Little Bubbles part 2 – Firn; The Great Equalizer

Continued from part 1…

Guest Post by Caleb Shaw

Snowflake. Small microscope kept outdoors. Sna...
Image via Wikipedia

I will now tell you what I’ve learned, so you can subject it to your kindly WUWT peer- review. I’m fairly certain I’ve gotten some of it wrong, because it doesn’t entirely make sense.

For the purposes of this paper we will imagine a place where snow falls at a great rate, builds up and compacts swiftly, and turns to ice with little bubbles, in only sixty years.  We will begin sixty years ago, in the year 1951, on an icecap where the temperatures are always below freezing.

When snow first falls it is called, “Snow.”  I find this very relieving, because Climate Scientists have more words for snow than an Inuit.  Their official reason for this is to respect other culture’s words for “snow,” and to demonstrate political correctness, as in Climate Science that correctness is more important than the mathematical sort, and they are exceedingly respectful towards all cultures, except Yankees. (In fact I imagine their secret reason for creating the snow-jargon is to keep Yankee laymen like myself confused, hoping the confusion will keep us from butting in where we are not wanted.  It is almost as if they are saying, “Yankee go home,”  but two can play that game.  With the exception of the single word “firn,” I will only use Yankee lingo.)

The snow that fell in 1951 was dry, and around 95% air,  but wind whipped it around and it became the sort of packed powder that is around 90% air.  At this point the snow is 1951 snow, and the air is 1951 air.

As seasons pass this snow gets buried deeper and deeper by successive snowfalls, as temperatures never allow thawing.  As 1951 turns to 1961, and 1961 turns to 1971, the sheer weight of the snow overhead causes changes in the packed powder.  Despite the fact temperatures never rise above twenty below, the snow behaves as if it had thawed, and becomes “firn,”  which involves the snowflakes becoming crystals of ice too large to be called flakes.

As decades continue to pass and pressures build the firn becomes what Yankee call “gritty snow,” (like granulated sugar,) and then becomes “corn snow,” and finally becomes “candle ice.” Then, in the year 2011, with over 400 feet of snow overhead, we arrive at a momentous occasion, wherein the air in the ice, which once was able to move with some degree of freedom through the firn, is locked into little bubbles. Firn is firn no longer, and has stepped over the frontier and become ice.

I’m sure Climate Scientists have a word for this frontier, but I can only research so long before my computer freezes up, and therefore I’ll make up my own Yankee jargon,  and call the boundary between firn and ice, “The Firnopause.”

It is at the Firnopause that the formerly free air suffers the indignity of an icy chastity belt clamping about its freedom, forcing it to become what Climate Scientists call, “pristine.”  And pristine it must remain, eon after eon, until at long last a gallant Climate Scientist rides up and frees it from its deplorable condition. (Sorry about the purple prose. Unfortunately that is a prerequisite, in Climate Science.)

And that gallant Climate Scientist then discovers a remarkable thing.  As you remember, the snow originally fell in 1951, so the ice around the bubble dates from 1951.  However the air within the bubble dates from 2011. Somehow the air from 2011 has made its way down through over 400 feet of tightly packed snow, and all the air from 1951 has been booted out.

Accepting authority, I try to get my mind around this amazing natural phenomenon, and to think of what natural factors could have caused it to occur.

It can’t be the kinetic movement of air, for that higgiltypiggilty movement would not cause 1951 air to only move up, even as 2011 air only moves down. Even the most frenetic kinetic motion would create a mix of airs from all the years between 1951 and 2011, with air from 2011 the least likely to be down that deep.

It can’t be due to expansion and contraction of summer and winter air, because, once you move down ten feet  into the firn, temperatures remain constant, and air neither expands nor contracts.

The best solution involves the difference between a huge 950 mb winter storm and a huge 1040 mb winter high pressure area.  Before my computer froze I determined this was a difference between 13.778 psi and 15.084 psi. (I haven’t a clue what this means in terms of volume; the peer-review of WUWT will help me out, I’m sure.)  However, because I prefer math to be simple, I will state there is a ten percent difference in volume between  the same amount of air in a 950mb low and a 1040mb high.

This is a significant difference.  Stand by a cave with a large chamber and a small entrance as barometric pressures falls,  and you will feel a breeze blowing out.

A cave is actually a poor analogy for firn, for firn in effect has a large entrance which funnels down to smaller and smaller cracks and capillaries.  However, just to shut me up, assume that, as a 950mb low gives way to a 1040 mb high overhead, air actually can be inhaled 10% of the way down into the firn.

Big deal. That is only 40 feet, and leaves you with 360 feet to go, for 2011 air to be at the Firnopause in time to be clamped into little bubbles. Furthermore, as soon as the 1040 mb high starts to move off and pressures fall, the 2011 air gets exhaled out.

