Oh, darn. Study: Most meltwater in Greenland fjords likely comes from icebergs, not glaciers

From the AMERICAN GEOPHYSICAL UNION

Most meltwater in Greenland fjords likely comes from icebergs, not glaciers

Image of Greenland glaciers and icebergs from lifeonthinice.com
Image of Greenland glaciers and icebergs from lifeonthinice.com

WASHINGTON, DC — Icebergs contribute more meltwater to Greenland’s fjords than previously thought, losing up to half of their volume as they move through the narrow inlets, according to new research.

Greenland, the world’s largest island, is almost entirely covered by a permanent ice sheet that has been shrinking and melting as global warming increases temperatures. In fjords, narrow inlets where glaciers meet the sea, ice breaks off from glaciers to form dense packs of icebergs.

The new study finds 10 to 50 percent of iceberg melting happens in the fjords, not in the open ocean as assumed by previous research. As a result, more than half of all meltwater entering Greenland’s glacial fjords can come from these dense packs of icebergs, outweighing the amount of freshwater coming from the island’s glaciers, according to the new study.

“We should now be able to better measure the freshwater fluxes that are coming off of Greenland,” said Ellyn Enderlin, a glaciologist at the University of Maine in Orono, and lead author of the new study published in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union. “That could be really important when we’re thinking about how Greenland melts, how that influences ocean circulation and climate.”

The new study could help scientists better understand what happens at the ice-ocean interface where glaciers meet the water, according to Jason Amundson, a geophysicist at the University of Alaska Southeast in Juneau, who was not involved in the new study.

“The reason that’s interesting is that there’s been quite a few studies in the past 20 years that have shown that the stability of … glaciers depends on what happens at the ice-ocean interface,” he said.

Melting point

The Greenland Ice Sheet releases more than 1,000 cubic kilometers (240 cubic miles) of meltwater per year, according to the authors. Previous research found half of this meltwater comes from icebergs and half comes from glaciers, but the amount icebergs melted in fjords before they reached the ocean remained a mystery.

In the new study, Enderlin and her colleagues used satellite images of two Greenland fjords to calculate the total volume of icebergs within them. Tracking the icebergs over the course of days, weeks and months allowed the researchers to calculate how much volume the icebergs lost through melting before they reached the ocean.

The researchers determined that from October to April, melting icebergs dominate the freshwater flux into the fjords losing up to half of their volume — glaciers barely melt during the cold winter months. At their peak, these dense packs of icebergs melted at a rate of around 1,000 cubic meters per second (260,000 gallons per second), the equivalent of filling an Olympic-sized swimming pool every two and a half seconds. Even during the warm summer months, underwater glacier melting only occurs at a maximum rate of 400 cubic meters per second (about 100,000 gallons per second).

Icebergs are tiny in size compared to glaciers, but they contribute such a large fraction of meltwater to fjords because their large surface area allows them to melt more quickly, according to Enderlin.

“If you took an ice cube and put it in your drink, one solid ice cube would melt pretty slowly, but if you took it out, hit it with a hammer and put it back in, it would melt a lot faster,” she said.

Enderlin and her team also used satellite images to estimate the iceberg distribution in the two fjords, which they used to calculate the icebergs’ total underwater surface area. Multiplying the melting rate by the total underwater surface area, Enderlin and her colleagues found more meltwater in the fjords was coming from icebergs than from glaciers throughout most of the year.

“What I see now is that iceberg melting is huge, and so if you don’t take that into account you’re going to come up with some crazy high estimates for glacier melting that might not be representative,” Enderlin said.

Melting icebergs in the fjords create a layer of cold freshwater near glaciers. This freshwater can affect water circulation in the fjords, which can affect how glaciers melt and recede, Enderlin said.

Ocean circulation patterns could also be disrupted depending on where the icebergs melt and release their freshwater, according to Enderlin. Ocean circulation is a major driver of heat movement from the tropics to the poles, and disruptions to it could cause chaotic and unpredictable changes to weather and climate, she said.

