From the “fresh melt water will disrupt the planet” department, except that this ongoing alarm has already been debunked by NASA, see: NASA refutes Mann and Rahmstorf – Finds Atlantic ‘Conveyor Belt’ Not Slowing
![436189main_atlantic20100325a-full[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/436189main_atlantic20100325a-full1.jpg?resize=720%2C360&quality=83)
Melting Greenland ice sheet may affect global ocean circulation, future climate
University of South Florida and international scientists find influx of freshwater could disrupt the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, an important component of global ocean circulation
TAMPA, Fla. (Jan. 22, 2016) – Scientists from the University of South Florida, along with colleagues in Canada and the Netherlands, have determined that the influx of fresh water from the Greenland ice sheet is “freshening” the North Atlantic Ocean and could disrupt the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), an important component of global ocean circulation that could have a global effect. Researchers say it could impact the future climate in places such as portions of Europe and North America.
Their study on the influence of freshwater influx on Labrador Sea convection and Atlantic circulation is published in a new issue of the journal Nature Communications.
“We derived a new estimate of recent freshwater flux from Greenland using updated GRACE satellite data,” said USF professor Tim Dixon. “The data suggest that the influx of freshwater from Greenland is accelerating, and has changed the Labrador Sea in ways that could lead to a weakening of the AMOC.”
Freshwater flux from Greenland is composed of melt runoff from ice and tundra runoff as well as ice discharge (“calving” of icebergs). The amount of freshwater flux from Greenland was relatively stable from the late 1970’s to the mid 1990’s, and then began to increase. Increased freshwater flux could weaken the AMOC, resulting in a number of consequences, both local and global, said the researchers.
“Focused freshwater flux into the Labrador Sea has the potential to increase the buoyancy of surface waters and reduce formation of dense, deep water that helps drive the overturning circulation,” said co-author Don Chambers , USF College of Marine Science associate professor.
How much of the enhanced freshwater flux actually winds up in the Labrador Sea?
Because of the clockwise nature of ocean circulation around Greenland, most of the freshwater increase, up to 70 percent, is being driven toward the Labrador Sea, magnifying its impact and increasing the possibility of significant effects on the AMOC, said Qian Yang, the paper’s first author and a PhD student at USF whose dissertation, in part, includes this research.
According to the researchers, not only are changes in the AMOC difficult to measure, it’s also difficult to separate natural climatic variation from climate changes induced by human activity.
The potential consequences of a weakened AMOC include changes in climate.
“The AMOC transports a large amount of heat into the North Atlantic where it is given up to the atmosphere and helps regulate the climate in Europe and North America. The major effect of a slowing AMOC is expected to be cooler winters and summers around the North Atlantic, and small regional increases in sea level on the North American coast,” explained Chambers.
According to Dixon, the global impacts are less certain, but potentially more consequential.
“The AMOC and Gulf Stream are part of a complex global ocean circulation system that is still not completely understood,” said Dixon. “If human activities are starting to impact this system, it is a worrying sign that the scale of human impacts on the climate system may be reaching a critical point.”
Continued long-term observation is required to understand the impact of the freshwater influx.
“This shows the need to continue to look at different components of the climate system, including the ice sheets and oceans, in an integrated sense,” concluded Paul Myers, study co-author and Professor of Oceanography at the University of Alberta.
###
Damn–another dreadful scenario to not worry about.
Given that all of these circulations survived the MWP, the RWP, and the Minoan WP, all of which were warmer than today and global from all evidence, I call BS. The escathological cargo cult of the CAGW is a history denier.
Measure something in the real world, then compare it to previous measurements…. and get back to me. So tired of guestimate-based nonsense. You would never know that money was a useful and scarce commodity by the amount that is flushed down the collective academic toilettes
Another whack a mole paper. This gets tiresome. How did this get thru pal review when already debunked.
So if it warms it’s our fault, and if it cools, it’s our fault too. Got it.
. . . .“This shows the need to continue to look at different components of the climate system, including the ice sheets and oceans, in an integrated sense,”
In other words…” Give us more MONEY !! “
How does the conveyor turn cold water to hot in the Pacific off the west coast of Canada?
i’m still confused as to why, with the melting ice sheet, the WWII planes were recovered at a depth of 270 feet. I realize that its a big island and there will be different changes in different areas, but if there is an an average add of 6 feet per year at the surface that means that there is an average melt underneath of greater than 6 feet per year.
Again, I realize that it is just one location on a big island, but 270 feet ice added over 46 years seems like crapload for an island that is supposed to losing ice.
This is merely an insurance policy for potential cooling that could happen in the north Atlantic. Since the AMO is entering into its major cooling phase, I find this a rather clever “study.” It will give another excuse for an extension of the Pause, which does not allegedly exist, but making up excuses for it covers the posterior ends of certain quarters. Regardless, it is all our fault and it is worse than “we” thought. Gee, it could stop the alleged melting of the Greenland ice cap too. Oh this is one tangled web being woven.
