New Greenland Ice Cracks Worry Scientists

WASHINGTON — In northern Greenland, a part of the Arctic that had seemed immune from global warming, new satellite images show a growing giant crack and an 11-square-mile chunk of ice hemorrhaging off a major glacier, scientists said Thursday.

And that's led the university professor who spotted the wounds in the massive Petermann glacier to predict disintegration of a major portion of the Northern Hemisphere's largest floating glacier within the year.

If it does worsen and other northern Greenland glaciers melt faster, then it could speed up sea level rise, already increasing because of melt in sourthern Greenland.

The crack is 7 miles long and about half a mile wide. It is about half the width of the 500 square mile floating part of the glacier. Other smaller fractures can be seen in images of the ice tongue, a long narrow sliver of the glacier.

"The pictures speak for themselves," said Jason Box, a glacier expert at the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University who spotted the changes while studying new satellite images. "This crack is moving, and moving closer and closer to the front. It's just a matter of time till a much larger piece is going to break off.... It is imminent."

The chunk that came off the glacier between July 10 and July 24 is about half the size of Manhattan and doesn't worry Box as much as the cracks. The Petermann glacier had a larger breakaway ice chunk in 2000. But the overall picture worries some scientists.

"As we see this phenomenon occurring further and further north _ and Petermann is as far north as you can get _ it certainly adds to the concern," said Waleed Abdalati, director of the Center for the Study of Earth from Space at the University of Colorado.

The question that now faces scientists is: Are the fractures part of normal glacier stress or are they the beginning of the effects of global warming?

Story continues below

advertisement

"It certainly is a major event," said NASA ice scientist Jay Zwally in a telephone interview from a conference on glaciers in Ireland. "It's a signal but we don't know what it means."

It is too early to say it is clearly global warming, Zwally said. Scientists don't like to attribute single events to global warming, but often say such events fit a pattern.

University of Colorado professor Konrad Steffen, who returned from Greenland Wednesday and has studied the Petermann glacier in the past, said that what Box saw is not too different from what he saw in the 1990s: "The crack is not alarming... I would say it is normal."

However, scientists note that it fits with the trend of melting glacial ice they first saw in the southern part of the massive island and seems to be marching north with time. Big cracks and breakaway pieces are foreboding signs of what's ahead.

Further south in Greenland, Box's satellite images show that the Jakobshavn glacier, the fastest retreating glacier in the world, set new records for how far it has moved inland.

That concerns Colorado's Abdalati: "It could go back for miles and miles and there's no real mechanism to stop it."

___

On the Net:

Ohio State University images and data: http://bprc.osu.edu/MODIS/

Comments

[johnnyjust]

Do you mean to say that Greenland might one day look like it did when it was so named?

[Exusian]

Hey look, while all of you have all been arguing about this one glacier this summer's Arctic sea ice melt has almost caught up to last summer's melt:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png

[realpolitic]

Great graph! But the deniers will keep denying, that's what they do. It has little to do with science for them. It goes right to their core ideology of free markets and selfish individualism.

[greendrake]

FYI: floating glaciers have already contributed their entire potential to sea level rise. Whether the glacier breaks up or not, the ice that is already floating will not add any more to sea level.

The concern is that glaciers may be ACCELERATING - that this kind of glacial ice phenomenon may indicate a speeding up of the flow of the glacier, such that more previously land-bound ice will make its way to the sea, hastening the rise in sea level.

The article does not get this distinction right.

[rocksthedock]

This is a natural process that has occurred many times in the last 3 billion years. The primary impact initially felt on our planet will come as a result of a dramatic change in the ocean's currents; a change that will be felt soon. I would surmise that when new routes for currents open, as is happening due to melting ice sheets and cracks appearing in the arctic land masses, the change will be felt in years .. not thousands of years..

[sculptor]

If the ice is already floating it's not going to raise the sea level if it breaks off and melts. However, if enough floating ice melts it could possibly effect the salinity of the artic sea enough to disrupt the gulf stream and essentially put northern Europe in the deep-freeze. I'm not an expert at climate science or oceanography but I have heard this possibility raised before by such experts.

[Huffingtonposter231]

A New Ice Age may be coming. Scientests are now standing up against "man made global warming a disaster" BS. http://www.politickernj.com/bguhl/22291/doherty-new-scientific-data-justifies-repealing-global-warming-response-act

Al Gores new religion will find it's place in the scrap heap where all radicalized junk science eventually goes.

[OneVoiceInACrowd]

Yeah, now there an intelligent article-20 year sunpsot cycle will start period of dramatic cooling some scientists suggest. Hmm some, then to finish it she states:
"Rather than conforming our policies to questionable scientific theories, we should be looking at the concrete economic indicators that show our state’s economy is in trouble."