Enderlin hopes to expand her studies on iceberg meltwater flux to other areas, like Antarctica. She said she will continue the work she started with Gordon Hamilton, who was a glaciologist at the University of Maine in Orono, and a co-author of new study. Hamilton died in October while doing research in Antarctica.

“I would say that really this was sort of our joint brainchild,” Enderlin said. “I bounced lots of ideas off of him … He was really instrumental to [the research] and it was sad that he couldn’t see it come to be finally.”

###

 

This research article is open access for 30 days. A PDF copy of the article can be downloaded at the following link: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL070718/pdf.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
66 Comments
Bob B.
November 21, 2016 11:49 am

“as global warming increases temperatures”
And I always thought global warming was defined by an increase in temperature rather than the cause of the increase. Silly me.

Gerry, England
November 21, 2016 12:13 pm

I like the phrase ‘as assumed by previous research’ indicating not very good research then.

November 21, 2016 12:24 pm

Nature.com has an article on the effect of churning Southern Ocean…and how so much of the effect or lack of effect on global climate is totally unknown. Wasn’t the science…um. What is that word? Settled?

n.n
November 21, 2016 12:24 pm

The use of inference and estimates is a known first-order cause of scientific corruption.

November 21, 2016 12:38 pm

Glaciers calve and become icebergs. Glaciers = icebergs, kind of like grated cheese is still cheese. (Cheese = grated cheese)
I don’t see how the purpose, or the results of this study changes anything we didn’t already know. Interesting though, who payed for this study?

AndyG55
November 21, 2016 12:44 pm

“Greenland, the world’s largest island”
Hey????? .. Australia is more than 3 times the area.
Greenland 2.166M km²
Australia 7.696M km²

Robin Richards
November 21, 2016 1:30 pm

This makes no sense to me. All the icebergs in the Greenland fjords originate from the glaciers and so does the resultant fresh water. Any pack ice formed in the fjords does not shange the fresh to salt water balance although as a result of a leaching process the pack ice gradually loses its salt content. But that does not change the salt/fresh water balance.

November 21, 2016 1:34 pm

80% of the year it’s below freezing above 80 N. Just how much melting is that going to have?

November 21, 2016 1:44 pm

Greenland, not Iceland. Wonder why they named it that.

ferdberple
November 21, 2016 1:58 pm

“In a 2013 study published in Nature, 133 researchers analyzed a Greenland ice core from the Eemian interglacial. They concluded that GIS had been 8 degrees C warmer than today.”
“Eemian interglacial reconstructed from a Greenland folded ice core”. Nature. 493: 489–494. January 24, 2013. doi:10.1038/nature11789.
============================
so how could it have been 8C warmer without fossil fuel or extra CO2?

wws
November 21, 2016 2:01 pm

Recent months have been so tense on all of us that everyone’s nerves seem to still be on edge – I know mine still are. In light of that, I think it’s appropriate for both sides in this climate change fight to sit back and take some time to contemplate this world and our place in it. These wise words are a good place to start:
Desiderata
You are a child of the universe,
no less than the trees and the stars;
you have a right to be here.
And whether or not it is clear to you,
Hillary Clinton will never be president.

Owen
November 21, 2016 2:18 pm

This news is both new and obvious. We have all fooled around with ice cubes. The idea that flux is a function of surface area is simple and almost intuitive. I don’t understand how the people studying glacier/fjord dynamics would not have adopted, long ago, a model that took account of the fragmentation of the glacier front as it calved into bergs, and as the bergs eddied around in the fjord, and dwindled. You could have put an observer at the mouth of the fjord estimating the size of departing bergs relative to their size when they first broke off. You might even have put somebody in a Zodiac with instruments to guesstimate volume and, measuring the isotherms in the water around the berg, figure out what the “melt field” looks like.
I am making this up because I have no degree. But I have seen glaciers and bergs, and they are both mysterious and IMHO open to our best inquiry.
Just puzzled at how sloppy the science seems to have been here.

