Sentences with phrase «ice loss does»

Over all, the pace of sea - level rise from the resulting ice loss doesn't go beyond about 1.5 feet per century, Dr. Pollard said in an interview, a far cry from what was thought possible a couple of decades ago.

«This research indicates that although sea - ice loss does intensify the negative NAO, bringing more days of cold easterly winds, it also causes those same winds to be warmer than they used to be.

On the one hand this study shows that sea - ice loss does influence European wind patterns.

He says previous predictive models of Greenland's ice loss did not adequately take into account the faster movement of its southern glaciers, which is accelerating the amount of ice entering the ocean: «Greenland is probably going to contribute more to sea level rise, and faster than predicted by these models.»

Not exact matches

Yet these model - based estimates do not include the possible acceleration of recently observed increases in ice loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.

If the polar cod population in the Barents Sea actually does shrink, the juvenile fish under the ice of the Eastern Arctic could become even more important — especially in order to make up for losses elsewhere.

The results do suggest however that if sea ice loss continues as it has over recent decades, the risk of wet summers may increase.

«It doesn't change our estimates of the total mass loss all over Greenland by that much, but it brings a more significant change to our understanding of where within the ice sheet that loss has happened, and where it is happening now.»

The loss of floating ice shelves doesn't raise sea level directly.

Some species win, others don't Meanwhile, the loss of sea ice is making life harder for some marine animals, including polar bears and walruses, that rely on sea ice to hunt, breed and rear their young.

The study does not attribute the 2012 - 2016 drought to Arctic sea ice loss.

The melting of Greenland contributes to the global sea level, but the loss of mass also means that the ice sheet's own gravitational field weakens and thus does not attract the surrounding sea as strongly.

But DeConto says that Hindmarsh's work predicts future ice loss based on what's happened so far, and doesn't take into account processes like ice surface melt that haven't kicked in yet.

«While more research should be done, we should be aware that an increasing number of studies, including this one, suggest that the loss of Arctic sea ice cover is not only a problem for remote Arctic communities, but could affect millions of people worldwide.»

Dr Ian Joughin at the University of Washington, author of a recent study simulating future Antarctic ice sheet losses added: «This study does a nice job of revealing the strong thinning along the Amundsen Coast, which is consistent with theory and models indicating this region is in the early stages of collapse.»

The study, published this month in the journal Diversity and Distributions, is one of the first to consider the indirect effects of sea ice loss on Arctic species that dwell near the ice, but don't necessarily depend on it for survival.

Despite an especially warm winter, the current extent of sea ice does not represent a new record low; nevertheless, the amount of ice loss is massive.

Despite being trumpeted in certain circles as meaning that there's really nothing to worry about regarding the Greenland ice sheet, the authors made a point of noting (although not in this press release) that an additional source of mass loss needs to be identified in order to reconcile their results with the GRACE data (which do not show a reduction in mass loss for the same period).

That's a process playing out throughout the Southern Ocean, but scientists don't have a good grasp on it or how sudden changes like the loss of a huge hunk of ice will alter carbon uptake.

The global mean temperature rise of less than 1 degree C in the past century does not seem like much, but it is associated with a winter temperature rise of 3 to 4 degrees C over most of the Arctic in the past 20 years, unprecedented loss of ice from all the tropical glaciers, a decrease of 15 to 20 % in late summer sea ice extent, rising sealevel, and a host of other measured signs of anomalous and rapid climate change.

While there may be a good case for attributing Greenland's or Antarctica's ice loss to human induced climate change — even though the paper itself does not do so — the changes in continental water storage, which also play an important role in the result, are tougher to attribute.

One year without a net loss also doesn't buck the long - term trend of Greenland losing ice, both from surface melt and from ocean waters eating away at glaciers that flow out to sea.

The accelerated loss of sea ice should come as no surprise given that another study presented at the AGU meeting found accelerated Arctic warming (see NSIDC: Arctic melt passes the point of no return, «We hate to say we told you so, but we did»):

weight loss you can lose weight eating anything as long as you're in a calorie deficit, in no way am I advocating getting high off Oreo's or mainlining packs of candy or eating ice cream off of a model's ass — that doesn't even make any sense, but guess what?

«But the «eat whatever I want for dinner» part gives me pause,» says Health's contributing nutrition editor, Cynthia Sass, RD. «I have clients who eat very clean and healthfully during the day, but really go all out in the evening — a few glasses of wine, a comfort food meal, ice cream — and this pattern doesn't lead to weight loss or optimal health.»

