Antarctic Ice Discussion

[mikeworst]

Tsk tsk, desperation sets in and the arguments get silly. 

[Gray-Wolf]

So we now know it was the Mertz glacier that provided the ice field and that the area the ship encountered the blizzard is one where we have seen precipitation rates increasing over recent decades. Did we not also see the glacier tip , that used to project out into the Southern Ocean like a Sore thumb, completely break off 3 years back? ( and swing 90 degrees to rest up against the shore?). now there is a sizable piece of decaying glacial ice to seed the ocean in front of it???

 

EDIT: Yeah, it was Mertz back in 2010 when a huge berg from the 87 Ross calve knocked the end off and there was all the to do about losing the Polynia 'ice factory' there?

 

http://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-us/publications/australian-antarctic-magazine/2006-2010/issue-18-2010/glaciology/mertz-glacier-tongue-unhinged-by-giant-iceberg

 

It might be a fun exercise to see just how both those bergs have done over the years? The Ross Berg will have stood up to 200ft above the water line on calving ( the size of the ice cliff at the calving edge of Ross) but Mertz will have been much thinner? Still a lot of ice!!! I think most of the initial collapse comes from the remnant fissures in the glacial ice ( worked on by wave action) and obviously mechanical breakup when the berg then rolls. for slabs 4m in thickness to evolve must take quite a while and must cover huge areas?

 

It also appears that the type of winds that finally re-floated the Ross berg (B09B), after years of being grounded to the side of Mertz, were the type of event that shunted this ice flotilla out to it's current position?

 

Anyhow it's nice of the 'other side' to bring up this subject and allow closer scrutiny of the Antarctic processes? We get swamped with Arctic info and it must be easy to fall into the trap of thinking both areas ( north and south) are the same. This incident not only highlights just how different both places are ( most sensible media outlets are now doing articles highlighting the differences) but also just how much of the ice that survives summer melt is not 'sea ice' as we know it up north? The last time we saw such ice was through the 40' and 50's in the arctic when T3 , a huge ice island from the initial collapse of Ward Hunt, spent decades trawling around the Arctic basin. sadly we cannot look forward to anything similar again as all that ice has now perished and Ward Hunt is a collection of small, eroding, shelfletts along the north shore of Ellesmere Island. 

 

When you consider the scale of B09B, and the length of time it has been present in the Antarctic waters ( measured as 'sea ice') you can see how things differ? Over time the acelleration of glacier/shelf collapse will place more and more 'bergy ice' into the mix of antarctic sea ice and I have to wonder just how much of this is included in the upsurge in Antarctic sea ice over the summer months? The collapse of Larsen B flooded Weddell with bergs and that area does not see much in the way of transport ( protected from the circumpolars by the peninsula) so a fair portion of the Weddell sea must be comprised of this remnant shelf ( and not 'sea ice' that grows each winter).

 

Next time you hear someone tell you that antarctic sea ice is growing ask them how much of that 'growth' is collapsed Shelf/glacier remnants......they'll not like it!

Edited January 2, 2014 by Gray-Wolf

[knocker]

Just caught the second half of an interview on PM regarding this. Don't know who the woman was but from her answers I would say she was a climate scientist. She said the fragmentation of the Mertz was totally unexpected. Prior to this she emphasized the importance of scientific expeditions such as these in the context of GW.

[Gray-Wolf]

Did you know that the mertz berg from 2010 was;

 

"  400 metres (1,300 ft) high, has a surface area of 2,545 square kilometres (983 sq mi) and weights in at about 860 billion tonnes."

of course when you smash it into 4m thick slabs it covers a tad more than that.........

 

Sometimes I think folk don't get the scale of Antarctica and some of the processes there?

 

Like.....would anyone care to guess what the loss of Ross would do to global sea levels and how fast it's collapse would be ( hint: Larsen )

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* 2006 NZ researchers found evidence that Ross goes it goes very quickly, in fact just like Larsen B did in 2002( the ocean bed sediments show repeated rapid transitions from iced to open water). In 2007 the NSIDC reported the Ross was now only a little cooler than Larson when it went all 'domino ' on us.... Sea levels would rise from 5 to 17m should Ross fail and that over a matter of a decade or so......You'll not find that in the current IPCC report though! Now that, my friends, is truly Catastrophic change!!!