Which are the questionable theories? The ones that some scientist suggest or the ones that most of the Worlds scientists suggest?

He's looking out for his States economy, fair enough.

Look, most scientists tell us that global warming in happening and that man is atleast partially responsible. They are not ruling out sunspot activity as playing a big role, but with the evidence at hand the planet is on a warming trend and if continued will have far reaching consequences for us. So the thinking goes that if we can reduce that warming we can also reduce the consequences. That is what we are going to do until we have more evidence to consider.

Doherty is trying to find any justification to keep from having to be a real leader, he just doesn't realize it. He needs to step up and make green jobs in his community a priority. Looking for outliers to support his policy will only be a hindrance, and how he communicates it in this article makes him look stupid.

[Huffingtonposter231]

Actually the sun has many cycles short and long. To deny that is simply to deny reality.

I have no problem saying man might "contribute" to global warming. But so what? More and more scientists are telling us from all angles.....carbon is not he culprit. Yet the politically correct left will not be happy until they enact punishing carbon taxes, no matter what the facts and no matter how cold it gets.

I lived long enough to see the crowd that was telling us pollution was creating an ice age be shown up to be radicalized nuts worshiping a false religion. I think it's possible I'll live long enough to see radicalized nuts claiming pollution is causing a global warming catastrophe proved to be worshipers of a false religion too.

I think the cycle guys have it right, that the sun will do what it always does, the cycles will line up, and the earths furnace (the sun) is going to chill us down, crops may fail in many northern climates, and the global warming crowd will pretend they never did really believe Al Gore.

[Exusian]

Ah, the "false religion" argument.

The refuge of those who have no coherent argument about the science.

[MalamuteMan]

So Huffington­poster231, Maybe you’re right... maybe Al Gore and the scientists are all wrong... Exactly what is wrong with taking the cautious approach??? What harm is there in doing what we can to take good care of our planet???

[LiberalBuzz]

Don't bother trying to talk to or have conversations with Flat Earthers. As far as they are concerned there is nothing wrong, nothing to see, move along and trust your corporate owned president.

Flat Earthers are convinced that corporations are our buddies and would NEVER do anything to harm the environment especially for anything as crass as money.

[Darkdonnie]

Global Warming is a Fact! Along with global cooling! Back in the 70's (yes I am old enough to remember) global cooling was the disaster du jour that was about to happen! Global warming caused by humans is a scheme, theory and boondoggle from the left to enable the largest transfer of wealth in history. And no matter how many times you say the “debate is over” other than in your mind, it won’t make it true. Wake up the world is run on hydrocarbons and you can make fairy tale wishes of ten years and no more oil. But this is the real world. And if anyone is living on a flat earth it is you fanatical environmentalist. You want a real cause go after the worst polluters in the world (China if you haven’t figured it out yet). We as a nation have become 50% more efficient in our use of energy (simple Google search will show). That is pretty good by any standard but we can do better. How about the cleanest, Greenest, most efficient, and safest energy in the known universe Nuclear energy. Why are we behind the world (including the French which frost may bottom) in nuclear energy because of uniformed fanatical environmentalist using junk science.

[realpolitic]

Incomes extremes are now more disproportional than ever in this country after eight years of Bush. Your transfer of wealth is a fiction. Don't worry the wealthiest among us are not going to be forced to eat at McDonald's any time soon, unless they own the franchise.

[Darkdonnie]

And most of your suposed poor are a myth also.
• Forty-three percent of all poor households actu¬ally own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
• Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
• Only 6 percent of poor households are over¬crowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
• The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
• Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars. • Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
• Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
• Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.

If we would concentrate on the truly poor (bottom 10%) I would get on board.

[NL207]

"Incomes extremes are now more disproportional than ever in this country "

And you have measured this how?

[nodonjuan]

I heard the GOP were running out of ice for their martini's. Now we know where they plan to get it.

[fino462]

Ok, so the first thing we need to do in order to combat and hopefully remedy this trend is to acknowledge the fact that those who continue to nurse the highly illogical belief that global warming is not reality are, thankfully, moving further and further towards the minority fringe. Embrace the beauty that most Americans, as well as the rest of the world, acknowledge and understand the concept that the transition of CO2 from a geological sink to an ambient gas does impact the earth's climate (I just love it when people who lack any capacity to understand natural phenomenon reveal their ignorance by citing their misconceptions of natural phenomenon to support their completely baseless assumptions, ie "the earth's climate has always changed over time"...yes it does, but always over centuries, millennia and epochs, not decades as we are observing now). So, I believe, let us move past the conversation of fact or fiction, and move onto an intelligible dialogue among those of us with the evolved intellect to realize that a solution can be achieved, and let the last of the naysayers die off like the dying breed they are.