Obviously we need to discover a way to inhale the 2011 air down, and exhale all the pre-2011 gas out.  Fortunately Climate Science is much like undone homework; if you have no excuse you can always make one up.

Therefore, to be helpful, I have invented the concept of “grabacules.”  Grabacules are yet-to-be-discovered, gravity-activated, kinetic bonds on the sides of fresh air,  but worn off the sides of stale air.  Because they are gravity-activated, 2011 air slides freely downwards through the firn, but grabs onto the ice when any power tries to move it back up.  In essence 2011 air stands aside for pre-2011 air, (which lacks grabacules,) to pass, and then moves downwards again the next time downward forces come into play.  The 2011 air moves like an inchworm, moving foreword, grabbing, and moving foreword again.

Pretty cool theory, aye?  Isn’t Climate Science wonderful!?  (And if you think  that idea is good, you should have heard my excuses for undone homework. A breathless hush would fall in the classroom, as I arose to speak…)

The problem with my admittedly brilliant idea is that the inch-worm gets shorter and shorter.  Moving 10% of the way to your goal can never get you to your goal.  Up at the surface of the firn, a huge change in atmospheric pressure may shove the 2011 air 40 feet downwards,  but 100 feet from the firnopause the same change only moves the 2011 air 10 feet towards the goal, and 10 inches from the goal it only moves an inch towards its goal.

According to my layman’s calculations that is as far as the 2011 air gets, for by then it is 2012, the 2012 Air starts downwards, and the 2011 air, its grabacules all shot to heck, has to U-turn and start back upwards to make room for the 2012 air.

This leaves a space of nine inches the 2011 air never gets to.  This is a very important space, for it is this air which is actually is incorporated into the little bubbles.  If this air isn’t 2011 air,  what is it?

First we must have a name for this nine inches, just above the Firnopause, and I suggest it be called the Yankeeopause, (named after me, of course.)

It is in this nine inches which a factor so tiny it is unseen, up at the surface,  becomes glaringly apparent.  It is a factor I call “Spongeosis.”

We all know that, when you squeeze a sponge, water comes out.  The exact same thing happens when you squeeze snow, which is 95% air, and wind up with the Firnopause ice, which is at best 10 % air.  The difference is that with a sponge you squeeze out water, but when you squeeze snow you squeeze out air.  Where is that air to go?  Nowhere but up.

This very weak, nearly imperceptible flow is unseen at the surface, where changes in barometric pressure have veritable tides of air inhaling and exhaling through the firn,  but down in the quiet and still depths of the Yankeeopause, this flow is all there is.  Like the bow-wave of a boat, it moves just ahead of the freeze-up at the Firnopause, and consists of the very last bit of air squeezed from the snow.  It never holds air from above, and rather consists of a great many years worth of air all slowly pushed ahead like snow before a plow.  Some of the air may be centuries old,  and when a part of the Yankeeopause’s blended air gets left behind as a bubble in ice at the Firnopause,  the CO2 level in that bubble will not represent any particular year,  but rather an average.  All peaks and valleys in the CO2 record will be smoothed out.  The firn, in the end, has been a great equalizer.

And that is the end of my story, which I have told for your entertainment.  It flies in the face of the desire of Climate Science, which is to move 2011 air down to inclusion in tiny bubbles at the Firnopause.  However it’s my story, and I’m sticking to it.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
161 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Harley
November 1, 2011 8:12 pm

A very entertaining account, considering I have never seen snow, nor wish to. I shiver even reading about it. Thanks.

thelastdemocrat
November 1, 2011 8:15 pm

Darn. No comments yet.

Kevin Kilty
November 1, 2011 8:30 pm

It’s a nice story, but it appears to contradict something that I believe is true of snow being compacted to ice. The process does a respectable job of preserving surface temperature history at the site, which would be difficult to do with the uppermost 400 feet breathing in and out and mixing air with ice and snow. At least glacier accumulation does a far better job of recording temperature history than does thermal conduction into soil or rock.

dalyplanet
November 1, 2011 8:32 pm

That is a very good story with an interesting ending. I enjoy the naming of the Firnopause. Apt and accurate.. No grants for your esteemed research and transcription though . . . I imagine. Big Boots you tread well in !!

hyperzombie
November 1, 2011 8:37 pm

Firntastic! best story all week. It grabaculed my attention from start to finish.

trbixler
November 1, 2011 8:42 pm

If that is your story and you are sticking to it then maybe there is hope. The hope is that some “climate scientist” will explain why Yankeeism and spongy-ism are not part of ice core lore. I suspect there is a YAD06 buried in some little bubble waiting to show its effervesce. Maybe we need some professor from Penn State to explain it all.