Don't forget that renters insurance in Charlotte covers losses from weight of snow and ice.

Although minute in comparison to the overall measurable loss, I can't help but see his paintings as a glaring antithesis to the poster didactics, charts, and statistics in the educational portion of Vanishing Ice, calling on world citizens to do their part to help reverse, impact or halt climate change, no matter how small their act of conservation.

Given the probability that ice loss leads to existential threats by disrupting the weather patterns we rely on for agriculture — I don't feel odds of 50/50 on being «right» are good enough in this case.

However, you do not acknowledge reiterate the direction of the error, which was to report an impossible, way overstated 15 % ice loss.

Greenland is indeed a lot of ice, but we don't need to melt a lot of it to have a big effect — even a 10 % loss this century would be devastating (and upper limits are perhaps 30 % (Pfeffer et al, 2008)-RRB-.

No - one is seriously claiming the whole ice sheet is going to disappear any time soon (except perhaps the Times Atlas cartographers)-- but that doesn't mean that important losses can't occur.

This appears to show the extra snow has done little or nothing to compensate for the loss sea ice as far effective albedo is concerned.

Emissions reductions should increase significantly compared to current mitigation scenarios that do not include Arctic sea - ice loss.

re: «These numbers reflect the FACT that EXPERTS (& PROFESSIONAL TRUTH TELLERS in SLR / Ice loss) have become more pessimistic about sea - level rise in recent years...» — Sept 2013 AR5 WGI does NOT reflect this FACT yet was published 8 weeks ago.

While methane is short - lived, all it has to do is shift the global energy balance for a while, to trigger irreversible loss of tundra methane, loss of Arctic sea ice cover and more calthrate loss, then loss of ice sheets and everything else Hansen et al promise.

I don't know about the «freakout» claim, but I believe Peter Wadhams» ideas / estimates regarding the loss of arctic sea ice are going to prove to be much more accurate than the IPCC estimates that sea ice will be gone by midcentury.

BC does have an effect, but BC inventories have been decreasing, so to the extent that BC contributes to melting, the effect is counter to the recent ice loss accelleration.

However, if the loss of Arctic Sea ice has significantly changed global atmospheric circulation patterns, then we are dealing with a different system that has only been in existence since 2007, and we do not know how often to expect crop failures.

Polar bears haven't seen what the ice models are predicting if we don't deal with the warming patterns and sea ice loss.

Here's an interesting thought for the ice experts, maybe Andy could pick this up, since he's done a very decent job of following up on my question: I've read suggestions that increased sea emissivity from the Arctic waters would gain relative to the loss of albedo from increasingly ice - free seas.

Of course, the IPCC models didn't predict the Arctic sea ice loss, either.

http://dosbat.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/musings-on-models.html The Spring volume loss in 2010 does seem to be associated with a persistent pattern of high pressure, which doesn't seem to be the Arctic Dipole (NCEP / NCAR), so as yet I haven't figured out how this caused the ice volume loss reported by PIOMAS.

Is there anything we can do to slow the ice loss?

The interviewer did say he would get back to it and that «get - back» resulted in Lawson insisting that OHC rise and global ice loss was «pure speculation.»

So how much do changes in the Arctic atmosphere play a role in the loss of sea - ice volume and the apparent failure of the GCMs to reflect the current volume loss?

No kilometers of ice shaved off to cause rebound, although there does appear to have been a fair amount of sea ice loss earlier in the twentieth century, principally prior to 1975.

For example, recent results from the Met Office do show that there is a detectable human impact in the long - term decline in sea ice over the past 30 years, and all the evidence points to a complete loss of summer sea ice much later this century.

The findings reinforce suggestions that strong positive ice — temperature feedbacks have emerged in the Arctic15, increasing the chances of further rapid warming and sea ice loss, and will probably affect polar ecosystems, ice - sheet mass balance and human activities in the Arctic...» *** This is the heart of polar amplification and has very little to do with your stated defintion of amplifying the effects of warming going on at lower latitudes.

Xinjiang's ban on glacier tourism in north - western China will do little to reverse the loss of ice caused by climate change — a crucial source of water for the country and much of Asia, writes Liu Qin

Xinjiang's ban on glacier tourism in north - western China will do little to reverse the loss of ice caused by climate change — a crucial source of water for the...