Blog Archive

Showing posts with label Zachariae Isstrøm. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Zachariae Isstrøm. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Collapsing Greenland Zachariae Isstrom glacier could raise sea levels by half a metre, say scientists

Huge Zachariae Isstrom glacier has begun to break up, starting a rapid retreat that could continue to raise sea levels for decades to come



A major glacier in Greenland that holds enough water to raise global sea levels by half a metre has begun to crumble into the North Atlantic Ocean, scientists say.


by Ian Sample, science editor, The Guardian, November 12, 2015

The huge Zachariae Isstrom glacier in northeast Greenland started to melt rapidly in 2012 and is now breaking up into large icebergs where the glacier meets the sea, monitoring has revealed.

The calving of the glacier into chunks of floating ice will set in train a rise in sea levels that will continue for decades to come, the US team warns.

“Even if we have some really cool years ahead, we think the glacier is now unstable,” said Jeremie Mouginot at the University of California, Irvine. “Now this has started, it will continue until it retreats to a ridge about 30km back which could stabilise it and perhaps slow that retreat down.”

Mouginot and his colleagues drew on 40 years of satellite data and aerial surveys to show that the enormous Zachariae Isstrom glacier began to recede three times faster from 2012, with its retreat speeding up by 125 metres per year every year until the most recent measurements in 2015.

The same records revealed that from 2002 to 2014 the area of the glacier’s floating shelf shrank by a massive 95%, according to a report in the journal Science. The glacier has now become detached from a stabilising sill and is losing ice at a rate of 4.5 billion tons a year.

Eric Rignot, professor of Earth system science at the University of California, Irvine, said that the glacier was “being hit from above and below,” with rising air temperatures driving melting at the top of the glacier, and its underside being eroded away by ocean currents that are warmer now than in the past.

“The glacier is now breaking into bits and pieces and retreating into deeper ground,” he said. The rapid retreat is expected to continue for 20 to 30 more years, until the glacier reaches another natural ledge that slows it down.

The scientists recreated the history of the glacier from aerial radar, gravitational measurements and laser profiles, and from radar and optical images taken from space. The combined data reveal the changing shape, size and position of Greenland glaciers over the past four decades.

To the north of Zachariae Isstrom, the scientists studied a second large glacier called Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden. Together, the two glaciers drain a region of nearly 200,000 sq km, amounting to 12% of the Greenland ice sheet. Were both to melt, they would contribute a full metre to global sea levels.

The monitoring showed that Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden glacier was also melting rapidly, but retreating more slowly than Zachariae Isstrom along uphill terrain. If the thinning continues at today’s pace, the scientists believe the ice shelf will become vulnerable to break up in the near future.

The bleak assessment of the glaciers’ retreat comes only months after NASA launched an urgent 6-year project called "Oceans Melting Greenland" (aptly contracted to OMG), to understand the processes that drive the loss of Greenland ice.


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/12/collapsing-greenland-glacier-could-raise-sea-levels-by-half-a-metre-say-scientists

Monday, April 14, 2014

Greenland’s icecap loses stability

by Tim Radford, Climate News Network, April 13, 2014

The calving front of the Jakobshaven Glacier in western Greenland in April 2012 Image: NASA ICE via Wikimedia Commons
The calving front of the Jakobshaven Glacier in western Greenland in April 2012. Image: NASA ICE via Wikimedia Commons
Greenland is losing ice from part of its territory at an accelerating rate, suggesting that the edges of the entire ice cap may be unstable.
LONDON, 13 April – Greenland – the largest terrestrial mass of ice in the northern hemisphere – may be melting a little faster than anyone had guessed.
A region of the Greenland ice sheet that had been thought to be stable is undergoing what glaciologists call “dynamic thinning.” That is because the meltwater from the ice sheet is getting into the sea, according to a study in Nature Climate Change.
In short, Greenland’s contribution to sea level rise has been under-estimated, and oceanographers may need to think again about their projections.
Shfaqat Khan from the Technical University of Denmark and colleagues used more than 30 years of surface elevation measurements of the entire ice sheet to discover that overall loss is accelerating. Previous studies had identified melting of glaciers in the island’s southeast and northwest, but the assumption had been that the ice sheet to the northeast was stable.
Four times as fast

It was stable, at least until about 2003. Then higher air temperatures set up the process of so-called dynamic thinning. Ice sheets melt every Arctic summer, under the impact of extended sunshine, but the slush on the glaciers tends to freeze again with the return of the cold and the dark, and since under historic conditions glaciers move at the proverbial glacial pace, the loss of ice is normally very slow.
But global warming, triggered by rising levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, has changed all that. Greenland’s southerly glaciers have been in retreat and one of them, Jakobshavn Isbrae, is now flowing four times faster than it did in 1997.
Now the Danish-led team has examined changes linked to the 600-kilometre-long Zachariae ice stream in the northeast.
This has retreated by about 20 km in the last decade, whereas Jakobshavn has retreated about 35 km in 150 years. The Zachariae stream drains around one-sixth of the Greenland ice sheet, and because warmer summers have meant significantly less sea ice in recent years, icebergs have more easily broken off and floated away, which means that the ice stream can move faster. The researchers used satellite studies to measure ice loss.
“Northeast Greenland is very cold. It used to be considered the last stable part of the Greenland ice sheet,” said one of the team, Michael Bevis of Ohio State University in the US.
Deep impacts

“This study shows that ice loss in the northeast is now accelerating. So now it seems that all of the margins of the Greenland ice sheet are unstable.”
The scientists used a GPS network to calculate the loss of ice. Glacial ice presses down on the bedrock below it: when the ice melts, the bedrock rises in response to the drop in pressure, and sophisticated satellite measurements can deliver enough information to help scientists put a figure on the loss of ice.
They calculate that between April 2003 and April 2012, the region was losing ice at the rate of 10 billion tons a year.
“This implies that changes at the margin can affect the mass balance deep in the centre of the ice sheet,” said Dr Khan. Sea levels are creeping up at the rate of 3.2 mm a year. Until now, Greenland had been thought to contribute about 0.5 mm. The real figure may be significantly higher.

