Sentences with phrase «ice mass loss in»

The rate of ice mass loss in the Russian Arctic has nearly doubled over the last decade when compared to records from the previous 60 years, a new study shows.

Between April 2002 and April 2006, GRACE data uncovered ice mass loss in Greenland of 248 ± 36 cubic kilometers per year, an amount equivalent to a global sea rise of 0.5 ± 0.1 millimeters per year.

The maps suggests growth of parts of coastal East Antarctica, little change in the interior and ice mass loss in West Antarctica (basins 18 - 27 and 1) focused on the Amundsen Sea Coast region (basins 20 - 23).

Although that's really all that needs be said, I should add that jetfuel is trying to compare cumulative year - over-year land ice mass loss in Antarctica with (cyclical) seasonal river / lake ice volume gain in Canada - and ignoring the inevitable melt - away of the latter.

Ice mass loss in Greenland 2003 - 2009 as measured by GRACE amounts to 223 + / - 29 Gt / yr.

And since you have missed this acceleration you have assumed that the rate will remain at 3.3 mm / year for the rest of this century, despite ongoing observations of increases in ice mass loss in Greenland and parts of Antarctica.

Indeed, some, such as Arctic sea ice loss or ice mass losses in Greenland's glaciers, have been proceeding faster than expected.

Not exact matches

As glaciologist Richard Alley of Pennsylvania State University notes: «The ice sheet is losing mass, this loss has increased over time, [and] it is not the dominant term in sea - level rise — but it matters.»

By lubricating the bedrock, it will speed the flow of the overlying ice, perhaps increasing the rate of ice - mass loss in West Antarctica.

«By refining the spatial pattern of mass loss in the world's second largest — and most unstable — ice sheet, and learning how that pattern has evolved, we are steadily increasing our understanding of ice loss processes, which will lead to better - informed projections of sea level rise.»

In other words, the losses of mass of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet will intensify — just like the models predict.»

Complementary analyses of the surface mass balance of Greenland (Tedesco et al, 2011) also show that 2010 was a record year for melt area extent... Extrapolating these melt rates forward to 2050, «the cumulative loss could raise sea level by 15 cm by 2050 ″ for a total of 32 cm (adding in 8 cm from glacial ice caps and 9 cm from thermal expansion)- a number very close to the best estimate of Vermeer & Rahmstorf (2009), derived by linking the observed rate of sea level rise to the observed warming.

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).

First, the loss of mass in the Antarctic ice sheet is actually somewhat unexpected.

The relevant papers are [Velicogna and Wahr 2006 Measurements of time - variable gravity show mass loss in Antarctica Science 311, 1754 - 1756 and Rignot and Thomas «Mass balance of polar ice sheets» Science 297, 1502 - 1506]

It is quite possible that we are well past half - way — maybe at 75 % in terms of loss of arctic sea ice mass.

His comments are based on the paper «Limits in detecting acceleration of ice sheet mass loss due to climate variability», B. Wouters, J. L. Bamber, M. R. van den Broeke, J. T. M. Lenaerts and I. Sasgen, Nature Geoscience 6, 613 — 616 (2013) doi: 10.1038 / ngeo1874 Find the abstract and illustrations for that paper here.

The findings, published Monday in Nature Geoscience, reveal that the 1997 - 98 El Niño led to a substantial loss of mass from the bottom of the ice shelves in West Antarctica's Amundsen sea sector, even as the shelves appeared to grow about ten inches taller from additional snowfall.

Rates of sea - level rise calculated from tide gauge data tend to exceed bottom - up estimates derived from summing loss of ice mass, thermal expansion and changes in land storage.

In the figure right, from Rignot et al. 2008, you can see that mass losses from Pine Island Glacier and Thwaites Glacier dominate Antarctic Ice Sheet ice lossIce Sheet ice lossice losses.

Our modelled values are consistent with current rates of Antarctic ice loss and sea - level rise, and imply that accelerated mass loss from marine - based portions of Antarctic ice sheets may ensue when an increase in global mean air temperature of only 1.4 - 2.0 deg.

Most of the mass - loss is apparently from ice - dynamics, which was apparently not considered at least in the first study you linked to.

Our experiments show a clear threshold in the relationship between the rate of sea - level rise, and the rate of (sea - level contributing) ice - sheet mass loss.

From recent instrumental observations alone we are therefore unable to predict whether mass loss from these ice sheets will vary linearly with changes in the rate of sea - level rise, or if a non-linear response is more likely.

