People send me stuff. In my email this past week I got a cover photo of the June 2010 issue of National Geographic along with this message from Al in Georgia:
I was at the Doctor’s office and picked up the following magazine in the waiting room. National Geographic June 2010 issue entitled Greenland Ground Zero for Global Warming.
- Melt Zone There’s a meltdown on the ice sheet—and optimism among Greenlanders.
- Viking Weather The warming climate that enticed Erik the Red is returning.
Now how can you claim that on the one hand we created the current warming trend and on the other hand admit that there was a time when the climate was much warmer than today. In fact, use that history as a means of suggesting how things might look as we humans warm the planet to temperatures never seen except during the time of Erik the terrible. What a riot!
Indeed. The email circulated, and that prompted this famous photo being posted:
Of course images like this one at left showing water tumbling down a huge moulin are being held up with gloom and doom scenarios that say Greenland’s Ice is melting “faster than expected” and we’ll get six feet of sea level rise from it along with a 10-15°F temperature rise by the year 2100.
Perhaps. But, moulins have existed since Greenland had ice, they are just part of the natural landscape and processes. They aren’t “new” to our time.
One of the photos we don’t often get to see was also circulated in the email, by somebody who lives in Greenland and knows what this is really all about.
It’s a real eye opener:
He writes:
In the winter a huge among of snow are accumulated on the Ice (2-3 meters, sometimes more) and we are not talking about 1 or 2 square-miles, it’s about 100.000’s of square miles (up to 1 million) on the Westside of the Ice cap and a similar picture on the Eastside… when the melting season starts in april-sep… the meltwater has to go somewhere, and for sure it goes downhill in huge meltwater rivers.
The black stuff on the bottom of the lakes is carbon dust and pollution in general… but not from one year, but several decades (the topographical conditions don’t change from year to year). On a flight over the Ice Cap a sky clear day, you can see hundreds of huge lakes with the black spot on the bottom.
Here in Kangerlussuaq, on the edge of the Ice Cap, we have several burst from edge-lake, all the water (millions of tonnes) in the river passing through the settlement in a day or two.
The Vikings (Eric the Red) is about Medieval warm period…. the Hockey-stick mystery!!!
Med venlig hilsen
Svend Erik Hendriksen
And in that same Nat Geo collection that the photo above came from, you can see this photo also:
No mention in that Nat Geo slideshow of the origin of cryoconite, but I did find this at Portland State University by Jonathan Ebnet:
Cryoconite Holes
Cryoconite holes are water filled holes caused by increased melting around sediment. Cryoconite holes are common on the surfaces of glaciers in polar and non-polar regions (in polar regions, cryoconite holes have an ice lid, while in non-polar regions, cryoconite holes are open to the atmosphere). Cryoconite holes are not limited to glaciers. Cryoconite holes are also found on lake ice and sea ice. I will investigate whether sediment is required to initiate melt in the subsurface of a glacier, or whether absorption of solar radiation by clean ice is only needed to allow melting to occur. Previous studies have shown that some cryoconite holes are interconnected by cracks within the ice, while the remainder are isolated. These cracks appear to be the means by which the subsurface melt exits the glaciers, discharges into the melt-water streams, and empties into the perennially ice-covered lakes.
There is this time lapse animation showing how a hole changes with some solar insolation (warning – huge file, may take several minutes to download)
Click on the image below to view the evolution of two cryoconite holes over a 41 hour period. Watch how quickly the sediment melts down into the ice, and how fast the hole ices over. The movie will show the ice lid thickening and the hole filling up with air, half way through the movie (visible as the hole becoming lighter in color).
Now the really interesting thing about all this cryoconite or black dust and soot is that it tends to accumulate and stay there, continuing to help with melting daily. If the holes are interconnected with cracks through which meltwater flows, then they’ll continue until such time that the hole gets so deep that no sunlight reaches the bottom.
I’m remined of a simple experiment that Mike Smith carried out in his backyard one winter.
This from Brett Anderson’s AccuWeather Global Warming blog last year:
Here is a photo of fresh snow cover in my backyard over which I had tossed some eight month-old fireplace ash under a totally blue sky
Keeping in mind this demonstration is occurring just two days after the winter solstice (meaning the albedo effect is less than it would have been under clear skies in February or March), in just one hour, the greater melting in the ash-covered areas is already apparent:
After four hours, the ash-free area has a depth of 5.5 inches
At the same time, the ash-covered areas have a depth of about 2.5 inches. Multiple measurements were taken (note ruler hold about an inch in front of ruler) which yielded an average depth of 2.5 inches.
The areas without soot melt about 0.5 inches of snow during this 4-hour period while the soot-covered areas melt 3.5 inches.
For visual comparison purposes, note the ruler hole in the non-ash-covered snow above the shadow.
Even tiny amounts of soot pollution can induce high amounts of melting. There is little or no ash at upper right.. Small amounts of ash in the lower and left areas of the photo cause significant melting at the two-hour mark in the demonstration.
Any discussion pertaining to melting glaciers or icecaps must consider the accelerated melting caused by soot pollution in addition to any contribution from changing ambient temperatures.
