NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses

timosman

Banned
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
29,090
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddar...ns-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.

According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.

“We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.” Zwally added that his team “measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas.”

Scientists calculate how much the ice sheet is growing or shrinking from the changes in surface height that are measured by the satellite altimeters. In locations where the amount of new snowfall accumulating on an ice sheet is not equal to the ice flow downward and outward to the ocean, the surface height changes and the ice-sheet mass grows or shrinks.

But it might only take a few decades for Antarctica’s growth to reverse, according to Zwally. “If the losses of the Antarctic Peninsula and parts of West Antarctica continue to increase at the same rate they’ve been increasing for the last two decades, the losses will catch up with the long-term gain in East Antarctica in 20 or 30 years -- I don’t think there will be enough snowfall increase to offset these losses.”

The study analyzed changes in the surface height of the Antarctic ice sheet measured by radar altimeters on two European Space Agency European Remote Sensing (ERS) satellites, spanning from 1992 to 2001, and by the laser altimeter on NASA’s Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) from 2003 to 2008.

Zwally said that while other scientists have assumed that the gains in elevation seen in East Antarctica are due to recent increases in snow accumulation, his team used meteorological data beginning in 1979 to show that the snowfall in East Antarctica actually decreased by 11 billion tons per year during both the ERS and ICESat periods. They also used information on snow accumulation for tens of thousands of years, derived by other scientists from ice cores, to conclude that East Antarctica has been thickening for a very long time.

“At the end of the last Ice Age, the air became warmer and carried more moisture across the continent, doubling the amount of snow dropped on the ice sheet,” Zwally said.

The extra snowfall that began 10,000 years ago has been slowly accumulating on the ice sheet and compacting into solid ice over millennia, thickening the ice in East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica by an average of 0.7 inches (1.7 centimeters) per year. This small thickening, sustained over thousands of years and spread over the vast expanse of these sectors of Antarctica, corresponds to a very large gain of ice – enough to outweigh the losses from fast-flowing glaciers in other parts of the continent and reduce global sea level rise.

Zwally’s team calculated that the mass gain from the thickening of East Antarctica remained steady from 1992 to 2008 at 200 billion tons per year, while the ice losses from the coastal regions of West Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula increased by 65 billion tons per year.

“The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away,” Zwally said. “But this is also bad news. If the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.”

“The new study highlights the difficulties of measuring the small changes in ice height happening in East Antarctica,” said Ben Smith, a glaciologist with the University of Washington in Seattle who was not involved in Zwally’s study.

"Doing altimetry accurately for very large areas is extraordinarily difficult, and there are measurements of snow accumulation that need to be done independently to understand what’s happening in these places,” Smith said.

To help accurately measure changes in Antarctica, NASA is developing the successor to the ICESat mission, ICESat-2, which is scheduled to launch in 2018. “ICESat-2 will measure changes in the ice sheet within the thickness of a No. 2 pencil,” said Tom Neumann, a glaciologist at Goddard and deputy project scientist for ICESat-2. “It will contribute to solving the problem of Antarctica’s mass balance by providing a long-term record of elevation changes.”
 
From the same site,
https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddar...l-sea-ice-diminishing-despite-antarctic-gains

NASA Study Shows Global Sea Ice Diminishing, Despite Antarctic Gains

Sea ice increases in Antarctica do not make up for the accelerated Arctic sea ice loss of the last decades, a new NASA study finds. As a whole, the planet has been shedding sea ice at an average annual rate of 13,500 square miles (35,000 square kilometers) since 1979, the equivalent of losing an area of sea ice larger than the state of Maryland every year.
“Even though Antarctic sea ice reached a new record maximum this past September, global sea ice is still decreasing,” said Claire Parkinson, author of the study and climate scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. “That’s because the decreases in Arctic sea ice far exceed the increases in Antarctic sea ice.”

Antarctica may be gaining some ice, but the Northern polar regions are still shedding ice rapidly.

