![ThwaitesTongue-600x423[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/thwaitestongue-600x4231.png?quality=75)
Remember the wailing from Suzanne Goldenberg over the “collapse” of the Thwaites glacier blaming man-made CO2 effects and the smackdown given to the claim on WUWT?
Well, never mind. From the University of Texas at Austin and the “you can stop your wailing now” department, comes this really, really, inconvenient truth.
Researchers find major West Antarctic glacier melting from geothermal sources
AUSTIN, Texas — Thwaites Glacier, the large, rapidly changing outlet of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, is not only being eroded by the ocean, it’s being melted from below by geothermal heat, researchers at the Institute for Geophysics at The University of Texas at Austin (UTIG) report in the current edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The findings significantly change the understanding of conditions beneath the West Antarctic Ice Sheet where accurate information has previously been unobtainable.
The Thwaites Glacier has been the focus of considerable attention in recent weeks as other groups of researchers found the glacier is on the way to collapse, but more data and computer modeling are needed to determine when the collapse will begin in earnest and at what rate the sea level will increase as it proceeds. The new observations by UTIG will greatly inform these ice sheet modeling efforts.
Using radar techniques to map how water flows under ice sheets, UTIG researchers were able to estimate ice melting rates and thus identify significant sources of geothermal heat under Thwaites Glacier. They found these sources are distributed over a wider area and are much hotter than previously assumed.
The geothermal heat contributed significantly to melting of the underside of the glacier, and it might be a key factor in allowing the ice sheet to slide, affecting the ice sheet’s stability and its contribution to future sea level rise.
The cause of the variable distribution of heat beneath the glacier is thought to be the movement of magma and associated volcanic activity arising from the rifting of the Earth’s crust beneath the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.
Knowledge of the heat distribution beneath Thwaites Glacier is crucial information that enables ice sheet modelers to more accurately predict the response of the glacier to the presence of a warming ocean.
Until now, scientists had been unable to measure the strength or location of heat flow under the glacier. Current ice sheet models have assumed that heat flow under the glacier is uniform like a pancake griddle with even heat distribution across the bottom of the ice.
The findings of lead author Dusty Schroeder and his colleagues show that the glacier sits on something more like a multi-burner stovetop with burners putting out heat at different levels at different locations.
“It’s the most complex thermal environment you might imagine,” said co-author Don Blankenship, a senior research scientist at UTIG and Schroeder’s Ph.D. adviser. “And then you plop the most critical dynamically unstable ice sheet on planet Earth in the middle of this thing, and then you try to model it. It’s virtually impossible.”
That’s why, he said, getting a handle on the distribution of geothermal heat flow under the ice sheet has been considered essential for understanding it.
Gathering knowledge about Thwaites Glacier is crucial to understanding what might happen to the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. An outlet glacier the size of Florida in the Amundsen Sea Embayment, it is up to 4,000 meters thick and is considered a key question mark in making projections of global sea level rise.
The glacier is retreating in the face of the warming ocean and is thought to be unstable because its interior lies more than two kilometers below sea level while, at the coast, the bottom of the glacier is quite shallow.
Because its interior connects to the vast portion of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet that lies deeply below sea level, the glacier is considered a gateway to the majority of West Antarctica’s potential sea level contribution.
The collapse of the Thwaites Glacier would cause an increase of global sea level of between 1 and 2 meters, with the potential for more than twice that from the entire West Antarctic Ice Sheet.
The UTIG researchers had previously used ice-penetrating airborne radar sounding data to image two vast interacting subglacial water systems under Thwaites Glacier. The results from this earlier work on water systems (also published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) formed the foundation for the new work, which used the distribution of water beneath the glacier to determine the levels and locations of heat flow.
In each case, Schroeder, who received his Ph.D. in May, used techniques he had developed to pull information out of data collected by the radar developed at UTIG.
According to his findings, the minimum average geothermal heat flow beneath Thwaites Glacier is about 100 milliwatts per square meter, with hotspots over 200 milliwatts per square meter. For comparison, the average heat flow of the Earth’s continents is less than 65 milliwatts per square meter.
The presence of water and heat present researchers with significant challenges.
“The combination of variable subglacial geothermal heat flow and the interacting subglacial water system could threaten the stability of Thwaites Glacier in ways that we never before imagined,” Schroeder said.
