The World's Glaciers

[knocker]

Calbuco Volcano Glaciers, Chile

 

Calbuco Volcano in Chile erupted this week.  It has been noted that significant pyroclastic flows/lahars have been observed travelling down the Rio Blanco fed in part by glacier melt.  Here we examine the glaciers on Calbuco.  We start with a 2012 Google Earth image that provides the clearest view.  There are three primary glaciers, the main summit ice cap , a glacier below the western rim, that is not significantly connected to the main ice cap in 2012 and a glacier descending the southwest flank.  There are numerous wind sculpted features observed from north-northeast to south-south west that also align with the flank glacier, blue arrows.

 

http://blogs.agu.org/fromaglaciersperspective/2015/04/25/calbuco-volcano-glaciers-chile/

[knocker]

Tibet glaciers' fast retreat causing huge, dangerous glacial lakes

 

China's glaciers, mostly in Tibet, have retreated by about 7,600km sq, nearly 18%, in the last 65 years.

 

Even the thick ice around the base camp of Everest has disappeared exposing the stones, says Zhang Mingxing, director of Tibet's mountaineering administration center.

 

Liu Shiyin, who led a survey of China's glaciers, told Xinhua that retreating glaciers will release meltwater and create lakes, leading to disaster.

Glacial lakes in Tibet were breached 15 times between the 1930s and 1990s, causing floods and mudslides.

 

Kang Shichang of the institute of Tibetan Plateau research, part of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) calculates that glaciers around the mountain have shrunk by 10% since 1974, feeding a glacial lake downstream which is now 13 times bigger.

 

China has more than 46,000 glaciers, mainly on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau

 

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/tibet-glaciers-fast-retreat-causing-huge-dangerous-glacial-lakes-1498306

Edited April 26, 2015 by knocker

[knocker]

Snow Deficit on Grinnell Ice Cap, Baffin Island, Canada

 

The Grinnell Ice Cap Is located on the Terra Incognita Peninsula on Baffin Island. The name suggests the reality that this is a not often visited or studied region. Two recent studies have changed our level of knowledge. Way (2015) notes that the ice cap has lost 18% of its area from 1974 to 2013 and that the rate of loss has greatly accelarated and is due to summer warming, declining from 134 km2 in 1973-1975 imagery to 110 square kilometers in 2010-2013 images. Papasodoro et al (2015) report the area in 2014 at 107 km2 with a maximum of elevation of close to 800 m. The location on a peninsula on the southern part of the island leads to higher precipitation and cool summer temperatures allowing fairly low elevation ice caps to have formed and persisted. Way (2015) in the figure below indicates the cool summer temperatures have warmed more than 1 C after 1990. Recent satellite imagery of snowcover and ICESat elevation mapping suggest little snow is being retained on the Grinnell Ice Cap since 2004. Papasodoro et al (2015) identify a longer mass loss rate of -0.37 meters per year from 1952-2014, not exceptionally different from many alpine glaciers. They further observed that from 2004-2014 this rate has accelerated to over -1 meter per year, including a thinning rate above 1.5 meters along the crest of ice cap. This can only be generated by net melting not ice dynamics. Further such rapid losses will prevent retaining even superimposed ice. Here we examine Landsat imagery from 1994 to 2014 to illustrate glacier response.

[John Badrick]

http://www.livescience.com/48256-asia-karakoram-glaciers-stability.html

Some are expanding!

[knocker]

Island Separates from Greenland Ice Sheet in 2014, Steenstrup Glacier

 

The retreat of outlet glaciers along the Greenland coast continues to change the maps of the region, Steenstrup Glacier located at 75.2 N in Northwest Greenland is an example of this. The glacier terminates on a series of headlands and islands, the glacier immediately to the south is Kjer Glacier. The boundary between Steenstrup Glacier and Kjer Glacier is Red Head, Steenstrup Glacier’s northern margin is near Cape Seddon. Here we examine changes in the terminus position of Steenstrup and Kjer Glacier from 1999 to 2014. The retreat of the glacier during this interval has led to generation of new islands. Steenstrup Glacier has retreated 10 km over the past 60 years (Van As, 2010). A recent example of the retreat is the separation from the glacier of an island in 2014. In 2012 there was a narrow glacier connection, red arrow, with an island Tugtuligssup Sarqardlerssuua that is clearly not stable, based on narrowness and extensive crevassing, the connection remained in 2013 and was in 2014.