MJPenny
November 1, 2011 8:47 pm

I believe you have captured the essence of what happens. From you description the top 40 feet breaths in and out as low and high pressure systems pass over. The bottom layer of this top 40 feet ends up with “present day” air. However the lower 360 feet moves up and down by ever decreasing amounts and gets slight mixing through the years, resulting in the trapped air being a mixture of potentially several hundred years of air.

davidmhoffer
November 1, 2011 8:50 pm

Well I for one am disappointed.
Here I was, settling in for a great read about chemistry, physics, and how they relate to raising daughters.
Seriously, a great read. Is the raising daughters part done or will it be continued in Part 3? Inquiring fathers want to know…

P.G. Sharrow
November 1, 2011 8:55 pm

It would appear that Climate Science is easy to do. Bravo Calib. pg

November 1, 2011 8:56 pm

Take a look at Antarctic Ice Cores: The Sample Rate Problem (Middleton) WUWT Jan 1, 2011.
Any my thoughts at 1/2 11:12 pm.
The de-flating of the air column during compation is similar to the dewatering of shales during lithofication. Looking at the physical processes, the blending would seem to be total. That make all the more astounding that you see varying concentrations of CO2 in different layers of ice, and apparently with some regional and world wide correlation.

Brian H
November 1, 2011 8:56 pm

I like the mechanisms you firnished. I think glacial gas dating is now well and truly firnished as a respectable field. Kudos!

bones
November 1, 2011 9:06 pm

Although there might be some bulk flows associated with outflows from compaction and changes of barometric pressure, the exchanges of gases above the “firnopause” should be dominated by diffusion processes. For example, for CO2 in air at the freezing point of water, the diffusion coefficient is about 0.14 cm^2/s. In sixty years, CO2 molecules could move diffusively about 400 meters, which is about three times the depth to your firnopause. The conclusion should be that the air trapped at the firnopause would have properties intermediate between those of air at the time the snow fell and those at the surface above the firnopause.

old44
November 1, 2011 9:08 pm

Is Caleb Shaw Douglas Adams?

Ex-Wx Forecaster
November 1, 2011 9:15 pm

“It would appear that Climate Science is easy to do.”
Indeed. Plug it into a model, and it becomes as rigid a fact as science can ever create.

November 1, 2011 9:22 pm

Atmospheric highs and lows pumping air in and out of the firn. Never thought of that.

Jesse
November 1, 2011 9:29 pm

Off-topic but appropriate comment from the past. Will Rogers: “It’s all right to fix the world, but you better get your own smokehouse full of meat first.”

November 1, 2011 9:44 pm

It would seem that as the air is deflated from the compacting firn, it would be thoroughly mixed — IF it rose vertically in a 1 D model.
Let’s take a couple of facts and an analogy with shale dewatering.
Fact 1: the snow is in layers, at least as frequently as annually, and perhaps as frequently as each storm. The water content of the snow is not constant within a storm, much less year long.
Therefore the snow column is not uniform.
Fact 2: as the snow compacts, these non-uniform layers will have slightly different compaction rates and therefore, different permiabilities to air flow.
Analog: When shales compact and dewater in the lithification process, the water is believed to migrate horizontally toward the more permiable sands, which are in communication with faults or other points of dewatering leakage.
So as the firn compresses, air that is mostly the same age is squeezed out and diffuses from locally high pressure impermiable layers into permiable layers laterally to a vent.
I think this is a way to maintain a difference in air chemistry in a relatively short vertical distance.
This mechanism does not address concerns about molecular sieve and the potential for CO2 solubilty at the surface of ice crystals or adhesion to dust in the ice.

Doug
November 1, 2011 9:51 pm

I spend a lot of time in snow, and can tell you that the barometric lungs are alive and well.
I ski a mountain known as Mt Bachelor in Oregon. It looks like a mountain, but actually. it is just a really big pile of volcanic cinders, poorly held together by some lava flows. Every winter it gets covered by about 20 feet of snow.
When air pressure rises, air moves into the gravel pile, where it is warmed to the average annual temperature, which I will make up on the spot,(like 97.36 % of all statistics cited) —-44 degrees
When air pressure drops, the warm air flows out, melting the snow. It frequently follows a particularly permeable route, and gushes to the surface, melting out a vertical cavern in the snow. Skiers fall into these pipe shaped hazards.
I don’t know the depth of mixing, but if you throw in some osmosis, maybe some convection, a few more scientific terms, it could be said that a lot of mixing goes on.