Edited January 2, 2014 by Gray-Wolf

[knocker]

Five basic Antarctic facts for climate change sceptics

 

Commentators say plight of MV Akademik Shokalskiy shows global warming is exaggerated – the truth is not that simple

 

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jan/02/antarctic-ship-stranding-delights-climate-change-sceptics?CMP=twt_gu

Edited January 2, 2014 by knocker

[knocker]

By coincidence.

 

Pine Island Glacier sensitive to climatic variability

 

A new study published in Science this month suggests the thinning of Pine Island Glacier in West Antarctica is much more susceptible to climatic and ocean variability than at first thought. Observations by a team of scientists at British Antarctic Survey, and other institutions, show large fluctuations in the ocean heat in Pine Island Bay. The team discovered that oceanic melting of the ice shelf into which the glacier flows decreased by 50 per cent between 2010 and 2012, and this may have been due to a La Ninã weather event.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-01-island-glacier-sensitive-climatic-variability.html#jCp

 

http://phys.org/news/2014-01-island-glacier-sensitive-climatic-variability.html

[BornFromTheVoid]

For those that believe the extra sea ice in Antarctica is related to cooler temperatures, the UAH global temperature report for December and 2013 http://nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2013/december/dec2013GTR.pdf

 

The warmest areas during the year were over the North Pacific and the Antarctic, where temperatures for the year averaged more than 1.4 C (more than 2.5 degrees Fahenheit) warmer than normal.

[Gray-Wolf]

Hi BFTV! I suppose this might explain why we're seeing the remnant berg from Mertz, from the snout break in 2010, causing such problems for the ships in it's area of influence? if we're seeing elevated temps across the region then it's calving will be more vigorous?

 

I suppose with Australia posting a record year it's no biggie to see other areas of the south also seeing elevated temps? We're a few months away yet but I wonder if this translates into a global temp blip ( esp. if we see Nino conditions forming in the second hald of 2014?).

[knocker]

 

For those that believe the extra sea ice in Antarctica is related to cooler temperatures, the UAH global temperature report for December and 2013 http://nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2013/december/dec2013GTR.pdf

 

The warmest areas during the year were over the North Pacific and the Antarctic, where temperatures for the year averaged more than 1.4 C (more than 2.5 degrees Fahenheit) warmer than normal.

 

 

And regarding sea temperatures.

 

Press Release - Warming Antarctic seas likely to impact on krill habitats

 

Using statistical models, a team of researchers from the British Antarctic Survey and Plymouth Marine Laboratory assessed the likely impact of projected temperature increases on the Weddell Sea, Scotia Sea and Southern Drake Passage, which is known for its abundance of krill. This region has experienced sea surface warming of as much as 1°C over fifty years. Projections suggest this could rise by another 1°C by the end of the 21st century.

 

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_releases/press_release.php?id=2283

 

Also

 

http://phys.org/news/2011-02-antarctic-sea-temperatures-cooled-holocene.html

[stewfox]

2013 a stunning year for sea ice growth

 

In 2013, the highest extent ever in each month occurred in July, August, September, October and November.

 

http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2014/01/01/antarctic-sea-ice-extent-stats-for-2013/

 

"""The bunch of clowns on the MV Akademik Shokalskiy had to have known the ice was highest it has ever been. And the BBC propaganda arm still claims the voyage was to study “melting iceâ€."""

 

http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2014/01/02/antarctic-clown-convention-had-to-know-the-ice-was-thick-way-back-in-october/

Edited January 5, 2014 by stewfox

[BornFromTheVoid]

2013 a stunning year for sea ice growth

 

In 2013, the highest extent ever in each month occurred in July, August, September, October and November.

 

http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2014/01/01/antarctic-sea-ice-extent-stats-for-2013/

 

"""The bunch of clowns on the MV Akademik Shokalskiy had to have known the ice was highest it has ever been. And the BBC propaganda arm still claims the voyage was to study “melting iceâ€."""