[knocker]

Shrinking Glaciers

[knocker]

Disaggregation of Austria’s Third Largest Glacier, Obersulzbach Kees

 

The Obersulzbach Glacier, is situated in the uppermost part of the Obersulzbach Valley, which feeds the Salzach River system in Austria. The glacier drains the northeastern flank of Großvenediger. The glacier was the third largest glacier in Austria in the 1980′s, but in the last several decades separated into five distinct sections. Now that it is in five parts, should it be listed as such?

[knocker]

Retreat of Grewingk Glacier, Alaska 1986-2014

 

Grewingk Glacier drains west toward the Kachemak Bay, Alaska terminating in a proglacial lake in Kachemak Bay State Park.  The glacier drains an icefield on the Kenai Peninsula, glaciers draining west are in the Kenai Fjords National Park. The glaciers that drain east toward are in the Kenai Fjords National Park, which has a monitoring program.  Giffen et al (2008) observed the retreat of glaciers in the region. From 1950-2005 all 27 glaciers in the Kenai Icefield region examined  are retreating. Giffen et al (2008)observed that Grewingk Glacier retreated 2.5 km from 1950-2005.  Here we examine Landsat imagery from 1986-2014 to illustrate the retreat of the glacier.  The icefront continues to calve into the expanding pro-glacial lake.

[knocker]

Skykomish River, Washington Reduced Minimum River Flow and Glacier Retreat

 

The focus this spring has been on the developing drought in Washington as a result of record low snowpack, the winter was a record warmth though not dry. The focus of this article is on another component of many alpine watersheds, glacier runoff, both the ameliorating role and their reduced ability as they shrink to augment flow during low flow periods. Glaciers act as natural reservoirs storing water in a frozen state instead of behind a dam. Glaciers modify streamflow releasing the most runoff during the warmest, driest periods of summer, when all other sources of water are at a minimum. Annual glacier runoff is highest in warm, dry summers and lowest during wet, cool summers. This is the first of two posts looking at the response of specific alpine watersheds to glacier change and glacier runoff, the second will look at the Nooksack River.

Edited May 20, 2015 by knocker

[John Badrick]

2) Little Ice Age

The science is absolutely clear that there was a massive, worldwide expansion in glaciers during the Little Ice Age.

In Alaska, there is evidence of three separate glacial advances, in the 12th/13thC, 17th/18thC, and finally in the late 19thC. Study of the Prince William Sound, Alaska, show that Ice margins were generally close to the late LIA maximum position at the time of the first visits of scientific parties around the turn of the century [around 1900].

There is also plenty of evidence of a similar massive expansion of glaciers from Europe, Iceland, South America and New Zealand during the Little Ice Age. Studies of glaciers in Greenland and Iceland show that, in the 19thC, they reached their maximum extent since the ice age.

3) Medieval Warming

How do today’s glaciers compare to how they looked before the Little Ice Age set in?

There is physical evidence from Alaska that glaciers were smaller back in the Middle Ages than they are now.

As glaciers have been receding in recent years, remains of forest, carbon dated back to the Middle Ages, are being uncovered. These have been found at the Exit, Mendenhall and Ultramarine glaciers. At the Mendenhall, some tree remains have been dated back to 2000 years ago (the Roman Warming Period).

We find similar discoveries in Patagonian glaciers.

In all these cases, the glaciers must have terminated well uphill of the trees, which could not possibly have grown at the very edge of the ice, where they are situated now. It also seems extremely unlikely that there are not more trees to be found further up stream.

In short, there is nothing to suggest that recent retreat of glaciers is anything other than a natural phenomenon, or that their current size is unprecedented or unusual.

[BornFromTheVoid]

2) Little Ice Age

The science is absolutely clear that there was a massive, worldwide expansion in glaciers during the Little Ice Age.

In Alaska, there is evidence of three separate glacial advances, in the 12th/13thC, 17th/18thC, and finally in the late 19thC. Study of the Prince William Sound, Alaska, show that Ice margins were generally close to the late LIA maximum position at the time of the first visits of scientific parties around the turn of the century [around 1900].