Latitude
November 21, 2016 2:28 pm

that has been shrinking and melting as global warming increases temperatures….
head wall……….

Owen
November 21, 2016 2:36 pm

“Total Greenland ice loss is calving plus pre-calving melt water. If some of what is actually post-calving melt water is counted as pre- then it is double counted and the mass loss over estimated.”
Very interesting. Has this methodological slop been implicitly favored because it produces results that are desirable?

Patrick B
November 21, 2016 2:44 pm

Margins of error on the study? They must be huge (or should I say HYYYYYYUUUGE?)

Owen
November 21, 2016 2:51 pm

Too bad the hysterical writer of the recent New Yorker essay had not the benefit of this insight on how glaciers and bergs actually work. It would have messed up the Doom narrative a bit.

Thin Air
November 21, 2016 3:26 pm

So they are saying yet how much overestimated all the previous numbers on Greenland melting have been? (But it sounds like about 40% overestimated?)

observa
November 21, 2016 4:33 pm

Speaking of oh darn, in Tim ‘the dams are never gunna fill’ Flannery country, the Murray Darling River folks have a wee problem with ignorant city slickers and their understanding of climate change-
http://www.msn.com/en-au/video/watch/though-people-in-south-australias-riverland-are-delighted-by-the-high-flows-coming-down-the-river-murray-tourism-operators-are-concerned-those-outside-the-region-may-be-driven-away/vi-AAkyBM5?ocid=spartandhp
Don’t be afraid of the bogeyman and it’s a lovely time to visit the Riverland folks.

Mike McMillan
November 21, 2016 7:58 pm

Image is at 62°51’30″N 42°28’55″W.

NW sage
November 21, 2016 8:30 pm

From Wikipedia: Gordon Hamilton, glaciologist – Died when his snow machine fell into a 30M crevasse. Age 50. Oct 25, 2016.

sophocles
November 22, 2016 12:59 am
Griff
November 22, 2016 1:57 am

do check out the current state of the arctic sea ice off Greenland – which has stalled then reduced in extent on the Atlantic side this week…comment image
a lot of the oldest thickest ice has been exported past Greenland and a lot of the ‘fast’ ice broke away from the Greenland coast this summer…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/02/nasa-reveals-shocking-rate-of-decline-in-arctic-sea-ice/
(is this website trying to avoid mentioning the recent state of arctic sea ice? It surely deserves discussion)

Brett Keane
November 22, 2016 1:59 am

The AMO cold bottom current is moving back to the Barents sea, possibly aided by negative AO winds (southerlies removing warmer Atlantic waters). This happens cyclicly over each c.63yrs but warmists have been claiming it is caused by AGW Greenland meltwaters, to save their bacon. This may have started in connection to that, wait for the claims. But the volumes have already been found to be totally inadequate….

Steve R
November 22, 2016 3:58 am

I had to stop reading when they used “olympic swimming pool” as a standard volumetric measure.

Owen
November 22, 2016 12:07 pm

Still puzzling over this whole article. This seems useful: “The Greenland Ice Sheet releases more than 1,000 cubic kilometers (240 cubic miles) of meltwater per year,…” If we adopt Olympic Swimming Pools (OSPs) as the unit of measure that will appeal to us little folk, that’s 2.5 x 10exp3 cubic meters divided into 10 exp6 cubic meters or 4000 OSP’s a year. Impressive until you look at Wiki which informs us that the Greenland Ice Sheet is about 2.7 Million cubic kilometers or 11 million OSP’s. So if the annual meltwater loss were not replenished from fresh snowfall on the ice sheet (which it is), we would be facing an ice sheet extinction event in about 2500 years.
Clearly we need to worry right now.
Notice also how units of measure are used to impress us in other contexts. We don’t hear about atmospheric CO2 concentrations in parts per thousand or parts per ten thousand or per hundred-thousand. It’s parts per million, because that way we are zoomed all the way in and can see each little squiggle, much to our alarm.