 

http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2014/01/02/antarctic-clown-convention-had-to-know-the-ice-was-thick-way-back-in-october/

 

Highest it has ever been? Clowns? Propaganda arm?

You're not usually the one to accept that kind of tabloid exaggeration and sensationalism, Stew? 

[UV-RAY]

Highest it has ever been? Clowns? Propaganda arm?

You're not usually the one to accept that kind of tabloid exaggeration and sensationalism, Stew? 

But it's a valid point though as it's the most farcical event in a long time and one which warms the cockles of my heart. I wonder what  scientific conclusions can be drawn from this jolly boy's outing I wonder?

[Gray-Wolf]

Well seeing as they deployed their 'Argo' buoys prior to becoming entombed in collapsing mega-berg then we'll have years of data that will help answer the questions of just how badly B09B is impacting the formation of Antarctic bottom waters and affecting the local ecosystem (including the penguins!)

[UV-RAY]

Well seeing as they deployed their 'Argo' buoys prior to becoming entombed in collapsing mega-berg then we'll have years of data that will help answer the questions of just how badly B09B is impacting the formation of Antarctic bottom waters and affecting the local ecosystem (including the penguins!)

A collapsing mega berg. The best part of this is how a journalist from one of the world greatest advocates of terrorism the guardian are entombed in ice, fantastic.  The only scientific conclusions that the world has come too, is the freeloading happy clappy's have shown just how far the ice shelf has extended at a time when the "alleged" scientific consensus were telling us it's shrinking. 

[Devonian]

A collapsing mega berg. The best part of this is how a journalist from one of the world greatest advocates of terrorism the guardian are entombed in ice, fantastic.  The only scientific conclusions that the world has come too, is the freeloading happy clappy's have shown just how far the ice shelf has extended at a time when the "alleged" scientific consensus were telling us it's shrinking. 

 

This thread isn't about The Guardian. Period.

[Gray-Wolf]

The glacier tongue has obviously undergone a rather significant reduction actually S.I. ?

 

If you read up on the collision in 2010 you'll find out just how much it has 'shrunk'. As for 'ice shelf'? The only shelf I can think of as being 'involved' is Ross ( quite a way around from Mertz but the parent of B09B).

 

If you look up the history of the particular Berg you might also increase you're knowledge of the situation leading up to the 2010 collision. Of course you'll be fully aware of the concerns of the impacts that the collision, and subsequent grounding of the mega Bergs had and why it is important to study the area ( part of the remit of the expedition) and the possible global impacts that the event may have lead to?

 

Out of interest, seeing as you appear to have concerns about the validity of the mission, how many areas of research were involved in the voyage and which leg of the voyage were they on?.

Edited January 5, 2014 by Gray-Wolf

[UV-RAY]

The glacier tongue has obviously undergone a rather significant reduction actually S.I. ?

 

If you read up on the collision in 2010 you'll find out just how much it has 'shrunk'. As for 'ice shelf'? The only shelf I can think of as being 'involved' is Ross ( quite a way around from Mertz but the parent of B09B).

 

If you look up the history of the particular Berg you might also increase you're knowledge of the situation leading up to the 2010 collision. Of course you'll be fully aware of the concerns of the impacts that the collision, and subsequent grounding of the mega Bergs had and why it is important to study the area ( part of the remit of the expedition) and the possible global impacts that the event may have lead to?

 

Out of interest, seeing as you appear to have concerns about the validity of the mission, how many areas of research were involved in the voyage and which leg of the voyage were they on?.

Lol. it's shrunk so  much that they had to go looking for ice so they could get rescued. Meanwhile back on planet reality the world watches with amusement, pull the other one GW it's been a disastrous PR campaign from start to finish and one which is highly amusing to everyone bar the activists. 

[4wd]

Not to be missed, so they were idiots.http://www.skynews.com.au/topstories/article.aspx?id=939155

[UV-RAY]

Not to be missed, so they were idiots.http://www.skynews.com.au/topstories/article.aspx?id=939155

Lol, the jolly buoys outing has been an embarrassment for anyone who cares about science and it's integrity. These idiots should have been left to their own devices and hopefully those concerned will be billed for this gross incompetence.