There is also plenty of evidence of a similar massive expansion of glaciers from Europe, Iceland, South America and New Zealand during the Little Ice Age. Studies of glaciers in Greenland and Iceland show that, in the 19thC, they reached their maximum extent since the ice age.

3) Medieval Warming

How do today’s glaciers compare to how they looked before the Little Ice Age set in?

There is physical evidence from Alaska that glaciers were smaller back in the Middle Ages than they are now.

As glaciers have been receding in recent years, remains of forest, carbon dated back to the Middle Ages, are being uncovered. These have been found at the Exit, Mendenhall and Ultramarine glaciers. At the Mendenhall, some tree remains have been dated back to 2000 years ago (the Roman Warming Period).

We find similar discoveries in Patagonian glaciers.

In all these cases, the glaciers must have terminated well uphill of the trees, which could not possibly have grown at the very edge of the ice, where they are situated now. It also seems extremely unlikely that there are not more trees to be found further up stream.

In short, there is nothing to suggest that recent retreat of glaciers is anything other than a natural phenomenon, or that their current size is unprecedented or unusual.

 

Where's "1)"?

 

Is this your opinion or copied and pasted from somewhere else?

 

Any links or sources to back this up?

[knocker]

2) Little Ice Age

The science is absolutely clear that there was a massive, worldwide expansion in glaciers during the Little Ice Age.

In Alaska, there is evidence of three separate glacial advances, in the 12th/13thC, 17th/18thC, and finally in the late 19thC. Study of the Prince William Sound, Alaska, show that Ice margins were generally close to the late LIA maximum position at the time of the first visits of scientific parties around the turn of the century [around 1900].

There is also plenty of evidence of a similar massive expansion of glaciers from Europe, Iceland, South America and New Zealand during the Little Ice Age. Studies of glaciers in Greenland and Iceland show that, in the 19thC, they reached their maximum extent since the ice age.

3) Medieval Warming

How do today’s glaciers compare to how they looked before the Little Ice Age set in?

There is physical evidence from Alaska that glaciers were smaller back in the Middle Ages than they are now.

As glaciers have been receding in recent years, remains of forest, carbon dated back to the Middle Ages, are being uncovered. These have been found at the Exit, Mendenhall and Ultramarine glaciers. At the Mendenhall, some tree remains have been dated back to 2000 years ago (the Roman Warming Period).

We find similar discoveries in Patagonian glaciers.

In all these cases, the glaciers must have terminated well uphill of the trees, which could not possibly have grown at the very edge of the ice, where they are situated now. It also seems extremely unlikely that there are not more trees to be found further up stream.

In short, there is nothing to suggest that recent retreat of glaciers is anything other than a natural phenomenon, or that their current size is unprecedented or unusual.

 

A couple of questions.

 

By the late the mid to late 19th century, glaciers were at their greatest elongation of the LIA. What was the natural phenomenon that caused the elongation and what is the relevance to the current situation? The last point applies to any  period you wish to choose.

 

You state that there is nothing to suggest that recent retreat of glaciers is anything other than a natural phenomenon. That isn't good enough. The consensus of virtually all of the world's glaciologists is that AGW is playing a significant part in the mass balance loss of the worlds glaciers. And they have the benefit of ongoing detailed studies of the worlds glaciers which was impossible prior to the satellite era.

 

So to justify your statement explain why you refute all of this and also explain the mechanism of the natural phenomenon which is causing the mass balance loss. Or at least point me in the direction of the explanation.

Edited May 21, 2015 by knocker

[John Badrick]

Where's "1)"?

 

Is this your opinion or copied and pasted from somewhere else?

 

Any links or sources to back this up?

Sorry here's 1)

[John Badrick]

A couple of questions.

 

By the late the mid to late 19th century, glaciers were at their greatest elongation of the LIA. What was the natural phenomenon that caused the elongation and what is the relevance to the current situation? The last point applies to any  period you wish to choose.

 

You state that there is nothing to suggest that recent retreat of glaciers is anything other than a natural phenomenon. That isn't good enough. The consensus of virtually all of the world's glaciologists is that AGW is playing a significant part in the mass balance loss of the worlds glaciers. And they have the benefit of ongoing detailed studies of the worlds glaciers which was impossible prior to the satellite era.