[JohnKdrew]

This argument is all very fascinating -- but nowhere in these comments do I see the 'other' climate extremists -- the people who fear it may already be too late for many aspects of our present way of life! Triage is applied in an emergency to allow the most globally beneficial use of inadequate resources. There will be severe climate disruptions, which will be left untreated because they will be recognized as able to recover autonomously. Selected climatical­ly-induced emergencies where tax-payers’ money can reduce suffering will be funded. Last, and most sadly, there may be even situations where unlimited funds cannot reverse impacts and the limited funds are deemed better deployed on other projects. e.g. www.climatechangetriage.net

[fumes]

hi realpolitic, you're everywhere on this thread! and so i'll answer you here it's easier: i'm not a fundamentalist, i'm an atheist. i'm not a global warming denier or even a global warming crisis denier. i'm a plan A denier. i think the war on co2 is admirable but futile. you, exursian, mghamma and some others think we cause all the global warming and i think that that's just plain nuts. the earth can warm and cool without our help, and does. we don't own the earth or control the earth or lead the climate around on some leash. and just so's ya know i'm not a meanie when i say coastal people and equatorial people are probably going to have to pick up and move some day. and yes that would mean some great cities and some poor low land populations will be affected, so help 'em pack if you want to do something. adapt or die, that's not being mean or disrespectful, that's being realistic realpolitic!

[realpolitic]

Yes, I, exusian and mghama wrote the IPCC report. You are correct.

[fumes]

be serious rp, you and i and everyone else do not control the weather or the climate. got a model from ipcc or anywhere else that says otherwise? no you do not. so get real, real, and think plan b, because controlling co2 is not going to happen.

[NL207]

You certainly did not read the 4AR carefully.

[LightningJoe]

fumes:

You deny denying, and then deny it -- then you forget logic, when you say that the "war on co2" is "admirable but futile." If it's futile, how on earth is it admirable?

Obviously, you compose your prose for effect, rather than reason. Starting that way, can you expect anyone to take what follows, for anything more than noise?

Argument without reason = rant.

"The earth can warm and cool without our help." Well sure, it does that every day. But if scientists agree on anything (and yes, they do) it's that CO2 creates a predictable warming effect -- in the lab, in track-proven climate models, and yes, in the real world. Warming events are proceeding at a pace that puts our modest predictions to shame; we now see that even our worst-case estimates of the impacts of warming were fatally pollyannish.

Your attitude strikes me less as someone who really doesn't care, and more like someone who can't afford to care. Can't personally confront the looming reality of a world in which millions die of causes like famine, water shortages, migrating diseases, and the critical depletion of ocean-caught foods. A world of uncontrolled burning and desertification.

A world which could have been avoided, if people like you had educated and open minds.

We're facing the start of all this within the next generation, as a realistic scenario. No waiting for the turn of the century. It's here now.

I'd run too, if I could.

[fumes]

hi lightningjoe, take a breath there bud, we're not facing extinction, and we're not all going to die! modeling from arrhenius to keeling have fallen inaccurately short of predicting what we are now experiencing. they went with co2 as the control behind warming or cooling due to it's ability to force water vapor into the atmosphere. and we all know that water vapor does the real work of holding heat in (think: cold dry desert nights v. hot sticky humid ones), or holding heat out (think: clouds). i like the theory that water vapor can take care of itself and cause it's own forcing and thereby create a runaway global warming effect which is more like what we are experiencing right now(google clausius and clapeyron). and as for my denial/logic: i think the war on co2 is admirable because a great deal of wonderful do-gooder energy has come to the fore over the concept that co2 is the culprit and that we caused a great deal of it by reintroducing sequestered carbon when we burn fossil fuel. and i think that that direction is futile because i still don't believe that .038% of the atmosphere (co2) can force water vapor into the atmosphere as effectively as water vapor can force itself. the co2 angle is anecdotal and flawed, methinks. but then, what the hell do i know?

[OneVoiceInACrowd]

Another good go around Fumes and others...

[fumes]

thanks onevoice, we couldn't have done it without you! i think that this sort of forum is what tim berners-lee had in mind, ya think? say, i never did hear back from lightningjoe below but i loved his line: ''You deny denying, and then deny it -- then you forget logic...''. snicker..

[Exusian]

"you, exursian, mghamma and some others think we cause all the global warming"

I'll thank you to not put words in my mouth, especially when they are not true.

[fumes]

ok

[BibleProphecy]

The root cause of the environmental declines we are facing throughout the world is a fulfillment of Bible prophecy.

Once one-fourth part of the earth is destroyed (Re.6:7-8) we will move forward to the next Seal events, followed by Trumpet events, followed by Plague events.

The earth is on a downhill slid; it will not recover. The first four Trumpet events will destroy an additional one-third part (Re.8:7-12).



Patricia © Bible Prophecy on the Web
Author of the self-study aid, The Book of Revelation Explained © 1982
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BibleProphecy

[TimmySlagle]

Your screen name isn't fooling anyone.