Chris Beal (@NJSnowFan) says:
June 10, 2014 at 5:57 am
This has to do with Antarctica so I will post it here. Man Made Warming of Antarctica???
http://www.accuweather.com/en/aq/amundsen-scott-south-pole-station/2258520/june-weather/2258520
For 9June14 the range was -61F to -85F, I wouldn’t worry too much about a 0,67C diversion from average, especially since there are, for the most part, no thermometers or temperature records for the overwhelming majority of a continent that is almost twice the size of the lower 48.
Time and again we see this kind of thing. A claim is made, people scream CAGW, later research finds some other cause. Remember the bees and lizards? Antarctic sea ice is not melting because of hot air, it’s recently been bloody freezing down there in summer and winter.
Oops!
I am not a glacier scientist but this sounds like male bovine excrement.
The profile of the glacier is such that the bottom of the glacier would have to flow upward to get to the ocean. link The thing is that the top of the glacier and the bottom of the glacier don’t have to move at the same speed because of plastic flow. link It is quite possible for the top of the glacier to flow at 2 km/yr without having the bottom move at all. If the bottom isn’t moving, it doesn’t matter if it is lubricated by a little melt water or not.
“In general, the rate of plastic flow is greater than the rate of basal sliding. ” link In this case, I suspect that the rate of basal sliding is zero. I also realize that a lot of papers talk about non-zero basal sliding but that requires the ice to flow uphill.
The WAIS is not far from one of the sites of surrounding Antarctic subsidence (SAS) where cold deep water formation and downweling occur. I understand there is some release of enthalpic heat associated with this. Could this be a factor in the anomalous warming in the vicinity of the WAIS while Antactica as a whole cools? It could be that there is a recent upsurge in downwelling and deep water formation linked to oceanic oscillation.
Don’t forget a few degrees drop in melting point at these pressures.
“Dave Says, For 9June14 the range was -61F to -85F, I wouldn’t worry too much about a 0,67C diversion from average, especially since there are, for the most part, no thermometers or temperature records for the overwhelming majority of a continent that is almost twice the size of the lower 48.”
Dave that was not the issue I had with CR. It is that in one day, overall it got colder( according to their color maps for temps) . They show +.67 today and yesterday it was +.61.
From the colors they show for Antarctic, it looks like it should be at least -5.0 C below avg not +.67 above average.
What is the true overall temp for Antarctic region Now??
I did E-mail CR this morning but got no response yet about their maps and Antarctic temp reading.
Well it has been dark energy heat up to this point. It’s time to throw some light on the subject with real observations on subglacial heat sources, subglacial volcanic activity, and hydrothermal activity. It is a continental-scale question after all.
Now for a reality check..
http://mallemaroking.org/amundsen-sea-embayment/
What if the Arctic has some underwater volcanoes too?
Could man made global warming actually be magma made global warming?
njsnowfan says:
June 10, 2014 at 11:17 am
I did E-mail CR this morning but got no response yet about their maps and Antarctic temp reading.
I’m curious where they get such detailed surface temperature data for both the present and to determine a 1979-2000 baseline. My impression of what is available suggests they are probably making most of it up as they go.
Glaciers – Rivers of Ice –
http://youtu.be/ZYCERy6-mmM
Ok, maybe my math is off but with a surface area of 139 million square miles, it would take 86,000 cubic miles of water to raise the level of the ocean even 1 meter. 172,000 to raise it 2 meters. So I highly doubt the 1 -2 meter rise that they predict.
So in theory an ice cap on Iceland is not possible.
http://youtu.be/sa-DdSPya2E
Leo Geiger says:
June 10, 2014 at 9:12 am
””Gary Pearse says: Leo, the ocean erodes along a linear strip (around the whole world even) and in this case the geothermal energy is also warming the ocean doing the eroding- did you miss that?”
Where in the press release or the paper itself does it suggest the geothermal energy is warming the ocean…”
They say: ”The glacier is retreating in the face of the warming ocean”
As a geologist, I assumed the researchers were aware of the general broader field of volcanic activity in the area, but you may be right, they may not even know. There is a lot of negligent research being done these days. Here’s what NOAA has to say:
”Ant_Proj_SUM_May31-05.doc
ftp://ftp.pmel.noaa.gov/…/Antarctica/Ant_Proj_SUM_May31-05.doc
As earthquakes can be used to track many plate boundary and lithospheric … pattern of earthquake production along the Antarctic Peninsula and western Scotia (Sea) … of submarine volcanic activity along the Antarctic Peninsula and throughout the ..”