 

So to justify your statement explain why you refute all of this and also explain the mechanism of the natural phenomenon which is causing the mass balance loss. Or at least point me in the direction of the explanation.

Can we first answer the question: what was the mechanism of the natural phenomenon that has caused the expansion and retreat of glaciers on our planet for the last 100 million years? Or to word it differently, What caused the natural phenomenon of glaciers to retreat before humans and our evil C02? What caused the glaciers to retreat so much in the past that trees were growing in the arctic?

Can we not apply that natural phenomenon of the past glacier retreats to the one we are in right now?

[knocker]

Can we first answer the question: what was the mechanism of the natural phenomenon that has caused the expansion and retreat of glaciers on our planet for the last 100 million years? Or to word it differently, What caused the natural phenomenon of glaciers to retreat before humans and our evil C02? What caused the glaciers to retreat so much in the past that trees were growing in the arctic?

Can we not apply that natural phenomenon of the past glacier retreats to the one we are in right now?

 

If you answer my question you will get many of the answers to yours. I assume you do realise that what you are saying is exactly the same as the deniers meme that the current global warming is perfectly natural as the climate has always waxed and waned. A bit like saying smoking doesn't cause lung cancer because it existed before the mass smoking of cigarettes.

 

One important point, you say "What caused the natural phenomenon of glaciers to retreat before humans and our evil CO^2."  I find it quite astonishing that you think CO²  didn't exist prior to humans and that you appear not to realise that it played a vital role in past climate changes.

 

Okay I'll answer my own question. The extent of the LIA ice was driven there ultimately by Jupiter's (and somewhat by Saturn's) gravitational influences on Earth's orbital eccentricity and by Earth's spin axis obliquity cycle and precession of the spin axis.

 

But none of this is relevant to the current very fast loss of mass balance of the world's glaciers in which GW is a leading player. Of course if you consider the current rise of CO² , higher than it's been for a couple of million years, not relevant to the warming, then I suspect we are both wasting our time.

Edited May 21, 2015 by knocker

[John Badrick]

If you answer my question you will get many of the answers to yours. I assume you do realise that what you are saying is exactly the same as the deniers meme that the current global warming is perfectly natural as the climate has always waxed and waned. A bit like saying smoking doesn't cause lung cancer because it existed before the mass smoking of cigarettes.

 

One important point, you say "What caused the natural phenomenon of glaciers to retreat before humans and our evil CO^2."  I find it quite astonishing that you think CO²  didn't exist prior to humans and that you appear not to realise that it played a vital role in past climate changes.

 

Okay I'll answer my own question. The extent of the LIA ice was driven there ultimately by Jupiter's (and somewhat by Saturn's) gravitational influences on Earth's orbital eccentricity and by Earth's spin axis obliquity cycle and precession of the spin axis.

 

But none of this is relevant to the current very fast loss of mass balance of the world's glaciers in which GW is a leading player. Of course if you consider the current rise of CO² , higher than it's been for a couple of million years, not relevant to the warming, then I suspect we are both wasting our time.

Firstly, no need to be so patronising,obviously I know CO2 existed before humans. That is exactly my point! what I was trying to put across, but obviously you didn't get it.....CO2 existed naturally before humans were on the planet and in more abundance in past eras. So CO2 existed when our planet lost it's ice in the past naturally, a natural phenomenon. Secondly,through ice cores scientists have concluded that there is evidence of rapid short warming before ice ages, so my question is have we come to the end of that short rapid warming period and entering a major cooling? And yes I am saying warming and cooling of our planet is a natural phenomenon!!

[knocker]

Firstly, no need to be so patronising,obviously I know CO2 existed before humans. That is exactly my point! what I was trying to put across, but obviously you didn't get it.....CO2 existed naturally before humans were on the planet and in more abundance in past eras. So CO2 existed when our planet lost it's ice in the past naturally, a natural phenomenon. Secondly,through ice cores scientists have concluded that there is evidence of rapid short warming before ice ages, so my question is have we come to the end of that short rapid warming period and entering a major cooling? And yes I am saying warming and cooling of our planet is a natural phenomenon!!

