Swiss ETH: Glaciers melted in the 1940's faster than today

From ETH Zurich: The stupefying pace of glacier melt in the 1940s

http://www.ethlife.ethz.ch/archive_articles/091214_gletscherschwund_su/091214_gornergletscher_L2.jpg?hires
In the 1940s, the glaciers were melting at a faster pace than today. An image of the Gorner glacier. (Image: Matthias Huss / ETH Zurich)

The most recent studies by researchers at ETH Zurich show that in the 1940s Swiss glaciers were melting at an even-faster pace than at present. This is despite the fact that the temperatures in the 20th century were lower than in this century. Researchers see the main reason for this as the lower level of aerosol pollution in the atmosphere.

In Switzerland, the increase in snow in wintertime and the glacier melt in summertime have been measured at measurement points at around 3,000 metres above sea level – on the Clariden Firn, the Great Aletsch glacier and the Silvretta glacier – without interruption for almost 100 years. As part of his doctoral work, Matthias Huss used this unique range of measurements to examine how climate change in the last century affected the glaciers. The work was carried out under the supervision of Martin Funk, professor and head of the Department for Glaciology at the Laboratory for Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (‘VAW’) at ETH Zurich, who is also co-author of the study.

A glaciologist on the way to work on the Silvretta glacier (Image: Matthias Huss / ETH Zurich)

A glaciologist on the way to work on the Silvretta glacier (Image: Matthias Huss / ETH Zurich) (more pictures)

Solar radiation as the decisive factor

In its work, the research team took into account the solar radiation measured on the Earth’s surface in Davos since 1934. Studies over the past two decades have shown that solar radiation varies substantially due to aerosols and clouds, and this is assumed to influence climate fluctuations. Recent years have seen the emergence of the terms ‘global dimming’ and ‘global brightening’ to describe these phenomena of reduced and increased solar radiation respectively. These two effects are currently the subject of more and more scientific research, in particular by ETH Zurich, as experts feel that they should be taken into account in the climate models (see ETH Life dated July 9, 2009)

The new study, published in the journal ‘Geophysical Research Letters’, confirms this requirement. This is because, taking into account the data recorded for the level of solar radiation, the scientists made a surprising discovery: in the 1940s and in the summer of 1947 especially, the glaciers lost the most ice since measurements commenced in 1914. This is in spite of the fact that temperatures were lower than in the past two decades. “The surprising thing is that this paradox can be explained relatively easily with radiation”, says Huss, who was recently appointed to the post of senior lecturer at the Department of Geosciences at the University of Fribourg in Switzerland.

On the basis of their calculations, the researchers have concluded that the high level of short-wave radiation in the summer months is responsible for the fast pace of glacier melt. In the 1940s, the level was 8% higher than the long-term average and 18 Watts per square metres above the levels of the past ten years. Calculated over the entire decade of the 1940s, this resulted in 4% more snow and ice melt compared with the past ten years.

Furthermore, the below-average melt rates at the measurement points during periods in which the glacier snouts were even advancing correlate with a phase of global dimming, between the 1950s and the 1980s.

Less snow fall and longer melt periods

The researchers arrived at their findings by calculating the daily melt rates with the aid of climate data and a temperature index model, based on the half-yearly measurements on the glaciers since 1914. These results were then compared with the long-term measurements of solar radiation in Davos.

Huss points out that the strong glacier melt in the 1940s puts into question the assumption that the rate of glacier decline in recent years “has never been seen before”. “Nevertheless”, says the glaciologist, “this should not lead people to conclude that the current period of global warming is not really as big of a problem for the glaciers as previously assumed”. This is because it is not only the pace at which the Alpine glaciers are currently melting that is unusual, but the fact that this sharp decline has been unabated for 25 years now. Another aspect to consider – and this is evidenced by the researchers’ findings – is that temperature-based opposing mechanisms came into play around 30 years ago. These have led to a 12% decrease in the amount of precipitation that falls as snow as a percentage of total precipitation, accompanied by an increase of around one month in the length of the melt period ever since this time. Scientists warn that these effects could soon be matched by the lower level of solar radiation we have today compared with the 1940s.

Reference

Huss M, Funk M & Ohmura A: Strong Alpine glacier melt in the 1940s due to enhanced solar radiation. Geophysical Research Letters (2009), 36, L23501, doi:10.1029/2009GL040789

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

140 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
January 4, 2010 2:05 am

sillybooks
Thanks for this link. Yes I do have that one in my store iof 1920/1940 arctic records. I hope to use it when I get round to writing the next article on ‘Arctic ice variation through the ages’.
Tonyb

Baa Humbug
January 4, 2010 2:11 am

BillD (04:40:38) :
Thankyou for the link, because without it one may get the wrong impression of the authors conclusion from your comment.
“contradict the modelling results to the extent that the increase occurs at about the same rate as the increase in daily minimum air temperature, and therefore more steeply, not less steeply, than the increase in daily mean air temperature”.
“Although the recent prevalence of warm winters in Europe MAY BE PARTLY attributable to global greenhouse-gas warming, it is ALMOST CERTAINLY also related to the currently prevailing
persistently positive phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) (Hurrell, 1995). Assuming this to be so, we might expect the NAO in the near future to revert to a less positive state on average, resulting in generally cooler winters, and hence in more normal hypolimnetic temperatures”.
I may be wrong, but hasn’t the NAO already flipped to negative since this paper?
Bill, thanks again for the link, I found the paper informative. But it may be a good idea not to draw selective conclusions. That may best be left up to the reader.