Saturday, March 22, 2014

Sea Levels To Rise More Than Expected Due To Warming-Driven Surge In Greenland Ice Loss

by Joe Romm and Jeff Spross, Climate Progress, March 17, 2014

ice sheet
Greenland’s contribution to global sea level has soared in the past two decades. An important new study finds that the massive northeastern part of the ice sheet, previously thought to be stable, has begun shedding ice. If this trend continues — and researchers say “a self-perpetuating feedback process may have been triggered” — actual sea level rise this century will likely be higher than many current models had projected.
Covering 660,000 square miles — roughly 80% of the country — Greenland’s ice sheet is second only in size to Antarctica’s. Scientists estimate that melting from the ice sheet as a whole has accounted for about 16% of sea level rise every year for the last two decades.
Research had also long suggested the northeastern portion of the ice sheet was stable. As a result, it was largely left out of the models used to anticipate future sea level rise.
But the new study, “Sustained mass loss of the northeast Greenland ice sheet triggered by regional warming,” published in Nature Climate Change (subs. req’d), suggests the northeastern portion began melting rapidly around 2003. And after first jumping from an ice loss rate of zero to about 10 billion metric tons per year, it’s now approaching 15 or 20 billion metric tons per year and may well keep accelerating.
“Most projections of the future behaviour of the ice sheet have no, or little, contribution from this part of Greenland,” said Professor Jeremy Bamber of Bristol University, a co-author of the study. “But these new results suggest that this region is sensitive to changes in climate and has the potential to contribute significantly now and in the future.”
The team arrived at their conclusion using a combination of surface elevation data from airplanes and four different satellites, along with a GPS-linked network of 50 stations located along the coast of Greenland’s ice sheet. The overall collection of data spanned 1978 to 2012 and was used to essentially weigh the ice sheet’s mass.
Specifically, the study suggests a series of particularly warm summers leading up to 2003 — bringing higher temperatures in both the atmosphere and the surrounding ocean — triggered the speed up in melting.
Much of the ice melt was also historically held in check by an ice barrier at the coast, which itself is now melting as well, allowing the entire system to speed up. Coauthor Prof. Kurt Kjær explains that there was “a clear acceleration in loss of mass after 2006.” He warns:
“This acceleration has since continued and even increased. The increased loss of mass can be explained by a combination of warmer air in the summer and a rise in sea temperatures. This has reduced the extent of sea ice, which otherwise helps to stabilize the glaciers. Our results also demonstrate that after 2009 both air and, in particular, sea temperatures have returned to the level from before 2006. At the same time, the sea ice has maintained its previous extent, although the loss in mass has increased even further. This indicates that a self-perpetuating feedback process may have been triggered….”
The loss of Arctic sea ice creates a well-known amplifying feedback whereby white ice is replaced by the dark blue sea, which absorbs far more sunlight and hence far more solar energy. Back in 2011, scientists warned that the Greenland ice sheet “could undergo a self-amplifying cycle of melting and warming“ that is “difficult to halt.” A 2012 study found we may be close to a “tipping point” in which “the summer melt area covers the entire land mass.”
Another cause for concern is Greenland’s ice streams. These are essentially “rivers” of ice that drain ice sheets in much the same way networks of streams and rivers drain water from huge areas on land. And the drainage basin for Greenland’s northeast portion is enormous — covering 16% of the ice sheet and reaching 373 miles inland, all the way to the center of the country.
Greenland`
Regional warming has triggered rapid ice loss in a vast portion of the northeastern Greenland Ice Sheet (NEGIS). Red indicates the fastest melting. (Via Ohio State)
“This implies that changes at the margin can affect the mass balance deep in the center of the ice sheet,” said Shfaqat Abbas Khan, a senior researcher at the National Space Institute at the Technical University of Denmark, and the leader of the research team. “Furthermore, due to the huge size of the northeast Greenland ice stream, it has the potential of significantly changing the total mass balance of the ice sheet in the near future.”
In short, the research adds to the case that actual sea level rise in the future will be on the high end of the projections from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — which ranged from one to three feet by the end of the century. Other climate scientists have projected even higher numbers.

Most climate scientists and glaciologists that Climate Progress has spoken to in recent years have said humanity should plan for at least three feet of sea level rise this century — and considerably more than that if we stay on our current high-end emissions path.

Monday, February 3, 2014

A-Team's comment on Neven's blog showing topography of Greenland, under the ice sheet

Still playing catch-up here. Several people have asked if the bedrock map of Greenland has been updated since Bamber 2001. Yes indeed, Griggs 2013 will appear next week in final form, free full text below.
The interior area below sea level has been corrected to 22% but consider too actual track coverage the error map (Fig.7). Much, but not all, of this is warmed by the (highly variable) geothermal gradient to a temperature where the pressure from above does not allow ice.
The resolution is immensely better in near-coastal regions (below, for Jakobshavn Isbrae). I enlarged Petermann glacier to the max (also below). With Petermann, the interest is in the main sill, secondary sills if any, currents cutting channels in the underside, the nature of the grounding line (gravelly sediment or precambrian bedrock), fjord overdeeping behind the hinge, and the connection if any to the main below-sea level interior. These issues are still not fully resolved even by dedicated flights; a submarine visit in the works next season could resolve down-fjord issues.
I just have to wonder what happens when the Petermann melts back enough for ocean water to get past the grounding line and connect with this large and deep pool of water, which may be augmented shortly by moulin drainage from higher elevation melt ponds (which are perfectly capable of drilling a couple of km straight down). A giant floating ice cube?
While this is an excellent article in many respects, the cartography products are unsatisfactory (as they often are in climate science). The color palettes are terrible, layers were flattened in the wrong sequence, no kmz, and nothing useful is supplied in supplemental -- not even the core map at measurement resolution. Do we need lat/long lines masking data? -- surely readers of The Cryosphere know where Greenland is located. Evidently 10k readers have to purchase 10k copies of mapping software, dive into yet another raw data format 10k times, guess at the projection, and produce the map that reviewers should have required in the first place. Then go through it all again with some other layer they need to co-register. GIS = geographical information system.
Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Mauri Pelto: Zachariae Isstrøm further retreat, NE Greenland


by Mauri Pelto, From a Glacier's Perspective, August 27, 2012

In an article Dan Bailey and I published at Skeptical Science, we observed that in northern Greenland high velocities extend far inland only on Zachariae and Petermann Glacier tapping into the midst of the ice sheet in northern Greenland. Further, it is the Zachariae Isstrøm (ZIS) that is likely the only of this group that would be comparable to a bank that is too big to fail as its increased velocity band extends well into the ice sheet. ZIS is one of the three main outlets of the northeast Greenland Ice Stream, Storstrommen and Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden (79N) are the other two.

The extent of the high velocity zone is evident in the first image below from the exceptionally detailed work of Joughin et al. (2010), and Joughin et al. (2001). The area of high velocity versus the surrounding ice at over 100 m/year extends 350 km upglacier from the ZIS terminus. The velocity then increased from 100 to 400+ m/year from 200-100 km from the ice front. At the grounding line, the velocity is 1100 m/year (Rignot et al, 2001). The velocity remains high to the ZIS icefront. The width of the ice stream identified by the zone of higher flow is 40 km wide 350 km above the terminus and remains at least 30 km wide all the way to the terminus region. The velocity is lower than on Jakobshavns, but the ice stream is also much wider.
A view of the basal topography from Joughin et al. (2001) indicates that the acceleration occurs in the same area as the bed depth drops significantly below sea level 200 km from the ice front. The base of the glacier is 300-700 meters below sea level all the way to the ice front. The thickness at the grounding line is noted as 550-600 meters by Rignot et al. (2001). The result is an ice flux at the grounding line of ZIS of some 11 cubic kilometers per year, this is much less than the 40+ cubic kilometers from Jakobshavn Isbrae and similar to the 12 cubic kilometers from Petermann Glacier. The red arrows in both images indicates the area of fast ice, discussed below and the yellow arrow the location of the new 2012 ice front.

