Greenland ice losses rising faster than expected

University of Leeds

The midnight sun casts a golden glow on an iceberg and its reflection in Disko Bay, Greenland. Much of Greenland's annual mass loss occurs through calving of icebergs such as this. Credit Ian Joughin, University of Washington
The midnight sun casts a golden glow on an iceberg and its reflection in Disko Bay, Greenland. Much of Greenland’s annual mass loss occurs through calving of icebergs such as this. Credit Ian Joughin, University of Washington

Greenland is losing ice seven times faster than in the 1990s and is tracking the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s high-end climate warming scenario, which would see 40 million more people exposed to coastal flooding by 2100.

A team of 96 polar scientists from 50 international organisations have produced the most complete picture of Greenland ice loss to date. The Ice Sheet Mass Balance Inter-comparison Exercise (IMBIE) Team combined 26 separate surveys to compute changes in the mass of Greenland’s ice sheet between 1992 and 2018. Altogether, data from 11 different satellite missions were used, including measurements of the ice sheet’s changing volume, flow and gravity.

The findings, published today in Nature today, show that Greenland has lost 3.8 trillion tonnes of ice since 1992 – enough to push global sea levels up by 10.6 millimetres. The rate of ice loss has risen from 33 billion tonnes per year in the 1990s to 254 billion tonnes per year in the last decade – a seven-fold increase within three decades.

The assessment, led by Professor Andrew Shepherd at the University of Leeds and Dr Erik Ivins at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, was supported by the European Space Agency (ESA) and the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

In 2013, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicted that global sea levels will rise by 60 centimetres by 2100, putting 360 million people at risk of annual coastal flooding. But this new study shows that Greenland’s ice losses are rising faster than expected and are instead tracking the IPCC’s high-end climate warming scenario, which predicts 7 centimetres more.

Professor Shepherd said: “As a rule of thumb, for every centimetre rise in global sea level another six million people are exposed to coastal flooding around the planet.”

“On current trends, Greenland ice melting will cause 100 million people to be flooded each year by the end of the century, so 400 million in total due to all sea level rise.”

“These are not unlikely events or small impacts; they are happening and will be devastating for coastal communities.”

The team also used regional climate models to show that half of the ice losses were due to surface melting as air temperatures have risen. The other half has been due to increased glacier flow, triggered by rising ocean temperatures.

Ice losses peaked at 335 billion tonnes per year in 2011 – ten times the rate of the 1990s – during a period of intense surface melting. Although the rate of ice loss dropped to an average 238 billion tonnes per year since then, this remains seven times higher and does not include all of 2019, which could set a new high due to widespread summer melting.

Dr Ivins said: “Satellite observations of polar ice are essential for monitoring and predicting how climate change could affect ice losses and sea level rise”.

“While computer simulation allows us to make projections from climate change scenarios, the satellite measurements provide prima facie, rather irrefutable, evidence.”

“Our project is a great example of the importance of international collaboration to tackle problems that are global in scale.”

Guðfinna Aðalgeirsdóttir, Professor of Glaciology at the University of Iceland and lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s sixth assessment report, who was not involved in the study, said:

“The IMBIE Team’s reconciled estimate of Greenland ice loss is timely for the IPCC. Their satellite observations show that both melting and ice discharge from Greenland have increased since observations started.”

“The ice caps in Iceland had similar reduction in ice loss in the last two years of their record, but this last summer was very warm here and resulted in higher loss. I would expect a similar increase in Greenland mass loss for 2019.”

“It is very important to keep monitoring the big ice sheets to know how much they raise sea level every year.”

###

From EurekAlert!

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

144 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ResourceGuy
December 12, 2019 7:49 am

How much less ice loss do you get from virtue signalling and jet setting to spread the alarm? I’m sure it’s calibrated.

Gator
December 12, 2019 9:00 am

I had forgotten that Greenland, and its ice sheet, formed in the nineties.

December 12, 2019 9:21 am

You couldn’t miss the recent headlines about the 2019 Greenland ice melt but just in case here is a selection.

