First complete map of the speed and direction of ice flow in Antarctica, derived from radar interferometric data. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/UCI
PASADENA, Calif. – NASA-funded researchers have created the first complete map of the speed and direction of ice flow in Antarctica. The map, which shows glaciers flowing thousands of miles from the continent’s deep interior to its coast, will be critical for tracking future sea-level increases from climate change. The team created the map using integrated radar observations from a consortium of international satellites.
“This is like seeing a map of all the oceans’ currents for the first time. It’s a game changer for glaciology,” said Eric Rignot of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., and the University of California (UC), Irvine. Rignot is lead author of a paper about the ice flow published online Thursday in Science Express. “We are seeing amazing flows from the heart of the continent that had never been described before.”
Rignot and UC Irvine scientists Jeremie Mouginot and Bernd Scheuchl used billions of data points captured by European, Japanese and Canadian satellites to weed out cloud cover, solar glare and land features masking the glaciers. With the aid of NASA technology, the team painstakingly pieced together the shape and velocity of glacial formations, including the previously uncharted East Antarctica, which comprises 77 percent of the continent.
Like viewers of a completed jigsaw puzzle, the scientists were surprised when they stood back and took in the full picture. They discovered a new ridge splitting the 5.4 million-square-mile (14 million-square-kilometer) landmass from east to west.
The team also found unnamed formations moving up to 800 feet (244 meters) annually across immense plains sloping toward the Antarctic Ocean and in a different manner than past models of ice migration.
“The map points out something fundamentally new: that ice moves by slipping along the ground it rests on,” said Thomas Wagner, NASA’s cryospheric program scientist in Washington. “That’s critical knowledge for predicting future sea level rise. It means that if we lose ice at the coasts from the warming ocean, we open the tap to massive amounts of ice in the interior.”
The work was conducted in conjunction with the International Polar Year (IPY) (2007-2008). Collaborators worked under the IPY Space Task Group, which included NASA; the European Space Agency (ESA); Canadian Space Agency (CSA); Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency; the Alaska Satellite Facility in Fairbanks; and MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates of Richmond, British Columbia, Canada. The map builds on partial charts of Antarctic ice flow created by NASA, CSA and ESA using different techniques. “To our knowledge, this is the first time that a tightly knit collaboration of civilian space agencies has worked together to create such a huge dataset of this type,” said Yves Crevier of CSA. “It is a dataset of lasting scientific value in assessing the extent and rate of change in polar regions.”
For a video animation of the new Antarctic map, visit: http://1.usa.gov/poJq1P .
For more information about NASA and agency programs, visit: http://www.nasa.gov .
JPL is managed for NASA by the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena.

To those discussing glacier height changes – along with ice plasticity, flow, and the issues of how accurate ice core data is or isn’t… or heck, for anyone else interested – don’t forget the Glacier Girl and the Lost Squadron!!
Everytime I hear how rapidly Greenland is losing ice, or for that matter almost any large scale glacier or ice issue, Glacier Girl immediately pops into mind. How can there be massive ice loss, when she wound up buried 268 ft deep in only 50 years??!! And she’d drifted over a mile from her original location to boot. Plasticity, flow… if you get that in 50 years, how do they accurately deal with such issues for ice core info? I know, I know, all of this could be a number of things like localized increase w/ overall decreases, or some weird glacier dynamic I’m unaware of that turns the surface under and drags it down (but then she wouldn’t have been intact I would think)…
Amazes me that they not only recovered her, but flew her again! It really is an incredible story.
And it certainly highlights a number of technical issues associated with glaciers.
http://p38assn.org/glacier-girl.htm
@ur momisugly Jim Cole says: August 23, 2011 at 8:38 pm
Jim, a paper you might be interested in that I just ran across a few days ago is: Atmospheric CO2 fluctuations during the last millennium reconstructed by stomatal frequency analysis of Tsuga heterophylla needles Lenny Kouwenberg, et. al 2005
I admit I’ve been skeptical of ice core results for a long time also, but am fully aware that may be due to my own ignorance. I’ve read a number of papers on the issue, but have no idea how much weight those who propose (in the peer reviewed literature or by those who are qualified scientists in the area) actually holds… of course then sites like rc or skepticalscience poo poo any question of their validity making it difficult for one not in the field to tell just what does or doesn’t have real merit. So I wind up tucking my skepticism back into a corner of my mind again and evaluate again whenver I run across more info.
Frankly, it seems to me that until we can get ice cores calibrated both in terms of actually measured CO2 levels, temperatures, AND ice depth, there’s really no way to know how accurate the ice core data is. Obviously that’s not going to happen for a very long time, e.g., we’d have to see how the Mao Launa (sp?) CO2 data we’ve actually measured, starting when, about the 1950’s? compares to ice core data that was from the same timeframes, after it’s firned, then at various depths as time went on to see just how much changes over time in pressure, temperature, water chemistry, crystallization, (including what biological contamination might occur from the time the air becomes trapped all the way until the final ice core is taken too!) etc., etc., how all of these factors affects the finaly resulting data. We’ll all be long long dead and gone by the time they’re able to compare our 1950-2000 CO2 measurements to ice that’s been in place for hundreds, then thousands of years.
Anyhow, the paper above touches on your very issue – that the ‘firn’ process whereby ice bubbles finally become permanently (?) trapped may lead to ice core results that can’t be resolved any closer than several decades, or even centuries – e.g. shifts in CO2 levels such as we’re currently seeing may be lost in the wash so to speak.
Here’s a more generalized article: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/stomata.html
and it references Zbigniew Jaworowski’s work – which I gather the warmists claim is bunk… his work and logic sounds fine to me, and if correct would make a huge difference – but then what do I know? http://www.john-daly.com/zjiceco2.htm
Anyhow, I would be interested in anything you turn up along these lines – or any light folks here can shed on the merits of Jaworowski’s work, plus related supporting or debunking research.
Oops, my bad. Here’s where you can find the stomatal frequency paper online: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:xs5srOHXGBkJ:fm1.fieldmuseum.org/aa/Files/lkouwenberg/Kouwenberg_et_al_2005_Geology.pdf+atmospheric+co2+fluctuations+during+the+last+millennium+reconstructed+by+stomatal&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShppZmaPk_h02vpSDys0Uo6fhPYWHV-epA7Plbwobpc6vdAmEz28wTOdKOhsq0Q2SyOT8BtMogG8mJEjdDSvwp4TCb3cx7m_oOFOTwRLgI1UbW-c1etIp9HFfakE4yMZKACYdJg&sig=AHIEtbTubDQITdGD6B9zhEH95VviEc9uBA