Actually the entire western coast of Antarctica, onshore and offshore is a busy volcanic field. At least we can’t cite CO2 in this so I don’t get your interest.
Hmmm……Let me see If I’ve got this straight. We’re supposed to mortgage our futures on Climate Models that didn’t see this coming?
commieBob says:
June 10, 2014 at 10:46 am
The profile of the glacier is such that the bottom of the glacier would have to flow upward to get to the ocean
===
…..correct
Man Bearpig says:
June 10, 2014 at 1:03 am
Oh no. In the snow shadow area (where mountains wring out most of the moisture so very little snow falls), there is exposed land, the McMurdo Dry Valleys.
http://www.mcmurdodryvalleys.aq/
The 15,000km2 Area contains cold desert soils millions of years old, special geological features, and unusual communities of plants and microorganisms. Its landscape includes glaciers, mountain ranges, ice-covered lakes, ephemeral streams, arid patterned soils and permafrost, sand dunes, and watershed systems. It is a region where life exists at the very extreme of environmental limits.
http://discovermagazine.com/galleries/2013/june/dry-valleys-diary
I received this reply about this topic earlier today.
Much like an ice cube in a glass of 35-degree water will melt faster than one sitting in 35-degree air, the melting of glaciers at the edge of a continent is dominated by the surface area touching the ocean. This area isn’t just at the edge of the glacier if you’re looking at an aerial photo, it is mainly the underside of the part of the sheet as it floats over the ocean. As you can learn from reading the studies you’ve linked (not the spin, but the actual scientific papers), the place where the glacier leaves land and begins floating isn’t constant – it depends on how thick the ice sheet is, which in turns depends on how much has melted: the more that melts, the less thick it is, the higher it floats, which moves the interface with land further inland, leading to more surface area interfaced with ocean water, leading to faster melting. It also depends on how fast the glacier flows over land – faster-flowing glaciers are thinner.
The new study from UT shows the distribution of heat coming from the earth underneath the glacier, which has the effect of creating a layer of water underneath the miles of ice. This layer of water acts as a lubricant, much like walking on a frozen pond with heated shoes would be incredibly slippery. Overall the earth’s crust under this glacier has a higher-than-average amount of heat flux, so the layer of water will be thicker and more lubricating – but it doesn’t mean this heat is dominating the melting. It will, however, influence the modeling of the glacial flow, which will change estimates of how fast the glacier will melt from contact with seawater.
So… yes, glaciers are complicated… but using this study to argue that AGW shouldn’t be blamed for accelerating melting of this glacier is silly, willfully ignorant, self-interested, or any combination of the above.
@Scarface
“Could man made global warming actually be magma made global warming?”
The average geothermal heat flow is 0.1 W/m^2. Your warm body is emitting about 30 W/m^2 of heat to the cool air around you. Body heat flow is 300 times greater than geothermal heat flow. That’s why we eat so much. A lot of calories is needed to keep our body warm. Too bad we can’t use body heat to run power plants.
A few years ago, I went over to one of those “science” sites where the debate the issues of the day by deleting comments.
Anyway, I saw a piece by this “scientist” about the melting in the Antarctic with a link to the WaPo to NYT that had a quickie summary of his work.
One of the comments was that the melting was due to a volcano which the “scientist” quickie retorted that the volcano was two miles under the ice.
Oddly enough, right there on the same page was a link to a story about how for the first time on record an Antarctic volcano had broken through the ice.
I quickly pointed that out in a comment … a few minutes later, my comment was removed.
Isn’t “science” wonderful.
CR emailed me back..
Hi Chris,
I found the problem. There was indeed a bug in the script. The Antarctic region definition had a typo, wherein the latitude ranged: -65 to 90 instead of -65 to -90. One character off! FYI here is the complete list of region definitions, obviously not all used. Averages are area-weighted, and therefore account for longitude convergence at the poles:
And here is the new difference map showing -3.57 deg C anomaly for Antarctic. Make sure to clear browser cache if the old image appears when you go to the site.