On this map, where are the jet streams?

jet_streams_Polar&Sub.jpg


The loss from global warming in the north is going to affect the earth a lot more than the gains from the south, unfortunately.
 
I'm still wondering how you accurately measure sea level rises that are so slight. The sea is never calm, tides go up and down all the time. There is so much variation. Even if the sea rises 0.27mm per year for 100 years, it's only 2.7cm, a little more than an inch. Can we really measure that ? The sea/oceans is/are one big liquid body that spans the earth, it's a giant dynamic system. Where do you measure, what do you measure ? Not saying you can't measure sea level rise but how can you be certain that what you are measuring is true.
 
From the same site,
https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddar...l-sea-ice-diminishing-despite-antarctic-gains

NASA Study Shows Global Sea Ice Diminishing, Despite Antarctic Gains

Except that melting arctic ice doesn't effect sea levels because the ice in the arctic is already IN the sea. While accumulating ice on the land mass of the antarctic causes sea levels to drop because it is volume removed from the sea. Hahahahaha!

Real scientists would admit that they don't really have a clue about the way climate works. But not the politicized climate "scientists". In spite of a string of dismal failures twenty years long, they insist that not only do they understand climate but they are able to make predictions about what that extremely complex and chaotic system will do. Such hubris.

Earth's climate has only ever looked stable when seen through the fearful, myopic eyes of human beings trying to project their puny human time frame onto systems that operate on the eon scale. The climate on earth has ALWAYS been a process of change. Where did anyone get a contrary idea? Certainly not from the factual evidence. I don't know if human activity is contributing to a change in the climate, but I DO know that the climate would change with or without human activity. I know this because it always has. It would behoove us as a species to learn to adapt to climactic change because it is inevitable no matter what we do. Pounding our tiny fists on the table in inconsolable fear and rage at a planet that won't stand still is of little survival value.
 
Except that melting arctic ice doesn't effect sea levels because the ice in the arctic is already IN the sea. While accumulating ice on the land mass of the antarctic causes sea levels to drop because it is volume removed from the sea. Hahahahaha!

Real scientists would admit that they don't really have a clue about the way climate works. But not the politicized climate "scientists". In spite of a string of dismal failures twenty years long, they insist that not only do they understand climate but they are able to make predictions about what that extremely complex and chaotic system will do. Such hubris.

Earth's climate has only ever looked stable when seen through the fearful, myopic eyes of human beings trying to project their puny human time frame onto systems that operate on the eon scale. The climate on earth has ALWAYS been a process of change. Where did anyone get a contrary idea? Certainly not from the factual evidence. I don't know if human activity is contributing to a change in the climate, but I DO know that the climate would change with or without human activity. I know this because it always has. It would behoove us as a species to learn to adapt to climactic change because it is inevitable no matter what we do. Pounding our tiny fists on the table in inconsolable fear and rage at a planet that won't stand still is of little survival value.

Let that sink in. +rep
 
A controversial NASA study says Antarctica is gaining ice. Here’s why you should be skeptical

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ning-ice-heres-why-you-should-stay-skeptical/

Late last week, a study published by NASA scientists in the Journal of Glaciology made the surprising claim that the gigantic continent of Antarctica is actually gaining ice, rather than losing it, to the tune of 82 gigatons (or billion metric tons) per year from 2003 to 2008.

The study has drawn massive amounts of media attention — and no wonder. It contradicts numerous prior scientific claims, including a 2012 study in Science by a small army of polar scientists, a study from earlier this year in Earth and Planetary Science Letters (which found 92 gigatons of net losses per year) and this 2014 study in Geophysical Research Letters (160 gigatons of net losses per year). It also contradicts assertions by the leading consensus body of climate science, the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which stated in 2013 that Antarctica is “losing mass” and that this process is accelerating. That statement was itself based on multiple studies showing Antarctic ice loss.