The Guardian
Greenland’s ice sheet melting seven times faster than in 1990s
BBC
Climate change: Greenland’s ice faces melting ‘death
National Geographic
Greenland’s melting ice may affect everyone’s future.
NASA
Greenland’s Rapid Melt Will Mean More Flooding
Forbes
Greenland’s Massive Ice Melt Wasn’t Supposed To Happen Until 2070
Washington Post
Greenland’s glaciers are losing ice faster and faster, according …
Daily Telegraph
Climate change melts 12.5bn tons of ice in Greenland

BUT LOOK AT THIS.

http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/

The summer months were only moderately warmer than average relative to 1981 to 2010, roughly 1 to 2 degrees Celsius (2 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit) higher along the western coast. This confirms that the main driver of surface melt in 2019 was above average cloud-free days, not warm air temperatures as in the 2012 summer melt. This also explains the exceptional dry and sunny conditions at the south.

Joe G
December 12, 2019 9:46 am

The Greenland ice sheet is dirty. That means it will melt even when the ambient temperatures are below freezing, as long as the sun’s rays hit it. And it is very telling that they don’t mention that fact.

astonerii
December 12, 2019 10:04 am

Professor Shepherd said: “As a rule of thumb, for every centimetre rise in global sea level another six million people are exposed to coastal flooding around the planet.”
600million per meter. 7.7 billion people…
13 meters of Ocean rise will completely wipe out humanity! Waterworld the movie is a prediction!
How many miles is 13 meters? Has to be enough to drown people in the Mile High City of Denver Colorado, no?

astonerii
December 12, 2019 10:05 am

“It is very important to keep monitoring the big ice sheets to know how much they raise sea level every year.”
Or, alternatively, for a lot less money, you could measure the sea level…

December 12, 2019 10:56 am

Yawn…… Zzzzzzz……

Greenland was a lot smaller during the Eemian interglacial time, yet Polar Bears, Humans and the planet itself still orbiting the sun……………..

Reply to  Sunsettommy
December 13, 2019 6:55 am

Watching water to boil is more exciting.

Steve Z
December 12, 2019 11:40 am

Assuming that the loss rate of 254 gigatons = 2.54(10^14) kg per year is accurate, at 900 kg/m3, the lost ice would have a volume of 2.82(10^11) m3. The estimated area of the Greenland ice sheet is 1.756(10^6) km2 = 1.756(10^12) m2. In order to lose 254 gigatons of ice, the average thickness would decrease by 2.82(10^11) / 1.756(10^12) = 0.16 meter.

Do these scientists really think that measurements performed from a satellite orbiting 200 km or more above the earth can measure such a tiny change in elevation of the ice (less than one millionth of the orbital altitude of the satellite) to any precision? Is the actual altitude of the satellite known to that precision, or is its orbit slightly eccentric (non-circular) and could there be some precession of the apogee and perigee?

There is some anecdotal evidence that the Greenland ice sheet is gaining ice. At the end of World War II in 1945, a squadron of planes was flying from Europe back to the United States, and planned to refuel in Iceland, but lost their way in a storm and made an emergency landing in southern Greenland. The pilots were rescued by another squadron in better weather, but the damaged planes were left behind.

During the 1990’s, the elderly pilots flew back to Greenland to search for their ditched planes, but could not find them visually. Using remote sensing techniques, it was discovered that the planes were buried by ice 100 meters thick. So, at least in that part of Greenland, the ice was getting thicker at about 2 meters per year.

Steven Lonien
Reply to  Steve Z
December 12, 2019 12:50 pm

In search of splinter in science eyes solutions are blinded by old log lies .

Anonymoose
December 12, 2019 1:26 pm

Perhaps that the ice is vanishing faster than expected is not due to events being worse than expected, but due to expectations being incorrect. If they don’t properly know how to properly calculate what to expect, then they can’t expect it to continue to be worse nor better than whatever is happening now. Perhaps they don’t truly know.

Bruce of Newcastle
December 12, 2019 1:36 pm

One graph is all it takes to falsify this garbage.

AMO

Well what d’ya know, since the late 1990’s the water near Greenland is warm! Oh and how weird that it got so cool so fast from 1960. Almost like it might be a cycle or something. Fancy that.