[stewfox]

Highest it has ever been? Clowns? Propaganda arm?

You're not usually the one to accept that kind of tabloid exaggeration and sensationalism, Stew? 

 

I tend to agree I don't like terms such as highest on record, when we are talking about data sets of just 30yrs but everyone is doing it.

[keithlucky]

 

For those that believe the extra sea ice in Antarctica is related to cooler temperatures, the UAH global temperature report for December and 2013 http://nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2013/december/dec2013GTR.pdf

 

The warmest areas during the year were over the North Pacific and the Antarctic, where temperatures for the year averaged more than 1.4 C (more than 2.5 degrees Fahenheit) warmer than normal.

 

Ice levels in the Arctic and Antarctic have always been strongly connected.  If one is at a minimum, the other is at a maximum both within a single year and over long periods of time, from long before the concept of Global Warming, so whatever the mechanism which connects them, Global Warming has nothing to do with it.

[knocker]

 it's been a disastrous PR campaign from start to finish and one which is highly amusing to everyone bar the activists. 

 

We are going south to:

• gain new insights into the circulation of the Southern Ocean and its impact on the global carbon cycle
• explore changes in ocean circulation caused by the growth of extensive fast ice and its impact on life in Commonwealth Bay
• use the subantarctic islands as thermometers of climatic change by using trees, peats and lakes to explore the past
• investigate the impact of changing climate on the ecology of the subantarctic islands
• discover the environmental influence on seabird populations across the Southern Ocean and in Commonwealth Bay
• understand changes in seal populations and their feeding patterns in the Southern Ocean and Commonwealth Bay
• produce the first underwater surveys of life in the subantarctic islands and Commonwealth Bay
• determine the extent to which human activity and pollution has directly impacted on this remote region of Antarctica
• provide baseline data to improve the next generation of atmospheric, oceanic and ice sheet models to improve predictions for the future

http://www.spiritofmawson.com/the-science-case/

Edited January 5, 2014 by knocker

[knocker]

Ice levels in the Arctic and Antarctic have always been strongly connected.  If one is at a minimum, the other is at a maximum both within a single year and over long periods of time, from long before the concept of Global Warming, so whatever the mechanism which connects them, Global Warming has nothing to do with it.

 

Just a guess but could it be due to the fact one is in the depths of winter and the other the height of summer. Perhaps the variation of the extent, volume, and the reasons behind this is the issue. I think your over long periods of time is suspect anyway as in the past. although variations of  temperature and ice volume were roughly in phase- to within a few millennia- variabilty did occur due to orbital forcing. It's quite complicated.

Edited January 5, 2014 by knocker

[Gray-Wolf]

Correct Knocks.

 

The subtleties of axial tilt play into this (every little helps!) so in the way the northern hemisphere had been in cooling for the thousand years up to our rude interruption of that trend so the progression of our orbital forcings will lead to the south losing Solar forcing as the north gains in strength. This, of course, is more of an impact when GHG forcings are such as to allow the extension of snow cover and so the increase in albedo (exacerbating the impacts) year on year.

 

In our changing world we have already over ridden the current tendency toward northern cooling with our grand atmospheric experiment (and probably saved humanity from a slow descent into another glacial epoch) so it may no longer be safe to think of some kind of 'counterbalance' existing between north and south as we can see that the minor axial forcings are no match for the GHG forcings now at play.

 

In some ways I believe that once we have averted the great disaster we face Humanity will continue to modify our global GHG levels so as to avert future Glacial periods (we'd be fools not too!) so some greater good may well arise for Humanity from our current crisis?

[UV-RAY]

I wonder when the alleged scientist will publish the data for the alleged decrease in salinity which they allege was the reason for the increase in ice to start with, due to the amount of alleged meltwater entering the ocean. Also will the cruise owners be held accountable under Maritime law, as surely they should foot the bill for such a costly rescue.