Not only does the new research fly in the face of all of this — if true, it also raises serious questions about our current understanding of sea level rise. If Antarctica is actually gaining ice, that means that a significant percentage of the current rise of the seas, estimated at roughly 3.22 millimeters per year by NASA itself, must be coming from elsewhere. (It takes 360 gigatons of ice to raise seas by 1 millimeter).

No wonder, then, that a number of researchers have been quoted expressing skepticism about the new research, even as climate change doubters have had a field day — adding the study to an argumentative arsenal that previously included misleading claims about growing Antarctic sea ice.

So what’s going on here — and what should you make of the new claim that Antarctica isn’t losing ice or raising our seas?

Measurement disputes and burdens of proof. The new NASA study uses satellite data from NASA’s ICEsat (Ice, Cloud and land Elevation Satellite) and the European Remote-sensing Satellite to derive its results, which are based on precision measurements of the elevation of the ice sheet and how that is changing over time. The key finding is that snow-related mass gain atop the ice sheet is more than compensating for the flow of ice outward in glaciers that reach the sea.

“Our interpretation is that this has been going on since the beginning of the last ice age when the snowfall over the continent doubled, the accumulation over the continent doubled, as shown in ice cores,” says H. Jay Zwally, the lead author and a longtime NASA expert on the planet’s ice sheets and methods for studying them with satellites.

More specifically, the research asserts that a “dynamic thickening” of ice over time has occurred as a result of this snowfall. Or as a NASA explanation puts it, “This small thickening, sustained over thousands of years and spread over the vast expanse of these sectors of Antarctica, corresponds to a very large gain of ice – enough to outweigh the losses from fast-flowing glaciers in other parts of the continent and reduce global sea level rise.”

However, this contradicts many other results, including those derived using a different NASA tool — the GRACE satellites, twin measurement devices that orbit the Earth and measure the changing mass of ice based on differential tugs of gravity on the spacecraft as they pass over it. Accordingly, numerous scientists have expressed skepticism, to varying degrees, about the new research.

Andrew Shepherd, a glaciologist at the University of Leeds in the UK who was an author of one of the recent studies cited above finding net Antarctic mass loss, puts it this way in an e-mail to the Post:

Zwally and his team have tried to account for snowfall, which masks changes in the thickness of the polar ice sheets. It’s right to attempt this, but in places where nothing much happens – like the interior of Antarctica, which is a vast desert – it’s really quite difficult to be sure that snowfall can be simulated with enough precision to detect ice imbalance. Fortunately we now have many different ways to examine Earth’s ice sheets – from space and on foot – and I’m confident that we can get to the bottom of this contradiction by taking everything into account.

I also reached an author of the other study cited above finding a net mass loss using GRACE — geoscientist Christopher Harig of Princeton University. Harig defended the GRACE measurements and the finding that Antarctica is losing mass, and said that a key part of the difference between his research and the new study involves how researchers handle something called “glacial isostatic adjustment” or GIA, which refers to the rising of land as the weight of ice has been removed from it since the last ice age.

As Harig put it by e-mail:

GRACE gives us the most direct measurement of mass changes that we have currently. This paper, which uses laser altimetry, claims the discrepancy between our results is due to recent GIA model corrections being incorrect, and that GRACE is more sensitive to the error. If we add back the GIA corrections, and compare our results then, their estimates should agree with ours because we measure mass directly. Instead they are still very far away. Arguing that because their results are different, they must be better, is unsustainable.

Other scientists have also defended the GRACE approach, and criticized the new research. Al Jazeera, for instance, quoted two other top Antarctic researchers — NASA’s Eric Rignot and the National Snow and Ice Data Center’s Ted Scambos — expressing arguably stronger criticisms of the new work than those cited above. Rignot has published some of the most cited work on the rapid retreat and unsettling vulnerability of West Antarctica, and Scambos is an author of a recent study finding that strong winds are wearing down East Antarctica and likely adding 80 gigatons per year to sea level rise — results that pretty clearly trend in a very different direction from the new NASA study.