However, the idea is simple, and I've talked about this much in many presentations this winter: Take the amount of ice you need to get rid of from Greenland to raise sea level 2 m in the next century, reduce it by your best estimate of the amount that would be removed by surface mass balance losses, and try to push the rest out of the aggregate cross-sectional area of Greenland's marine - based outlet glaciers.

8) Accelerated mass loss in Greenland and / or Antarctica, perhaps with another huge ice shelf breaking off, but in any case coupled with another measurable rise in the rate of sea level rise, 9) The Fifth Assessment Report (2012 - 2013) really spelling out what we face with no punches pulled.

IIRC, the limit on mass loss was attributed to the narrowness of passes in the mountains, but if the ice loss is behind the mountains as the ocean reaches beyond them, and mixes salt into the system with tides, then only the flushing of salt and icebergs via meltwater would limit the rate of melt in the (brand new) Greenland Sea.

The relevant papers are [Velicogna and Wahr 2006 Measurements of time - variable gravity show mass loss in Antarctica Science 311, 1754 - 1756 and Rignot and Thomas «Mass balance of polar ice sheets» Science 297, 1502 - 1506]

Over the time period of our survey, the ice sheet as a whole was certainly losing mass, and the mass loss increased by 75 % in 10 years.

First, the loss of mass in the Antarctic ice sheet is actually somewhat unexpected.

This is despite using observed ice sheet mass loss (0.19 mm / year) in the «modelled» number in this comparison, otherwise the discrepancy would be even larger — the ice sheet models predict that the ice sheets gain mass due to global warming.

The Greenland ice sheet gains mass via snowfall and losses mass via the production of icebergs and by melt of ice in the ice marginal zone.

Thus, whatever the contribution of mass loss from the Greenland ice sheet to the huge (4 - 8 m) rise in sea level of the Eemian, it occurred under very strong temperature forcing.

Given the level of denialism in the face of glacial mass loss, plummeting Arctic summer ice cover, progressive collapse of ice shelves that have been stable for 6000 to 10000 years, northward, upward, and seasonally earlier movements of ecosystems and other phenological changes, increasing Greenland ice melt, and all the other direct observations of global warming, I think denialists will go to their graves believing it can't be happening.

It is noted that the mass loss of Antarctica is mostly or entirely due to recent changes in ice flow.

That typically occurs in ice - sheet model simulations that involve more than about 2 m of sea - level - equivalent mass loss.

The acceleration increased the mass loss from 5 km3 ice / year in 1996 (12) to 36 km ice / year in 2005 (Table 1), which is 6 % of Greenland's total accumulation.

In 1996, the rate of ice mass loss had increased to 97 gigatonnes per year.

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.

It has come to the point that if we continue losing mass in those areas, the loss can generate a self - reinforcing feedback whereby we will be losing more and more ice, ultimately raising sea levels by tens of feet.»

A rise in global mean sea level of between 0.09 and 0.88 metres by 2100 has been projected, mainly due to the thermal expansion of sea water and loss of mass from ice caps and glaciers».

Gravity measurements of the ice - mass loss in Greenland and Antarctica are complicated by glacial isostatic adjustment.

The ice mass loss observed in this research was a change from the trend of losing 113 ± 17 gigatons per year during the 1990s, but was smaller than some other recent estimates (Luthcke et al. 2006).

Yet the rate of ice loss from these two polar realms, as identified by satellite measurements of the change in gravity of the ice masses, has more than doubled over the last decade.

Ice mass loss is occuring at an accelerated rate in Greenland, Antarctica and globally from inland glaciers.

«We also are seeing this ice mass loss trend in Antarctica, a sign that warming temperatures really are having an effect on ice in Earth's cold regions.»

CryoSat - 2 observations taken between November 2010 and September 2013 indicate annual ice sheet mass losses of 134 ± 27 gigatons in West Antarctica, 3 ± 36 gigatons in East Antarctica, and 23 ± 18 gigatons on the Antarctic Peninsula.

The main memory is through the warming of the oceans, manifested in part through the ongoing rise in sea level, and the loss of Arctic sea ice and glacier mass.

These authors use an ice sheet model within a Bayesian statistical framework — in which critical processes are guided by expert synthesis — to simulate the mass loss from the entire Antarctic ice sheet to 2200.

Its ice loss in 2003 was only 0.03 % of its total mass — well within long - term variability throughout its history.