From a Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution News Release : Team finds subtropical waters flushing through Greenland fjord
Waters from warmer latitudes — or subtropical waters — are reaching Greenland’s glaciers, driving melting and likely triggering an acceleration of ice loss, reports a team of researchers led by Fiamma Straneo, a physical oceanographer from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI).
“This is the first time we’ve seen waters this warm in any of the fjords in Greenland,” says Straneo. “The subtropical waters are flowing through the fjord very quickly, so they can transport heat and drive melting at the end of the glacier.”
Greenland’s ice sheet, which is two-miles thick and covers an area about the size of Mexico, has lost mass at an accelerated rate over the last decade. The ice sheet’s contribution to sea level rise during that time frame doubled due to increased melting and, to a greater extent, the widespread acceleration of outlet glaciers around Greenland.
While melting due to warming air temperatures is a known event, scientists are just beginning to learn more about the ocean’s impact — in particular, the influence of currents — on the ice sheet.
“Among the mechanisms that we suspected might be triggering this acceleration are recent changes in ocean circulation in the North Atlantic, which are delivering larger amounts of subtropical waters to the high latitudes,” says Straneo. But a lack of observations and measurements from Greenland’s glaciers prior to the acceleration made it difficult to confirm.
The research team, which included colleagues from University of Maine, conducted two extensive surveys during July and September of 2008, collecting both ship-based and moored oceanographic data from Sermilik Fjord — a large glacial fjord in East Greenland.
Sermilik Fjord, which is 100 kilometers (approximately 62 miles) long, connects Helheim Glacier with the Irminger Sea. In 2003 alone, Helheim Glacier retreated several kilometers and almost doubled its flow speed.
Deep inside the Sermilik Fjord, researchers found subtropical water as warm as 39 degrees Fahrenheit (4 degrees Celsius). The team also reconstructed seasonal temperatures on the shelf using data collected by 19 hooded seals tagged with satellite-linked temperature depth-recorders. The data revealed that the shelf waters warm from July to December, and that subtropical waters are present on the shelf year round.
“This is the first extensive survey of one of these fjords that shows us how these warm waters circulate and how vigorous the circulation is,” says Straneo. “Changes in the large-scale ocean circulation of the North Atlantic are propagating to the glaciers very quickly — not in a matter of years, but a matter of months. It’s a very rapid communication.”
Straneo adds that the study highlights how little is known about ocean-glacier interactions, which is a connection not currently included in climate models.
“We need more continuous observations to fully understand how they work, and to be able to better predict sea-level rise in the future,” says Straneo.
The paper was chosen for advanced online publication Feb. 14, 2010, by Nature Geosciences; it will also appear in the March 2010 printed edition of the journal. Co-authors of the work include WHOI postdoc David Sutherland (now of University of Washington), Gordon Hamilton and Leigh Stearns of the Climate Change Institute, University of Maine, Fraser Davidson and Garry Stenson of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, St. John’s, Newfoundland, Mike Hammill of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Mont-Joli, Quebec, and Aqqalu Rosing-Asvid of the Department of Birds and Mammals, Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. Canadian and Greenlandic colleagues contributed valuable data on the shelf, from tagged seals.
Funding for this research was provided by the National Science Foundation, WHOI’s Ocean and Climate Change Institute Arctic Research Initiative, and NASA’s Cryosperic Sciences Program.
#
Helheim glacier
Time-lapse photographs taken every 4 minutes show calving of the front of Helheim Glacier, August 2008. In 2003 alone, Helheim Glacier retreated several kilometers and almost doubled its flow speed.
| Gordon Hamilton, University of Maine |
| » View Video (Quicktime) 56K Modem |
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It was considerably warmer in Greenland 70 years ago than it is today.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=431042500000&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Alarmists think that Greenland formed in 2003 and disappeared in 2007. They have no interest in any other years.