So there is plenty of skepticism out there — but at the same time, Zwally fully stands by the new research. “We have a very high confidence in our results,” he says. “We have examined the accuracy of our results quite carefully, we believe they’re accurate, and in the paper we report why they differ from other methods, and provide constructive critiques of why they differ.”

In an interview, Zwally also reiterated the notion that GRACE is more sensitive to how one treats glacial isostatic adjustment — clearly, a key point of dispute here.

What’s clear, then, is that we are looking at a significant scientific disagreement — one that turns on different technologies, methodologies, and adjustments. In such a situation, scientists will now need to hash this out and reconcile their understanding of what is happening to the gigantic snowy mass of East Antarctica in particular.

In the meantime, nonspecialists may understandably feel baffled by the technical details at play here. But here’s where they can be more confident: Since the new results contradict a lot of other findings, they will likely face a major challenge when it comes to convincing the Antarctic research community as a whole.

That’s no criticism of the scientists behind the new study — it’s simply how science works. And as the process plays out, it’s fair for scientists and outside observers alike to regard the new research as having to overcome a relatively high burden of proof, and to stay skeptical.

None of which means you should worry any less about Antarctica and sea level rise. In the meantime, the reasons for worry about Antarctica aren’t any less — and particularly when it comes to West Antarctica, a marine based ice sheet that some scientists fear has already begun a process of irreversible collapse. Indeed, a new study released Monday finds that accelerating mass loss in the glaciers of West Antarctica’s Amundsen sea region could undermine the entire ice sheet and set in motion an inevitable, if slow moving, 3.3 meter (or over 10 foot) rise in global sea levels.

All of the research groups involved here agree that a key part of West Antarctica is losing mass and that, if treated on its own rather than as part of the larger continent, is making a net positive contribution to sea level rise. The new NASA study only covers a period from 1992 to 2008, so it excludes more recent observations that other researchers have made in this area. Nonetheless, it too finds accelerating mass loss in one key part of West Antarctica that includes the closely watched Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers, growing from 60 gigatons per year between 1992 to 2001 to 97 gigatons per year between 2003 and 2008.

Zwally is skeptical about some of the more worrying takes on West Antarctic loss, but he certainly doesn’t deny that it’s happening. “There’s no reason to believe that the loss that we see now will not continue for a long time,” he says. “But there’s a serious question about whether it is still accelerating.”

Research drawing on more recent data, however, does suggest the loss rate continues to increase. Another NASA supported study of the Amundsen Sea region alone, published in late 2014, ran from 1992 all the way to 2013, and found that the melt rate had “tripled during the last decade.”

As for what’s actually happening to sea levels if Antarctica is a net gainer rather than loser of ice, Zwally says he thinks the ice is indeed coming from elsewhere — the possibilities include Greenland, the melting of smaller glaciers around the world, and more ocean heat leading to greater thermal expansion of seawater.

Any way you look at it, though, the bottom line is that we’re facing ongoing sea level rise — and an increasing mass loss from Antarctica or a decreasing mass gain (as the new study finds) would both make that problem worse. As Jamin Greenbaum, a researcher at the University of Texas at Austin who studies East Antarctica, put it by e-mail:

Unfortunately, this study doesn’t change the fact that sea level rise has been accelerating since around 1870. Actually, it suggests that Antarctica’s ability to slow that rise is decreasing due to alarming trends in coastal mass loss. For instance, in East Antarctica, Totten Glacier is losing enough mass on its own to balance mass gains in an area larger than Texas.

All in all, then, the current disagreement helps to underscore that even as humans begin to modify the biggest systems and features of the planet, scientists are still struggling to fully measure and comprehend those changes.

Until the current debate gets ironed out, then, there are several possible stances you can take, ranging from fully accepting the new study over the prior ones — as many climate change doubters seem to be doing — to dismissing it out of hand. But the most reasonable one is probably to regard these surprising new findings with a fair dose of skepticism — and to continue worrying about ice losses along the Antarctic coasts.
 
Back
Top