This post examines recent changes in ZIS updating the work of Box and Decker (2011). They noted an average decadal rate of loss of 14 square kilometers/year and the evolving terminus position in the first image below from Jason Box at Meltfactor.org. Box and Decker (2011) also noted a potential advance in 2006-2007, that we will further explore here.

The reduced sea ice in the region has exposed the ZIS terminus to increased open water in what was typically a region that was dominated by persistent sea ice. The enhanced surface melting is also a concern. In 2012 ZIS has experienced an additional retreat that has separated the main glacier from a melange of glacier ice and fast sea ice on the northeast side of the terminus. The changes have been an ongoing watch by several of the participants at the Arctic Sea Ice blog, which has developed into a wonderful community for daily detailed sea ice observations. Espen Olesen and I have discussed the split that occurred this August which warrants pointing out. Here we examine Landsat imagery from 2006, 2008, 2009 and 2010 and MODIS imagery from 2011 and Aug. 19 2012 to depict the changes. The last image is a July 30, 2012, Landsat with the purple terminus line indicated. The images are shown below with the fast ice zone (FI) noted in 2006 and the MODIS images from 2011 and 2012. The new 2012 terminus that has retreated to the corner of is indicated by a yellow arrow. The actual terminus in the Landsat images is indicated by purple dots, but based on the melange that exists on the east side and fast ice on the north side this is not a clear cut distinction. The fast ice is distorted in a convex pattern by the impinging ice front in the Landsat images. The new terminus is at the southeast corner of Lambert land and extends directly southwest to Heretugen Orleans Land.
The retreat follows the calving events on Petermann and Steesnby Glacier. Here there is no single large iceberg to observe. The retreat from 2010 to 2012 is approximately 10 km, the loss of area is particularly hard to accurately determine, today I estimate it is 70 km2, and will look to better derive this estimate from new imagery from Geoeye and other satellites in the coming days and would welcome other such area loss analyses for the 2006-2012 period. The potential advance from 2006-2007 is simply not observed here.

Saturday, April 21, 2012

D. Bailey & M. Pelto: Zebras? In Greenland? Really? [Variations in Greenland Ice Sheet outlet glacier behavior]

Zebras? In Greenland? Really?

by Daniel Bailey and Mauri Pelto, Skeptical Science, April 11, 2012

At first glance, zebras are all the same.  Sure, you can argue that they are black with white stripes or white with black stripes.  But nobody really cares; they're zebras, after all.
[sorry, readers, in the interest of saving space the photo of the zebras is not posted -- but I am sure you will have no trouble imagining them]


Just as each zebra has an individualized set of stripes, making them unique, so also are each of the individual glaciers in Greenland unique.  They each have varied lengths, heights, widths, fjord geometries, differently-sized accumulation zones (where they "pack on weight") and flow speeds.  Each is located in a different part of Greenland and thus are also affected differently by their latitude, oceanic currents (for the marine-terminating glaciers), weather and climatic patterns.  And also by the modifying effects of Arctic amplification of the warming of the globe.

Variations in Greenland Ice Sheet outlet glacier behavior

The Greenland Ice Sheet has an area of 2.17 million square kilometers (1.28 million square miles) and spans 18 degrees of latitude from north to south.  It is not surprising that over this vast area that the geology and climate vary substantially and that this leads to variations in behavior of Greenland glaciers.  Our tendency is to lump the Greenland Ice Sheet into one category impacted similarly by each of the dynamic forces that impact flow. This is akin to saying banks, credit unions and savings and loan institutions are impacted similarly by all the economic forces.  In the case of a recession there is a shared signal, just as with global warming there is a shared signal amongst Greenland glaciers.   This is a simplification that does not work.  In this article we divide the glaciers into four main categories to illustrate the different properties and sensitiveness of each.
The surface mass balance of the glacier is the difference of accumulating snow on the ice sheet (its income) and snow and ice losses from melting and calving (its expenditures).  The volume of the ice sheet is its asset.  On an ice sheet, the main factor driving flow is simply the mass balance input in the accumulation zone.  The higher the accumulation rate the faster the movement; the accumulated snow is inexorably moved downslope towards the ocean and the margin of the ice sheet.  Observation of a precipitation map (focused not on the outer margin, but on the accumulation zone of the ice sheet) indicates that highest accumulation rates, over 40 cm per year, extend along the western side of the ice sheet to the southeast quadrant of the ice sheet.  
F2


Figure 2. Distribution of precipitation in Greenland (in grams per square centimeter per year). Contours dashed where inferred. Ice-free areas are shown in dark gray. (USGS Satellite Image Atlas of Greenland)


The overall topography of the ice sheet is controlled both by the basal and peripheral geology and the mass balance distribution of the ice sheet.  The higher rates of mass accumulation inland and the greater melting nearer the margin yield a steeper profile for the ice sheet. 
F3


Figure 3. Topographic map of the Greenland ice sheet. The contour interval is 100 m. Local ice caps and ice domes are shown in green. Ice-free areas are shown in dark gray. (USGS Satellite Image Atlas of Greenland)


Figure 3 shows that the contours have the closest spacing along the west margin and in the southeast, just as the high accumulation rates in those areas would suggest.  Thus the combination of the surface slope and the accumulation rate drive faster flow in these regions. 
The generalized calving output of each section of the ice sheet (Figure 4, below) indicates the volume flux by quadrant and by glacier in some cases. 
F4


Figure 4. Generalized calving output by quadrant, in cubic kilometers per year water equivalent based on the assumption of an equilibrium state. The contours indicate elevation in meters. (USGS Satellite Image Atlas of Greenland)


The northern quadrant is one of the largest in terms of the ice sheet perimeter, but the calving output is the lowest at 20 km3.  The northeast quadrant at 35 km3 is the second lowest.  The highest are the southwest and southeast quadrants at 113 and 80 km3, respectively.  The difference is the result of higher accumulation rates.   If we look at more recent work, which examines the changes in volume discharge and surface mass balance, we see the greatest discharge changes and surface loss are in the southeast. 
F5
Figure 5. Higher calving flux indicates higher velocities (Van Den Broecke et al., 2009). D denotes change in ice discharge while SMB denotes the net surface mass balance (accumulation minus ablation).

F6





Figure 6. Ice flow speed in Greenland (color) for winter 2006 derived from synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery (gray scale image derived from NASA funded research). Because of the large range of speeds (1-13,000 m/yr), a log color scale is used (Ian Joughlin, Big Ice).

Hence the above velocity map of the glacier will indicate higher average velocities in the quadrants with the highest calving volume flux.  This map indicates relatively low flow rates of less than 10 m/year inland, with particular bands of fast flow that extend well into the ice sheet and feed outlet glaciers.  The variation in flow and accumulation rates indicates the problem of lumping the glaciers into one category. 
Climate change has led to an observed increase in surface melting, surface accumulation, increased discharge and overall mass balance losses.  The very mechanism that establishes the basics of behavior of the GIS mass balance are changing (Zwally et al., 2011).
Greenland glaciers fall into at least 4 common types, each with its own unique sensitivity to sea surface temperature, surface melting, meltwater lubrication, calving changes, etc.