Cheers,
Sean
—
Sean Birkel
Research Assistant Professor
Climate Change Institute
University of Maine
Climate Reanalyzer
http://cci-reanalyzer.org
Temp data that was attached to the e-mail from CR.
latmin, latmax, lonmin, lonmax
;*** Land + Oceans ***
rlatlon(0,0:3) =(/ -90.0, 90.0, 0.0, 359.5/) ;World
rlatlon(1,0:3) =(/ 0.0, 90.0, 0.0, 359.5/) ;NH
rlatlon(2,0:3) =(/ -90.0, 0.0, 0.0, 359.5/) ;SH
rlatlon(3,0:3) =(/ 65.0, 90.0, 0.0, 359.5/) ;Arctic
rlatlon(4,0:3) =(/ -90.0, -60.0, 0.0, 359.5/) ;Antarctic
rlatlon(5,0:3) =(/ -25.0, 25.0, 0.0, 359.5/) ;Tropics
rlatlon(6,0:3) =(/ 25.0, 65.0, 0.0, 359.5/) ;N mid lats
rlatlon(7,0:3) =(/ -65.0, -25.0, 0.0, 359.5/) ;S mid lats
;*** Oceans ***
rlatlon(8,0:3) =(/ -50.0, 65.0, 290.0, 359.5/) ;Atlantic
rlatlon(9,0:3) =(/ 5.0, 65.0, 280.0, 359.5/) ;N Atlantic
rlatlon(10,0:3) =(/ -50.0, 5.0, 295.0, 359.5/) ;S Atlantic
rlatlon(11,0:3) =(/ 50.0, 65.0, 265.0, 285.0/) ;Hudson Bay
rlatlon(12,0:3) =(/ 17.0, 30.0, 260.0, 279.0/) ;Gulf of Mexico
rlatlon(13,0:3) =(/ -50.0, 60.0, 130.0, 260.0/) ;Pacific
rlatlon(14,0:3) =(/ 0.0, 60.0, 130.0, 260.0/) ;N Pacific
rlatlon(15,0:3) =(/ -50.0, 0.0, 150.0, 290.0/) ;S Pacific
rlatlon(16,0:3) =(/ -15.0, 15.0, 140.0, 290.0/) ;Eq Pacific
rlatlon(17,0:3) =(/ -50.0, 25.0, 30.0, 110.0/) ;Indian Ocean
rlatlon(18,0:3) =(/ 65.0, 90.0, 0.0, 359.5/) ;Arctic Ocean
rlatlon(19,0:3) =(/ -75.0, -50.0, 0.0, 359.5/) ;Southern Ocean
;*** Land ***
rlatlon(20,0:3) =(/ 23.0, 85.0, 190.0, 350.0/) ;North America
rlatlon(21,0:3) =(/ -57.0, 13.0, 278.0, 327.0/) ;South America
rlatlon(22,0:3) =(/ 35.0, 70.0, 0.0, 40.0/) ;Europe
rlatlon(23,0:3) =(/ 23.0, 80.0, 40.0, 190.0/) ;Asia
rlatlon(24,0:3) =(/ -36.0, 38.0, 0.0, 52.0/) ;Africa
rlatlon(25,0:3) =(/ -48.0, -10.0, 110.0, 180.0/) ;Australia + NZ
rlatlon(26,0:3) =(/ 49.0, 75.0, 220.0, 300.0/) ;Canada
rlatlon(27,0:3) =(/ 23.5, 49.0, 230.0, 300.0/) ;U.S.
rlatlon(28,0:3) =(/ 53.0, 72.5, 180.0, 220.0/) ;Alaska
rlatlon(29,0:3) =(/ 50.0, 80.0, 90.0, 180.0/) ;Siberia
rlatlon(30,0:3) =(/ 23.0, 47.0, 80.0, 132.0/) ;China
DavidR says (on the UAH global satellite temperature report for May 2014):
June 10, 2014 at 9:59 pm
So, IF Co2 warms the entire globe catastrophically, AND IF that warming is supposed to cause the Arctic sea ice to melt AND THAT melting is supposed to cause MORE CA global warming to melt more sea ice …
So, how could the Antarctic sea ice extents last October 2013 set an all-time satellite record high sea ice extents AROUND Antarctica if Antarctica was measured that same 2013 year with the earth’s highest regional temperatures?
Oh, and by the way, the Antarctic sea ice anomaly (the “excess” sea ice alone) has been continuously positive since May 2011, and been regularly higher than normal since 2007, and that excess has been as large as 1.6 Mkm^2 several times .. an area 97% the size of Greenland. Now, just what is that funny “Arctic amplification” positive feedback the so-called “scientists” propagandize their politicians about?