ice loss (gain).
In some cases, passing one threshold will trigger further threshold events, for example where substantial releases from permafrost carbon stores increase warming, releasing more permafrost carbon but also pushing other systems, for example parts of the Antarctic ice sheet, past a threshold point.

Once a tipping point is crossed, it is irreversible (under natural conditions) within certain time frames, so the consequence is to significantly affect the earth’s climate and ecosystems, for example by raising temperatures or greenhouse gas levels, or changing the efficiency of the land and ocean carbon sinks.  Given enough time and the right conditions, most processes (but not extinctions, for example) can be reversed.

In a period of rapid warming, most major tipping points once crossed (ice sheet loss, large-scale land carbon store releases such as permafrost) are irreversible on human time frames running to a few generations, principally due to the longevity of atmospheric CO2 (several thousand years). Large-scale human interventions in slow-moving earth system tipping points might allow a tipping point to be reversed (for example, a large-scale atmospheric CO2 drawdown program, or solar radiation management).

There is discussion, for example, that Arctic sea-ice loss is “easily reversible” in a cooling world, but that is easier said than done.  That would require greenhouse gas levels to be reduced significantly, below the level equivalent to the temperature at which the sea-ice system tipped in 2007, to produce a sufficiently cooler world.  This would be around 300–325 ppm CO2, compared to the present level of 400 ppm, so it is not so “easy” in the real world.

The scientific literature on tipping points is relatively recent, with a significant contribution by Lenton, Held et al. in 2008 on “Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system” in an issue of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences devoted to the subject. However, our knowledge is limited because “a system-level understanding of critical Arctic processes and feedbacks is still lacking” (Maslowski, Kinney et al.) and “no serious efforts have been made so far to identify and qualify the interactions between various tipping points” (Schellnhuber).

Climate models are not yet good at dealing with tipping points. This is partly in the nature of tipping points, where a particular and complex confluence of factors suddenly change a climate system characteristic and drives it to a different state. To model this, all the contributing factors and their forces have to well identified, as well as their particular interactions, plus the interactions between tipping points. Duarte, Lenton et al. conclude that “complex, nonlinear systems typically shift between alternative states in an abrupt, rather than a smooth manner, which is a challenge that climate models have not yet been able to adequately meet”.

The classic case was the Arctic sea ice “big melt” in 2007. Many models, including those on which the 2007 IPCC report had relied to conclude that Arctic sea-ice was pretty much likely to remain till the end of the century, did not fully capture the dynamics of sea-ice loss. Thus when in 2007 the summer sea-ice extent dropped radically compared to previous years, some model-oriented researchers exclaimed that the Arctic was melting “a hundred years ahead of schedule”.

Even today, papers are still being published with modelling that suggests a sea-ice free Arctic will not occur till mid-century. Given the observations, it’s difficult not to conclude that given a choice between their models and real-world observations, some modellers will always choose the former.

In an overview of the current state of Arctic climate research, Maslowski, Kinney et al. conclude that: “Model limitations are hindering our ability to predict the future state of Arctic sea ice”, and that the majority of general climate models (GCMs) including those used in IPCC (2007) “have not been able to adequately reproduce observed multi-decadal sea-ice variability and trends in the pan-Arctic region”, and their ensemble mean trend in September Arctic sea-ice extent “is approximately 30 years behind the observed trend”.

For example, what would be the impact of a sea-ice-free Arctic summer and the consequent amplified regional warming on the stability of the Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS)? Research does not yet provide a robust framework for considering such questions, yet most scientists if asked for their expert elicitation would probably say that it is hard to imagine the GIS doing anything other than melting at an accelerating rate and passing a critical tipping point in such circumstances.

The sea-ice model that has performed best (acronym NAME), is one of a new range of more specialised regional climate models developed by Dr Wieslaw Maslowski and colleagues. Maslowski is highly regarded, in part because his position at the American Naval Postgraduate School has given him unique access to half a century of Arctic sea-ice thickness scans from polar US military submarines. Maslowski told BBC News:

In the past… we were just extrapolating into the future assuming that trends might persist as we’ve seen in recent times. Now we’re trying to be more systematic, and we’ve developed a regional Arctic climate model that’s very similar to the global climate models participating in IPCC assessments. We can run a fully coupled model for the past and present and see what our model will predict for the future in terms of the sea ice and the Arctic climate.