Original Mike M
Reply to  Bruce of Newcastle
December 12, 2019 9:35 pm

But I suspect there remains something else going on that has far more influence than the AMO but hasn’t yet been discovered. Arctic temperature in the summer has remained essentially flat while winter temperature has been steadily increasing since the mid 90’s. http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n_anomaly.uk.php

Bruce of Newcastle
Reply to  Original Mike M
December 13, 2019 12:07 am

Seeing it happens around the 2000 solar minimum I’d hypothesize that the drop in solar activity since the grand maximum may be the driver. The 2010 minimum was especially low.

In lower solar activity conditions you get a slowing of the Rossby waves, which get more sinuous. If the jet streams are sinuous you get more mixing between temperate and arctic zones. In the 2010 winter the UK was famously covered in snow entirely, resulting in some fine sat pics. That event was a jet stream blocking event.

In winter in the north you don’t have much buffering from latent heat of melting, so swings will be larger.

richard
December 12, 2019 1:52 pm

-51C in Greenland today. -62 C a few days back.

http://www.summitcamp.org/status/webcam/

Ghandi
December 12, 2019 1:57 pm

Gee, could it be we’re in an interglacial period when glaciers subside before the future re-glaciation that will cyclically return? No, let’s not upset a political agenda with science! Those 11,000 Mickey Mouse climate experts know that we’re all doomed, right?

Original Mike M
December 12, 2019 9:25 pm

https://www.the-cryosphere.net/12/39/2018/tc-12-39-2018-supplement.pdf Temperature reconstruction for Greenland shows it was as warm there or little warmer than now from ~1888 to ~1940 peaking around 1930. Is there any trend data from tide gauges that correlates to temperature? I can’t find any …

If the claim is that warmth from more CO2 will melt Greenland then shouldn’t it first be determined that warmth actually is the most significant driving factor for ice loss?

December 12, 2019 10:08 pm

The meltwater did not reach Australia – “The two longest tide gauge records at Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour and at Fremantle in Western Australia indicate a sea level trend of 0.73 mm/yr at Fort Denison and a trend of 1.78 mm/yr at Fremantle ”
Source: https://www.ausmarinescience.com/marine-science-basics/sea-level-rise-1/

hunterson7
December 13, 2019 3:02 am

Since Greenland had a lot less 8ce when there was agriculture, and the rest of the world was ok, this study is yet another fear mongering bit of fluff designed to scare people and shut down thoughtful consideration of the facts.
Since Greenland, based on more recent concerns about melting has always recovered, there is no reason to think of this study as anything but another bit of deceptive fear mongering.
Since the amount of 8ce melting is so trivial compared to the mass of Greenland and the length 9f time covered by this dubioys study is so short, there 8s every indication the study is just another reason for thinking people to conclude that what poses as climate science is really a marketing campaign by extremists who reject science and history.

December 13, 2019 8:20 am

See
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2019/12/13/greenland-ice-melt-accelerating-says-jonathan-amos-conveniently-forgetting-what-he-wrote-in-2003/#more-42628

Greenland Ice Melt Accelerating, Says Jonathan Amos (Conveniently Forgetting What He Wrote In 2003!)
Greenland cools as world warms
By Jonathan Amos
BBC News Online science staff
Greenland is significantly cooler now than it was 40 years ago.
So, temperatures fell by 1.29C between 1958 and 2001, and have recovered by 0.75C in the past decade. Does not sound like apocalypse to me! Neither will this come as any surprise to regular readers of this blog, who are fully aware that temperatures in Greenland are no higher now than in the 1930s and 40s.

Halftiderock
December 15, 2019 9:34 pm

Stepping back I am looking at the tide gauge information released by NOAA. The prediction I am hearing is 10feet of rise in sea level by 2100. Ok we are at 1.9mm/yr where is the acceleration? NOAA doesn’t buy it either.

Objective reading of the simple graphs show that this “unexpected”melting hasn’t accelerated the predicted and failed rapid sea level rise predicated upon the unexpectedly expected rapid ineffective melting. Yes it is simple…