Should I be [embarrassed] to say I studied climatology and physical geography at USF?
This guy was not there at the time…unless he was that guy sitting in the back row not paying attention.
Tim Dixon is a geologist, if he’s the same person I’m thinking of. A bit out of his area …
“Scientists from the University of South Florida…”
I live in Florida and Floridians of all people should know that any fresh water entering the ocean from ice sheets up north is more than offset by the zillions of gallons of salty, acidic water dumped in the ocean daily by beach-going kids, drunks, tourists, and anyone else who decides to ‘go’ in the sea rather than stand in line at the port-o-potty. If ocean acidification were true the Florida Keys would be a bleached-out underwater wasteland by now. So I’m not buy any of this nonsense.
The usual tripe. Suggest a problem, give flimsy evidence, followed by the inevitable plea for grants…”Continued long-term observation is required to understand the impact of the freshwater influx.”
A little common sense would tell you why we need not fear Greenland to melt and raise sea levels. For one, how many Americans even know where it is? Do they know that the vast majority of Greenland is north of the northern most point of Alaska? The glaciers are one to two miles high. Air gets colder by about 3 degrees every thousand feet of elevation. With criteria like that a short summer melt is all that is possible.
It’s a tag team effort with Antarctica to prop up the pub mill.
Phishing for climate $$
Obviously we here will be skeptical about a prediction that is based on a confident assessment of what GRACE data tells us. But there is no consensus conclusion regarding the amount of ice-loss indicated by GRACE.
For example here in the introduction to a 2012 paper in Nature:
“Recent estimates of Antarctica’s present-day rate of ice-mass contribution to changes in sea level range from 31 gigatonnes a year (Gt yr−1) to 246 Gt yr−1, a range that cannot be reconciled within formal errors. Time-varying rates of mass loss contribute to this, but substantial technique-specific systematic errors also exist. In particular, estimates of secular ice-mass change derived from Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite data are dominated by significant uncertainty in the accuracy of models of mass change due to glacial isostatic adjustment”
From: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v491/n7425/abs/nature11621.html
So, the entire enterprise described in this post relies upon the GIA guesswork/modelling. And now we are told that x amount of melting would cause…blah blah blah to happen. Even though we haven’t really settled on a consistent narrowing of the estimates of x.
As usual – the output from one load of computer models is used as the input for the next!!!
Meanwhile, back in the real world…
http://pmm.nasa.gov/education/videos/thermohaline-circulation-great-ocean-conveyor-belt
Would less salty water near surface not slow down the pump. Thus transfer less heat to the northern region?
Another scarestory , this time about the oceans running AMOC
The climate system has run AMOC.
I wish someone would transfer all that unseen Glo.Bull Warming to Ontario, Canada…I’m really getting tired of freezing my ^$%#@ur momisugly$% balls off !!
Freshwater melt, real or fictitious, is the only aspect of AMOC that these m0r0ns allow themselves to talk or even think about. Otherwise they would realise that AMOC is where all climate change comes from – and their AGW scam gravy train is busted. This black comedy will continue a while longer before climate Nuremburg.
Funding for this study will be awarded in fiscal year 2147 pending confirmation of the results. Until then the money will be held in escrow.
And the salinity in the ocean in the area in question has changed by exactly ZERO. The paper doesn’t address this issue one iota.
The AMOC starts under the sea ice throughout the entire Arctic Ocean basin. Somehow climate scientists have convinced themselves that the deep water formation of the AMOC is next to Greenland. There is no way to correct them because they don’t actually care what the facts are, just what gets them published in the climate theology field.
The AMOC contains a nonlinear instability which is the reason for the difference between the north and south hemisphere climate oscillation. Transition periods such as the YD show that while the SH oscillates smoothly, the NH shows sharp fluctuations. The nonlinear instability of the AMOC comes from the salinity feedback – gulf stream increases salinity in the North Atlantic which drives deep water formation which in turn drives the Gulf Stream itself. Freshwater from Greenland could be the negative feedback that chokes off the salinity positive feedback causing it, like all positive feedbacks in climate, to be limited.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?site=&source=hp&ei=OeCiVp_JNsLmUpfMlcAG&q=bill+illis+greenland+DO&oq=bill+illis+greenland+DO&gs_l=mobile-gws-hp.3…3871.23302.0.25177.24.24.0.1.1.0.286.4418.1j11j12.24.0….0…1c.1.64.mobile-gws-hp..2.13.2473.3.bcR1XtYkgsE#q=bill+illis+greenland+YD+png&prmd=insv&start=10&imgrc=0A2Uup7u1GIPOM%3A