Type 1: Northern, with Large Floating Termini

Northern glaciers with large floating termini (Petermann, Ryder, Steensby, Zachariae, Academy, etc).  Each of these is a marine terminating outlet glacier that has an extensive floating ice shelf.  The large ice shelves can exist in part due to the lower surface melt rates and the lower flow rates of the glacier.  Petermann Glacier is the fastest with a flow speed of 1,000 m/year at the grounding line.  This is much less than the average outlet glacier speed along the west coast.  The large floating ice shelves are susceptible to bottom melting but, except for Petermann Glacier, we have no observations of the process or that more warm water is penetrating under these ice shelves.  Rignot and Steffen (2008) found that at Petermann Glacier 80% of the ice loss into the ocean was from basal melting of the floating tongue.  If the ice shelves are removed, the feeding glacier is less buttressed and will accelerate for a period and draw down its surface profile.  The recent ice area lost by Petermann, Academy and Zachariae Ice Stream indicate these glaciers are being impacted by the increased melting at the surface and likely the base of the ice shelf for Petermann Glacier at least. 
Examination of how far the high velocities extend inland in Figure 6 indicates that it is only Zachariae and Petermann that tap far into the ice sheet.  This northern area has low accumulation rates, and a shorter less intense melt season.  The early onset of melting and lack of accumulation in 2010 led to an early exposure of the ablation zone on these glaciers. 
This is their sensitivity Achilles Heel:  relatively little increases in melt can expand the ablation zone appreciably given the low surface slopes and low accumulation rates.   Based on the velocity map, it is the Zachariae that is likely the only of this group that would be comparable to a bank that is too big to fail as its increased velocity band extends well into the ice sheet. 
F7



Figure 7. Ice flow speed for Zachariae Glacier (Joughlin et al., 2010).




Type 2: Inland-terminating

Glaciers with inland termini lacking any calving (Sukkertoppen, Frederickshaab, Russell, etc.). Between the fast flowing marine terminating outlet glaciers, the ice sheet particularly in the southwest quadrant has numerous glaciers that terminate on land or in small lakes.  The velocity of these glaciers reaches a maximum of 1-2 meters/day.  Each terminates on land because total ablation over the glacier equals total accumulation at the terminus.  These glaciers are more like a typical alpine glacier and are susceptible to the forces that tend to cause alpine glaciers to experience peak flow during spring and early summer.  Those forces are the delivery of meltwater to the base of the glacier, when a basal conduit system is poorly developed.  This leads to high basal water pressure, which enhances sliding.  As the conduit system develops the basal water pressure declines as does sliding, even with more water.F8



Figure 8. Inland terminating glaciers (Sundal et al., 2011).


This is what has been recently reported to be the case by Sundal et al. (2011).  The meltwater lubrication mechanism is real, but as observed is limited both in time and area impacted.  It is likely that, as on alpine glaciers, the seasonal speedup is offset by a greater slowdown late in the melt season.  Most observed acceleration due to high meltwater input has been on the order of several weeks, leading to a 10-20% flow increase for that period.  The role of supraglacial lakes in this has been a point of emphasis; Luthje et al. (2006) noted that the area covered by supraglacial lakes was independent of the summer melt rate but controlled by topography.  This led Luthje et al. to conclude that  the area covered by supraglacial lakes will remain constant even in a warmer climate.  This suggests that the enhancement of flow by the drainage of such lakes would be limited.
The land terminating glaciers such as Sukkertoppen, Russell and Mittivakkat are retreating significantly in response to global warming.   This is an indication of negative mass balance. The latter glacier in southeast Greenland has retreated 1,200 meters since 1931 (Mernhild et al., 2011).  The Mernhild study identified this slow rate compared to the outlet glaciers and, based on mass balance observations, that the current surface mass balance can only support a glacier at most one-third its current size.   This indicates the slow but inexorable sensitivity of the non-calving glacier to surface mass balance change.  Moon and Joughin (2008) observed that the retreat of the land terminating glaciers was relatively minor from 1992 to 2007, averaging 5 m/year or less.  These glaciers are the equivalent in our banking system to the local banks:  there are many and they are sensitive, but the changes in a single one is not important. 

Type 3: Marine-terminating

Fast flowing marine terminating outlet glaciers of western and southeast Greenland (Rinks, Umiamako, Helheim, Jakobshavn, Epiq Sermia, etc.).  These are the glaciers that drain the greatest area of the ice sheet and deliver the greatest volume to the oceans via calving.  The flux from many of the larger glaciers is over 10 km3/year (DMI).  Each of these glaciers is fast-flowing at the terminus; the fast flow section extends inland into the ice sheet up a sub-glacial trough.  The outlet glaciers act like a drain capturing ice from a larger area of the ice sheet than their narrow terminus would suggest.  
F9


Figure 9. Marine-terminating glaciers (Thomas et al., 2009).


Pelto et al. (1989), in a paper on the equilibrium state of the Jakobshavn Glacier, showed that the terminus had not changed significantly in 30 years; its velocity had also been consistent.  Furthermore, it was observed that the velocity was consistent throughout the seasons.  This indicated that the glacier velocity was not being impacted by the meltwater pulse of summer. 
Bob Thomas (NASA, 2004) and Terry Hughes (University of Maine, 1986developed the basic mechanism of flow for the glacier that has proven to be true.  The outlet glaciers have a balance of forces at the calving front.  The fjord walls, the fjord base and the water column impede flow.  The slope of the glacier, its upglacier velocity and the height of the calving face strive to increase flow.  If the glacier thins than there is less friction at the calving front from the fjord walls and the fjord base, leading to greater flow.  The enhanced flow leads to retreat and further thinning, resulting in the thinning and the acceleration spreading inland.  In 1990 it was not envisioned that acceleration would occur as soon as it has, yet that was the motivation for the research. 
Figure10
Figure 10. Jakobshavn profile (Thomas et al., 2009).
In 2001, the acceleration of the Helheim, Jakobshavn and Kangerdlussaq Glaciers caught the attention of the world.  By 2007, acceleration had been noted at all 34 marine terminating outlet glaciers observed.
The acceleration was not significantly seasonal; Howat et al. (2010) noted a 15% seasonal component to the acceleration: it had spread inland and had led to retreat and thinning.  This demonstrated that the marine terminating glaciers were largely responding to a change in the balance of forces at the glacier front. 
Figure11
Figure 11. Ice flow velocity as color over SAR amplitude imagery of Jakobshavn Isbræ in (a) February 1992 and (b) October 2000. In addition to color, speed is contoured with thin black lines at 1,000 m/yr intervals and with thin white lines at 200, 400, 600, and 800 m/yr. Note how the ice front has calved back several kilometers from 1992 to 2000. Further retreat in subsequent years caused the glaciers speed to increase to 12,600 m/yr near the front (Ian Joughlin, Big Ice).
The recent increases in outlet glacier discharge have always been coincident with floating tongue losses.   This causes reduced back pressure at the glacier front, letting up on the brakes; the resulting glacier thinning leads to less basal friction and further acceleration.  If the glacier front retreats into deeper water the process will continue and increase.  This is why understanding the basal slope changes inland of the calving fronts is crucial. Moon and Joughin (2008) observed the terminus change of 203 glaciers from 1992 to 2007 and noted a synchronous ice sheet wide retreat of tidewater outlet glaciers. The thinning could be due to increased surface melt, basal melt or most likely a combination of the two.  Moon and Joughin (2008) reported for the 2000-2006 period:
  • In the southeast quadrant 35 glaciers retreated an average of 174 m/year
  • In the eastern quadrant 21 glacier retreated an average of 106 m/year
  • In the northwest 64 glaciers retreated an average of 118 m/year. 
Each quadrant’s retreat increased markedly after 2000.  The largest of this group are comparable to the banks that are too big for our banking system to allow them to fail:  they drain a substantial portion of the entire ice sheet and reach so far into the ice sheet that their behavior can impact that of other adjacent glaciers.