The US Weather Bureau reported this in 1922:
http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/050/mwr-050-11-0589a.pdf
Well, in the first place, it’s not as though they melt either in response to warm air or warm water. It’s both. This is good news; it may help explain why Greenland glaciers are melting faster than the climate models predict. Changing ocean currents transferring more heat.
The Oceans have it….make no mistake….they do.
Even so….in this article….we have to still tolerate the drivel:
“While melting due to warming air temperatures is a known event…”
DUH!!
When the temperature rises above freezing, ice melts.
What known “event” besides the obvious should even deserve mention here.
Also…the decline or increase of many glaciers has more to do with precipitation and not simply temperature.
At least they are trying to figure it out. And that deserves props.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
“It was considerably warmer in Greenland 70 years ago than it is today.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=431042500000&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1”
At that single station, I’m sure it was, but over Greenland as a whole? The anomaly over Greenland from 1999-2009 appears significantly greater than that present from 1930-1940, using the “Global Maps from GHCN Data” feature.
“While melting due to warming air temperatures is a known event …”
They obviously don’t understand glacier dynamics :
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/OllierPaine-NoIceSheetCollapse-AIGNewsAug.2009.pdf
What?! It isn’t the air temperature?! That’s still consistent with predictions.
Just like all those snow storms. Warmer air holds more moisture ya know! (Please try to avoid thinking about the fact that 32F is the temperature where water freezes, and that this is not ‘warmer air’)
Sea temperature rising is consistent with predictions. So is sea temperature falling, so just shut up already. There is no need to point anything out, because Earth is consistent with climate change, ok?
[/snark]
Aaaahhhh….nice to see some real science for a change. No mention of global warming in this discussion of changing oceanic currents?
Thanks Steve Goddard for some historical perspective on Greenland warming. But where are the temperature readings and hard scientific data that can be adjusted downward by GISS et al. to show that these eyewitnesses and their anecdotal reports got it all wrong? 🙂
Actually, I hate to play devil’s advocate here but a few posts ago we were critiquing the IPCC’s glacier ‘science’ for its reliance on someone’s MSc thesis based on Alpine ski guides’ anecdotal reports of loss of glaciers. Perhaps the difference here is that in this case, the early 20th century fishermen, sealers and other witnesses had not been propagandized by the scientistic cult of global warming and thus led to expect only one specific outcome?
Before they get too worked up over this they should read the report on John Daly’s site that begins with a quote by the President of the Royal Society, London, to the Admiralty, 20th November, 1817
http://www.john-daly.com/polar/arctic.htm
Weird! I think I will have to read the article again… I did not see Global Warming or Climate Change mentioned.
And in the broader scheme of things, if Greenland grows warmer because of ocean currents, somewhere else grows colder.
Nice find, Steve.
Here, we are discussing distribution, not the input/output to the system as a whole.
Very important distinction.
IIRC, the loss/gain of Greenland ice sheet is not homogeneous.
In any event this may be another Inconvenient Truth.
So, exactly why is the warmer water moving that far north?
But, a logical explanation of glacial melt – especially as the melting is very inconsistent across the globe (is soot a factor?)
Robert,
GISS stations show that most of the Arctic and particularly around Greenland were warmer 70 years ago. A quote from Dr. Walt Meier at NSIDC “The current Greenland warming, while not yet quite matching the temperatures of 70 years ago,”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/09/21/nsidc-s-dr-walt-meier-answers-10-questions/
I made a map in another piece showing which Arctic regions were warmer 70 years ago and which were cooler, based on GISS data.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/10/16/nsidcs-dr-walt-meier-answers-reader-questions-on-sea-ice/
So there is some warm water around Greenland. We don’t know why. We don’t know if it has always been this way. We don’t know if it changes anything at all. But we are certain that these amounts of warm water are being delivered in ever larger amounts. Despite the fact that we’ve never measured them before.
And we are obviously certain that CO2 is to blame.
We can also confirm that no climate models actually model the interaction between the ice and the water. We are sure, however, that these climate models are accurate. Despite not having any notion of this essential facet of climate.