Konrad
November 1, 2011 9:59 pm

But if tiny bubbles are discredited then we would have to rely on plant stoma records and Becks empirical measurements. The problem with Becks historical chemical CO2 measurements is that they are ground level measurements that were recorded by hand using lest precise methods than available today, much of the data is too noisy to show a trend and many of the measurements may have been corrupted by proximity to built up areas and industry……oh wait, climate science should be ok with that. We’ll just apply the BEST methodology. What could possibly go wrong?
sarc/

KR
November 1, 2011 10:00 pm

So – in 50-60 years, the snow/ice becomes compacted enough to wall off bubbles and prevent diffusion, which as bones noted is fast enough to exchange with the surface of the snow quite well. So the bubbles in the ice have about a 60-year average level of CO2, oxygen isotopes, etc.
Well, that’s about what the ice guys have always said – 60 years for places with lots of snow, longer for those with less (like the ‘desert’ regions of Antarctica).
Two posts, lots of “oh shucks” prose – but missing the diffusion rate. Not a big story, C. Shaw.

Doug in Seattle
November 1, 2011 10:21 pm

You might be leaving out a few other processes which are known or suspected to be occurring once the air bubble is trapped.
The first of these is diffusion of the gases out of the bubble through the spaces between the molecules in the crystal structure, which while it happens very slowly, does occur. It also occurs at different rates for different constituent gases within the bubble and for different isotopes within those gases.
In addition to diffusion through the crystal itself, there is transport of gases (and liquid too) between ice crystals along the boundaries between the crystals. We know this must occur because at depth within the ice are bodies of liquid water.
Another thing that occurs when ice cores are brought up to the surface – Microfractures. These are a product of decompression when deeply buried ice is brought up to atmospheric pressure. Seems those trapped gases are under pressure when buried deeply within the ice sheet and the ice is not strong enough to fully contain them during decompression.
Finally, and this one kind of shocked me when I learned of it, the drill bits for ice rigs are lubricated with diesel fuel. I wonder what this does to gases now connected to the ice core surface via microfractures.
Add up all the possible issues and what do you get? I’m pretty sure the answer is NOT a pristine sample of the atmosphere from some time in the past.

November 1, 2011 10:33 pm

Very nicely done. A fine model and not an untestable prediction or conclusion in the lot. Way to much physics and chemistry for the climate guys to even begin to understand, however.

Robert Clemenzi
November 1, 2011 10:38 pm

From Convective mixing of air in firn at four polar sites, 2006.
The top 1–20 m from the surface may be the convective zone in which convective mixing overwhelms molecular diffusion and prevents isotopic fractionation.
The second zone is the diffusive zone, the largest part (40–100 m) of the firn, in which molecular diffusion dominates the gas movement and thus gravitational and thermal fractionation occur.
The third zone occurs in the bottom 2–12 m and is the lock-in zone
The paper describes how the firn air was sampled and describes the results. This paper addresses most of the speculation above.

John West
November 1, 2011 10:43 pm

Diffusion rate paper:
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Reference_Docs/CO2_diffusion_in_polar_ice_2008.pdf
Raises more questions as to the legitimacy of ice core CO2 data than it answers. Like where did the “excess” CO2 come from in the melt layers? The same air that non-melted firn would have only captured a fourth as much CO2 from?

Joe
November 1, 2011 10:48 pm

It has always been clear, at least to engineers who spend their every waking moment teasing signals from noise, that the gas trapped in the ice bubbles must be an amalgum of the years before (gasses drifting up) and the years after (gasses drifting down) the “age” of the ice at the target layer. You can envision a probability density function in Y, probably unusually shaped, centered on the target ice layer (historical age) in question where the amplitudes of the density function above and below the target layer represent the contribution of gasses to the target layer from the adjacent layers. The spread of that function, similar to line spreading in lasers, determines the minimum temporal distance between layers that can be used as markers to ensure independence of each data point. The questions I have are 1) what is the shape of that distribution function and 2) how wide is the line spreading? 6 years? 40 years? 200 years? 1000 years?
The line spreading determines the minimum temporal resolution that can be expected from that sample. That time resolution becomes the minimum viable sample clock in the data and no artifact faster than that clock can be assumed to be valid. Technically, to prevent “aliasing” which is the translation of the amplitudes of frequencies higher than the sample rate into the lower frequency space, the data must be run through a low pass filter having the sample clock frequency as the cut-off frequency. As well, the data must be de-convolved with [Sinc t] to eliminate the end effects of the first and last few data points. The “end effects” are one of the frequent points of discussion on climate sites but I have never seen the [Sinc t] deconvolution requirement mentioned even once on any site. This raises the question of whether it is being done. Is there a reason it should not be done?
I can only assume that the “ice scientists” have properly worked this problem and have a proper answer. The next step, Caleb Shaw, is to follow that layer of ice from the drill stem to the lab to the computer and finally to the graph to estimate an expected accuracy and resolution of the final plot.

1 2 3 7