Type 4: Marine-terminating in Shallow Water

Marine terminating glaciers outlet glaciers in shallower water (Humboldt, Cornell, Steenstrup, etc.).  These glaciers do have calving termini but lack the large fast flowing feeder tongues extending into the glacier.  This is because there is not a topographic low under the ice sheet that funnels the flow.  Humboldt Glacier is the widest front of any Greenland glacier, wider even than Petermann Glacier. 
Figure12
Figure 12. Humboldt profile (Thomas et al., 2009).
However, the velocity on average is low at 100 m/year, and the base of the glacier is quite high.  This makes it difficult for a large calving retreat of the glacier to occur and extend inland.  Humboldt Glacier is retreating but, as the velocity profile indicates, the glacier, despite its size, does not tap dynamically into the center of the ice sheet.  These glaciers are substantial, but their failure (though significant for sea level) would not destabilize the ice sheet as a whole.

 Greenland Ice Sheet outlet glaciers: Zebras no more

 Overall in Greenland, the rate of area loss in marine-terminating glaciers during the 2010 melt season (419 km2) was 3.4 times that of the previous 8 years. There is now clear evidence that the ice area loss rate of the past decade (averaging 120 km2/year) is greater than loss rates pre-2000.  The exceptional extension of the ablation season in 2010 in southern Greenland indicates the vulnerability of these areas to expanded melt regions (Box et al., 2010). 
The amazing aspect of Greenland glaciers is that (despite the specific variation in type, location specific fjord configuration, etc.) their response has been as uniform and synchronous to global warming as has been observed.  If this warming of the world persists long enough, the  ice “banks” of Greenland will begin to fail.  Those with the greatest reserves on their asset sheets and the fastest turnover, and thus having the greatest potential contributions to sea level rise over time, are:
  • In the north, Zachariae (and to a lesser extent, Petermann)
  • The fast flowing marine terminating outlet glaciers of western and southeast Greenland (Rinks, Umiamako, Helheim, Jakobshavn, Epiq Sermia and Kangerdlussaq)

Further Reading & Resources

  1. Pelto et al. (1989)
  2. Luthje et al. (2006)
  3. Moon and Joughin (2008)
  4. Rignot and Steffen (2008)
  5. Thomas et al. (2009)
  6. Van Den Broecke et al. (2009)
  7. Box et al. (2010)
  8. Howat et al. (2010)
  9. Joughlin et al. (2010)
  10. Mernhild et al. (2011)
  11. Sundal et al. (2011)
  12. Zwally et al. (2011)
  13. The USGS Satellite Image Atlas of Greenland

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Fiamma Straneo et al. have found Greenland's fjord waters much warmer than expected, melting back glaciers' floating tongues, accelerating outflow

A Glacier's Pace: Are ocean currents hastening the retreat of Greenland's glaciers? [very misleading title]

Time was, saying something moved “at a glacier’s pace” meant it was grindingly slow. No longer. Glaciers don’t move like that anymore.

Since the early 1990s, glaciers in Greenland have been shrinking at an unprecedented and ever-faster pace. The well-studied mountain glaciers of Europe typically move about 50 meters a year; some of the glaciers in southeast Greenland are now moving at a rate of 38 meters a day.

image
WHOI oceanographer Fiamma Straneo watches as a crane begins to lower a sampling device into the
icy waters of a glacial fjord in Greenland. (Photo by Nick Cobbing, ? Greenpeace International)


Greenland’s glaciers are not simply melting, cautions Fiamma Straneo, a physical oceanographer at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI). It would be more accurate to say they’re falling apart.

More and more, the drip-drip-drip of rapid thawing has been accompanied by the thunderous crash of massive ice chunks cracking off the glaciers’ front edges and plunging into the ocean.

greenland ice sheet
Greenland is under an ice sheet that drains into the ocean via glaciers such as this one. Many of the glaciers
have shrunk rapidly in recent years. (Photo by Nick Cobbing,  Greenpeace International)


“This is a very important distinction,” said Straneo. “It’s not as simple as ‘We’ve increased the air temperature above Greenland, and it’s driving more melting.’ The glaciers are moving a lot faster, they’re thinning, they’re breaking up, and they’re retreating. They’re dumping more ice into the ocean.

“The glaciers are changing how they work.” (See animation)


How glaciers work

Glaciers are in perpetual motion. The enormous weight of ice piled on Greenland flows downhill, channeling like rivers into individual glaciers. Near the coast, the glaciers disgorge into outlet fjords, where they lose ice to the water. Every winter, snowfall on the ice sheet replenishes the supply of ice. When the processes of loss and addition are approximately in balance, the glacier front stays in about the same place. If the glaciers lose ice faster at the bottom than snow accumulates at the top, the glacier recedes.

While some of the recent loss of glacier ice is due to warming of the air above the glaciers, a few years ago Straneo and other scientists began to wonder whether the ocean could be playing a role, too, by affecting the front ends of the glaciers where they reach into the ocean. Greenland’s large glaciers flow into fjords that, like fjords everywhere, are long—about 100 kilometers (62 miles); skinny—about 8 kilometers (5 miles); and very deep—about 900 meters (half a mile) at their deepest points.

The front, or leading edge, of each glacier rises about 100 meters above the waterline and reaches below it all the way to the bottom. That exposes the glacier to a lot of water in the fjord. In past decades, most of the glaciers also had an “ice tongue,” a floating shelf of ice about 100 meters thick that extends from the main body of the glacier. The tongues stick out many miles into the fjords, with a few hundred meters of water flowing beneath them. In recent years, many glaciers have lost their tongues; now they end in blunt cliffs of ice that reach more or less straight down to the ocean bottom.

Straneo and her colleagues thought the loss of the ice tongues and the acceleration of the glaciers might be caused in part by changes in the water in the fjords. If the water beneath the tongues had gotten warmer, that could have increased melting, weakened the tongues, and perhaps sped up the glaciers’ loss of ice into the fjord.


A role for the oceans?

Oftentimes, scientists gain insights into complex natural processes by consulting computer models designed to simulate the processes. On the question of glacier loss, however, none of the existing models took into account what happens at the interface where glacial ice meets ocean water.

