From the EARTH INSTITUTE AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY and the “we told you so time and again at WUWT” department comes this study which not only explains the “insta-melt” in the Summer of 2012, but the ongoing melting that has been incorrectly blamed on CO2, when instead it’s all about older soot embedded in snow coming around again to enhance melting combined with weather pattern changes..

Greenland’s ice is getting darker, increasing risk of melting
Feedback loops from melting itself are driving changes in reflectivity
Greenland’s snowy surface has been getting darker over the past two decades, absorbing more heat from the sun and increasing snow melt, a new study of satellite data shows. That trend is likely to continue, with the surface’s reflectivity, or albedo, decreasing by as much as 10 percent by the end of the century, the study says.
While soot blowing in from wildfires contributes to the problem, it hasn’t been driving the change, the study finds. The real culprits are two feedback loops created by the melting itself. One of those processes isn’t visible to the human eye, but it is having a profound effect.
The results, published in the European Geosciences Union journal The Cryosphere, have global implications. Fresh meltwater pouring into the ocean from Greenland raises sea level and could affect ocean ecology and circulation.
“You don’t necessarily have to have a ‘dirtier’ snowpack to make it dark,” said lead author Marco Tedesco, a research professor at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and adjunct scientist at NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies. “A snowpack that might look ‘clean’ to our eyes can be more effective in absorbing solar radiation than a dirty one. Overall, what matters, it is the total amount of solar energy that the surface absorbs. This is the real driver of melting.”
The feedback loops work like this: During a warm summer with clear skies and lots of solar radiation pouring in, the surface starts to melt. As the top layers of fresh snow disappear, old impurities, like dust from erosion or soot that blew in years before, begin to appear, darkening the surface. A warm summer can remove enough snow to allow several years of impurities to concentrate at the surface as surrounding snow layers disappear. At the same time, as the snow melts and refreezes, the grains of snow get larger. This is because the meltwater acts like glue, sticking grains together when the surface refreezes. The larger grains create a less reflective surface that allows more solar radiation to be absorbed. The impact of grain size on albedo – the ratio between reflected and incoming solar radiation – is strong in the infrared range, where humans can’t see, but satellite instruments can detect the change.
“It’s a complex system of interaction between the atmosphere and the ice sheet surface. Rising temperatures are promoting more melting, and that melting is reducing albedo, which in turn is increasing melting,” Tedesco said. “How this accumulates over decades is going to be important, because it can accelerate the amount of water Greenland loses. Even if we don’t have a lot of melting because of atmospheric conditions one year, the surface is more sensitive to any kind of input the sun can give it, because of the previous cycle.”
The study used satellite data to compare summertime changes in Greenland’s albedo from 1981 to 2012. The first decade showed little change, but starting around 1996, the data show that due to darkening, the ice began absorbing about 2 percent more solar radiation per decade. At the same time, summer near-surface temperatures in Greenland increased at a rate of about 0.74?C per decade, allowing more snow to melt and fuel the feedback loops.
A likely cause for the large shift around 1996 was a change in atmospheric circulation, Tedesco said. The North Atlantic Oscillation, a large-scale natural weather cycle, went into a phase in which summer atmospheric conditions favored more incoming solar radiation and warmer, moist air from the south. Later records show those conditions shifted in 2013-2014 to favor less melting, but the damage was already done – the ice sheet had become more sensitive. In 2015, melting spiked again to reach more than half of the Greenland ice sheet.
While new snowfall can make the ice sheet brighter again, the dark material built up during the melt years is waiting just below the surface, preconditioning the surface to future melting, Tedesco said.
The scientists also ran a computer model to simulate the future of Greenland’s surface temperature, grain size, exposed ice area and albedo. Over the current century, the model projects that the average albedo for the entire ice sheet will fall by as much as 8 percent, and by as much 10 percent on the western edge, where the ice is darkest today. Those are conservative estimates – the change could be twice that, Tedesco said.
The scientists looked into the hypothesis that soot from forest fires in China, Siberia and North America could be driving the increased darkening of the ice sheet. Using the Global Fire Emissions Database, they analyzed trends in black-carbon emissions from wildfires in those regions and Europe. While the amount of black carbon released by fires varied year to year, the scientists found no statistically significant increase during 1997-2012 to match the darkening of Greenland.
The study also raises questions about whether Greenland’s high plateau is darkening as previous reports have suggested. The scientists found no long-term trend of darkening at the top, and they suspect that the Terra MODIS satellite sensor that has detected darkening in the past may actually be degrading, as previous studies have suggested. At lower elevations, the signal is much stronger.
“It is a very good paper which provides valuable new insights about the physical processes controlling the change in reflectivity of the Greenland ice sheet and specifically its darkening over time,” said Eric Rignot, a senior research scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory who studies ice sheets but was not involved with the new study. “I also find it particularly interesting that the darkening indicated earlier by satellite sensors is now confirmed to be less, which is good news for the ice sheet. Yet the darkening of Greenland around its periphery remains a source of concern because it contributes to making the ice sheet melt away faster.”
The feedback loops could be stopped with lots of snowfall and less melting, but that doesn’t seem likely given the increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, Tedesco said. And while warming is expected to increase precipitation, that precipitation includes increasing rainfall, which speeds up melting. Melting is also moving to higher elevations as global temperatures warm.
“As warming continues, the feedback from declining albedo will add up,” Tedesco said. “It’s a train running downhill, and the hill is getting steeper.”
###
Co-authors of the paper are Sarah Doherty of the University of Washington; Xavier Fettweis of University of Liege; Patrick Alexander of NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies and City University of New York; Jeyavinoth Jeyaratnam of the City College of New York; and Julienne Stroeve of University of Boulder.