Photos: Copyright 2007, Michael R. Smith (used with permission)
Mike Smith is CEO of WeatherData Services, Inc., An AccuWeather Company. Smith is a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society and a Certified Consulting Meteorologist.
So yes, it does look like man made melting in Greenland, but not from CO2, but rather from soot. Since the USA has tough laws against particulate emissions, I’m wondering if we shouldn’t be pointing the finger at China and asking them to adopt clean air standard rather than worrying about California’s idiotic Prop AB 32 “global warming law”:
Note that this is just a snapshot of the atmosphere, it doesn’t show where the soot ends up, but as you can see, it does reach the latitude of Greenland.
Some science has already been done on it, emphasis mine:
========================================================
20th-Century Industrial Black Carbon Emissions Altered Arctic Climate Forcing
Joseph R. McConnell,1* Ross Edwards,1 Gregory L. Kok,2 Mark G. Flanner,3 Charles S. Zender,3 Eric S. Saltzman,3 J. Ryan Banta,1 Daniel R. Pasteris,1 Megan M. Carter,4 Jonathan D. W. Kahl4
Black carbon (BC) from biomass and fossil fuel combustion alters chemical and physical properties of the atmosphere and snow albedo, yet little is known about its emission or deposition histories. Measurements of BC, vanillic acid, and non–sea-salt sulfur in ice cores indicate that sources and concentrations of BC in Greenland precipitation varied greatly since 1788 as a result of boreal forest fires and industrial activities. Beginning about 1850, industrial emissions resulted in a sevenfold increase in ice-core BC concentrations, with most change occurring in winter. BC concentrations after about 1951 were lower but increasing. At its maximum from 1906 to 1910, estimated surface climate forcing in early summer from BC in Arctic snow was about 3 watts per square meter, which is eight times the typical preindustrial forcing value.
1 Desert Research Institute, Nevada System of Higher Education, Reno, NV 89512, USA.
2 Droplet Measurement Technologies, Boulder, CO 80301, USA.
3 Department of Earth System Science, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA.
4 Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI 53201, USA.
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: Joe.McConnell@dri.edu
==========================================================
So when you see alarming stories of Greenland meltwater, remember: soot is more powerful at melting snow and ice than CO2.
h/t to Steve from Oregon
Juraj V. adds in comments the Greenland Temperature record:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The National Geographic should stick to what they do best – photographs. That second shot is beautiful.
Greenland instrumental record should be included in every article about Greenland.
http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/icrutem3_300-340E_55-85N_na.png
Also the GISP2 Greenland core, putting some historical perspective (the graph ends in 1905 though).
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/alley2000/alley2000.gif
Temperature-wise, it should be melting during the summers just as it did 70 years ago.
Interesting, that the 1990-20100 trend looks as a precise copy of 1910-1930 period.
National Geographic sure has gone down hill.
What happened to the eye catching covers of the past?
A picture of Al Gores proposed outside toilet idea is a real disappointment.
You can see the same effect when an animal cr@ps on snow. It rapidly disappears down a melt hole (the cr@p, not the animal).
I’m a little sceptical about the scattered ash experiment as there are other chemicals in the ash besides carbon. As you know scattering white salt will cause snow melt and that has nothing to with the absorption of solar radiation. Wood ash, for example, has approximately 10% potash content, which is what makes it valuable to gardeners and as a basis for the traditional method of making potassium hydroxide.
This is one of my favourite National Geographics. I’ve red the piece several times and love the photographs. There was no AGW hysteria in it at all.
“How do we know it was warmer? Here are a number of clues:
1.A viking farm was recently archaelogically examined at a place named “Gården under Sandet”
http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf
http://www.december212012.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=6811
From:
http://rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com/
This post gives the mistaken impression that all the cryoconite is from soot. That is incorrect. Various snow algae are also important (and I wonder how much they respond to N-pollution).
REPLY: And you give the mistaken impression that is what I said. It still doesn’t negate the fact though that the industrialization of the Asian continent is the biggest industrial soot producer on the planet. – Anthony
I cancelled my NG subscription 2-3 years ago because of all the pro-CAGW articles that NG publishes.
All across the Great White North mankind should be building coal-fired power plants designed with the option of producing lots of soot as a way of mitigating global cooling, in the likely event that the recent end of the 20th century “grand maximum” of solar activity causes a turn-around in temperatures. We need greatly expanded energy production in any case, after the eco-lunatics successfully stopped necessary new plants from being built for decades, and adding a soot-producing capacity would be easy and cheap. Just bypass the expensive measures usually taken to reduce particulates.
On this point, I wish Anthony and some others would stop referring to higher levels of arctic ice as “good ice news.” It is bad news. Unlike warming, cooling is actually dangerous. Once it actually starts cooling, yes, everyone will immediately understand that, but we need people to understand it now, if there is to be any chance of taking preparatory steps.
Ground Zero for Global Warming
Yup, no hysteria comparing Global Warming to a nuclear weapon here. None at all. Just look somewhere else for your hysteria.
With reference to Mike Smith’s observations after throwing ash on snow – could the faster melting of snow amongst the darker debris of ash and unburnt (black) coal have something to do with a slightly higher heat absorption rate from the sun, as opposed to reflection from the purer snow?