Ruth Curry, a physical oceanographer at WHOI, studies how masses of water move through the oceans and link far-distant regions. To her, it seemed reasonable to think that warming oceans could be affecting the great glaciers.

“On a global scale, the ocean has been gaining heat at a faster rate than any other part of the climate system—more than the glaciers, ice caps, and ice sheets, more than the land, more than the atmosphere,” she said. “Ocean water stores about a thousand times more heat than the same volume of air. The ocean has the highest heat capacity in the climate system, and it functions like a global baseboard heating system, storing energy and moving it around the planet.”

Previous studies had shown that ocean currents flowing past Greenland warmed significantly at about the same time the glaciers started accelerating; but nobody knew whether that warmer water was getting into the fjords. There was reason to think it might not. Many fjords in northern Europe have a sill, or underwater ridge, across their mouths, which restricts the flow of water into and out of them.

But few fjords in eastern Greenland had been studied in detail. Nobody knew their structure or how the water moved within them. Until the glaciers started falling apart, there was little reason to go there and ample reason not to. Remote and forbidding, even in summer they teem with icebergs and slabs of pack ice.

“Why would anybody want to go there?” said Straneo. “They’re hard to get to, nothing was happening, the glaciers weren’t moving, and the icebergs pose a huge challenge” both to navigation and to instruments left in the water for long-term measurements.

But with Greenland’s glaciers changing so fast, the time had come to find out more about the interaction between ice and ocean.


Heading north 

Straneo had already worked on the waters west of Greenland. Then a few years ago she and Gordon Hamilton, a glaciologist at the University of Maine, started talking about what it would take to study the waters in and around the glacial fjords on the eastern side of Greenland.

“We didn’t even know how to propose to make measurements in one of these fjords,” said Straneo. “I said, ‘Oh, this is a crazy place. We can’t put any instruments in, I don’t know how to get there, the icebergs are too deep—no way!’ ”

But they kept thinking about it, and in July 2008 Straneo headed north with Hamilton, Dave Sutherland, a former graduate student and postdoctoral researcher at WHOI and now a guest investigator, WHOI mooring engineer Jim Ryder, and Leigh Stearns, a postdoc at the University of Maine. They ventured into Sermilik Fjord, which drains Helheim Glacier, one of the largest glaciers in Greenland. Located at about 67 °N latitude, Helheim had been retreating rapidly since 2003 and had lost most of its ice tongue. “We decided to just go and take a look,” Straneo said. “We were interested in learning, ‘Can we even work in this fjord?’ ”

They scraped together enough money to charter a do-it-themselves research vessel—the 24-foot-long boat of Arqaluk Jørgensen, a telephone technician and part-time fisherman from Tasiilaq, the nearest village to Sermilik Fjord.

Greenlander Arqaluk J?rgensen and WHOI researchers Fiamma Straneo and Dave Sutherland.
Greenlander Arqaluk Jørgensen and WHOI researchers Fiamma Straneo and Dave Sutherland ready Jørgensen’s boat for the day’s trip into Sermilik Fjord in 2008. (Photo by Jim Ryder, WHOI)


Dwarfed by the fjord’s enormous icebergs, the boat didn’t even have room to house the researchers overnight; except for two nights late in the season when they stayed at a tiny settlement partway up the fjord, they returned to Tasiilaq every evening and made the two-hour trip back into the fjord every morning.


No substitute for local knowledge

As it turned out, Jørgensen’s little boat had advantages over larger, “official” research vessels. It was inexpensive; it could maneuver in small spaces; and the scientists got the benefit of the pilot’s lifetime of experience navigating, fishing, and hunting in those waters. Straneo recalled that Jørgensen would stand on the captain’s chair to get a better view of where they were headed and steer with one stockinged foot on the wheel. Guiding the boat carefully through dense fog, he could sense approaching icebergs and boats minutes before Straneo and her colleagues were aware of them.

Straneo’s view of the interaction between science and local cultures changed during that first voyage to Sermilik.

“For me the real first experience in Greenland was on Arqaluk’s little boat,” she said. “We got such a good feel for what it was like to work in these regions. He just knew them. And that’s invaluable.

“It also makes you appreciate about protecting local knowledge, because there’s no way that we can match that. This is something that I feel really strongly about. It just woke up in me that, above all, we need to preserve this knowledge. And also make use of it, not in an exploiting sense, but we can’t go and blindly work. We come in as scientists, we fly in with all this high-tech gear, we do our thing. We’ve got so much to learn. If we can tap into local knowledge, even our science will be so much better.”


A matter of degrees 

Although Jørgensen’s boat was too small to be used to deploy large moorings, it was big enough to handle the equipment needed to make some basic measurements of water conditions. In July and again in September, Straneo’s team measured temperature and salinity at various depths, at four distances along the fjord and also across the channel leading into its mouth.

Physical oceanographer Ruth Curry draws a water sample from the bottom of Sermilik Fjord.
Physical oceanographer Ruth Curry draws a water sample from the bottom of Sermilik Fjord. The white frame houses an acoustic Doppler current profiler, which measures the speed of currents, and an instrument that measures pressure, temperature, salinity, and turbidity of the water. (Photo by Nick Cobbing, ? Greenpeace International)


What they found stunned them. At every sampling station in the fjord, from 150 to 200 meters down to the bottom, the water was warm.

“It gets to over three and a half degrees Celsius, which is very warm for Greenland,” Straneo said. “We were just astonished at how warm it was, because there we were, surrounded by ice everywhere, and we were very far away from a source of warm waters.”

Three and a half degrees Celsius, or just over 38 °F, isn’t warm in the bathtub sense, but it’s plenty warm enough to melt glacier ice, and it’s much warmer than anyone expected to find in a fjord in Greenland. The temperature of Arctic seawater often drops below the freezing point of fresh water (0 °C or 32 °F), because the salt in it allows it to cool past that point. Water coming off the melting glaciers is just a shade above freezing.

For water in the fjord—anywhere in the fjord—to be several degrees above freezing was startling.


Current affairs

Earlier work by researchers at WHOI and elsewhere showed that warm water from the subtropics makes it to the east coast of Greenland via a series of powerful currents. The Gulf Stream carries it northward along the coast of North America, then veers toward Europe as the North Atlantic Current. West of Ireland, the current splits into two main branches. One loops back, skirts the southern shore of Iceland and then sweeps southward along the southeast coast of Greenland as the Irminger Current. The other becomes the Norwegian Atlantic Current and heads north past Norway; then it turns west, converges with polar waters, and heads back southward along the edge of the continental shelf off Greenland, where the seafloor drops off into the depths of the Greenland Sea.

In 2008, a few months before Straneo explored Sermilik Fjord from Jørgensen’s little boat, Curry had tested the waters along Greenland’s east coast as part of a research cruise on a Norwegian coast guard icebreaker. At the latitude of Sermilik Fjord, she found the waters of the Irminger Current were very warm—up to 6 °C (nearly 43 °F). Even waters off the northeastern tip of Greenland, which had traveled farther from their subtropical origins and been cooled by contact with Arctic winds and waters, was warm (about 2 °C or 35.6 °F).