The paper, “The darkening of the Greenland ice sheet: trends, drivers, and projections (1981-2100),” http://www.the-cryosphere.net/10/477/2016/tc-10-477-2016-discussion.html
“Greenland melting due to old soot feedback loops and albedo change – not AGW”
They aren’t saying it isn’t AGW. The feedback loops amplify the change, they don’t cause them.
‘“It’s a complex system of interaction between the atmosphere and the ice sheet surface. Rising temperatures are promoting more melting, and that melting is reducing albedo, which in turn is increasing melting,” Tedesco said.‘
The temperatures weren’t rising of their own accord.
‘The feedback loops could be stopped with lots of snowfall and less melting, but that doesn’t seem likely given the increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, Tedesco said. And while warming is expected to increase precipitation, that precipitation includes increasing rainfall, which speeds up melting. Melting is also moving to higher elevations as global temperatures warm.
“As warming continues, the feedback from declining albedo will add up,” Tedesco said. “It’s a train running downhill, and the hill is getting steeper.”’
From the paper:
“The drivers we identified to be responsible for the observed darkening are related to endogenous processes rather than exogenous ones and are strongly driven by melting. Because melting is projected to increase over the next decades,…”
Yes, exactly. The higher temps are acting as a catalyst. If warming cycles were a common occurrence, then this would’ve happened before. Instead, the “cake layer” effect of new snow, then some carbon deposits from the air, then new snow, then carbon, etc has been altered by the top snow layer getting melted due to warming, exposing darker snow underneath and setting off a chain reaction of accelerated melting.
Ahh, the truth shines through,thanks Nick
“From the paper:
“The drivers we identified . . .”
They deserve some sort of award for using the traditional term instead of the alarmist invention, “forcing.”
I wonder if they got the idea for this study after observing the condition of the last bits of snow left on the side of the roadway.
Well … I looked for the darkening and couldn’t find it. See “Through the Ice, Darkly“.
w.
http://sciencejots.com/image/science.jpg
If only!
Scientists, OTOH . . .
Using the Global Fire Emissions Database, they analyzed trends in black-carbon emissions from wildfires in those regions and Europe. While the amount of black carbon released by fires varied year to year, the scientists found no statistically significant increase during 1997-2012 to match the darkening of Greenland
Another way to show no link between man made CO2 and wildfires.
No, it doesn’t show that at all. It only shows that the darkening of Greenland between 1997-2012 was not due to black carbon released by fires. So either the darkening was caused by other carbon (other sources) or by the melting effect, which the paper concludes is the primary driver.
“The North Atlantic Oscillation, a large-scale natural weather cycle, went into a phase in which summer atmospheric conditions favored more incoming solar radiation and warmer, moist air from the south.”
Water vapour has absorption bands in the solar near infrared, that would decrease solar radiation at the surface, though the moist air from the south is probably carting soot along with.
Increased CO2 is modeled to increase positive NAO, so no one should be blaming it for these negative NAO driven humidity event Greenland melts anyway.
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-3-5-6.html
along with *it*. Sorry, migraine!
well, it’s a theory. Let’s see if it holds water better than trace bits of plant food driving climate.
Using a different accent, “Diamon ar a gul beft fwend.” Ha ha ha
Ha ha
Why? We’ve been told by the so-called climate experts that pretty much everything is attributable to an AGW-driven world, including more snowfalls. Tedesco forgets at what elevation and mean surface temperature Greenland’s ice cap is actually at. It’s very well possible that heavy snowfalls in the years to come across the surface of the island will make all of this a moot point.
I’ve always wondered why there are certain banding patterns in old icebergs that, to me, aren’t easily explained by the collection of rocks and soil detritus as the glacier advances. If that theory were true, you’d see banding only at a singular front and at the very bottom of the glacier where it makes contact with the ground. But banding patterns are much farther up, and can be separated by small gaps or many feet of otherwise pristine compacted snow ice. So what impetus drives the advance and retreat of snow ice formation if, as suggested above in the article, decreased albedo and increased insolation absorption are inevitable?
All seems like poppycock to me, that the REAL question these scientists should be asking is, By what mechanism does a switch from increased melting to one of increased snowfall overcome the summer ice loss? Weather patterns that allow greater cloud cover over the ice cap seems a likely beginning, with heavy snow events (as evidenced from DMI data records) increasing in frequency as a co-factor.
Could some government agency give me $500,000 to perform a study please? Anyone? Anyone?
I remember walking on old snow that was heavily pock marked because as the sun heated up the darker material it melted the snow and ice around it and the material had sunk. Dust is fine particles but the particles themselves are generally heavier than water and will therefore sink below the ice. I therefore have some doubts about the underlying thesis.
Wait. Did you read the paper? It says that it’s GHG driven warming that has caused multi year ice to melt, leaving impurities on the surface. The projections in the paper are that continued increases in GHG will result in more melting and even darker ice, which will result in more melting. How can you people read a paper that confirms GHG levels are causing the ice to melt even faster than models predicted and decide that it means the *exact opposite*.
Read the original paper here: http://www.the-cryosphere.net/10/477/2016/tc-10-477-2016.pdf the decrease in albedo was found to be caused by an increase in surface temperature, not the opposite as this blog post suggests.
Climat is and has been ever changing, so quit the crap. Greenland is on the way to stop being “Whiteland”.
Old soot? They are trying to keep the connection with carbon alive. Because they are setup a world-wide taxation scheme based upon carbon taxation, IMO. These people are so efficient, they need a committe to change their minds, IMO.