David Alan
January 4, 2010 2:41 am

I know this is not really on topic, but hey, I did the best i could.
There hasn’t been a update on arctic sea ice extent since 12-29-09 :
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm
So I thought I would get creative and create a flipped version of the graph and super impose my own predictions on it. You can find it at:
http://i50.tinypic.com/2i6pfnr.jpg
For some reason, just flipping the graph over just makes more since for me. Seeing the graph rise to maximum see ice melt puts things in a better perspective I think. I included an approximate date and value for this years Arctic Sea Ice Extent.
If anyone else feels the same way about the appearance of the graph seemingly more appropriate flipped like this, I’d like to hear your comments on it.

January 4, 2010 3:51 am

Interesting page from the CRU about NAO:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/nao/
“Looking further ahead, there is the possibility that climate change may induce a change in the state or behaviour of the NAO. Unfortunately, the global climate models that are used to study anthropogenic climate change do not yet give unequivocal predictions for the future of the NAO, linked to the fact that the NAO is related to the tracks of Atlantic storms, and predictions of storminess changes are also currently uncertain.”
Look at how the NAO was positive from 1900-1945ish, then went negative for 20 years, then positive again. Hmm…
The science is still, apparently settled though.

January 4, 2010 4:03 am

Another interesting related link on the NAO and its high and low fluctuations and their influences:
http://www.pnas.org/content/98/23/12876.full

drjohn
January 4, 2010 6:57 am

Anthony
Congratulations on the well-deserved attention you’ve gotten. May you always have the bandwidth you need!

Murray
January 4, 2010 7:05 am

Decided to check it out – the glacier face is now 440 m above the 1860 level. that’s about 1500 ft higher. Surprise at continued rapid melt for 30 years or so? During that time more road got paved, a big parking lot got paved very near the glacier terminus, a 15.4 km rail tunnel was dug from1972 to 1982, road traffic from the mid 1940s to the mid 1990s increased by more than factor 10, and in the mid 70s they started cruising a gallery into the glacier every summer so tourists could walk into the galcier. There are so many contributing factors besides temperature and aerosols (measured 3 nicroclimates away) that the paper is probably meaningless.
[REPLY – Heh. Sounds like a “CRN4” glacier. They really ought to find better sites for those glaciers! ~ Evan]

Murray
January 4, 2010 7:12 am

Forgot. There is also the question of decadal changes in atmospheric circulation patterns. What has been the relative frequency of “foehn” winds that bring Sahara sand to the Alps and deposit it in great red swatches on the high snowfields? Much more analysis needed to draw conclusions.

Steve Oregon
January 4, 2010 8:20 am

Sou,
You’re seeing and projecting what you want seen and projected.
ANY scroll through this site at anytime reveals extensive science and analysis from the many contributors. The posted links to additional material, studies and reports adds layers to what you too conveniently fail to recognize.
IMO, your rotten ice depiction of the content here is a deliberate misrepresentation.

Wondering Aloud
January 4, 2010 10:57 am

BillD
Why is thegraph truncated at 1998? What is the history of the site? Why did you think this showed anything?

SteveSadlov
January 4, 2010 12:18 pm

My outing last year to Gorner, Matterhorn and other glaciers did not reveal anything alarming. Many areas were open in the zones of organized pistes and unofficial off piste usage was not particularly dangerous with few crevasse issues and ample snow pack.

mike A.
January 4, 2010 6:46 pm

The glasiers in New Zealand are advancing and have done so since the mid 1980s. For the preceding 200 years they were retreating.

January 5, 2010 4:44 am

A few glaciers in New Zealand are advancing, but the majority are retreating, and their volume continues to reach new lows. Keep it real.
http://glacierchange.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/tasman-glacier-retreat/

Robuk
January 6, 2010 11:46 am

http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/Illecillewaetglacier.jpg
http://www.cmiae.org/Resources/glaciers-lichens.php
Illecillewaet Glacier in British Columbia’s Glacier National Park (Canada) has retreated 2000 mtrs since first photographed in 1887.
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/glacierretreatSINCE1850.jpg
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/glacier3.jpg
Below From the Gore fairytail, his retreat starts at 1980, wonder why.
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/goresfilm.jpg
The only constant is change,
Enter glacier bay and you cruise along shorelines completely covered in ice just 200 years ago. Explorer Capt. George Vancouver found ice in 1794, and Glacier bay was a barely indented glacier. That glacier was more than 4000 feet thick, up to 20 miles or more wide, and extended more than 100 miles to the St Elias range of mountains. But by 1879 naturalist John Muir found that the ice had retreated 48miles up the bay. By 1916 the Grand Pacific Glacier headed Tarr inlet 65 miles from Glacier Bays mouth.
Such rapid retreat is known nowhere else. Scientists have documented it, hoping to learn how glacial activity relates to climate change.
http://www.pbs.org/edens/glacierbay/ice.html
http://www.seatrails.org/pdf/USFS_SE_Guide.pdf

1 4 5 6