So the team knew that warm water flows just offshore along Greenland’s east coast; and they discovered that warm water was reaching far up into Sermilik Fjord. But how does it get into the fjord? Does it stay long enough to affect the glacier? Is Sermilik unusual, or has the same thing happened in other fjords in eastern Greenland? The answers to those and other questions awaited another research cruise.


Buddy, can you spare a boat?

Excited by their findings, Straneo, Sutherland, and Hamilton wrote a proposal to the National Science Foundation (NSF) seeking money to go back to Sermilik Fjord. They succeeded, but the funding wouldn’t be available until 2010. So they kept searching for a way to get to Sermilik in 2009.

They wanted to retrieve two small moorings they had left to take measurements over the winter. They also wanted to do a more thorough survey of temperatures and currents and try to find out how the subtropical water was getting into the fjord. Luck turned their way when Hamilton got a call from a private organization that was interested in raising awareness about change in the Arctic and was inviting several scientists to conduct research aboard its icebreaker.

Free use of an icebreaking ship? Of course they were interested. There was just one catch: The call had come from the environmentalist group Greenpeace, and the ship was its vessel, Arctic Sunrise.

“I was initially reluctant about using Greenpeace, because they carry a lot of political baggage,” said Curry, whom Straneo had invited to join the team. Sutherland also had reservations. Straneo was less concerned.

“I’m from Europe, and Greenpeace in Europe is very active and very well regarded. They’re sort of seen as heroes,” she said. Furthermore, Hamilton had worked from a Greenpeace ship a few years earlier and had no problems.


Media and polar explorers

Greenpeace guaranteed that the scientists would not be interfered with or pressured in any way. In turn, the scientists agreed to make themselves available for interviews and photographs by about a dozen journalists who were also invited to join the cruise.

Straneo didn’t mind the interviews, but the presence of the journalists on board produced the only real downside of the trip: With so many berths allotted to the press, there weren’t enough for her to bring along a full scientific and technical team.

“We were very understaffed for what we were trying to do,” she said. But the ship “had very experienced people on board, and that really helped.” One member of the Greenpeace staff had Straneo rolling her eyes at first. “I laughed when I first heard we had a ‘polar explorer,’ but I later took everything back, because anytime I would go out on the ice, I would ask him to come, and let him know, ‘You’re in charge of all the safety. It’s on you. I’m just going to do the science.’ And he would. He would pack a survival bag, he’d equip us, he’d give us crampons, ice axes, he’d make sure that somebody was looking out for polar bears, the whole thing. So we could just do the science.”

Even Curry was won over.

“They were very good about saying, ‘OK, we understand that you’re doing your own private research, and we make no claims, we won’t try to steer it, we won’t try to influence anything. You do your science,’ ” said Curry. “I came away with a very positive view.”

Besides, she and her colleagues couldn’t have done the work any other way.

“The Arctic Sunrise was an amazing platform—exactly what we needed to do this job,” said Curry. “We wouldn’t have had the ability to get the measurements that we did [without it]. There are no U.S. facilities like that, and very few in the world. And it was free.”


A glacial time machine

Being aboard the Greenpeace icebreaker opened up new possibilities for study. Besides revisiting Sermilik Fjord, Straneo and her team also examined the waters in two fjords farther to the north. Kangerdlugssuaq Fjord lies 250 miles up the coast from Sermilik at 69° N latitude. Like Sermilik, it drains a large glacier that has been accelerating at an unprecedented rate, but the ocean water at its mouth is slightly cooler than that near Sermilik.

The third fjord they visited helped them get critical data in their effort to understand how changes in the ocean might be influencing the glaciers. There had been no way to find out what Sermilik and other fjords were like before the recent warming trend set in. How could the researchers know that whatever they found now was substantially different from the conditions that prevailed 20 or 50 or 100 years ago?

“The best oceanographic instrument anyone could ever invent would be a time machine,” Curry said. The next-best approach was to find a fjord whose glacier had not accelerated and could be used as a proxy for the “before” conditions at the other fjords. Hamilton recommended the fjord known as 79N [I think this is near the Zachariae Glacier, which is no longer blocked by a huge ice shelf that used to be up on the northeast coast)], which lies about 1,000 miles north of Sermilik on the northeast coast of Greenland. (“It has a long Danish name which we all pronounce ‘Seventy-nine north,’ ” laughed Straneo.)

79N drains a massive glacier that still has a huge ice tongue. Small rocky islands near the mouth of the fjord hem in the ice tongue and may impede the flow and rapid loss of glacier ice into the fjord.

If the researchers could find a way to measure the temperature of waters underneath the ice tongue, 79N offered a fine natural laboratory for observing the effects of warming seawater on a glacier/fjord system that was not accelerating.

Come on hover

Pack ice in the fjords was so thick that even the Arctic Sunrise couldn’t penetrate to the glacier fronts. Fortunately, the ship had another way to give the researchers access to the inner reaches of the fjords—a helicopter and a pilot with experience in the Arctic. “Lucky Bird,” as the researchers called it, ferried them to within a few kilometers of the glaciers, enabling them to take measurements in areas that they could not have sampled otherwise.

As they flew over an ice-packed fjord, the team kept a lookout for leads of open water or spots where the ice looked thin enough to let an instrument drop through. When they spotted one, they had the pilot hover a few feet above the surface while one member of the team dropped an expendable bathythermograph, or XBT, out of one side of the helicopter, and another dropped a grounding wire out of the other side. An XBT measures water temperature as it sinks, transmitting the data up the wire to the researchers. As its name implies, it’s not retrieved and reused; each XBT completes one run and then is left wherever it lands.

WHOI mooring engineer Jim Ryder aims an XBT at a patch of open water in Kangerdlugssuaq Fjord
From the open door of the Greenpeace helicopter, WHOI mooring engineer Jim Ryder aims an XBT, or expendable bathythermograph, at a patch of open water in Kangerdlugssuaq Fjord. As it falls to the bottom, the XBT will send back information on the fjord water’s temperature. (Photo by Nick Cobbing, ? Greenpeace International)


Working from the helicopter “was the most fun part” of the whole cruise, said Sutherland. “It was crazy.” The pilot had to keep the chopper steady for the several minutes it took an XBT to complete its run to the bottom, and the scientists had to aim the XBT while sitting, well-strapped-in, with their legs hanging out of the craft. Lucky Bird’s doors had been removed to give the team a clear shot at the seams of open water below.

greenland
As the helicopter they arrived in departs, a team of researchers from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and the University of Maine prepares to drill through the ice to sample the water beneath it in 79N, a glacial fjord in northeastern Greenland. (Photo by Nick Cobbing, ? Greenpeace International)


“I think we were always safe, but definitely, this group was willing to try out new things,” said Straneo. “It’s good to be on a Greenpeace ship if you want to do this, since their first answer is never ‘No way’ but more like ‘Let’s see if we can do this in safety.’ ”

Fiamma Straneo (kneeling) and colleagues to drill through it to sample water within the fjord below.
A massive tongue of ice covers much of the fjord called "79N." The tongue extends from left to right in this picture. It has begun to split apart, forming a gap. Ice on the floor of the gap is thick enough to support researchers and equipment flown in by helicopter, yet thin enough to allow WHOI oceanographer Fiamma Straneo (kneeling) and colleagues to drill through it to sample water within the fjord below. (Photo by Nick Cobbing, ? Greenpeace International)


A layered ocean

During the monthlong cruise, Straneo and her team deployed 11 moorings and three floats that will gather data near the glaciers for a year. They also measured temperature and salinity, from the ocean surface to the bottom of the fjord, at various distances into each of the three fjords.