And we are obviously certain that CO2 is to blame.
/sarc off
[snip] is ‘subtropical water’ anyway? Once sea water has ever been to the subtropics it is for ever ‘subtropical water’, or something? It was there last week, last month. last year? What? I was up in Mackay a few weeks ago. Does that make me ‘subtropical’, perhaps?
The whole thing seems hideously speculative and insidiously alarmist with absolutely no basis in fact since there is no data to compare it to. Hang on, isn’t that the whole Al Gore Warming position?
rbateman (22:14:58) “And in the broader scheme of things, if Greenland grows warmer because of ocean currents, somewhere else grows colder.”
There are two things to bear in mind with regards to this. One is that the warming of the earth that is taking place affects the oceans, not just the air. Changing ocean currents are bringing some of that heat to Greenland. So while it’s true that the heat has to come from somewhere, it comes from the same place the warm air comes from: solar energy, enhanced by the greenhouse effect.
Second, even if the earth’s climate were not warming (as it is) the melting of the ice causes warming of its own, via changes in albedo, for example. So even if it were a zero-sum equation, unless the loss of heat somewhere else is growing an ice sheet somewhere, the exchange will lead to more warming in the long run.
The headline for this post is simply wrong. The team did NOT exclude warmer air temps from ALSO causing melting…they were simply looking at the effects of a the warmer currents. In fact, right in the press release they say:
While melting due to warming air temperatures is a known event, scientists are just beginning to learn more about the ocean’s impact — in particular, the influence of currents — on the ice sheet.
This kind of massaging of the actual finding of study are every bit as serious as any other kind of data manipulation…and totally inexcusable.
Given the Tilsdale analysis of warm water movement (the Pacific decadal oscillation of warm water re El Nina), this is entirely consistent.
@Robert, here are all station record from Greenland.
http://blog.sme.sk/blog/560/215098/KNMI_Greenland.jpg
Notice, that in all those hysterical prediction about Greenland, there was NEVER mentioned its recent temperature history, all hype was concentrated on recent, absolutely normal, temperature rise since 1980 (as the whole AGW is).
We provide an analysis of Greenland temperature
records to compare the current (1995–2005) warming
period with the previous (1920–1930) Greenland warming.
We find that the current Greenland warming is not
unprecedented in recent Greenland history. Temperature
increases in the two warming periods are of a similar
magnitude, however, the rate of warming in 1920–1930
was about 50% higher than that in 1995 – 2005.
http://www.joelschwartz.com/pdfs/Chylek.pdf
&
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006/2006GL026510.shtml
Real science?
“The research team, which included colleagues from University of Maine, conducted two extensive surveys during July and September of 2008,”
That was a long scientific study. Surley “robust”
And compared with earlier years?
This is obviously the big warming sign that the thermohaline circulation has stalled. We’ll all be dead in a few weeks, except for the lucky few who happen to be climatologists who studied in the Antarctic, who will walk across the Continental US in temperatures approaching 400 degrees below absolute zero.
Climatologists who read this site, please keep fresh batteries in your GPS units so you don’t fall through a mall skylight as you’re traversing a glacier. Mall roofs and walls are designed to withstand forces from a glacier but their skylights are not.
Thanks Steve.
Still, this leaves me curious where we’ll end up this summer. It seemed obvious something other than atmospheric warmth led to 2007.
Yep, that letter from Sir Joseph Banks to the Lords of the Admiralty in 1817 just won’t go quietly into the night! Damn it why can’t we change historical records to suit todays arguments, grrrr!
savethesharks (21:44:56) :
Something in italics
Dude, your posts are great, but you’re killing me – you always miss the closing tag. It’s the same as the opening tag, with a slash (unshifted question mark) before the i. In other words open the tag with lt. i gt., and close it with lt. /i gt.
🙂
Mark
Robert (22:32:14) :
What is the data that says the earth is warming?