Presumably only clear-air soot has this effect? Soot and particulates that form cloud nuclei are inside the snowflake/ snowdrift. It would be interesting if the soot was gathered by its melting into these sinks, a sort of facial scrub for the ice-pack .
Anthony:
Per above:
“BC concentrations after about 1951 were lower [than the maximum reached in 1906 to 1910] but increasing.”
This would appear to be another forcing that could hinder a recovery of arctic ice extent.
I may have missed it but have you previously posted information from this study?
(I did find your previous post on Soot at
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/25/soot-ahoy-ship-traffic-in-the-arctic/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/29/oh-soot/ and one from 2009, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/08/21/soot-and-the-arctic-ice-%e2%80%93-a-win-win-policy-based-on-chinese-coal-fired-power-plants%e2%80%9d/ )
Best Hope for Saving Arctic Sea Ice Is Cutting Soot Emissions, Say Researchers
“The quickest, best way to slow the rapid melting of Arctic sea ice is to reduce soot emissions from the burning of fossil fuel, wood and dung, according to a new study by Stanford researcher Mark Z. Jacobson.
[Short-term effects of controlling fossil-fuel soot, biofuel soot and gases, and methane on climate, Arctic ice, and air pollution health, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D14209, doi:10.1029/2009JD013795 ]
His analysis shows that soot is second only to carbon dioxide in contributing to global warming. But, he said, climate models to date have mischaracterized the effects of soot in the atmosphere.”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100728092617.htm
Peter Plail says:
November 3, 2010 at 10:53 am
I’m a little sceptical about the scattered ash experiment as there are other chemicals in the ash besides carbon. As you know scattering white salt will cause snow melt and that has nothing to with the absorption of solar radiation. Wood ash, for example, has approximately 10% potash content, which is what makes it valuable to gardeners and as a basis for the traditional method of making potassium hydroxide.
=================================================
Easy enough to duplicate the results.
Sounds as simple as a high school science project.
Good for Greenland. I hope they don’t mind if a few million refuges migrate there.
I’d be interested if any of the ice cores from Greenland were ever checked for soot or its chemical fingerprint? The forest fires in North America were not put out until recently and would either burn out or keep burning until rain/snow extinguished them.
Will Crump says:
“Best Hope for Saving Arctic Sea Ice Is Cutting Soot Emissions, Say Researchers
“The quickest, best way to slow the rapid melting of Arctic sea ice is to reduce soot emissions from the burning of fossil fuel, wood and dung, according to a new study by Stanford researcher Mark Z. Jacobson.”
I agree with that. The problem is that the almost totally soot-free emissions from the U.S. are nothing compared with the heavy particulate emissions from China – a large fraction of which wafts across the oceans to settle on other countries, including the U.S. West Coast, where up to 40% of the soot comes from China.
But do we hear criticism of China by eco-fascists? Hardly ever, and the occasional reference is extremely muted. If they gave a damn about pollution, these NGO puppets would be railing against China 24/7/365. Instead, the ultra-clean U.S.A. is their target.
The New Scientist article gratuitously adds:
“His analysis shows that soot is second only to carbon dioxide in contributing to global warming.”
That’s like saying a pimple is second only to heart disease in human mortality. CO2 has never been shown to be a problem. At all.
But then this article was from New Scientist.
My apologies, the article was from Science Daily, not New Scientist.
“I’d be interested if any of the ice cores from Greenland were ever checked for soot or its chemical fingerprint? The forest fires in North America were not put out until recently and would either burn out or keep burning until rain/snow extinguished them.”
There have been several such studies. Data from one is here:
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/greenland/d4-2007carbon.txt
Soot levels are moderate but very variable (presumably reflecting variations in forest fires) until the 1880’s. They then rise steeply to about 1910-15 and then trail off slowly. This almost certainly reflect the coal-powered industrialization of the US, and the gradual cleaning up of same. In recent years soot levels have been about the same as they were before industrialization (but less variable), suggesting that residual industrial soot more or less makes up for the decrease in forest fires. The Clean Air Act incidentally is hardly noticeable in the record.
Not so long ago, the Northeastern US put a lot of soot in the air too. This source would have a much easier time reaching Greenland, while China’s soot would best explain the loss of Asian and Alaskan Glaciers.
I wonder what the environmental halflife of soot is.
Peter,
Coming from Alaska and using ash from wood stoves from wood I chopped down and split and burnt, I will say that is exactly what happens.
Other chemicals non withstanding, ‘soot’ and ash do produce that effect extremely well, which is why we save it to sprinkle on our walkways so we don’t slip.
Josh
Now you know why Nat’l Geographic made my no renew list.
If the surface of the ice caps is covered with lakes several feet deep, How do scientists count the layers of snow in ice cores? And what does melt and refreeze do to the trapped “air bubbles”?
Robert C says:
November 3, 2010 at 12:35 pm
Surface melt only occurs towards the edge of the ice sheet. The most ice cores are collected from the high, cold interior of the ice sheet where melting rarely occurs. When it does, melt layers are be detected (and their abundance used as a proxy for warm summers.