They were even able to take measurements beneath the ice tongue at 79N. Several miles up one arm of the fjord, the tongue had begun to split, in much the same way that a rift opens in a continental plate. At one end, the crack was just a few feet wide but a hundred or so feet deep; at the other, it was as wide as a football field and just a few yards deep. Along its whole length, the crack remained floored with ice. Near its wide end, the ice floor was thick enough to support a helicopter and four people, yet thin enough to drill through with an auger.

Straneo and her team did just that, riding the Lucky Bird into the crack, punching holes in the ice, and dropping XBTs and other instruments into the water below.

The researchers found that warm ocean water, originating from subtropical currents, had moved from the continental shelf into all three fjords. Even in 79N, far above the Arctic Circle and under a sheath of ice, at every location they checked below 150 meters, the water was above 32 °F. It wasn’t as warm as water in the more southern fjords, but it was warmer than expected, and definitely warm enough to melt ice.

The researchers identified three distinct masses of water in the fjords. At the surface was a thin layer of cold, fresh water that had melted off the glaciers. Just below the meltwater was a 100- to 150-meter-thick layer of cold, slightly saltier and denser Arctic water. Below that, from about 150 to 200 meters deep all the way to the bottom, the water was much warmer, saltier, and denser.

The differences in the salinity and density of the three waters keep them separate. “It’s like putting oil and water together,” Curry said. “They don’t mix.” It doesn’t take fancy instruments to know they’re separate, she said; dip a finger in a sample of each one, and you can taste the difference.

The scientists weren’t able to take measurements right next to the glacier fronts, but the warm water mass showed no dissipation from the fjord’s mouth to within a few kilometers of the front. It’s highly unlikely that it disappeared in those last few kilometers, she said; it probably persisted all the way up to the submerged face of the glacier.


Fast-flushing fjords

How does so much warm water get into the fjords? To find out, the researchers measured the speed and direction of the currents within and just outside the fjords. They got data about winds and major storm events from weather stations and satellites and took a close look at the structure of the fjords themselves.

That last item proved to be critical. None of the three fjords has a large sill that restricts waters flowing in from or out to the open ocean. They are deep all the way to their mouths and even beyond—a trough or a series of deep pools extends from each fjord’s mouth out onto the continental shelf. Straneo said that indicates that in past ice ages, the glaciers advanced and gouged troughs all the way to the edge of the shelf; when they retreated, the troughs and fjords remained. Today the troughs provide channels that allow deep, warmer ocean waters to move up into the fjords.

The researchers found unexpectedly strong currents in the fjords, along with strong winds and storms along the coast just outside the fjords. “Eventually we figured out that whenever you have a storm coming up the coast of Greenland, it generates strong winds along the coast, and these winds drive a very active exchange between the fjord and the shelf,” said Straneo.
The winds, which usually come out of the northeast, push surface waters into the fjord, creating a short-term exchange in which ocean water flows in on top and deeper fjord water flows out. After the storm, when the wind subsides, the flow reverses: Surface water flows out, and deeper water—which is quite warm—flows in.

“It’s like a piston,” said Curry. “A piston, if you push on it, can push water in, and if you pull on it, it sucks water out. That’s what we believe is going on here. The winds seem to create sucking and filling actions inside the fjords.”

Once they get into a fjord, Curry said, the deeper waters tend to stay warm. A fjord’s narrow shape leaves little room for deeper and upper water masses to swirl and mix. Polar water stays nearer the surface; subtropical water stays deep in the fjord—and stays warm.


New questions

The researchers don’t think this pattern has changed in recent years.

“The process of that water getting in and out of the fjord has probably been the same for a long time,” said Sutherland. “It’s just that if you’re bringing in a little bit more heat all of a sudden, then you might start to induce these changes in the glacier.”

More questions remain to be solved. Is the recent acceleration of the glaciers related to the warm water in the fjords? Perhaps the loss of a glacier’s ice tongue “undams” the river of ice, allowing it to flow faster.

And why is there more heat in the water along the coast now than there was in times past?

Some scientists have suggested that it’s simply part of a natural ocean-atmosphere cycle called the North Atlantic Oscillation, but Curry said the ocean water flowing north now is carrying more heat than in the past—and she attributes at least some of that difference to climate change. “The heat content of the subtropical source water is higher than at any time in the last 60 years, and that can’t be explained unless you take into account greenhouse warming,” she said.

Straneo hesitates to attribute the greater volume of warm water along Greenland’s east coast to greenhouse warming. “We know that the circulation patterns are changing and that more water from the subtropics is being delivered to subpolar and Nordic regions, but more work needs to be carried out before we can pinpoint what is going on,” she said. “It is true, though, that these changes, especially in the subtropics, are what we expect to see in a warming planet and that we do indeed see in the climate models.”

Clearly, there is a lot yet to learn about how the oceans affect Greenland’s glaciers. But by venturing into one of the most challenging environments on Earth, Straneo and her colleagues have shown how important the ice-ocean boundary is to our understanding of glacier loss.
And it’s a good thing the team got the measurements they did, when they did, said Curry; glacial time machines are in serious decline. A study published recently in the journal Nature reported signs that glaciers throughout Greenland are beginning to accelerate —all the way up to and beyond 79N.


Going back for moorings

Straneo is planning a follow-up cruise to learn more about what is happening at the ice-ocean boundary. If she can retrieve the moorings she deployed in 2009, they will provide the first year-round data from the fjords and tell her whether the deep warm water stays all year, and how circulation within the fjords changes with the seasons.

Getting such data will be hard; one of the two moorings she left in Sermilik Fjord in 2008 disappeared, and the other had moved dozens of meters away from the spot where it had been placed, probably the victim of a hit-and-run iceberg. But the displaced mooring survived and recorded valuable information about the persistence of warm water in the fjord—showing that it is possible to get long-term measurements in this challenging environment.

A grant from the WHOI Arctic Research Initiative, which paid for her trip with Greenpeace, will fund the retrieval of the moorings, while a grant from NSF will pay to set out new moorings for the next two years—but only in Sermilik Fjord. Straneo doesn’t know yet how she’ll recover the moorings she left in Kangerdlugssuaq Fjord; there are no nearby villages from which to hire a boat.

Her experience of the past few years has her looking into options she might not have considered before. “We’re being very creative about what we can do,” she said. “You have to be very adaptive. There’s a mining company that’s nearby, that maybe has a plane, a helicopter. I don’t know, we’ll figure it out. Maybe we’ll use kayaks."

http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/viewArticle.do?id=73766