He emphasizes “the need for detailed analyses of changes in sea ice thickness and volume to determine the actual rate of melt of Arctic sea ice”, and concludes that:

The modeled evolution of Arctic sea ice volume appears to be much stronger correlated with changes in ice thickness than with ice extent as it shows a similar negative trend beginning around the mid-1990s. When considering this part of the sea ice–volume time series, one can estimate a negative trend of −1,120 km3 year−1 with a standard deviation of +/-2,353 km3 year−1 from combined model and observational estimates for October–November 1996–2007. Given the estimated trend and the volume estimate for October–November of 2007 at less than 9000 km3, one can project that at this rate it would take only 9 more years or until 2016 +/-3 years to reach a nearly ice-free Arctic Ocean in summer. Regardless of high uncertainty associated with such an estimate, it does provide a lower bound of the time range for projections of seasonal sea ice cover.

The point cannot be emphasised enough that the best-performing Arctic sea-ice model projects 2016 +/-3 years to reach a nearly ice-free Arctic Ocean.

Arctic sea ice volumes estimates from observations and from the NAME model (Maslowski, Kinney et al., 2012, Figure 9)

The non-linear problem still plagues many Arctic GCMs, and indeed parts of the IPCC process which largely excludes tipping points and carbon cycle feedbacks from consideration, exemplified by the 2007 IPCC’s reticence on sea level rises. Several fundamental projections found in IPCC reports have consistently underestimated real-world observations in at least eight key areas.  In its February 2007 report on the physical basis of climate science, the IPCC said that Arctic sea-ice was responding sensitively to global warming: ‘While changes in winter sea-ice cover are moderate, late summer sea-ice is projected to disappear almost completely towards the end of the twenty first century.’ And apparently the forthcoming 2013 IPPC AR5 has omitted consideration of permafrost feedbacks – another glaring example of that body’s scientific reticence (Romm, 2012).

• Concluding post: Summing up

No comments:

Sep. 23, 2013 — As humans continue to heat the planet, a northward shift of Earth’s wind and rain belts could make a broad swath of regions drier, including the Middle East, American West and Amazonia, while making Monsoon Asia and equatorial Africa wetter, says a new study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by The Earth Institute at Columbia University.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

enlarge

During boreal summer, Earth’s tropical rain belt migrates north. A similar but prolonged shift could happen if the north continues to heat faster than the south, disrupting global rainfall patterns. (Credit: Mats Halldin)

Related Topics

Related Stories

Rising Temperature Difference Between Hemispheres Could Dramatically Shift Rainfall Patterns in Tropics (Apr. 2, 2013) — One often ignored consequence of global climate change is that the Northern Hemisphere is becoming warmer than the Southern Hemisphere, which could significantly alter tropical precipitation …  > read more

Prediction of Asian Summer Monsoon Rainfall and Tropical Storm Activity Close at Hand (Jan. 23, 2013) — The amount of rainfall and number of tropical storms during a summer monsoon season greatly impact the agriculture, economy, and people in Asia. A promising breakthrough for predicting in spring the …  > read more

Warming to Shift Heavy Rainfall Patterns in the UK (Nov. 20, 2012) — It appears that it’s not just us Brits who are fascinated with the UK weather. A group of researchers from Germany has taken to investigating the potential changes in extreme rainfall patterns …  > read more

Changes in Atlantic Ocean Temperature Affects Western Amazonia Climate (Oct. 1, 2012) — A new paper reveals that changes in the temperature of the Atlantic Ocean quickly translate into climate change in western …  > read more

Tropics: Global Warming Likely to Significantly Affect Rainfall Patterns (Feb. 28, 2010) — Ocean temperature patterns in the tropics and subtropics will change in ways that will lead to significant changes in rainfall patterns, according to new …  > read more

Search ScienceDaily