We know who you are Dr. Hansen!

[realpolitic]

No. it is George Bush.

[SusanRen]

Alot of people on here think the Bible is a fairytale and God is an imaginary friend. I do not. It also says there shall be a new heaven and a new earth. Alot of disbelievers are going to be in for a rough ride.

[TimmySlagle]

"the Bible is a fairytale and God is an imaginary friend."

And there are a lot of people here who think the IPCC report is a fairy tale, and Al Gore is an imaginary friend.

[crazylikeafox]

And a stupid fairy tale it is.
As for rough ride, I'm here to tell you you aren't going to miss it either.

[gps8001]

Well sitting back and waiting for the end and ultimate salvation seems like a waste of the time that God has apparently given us.

[shockmagog]

"The first four Trumpet events will destroy an additional one-third part"

Sounds like a recipe...for disaster. Science fiction is way less boring.

[GrainOSand]

My belief in a power and presence beyond that of humans is steadfast.

Though I grew up in Christian churches, I cannot call myself a Christian. Because I grew up in the Christian faith, I am very aware of the prophecies of the end times. I am also very aware that no human can predict when God will come to make things right here in this failed attempt at mass existence, where greed, deceit, hate, and disastrous conflict run rampant. There may be signs of coming doom but no one can know for sure when the hand of the almighty will come to collect on the debts of sinners and to bring final resolution to the “seemingly endless” conflict that is this manifest world.

Some believe the year 2012 is the year due to speculations concerning the Mayan calendar. I do not disrespect such soothsaying nor do I buy into it. All I can do, all any of us can really do, is the best we can to realize our God given potential. If you are a non-believer, you still have an innate potential that remains untapped. Morality is not a thing of religion, it is an internal conclusion that one comes to if they endeavor to think beyond the realm of self.

[GrainOSand]

Fire and brimstone, catastrophic loss of life, pain and suffering untold, disease and pestilence, is there any amongst us that covet such a reality? None of us can operate in the realm of God, but we can love one another, we can help one another, we can rise above our limitations to transform our world. However, self-interest has bogged us down in division, in scorn, in hate, in malice, in greed, in all things that seem to momentarily reward but ultimately do great injury to an entire world.

When bombs kill innocents, the universe weeps. No life is unimportant. Our very dialogue betrays our callousness. We call innocents killed in war collateral damage. The millionaires and the billionaires cool their feet in the pools of million dollar mansions while suffering rages on and they feel smug. Punishment for wrongdoing knows not tax bracket but heart intent. You may enjoy your seventy or eighty years of prominence amongst mere men and women, but the eternal hot flames burns souls. Is this a literal flame or is it as Aristotle talked about in the Nicomachean Papers when he pondered what the common good is. When he postulated that one could think they have lived a good life, but if vision into life is afforded after death, and one is made to see how their life brings suffering to their offspring; this might be a version of hell, this might undo any myths of life lived well.

[diogeron]

At first I thought this post was meant to be satirical. Realizing it isn't, it's absolutely frightening that people in 2008 would ignore the National Academy of Science and give credence to nonsense written thousands of years ago by people who thought the earth was the center of the universe.

[johnnyjust]

The only reason people believed that was because scientists said it was.

The bible never mentions it, though it does mention the earth being round. And, of course, people knew that from observing the phases of the moon and how people disappear over the horizon.

[gardenbookie]

The "Race Into Space" in search of a planet or other heavenly body that can support human life has been in constant motion for....how many years now? Me thinks we need to get a hustle on. We're gonna run outta time at about the same time Kansas slips into the sea.

[TimmySlagle]

Kansas is 740 feet above sea level.

If all the Glaciers, Greenland and Antarctica completely melted (highly unlikely), the oceans would rise less than 250 feet.

[realpolitic]

Kansas may be safe, but how about San Francisco?

"The map below shows areas of San Francisco, the Bay Area and the Sacramento Valley that would be flooded at various stages of sea level rise. You can select a value of sea level rise using the dropdown box in the upper left corner of the map. The navigation buttons can be used to zoom in/out and pan across the map.

The map clearly shows that a sea level rise of only a few meters would inundate hundreds of square miles of land. San Francisco Bay and San Pablo Bay would enlarge, covering industry, residences and infrastructure. More surprising would be the enormous area of flooding that would occur in the Sacramento Valley. Hundreds of square miles would be underwater there and the intrusion of this salt water would have major environmental impacts."

http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/san-francisco.shtml

[notepad2]

Even the scientists in the article don`t say the crack has been caused by humans or global warming. Never mind, though. The liberal "scientists" in here know better.

[who38]

Whatever the cause--whether global warming or religious prophecy--it's happening. We need to be looking at a response. Often things heal by treating the symptom.