 

Climate changes of the past were essentially caused by orbital and solar changes such as orbital eccentricity, changes in obliquity, precession of the equinoxes and changes in orbital inclination. This was accompanied by changes in the CO²  cycle that dictated the amount and direction of change. Natural variation triggered by an external source. All this in geological time.

 

Much the same is going on today, except we are not talking orbital or solar changes, only in an infinitely shorter time span. Today he trigger that is interfering with the natural carbon cycle is mankind pumping billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere that had been sequestered by natural processes millions of years ago.

 

Basic physics tells us that increasing CO² will warm the planet so if this isn't the case as you maintain and just the planet warming and cooling as usual what is the natural phenomenon that's causing the warming? And more to the point why isn't the excessive CO²  causing warming.

 

In short

 

 

In short, there is nothing to suggest that recent retreat of glaciers is anything other than a natural phenomenon

 

I think there is plenty to suggest the retreat of the glaciers is aided and abetted by AGW, not least the combined opinion of all the world's experts.

Edited May 21, 2015 by knocker

[mikeworst]

Oops it appears that Alaska's Hubbard Glacier is expanding http://www.weather.com/science/environment/news/alaska-hubbard-glacier-growth .I will now proceed to duck, avoiding flack and such.

[Devonian]

Oops it appears that Alaska's Hubbard Glacier is expanding http://www.weather.com/science/environment/news/alaska-hubbard-glacier-growth .I will now proceed to duck, avoiding flack and such.

Even Bradman got the occasional duck...

[John Badrick]

Oops it appears that Alaska's Hubbard Glacier is expanding http://www.weather.com/science/environment/news/alaska-hubbard-glacier-growth .I will now proceed to duck, avoiding flack and such.

Good find!!!

[4wd]

Good find!!!

There's some interesting photos in that slideshow, it's very striking that there was huge retreat in the first half of 20th century, not sure how that can be blamed on CO2.

It shows how very much they had advanced in the  previous colder little ice age period, which was barely over when he earlier photos were taken around 1900

[knocker]

Funny when I posted that same slide show a wee while ago it attracted no comment.

 

Anyway In case you missed it the first time and wish to fill in the gaps in your knowledge

 

 

And this has some relevance as well

 

[knocker]

With ref. to the above perhaps a little more detail

 

• Glacier disappearances in the last decade or so.

 

â—˜ the last glacier in the Apennines (Italy)

â—˜ the last glacier on Marion Island (southwestern Indian Ocean)

â—˜ Chacaltaya Glacier (a benchmark glacier for mass balance), Bolivia

 

• Glaciers that have grown in the last couple of decades

 

â—˜ Crater Glacier, Mt, St. Helens

â—˜ Glaciers on Mt. Shasta

â—˜ Hundreds of glaciers in the Karakorum Range, Pakistan.

 

Between these two extremes are nearly a couple of hundred thousand glaciers, most of which are rapidly losing mass, but they are big enough that news of their extinction is decades to centuries away.

 

The growth of the Crater glacier is tied up with the 1980 eruption.

 

The growing glaciers of the Karakoram Range, on the other hand, are climatically significant. Their growth appears to be relatedto a shift, possibly related to global warming, in the relative importance of prevailing winter westerlies and the summer monsoon. The shifting balance of these two great conveyors of moisture has controlled glacier fluctuations in the Himalayan region for a long time, but now human influences, caused by global warming and increasing particulate air pollution, are having a marked effect on the regional climate.

 

Source

Global Land Ice Measurements from Space, Springer.

[John Badrick]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-28885119

 

interesting!!!!

[knocker]

Postscript: future prospects of glaciers

 

The study of glaciers is important for many reasons, not least because of the impact they will have on all our lives in the future. Most importantly, glaciers are responding to global warming and, as time goes by, their contribution to rising sea levels will become increasingly important and potentially catastrophic. More locally, many areas of the world rely on glacial meltwater for power generation, water supply and irrigation. Some of the world's major cities are vulnerable to the loss of glaciers. Images in this section illustrate how humans are likely to be affected by the demise of glaciers.

 

http://www.swisseduc.ch/glaciers/earth_icy_planet/glaciers16-en.html

Edited May 26, 2015 by knocker