Greenland update for 2010: record melting and a massive calving event

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 2:31 PM GMT on March 04, 2011

Share this Blog
6
+

No humans were present on the morning of August 4, 2010, in a remote fjord in Northwest Greenland, when the air vibrated with a thunderous crack as one of the largest icebergs in world history calved from the Petermann Glacier, the island's second largest ocean-terminating glacier. Where the glacier meets the sea, a 43 mile-long tongue of floating ice existed at the beginning of 2010. On August 4 2010, a quarter of this 43 mile-long tongue of floating ice fractured off, spawning a 100 square mile ice island four times the size of Manhattan, with a thickness half that of the Empire State building. According to Andreas Muenchow, associate professor of physical ocean science and engineering at the University of Delaware's College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment, the freshwater stored in this ice island could have kept the Delaware or Hudson rivers flowing for more than two years, or kept all U.S. public tap water flowing for 120 days. There was speculation that the ice island could find its way into the open Atlantic Ocean in two years, and potentially pose a threat to oil platforms and ships. However, as the ice island made its turn to get from the narrow Petermann Fjord to enter Nares Strait between Greenland and Canada, the mighty iceberg split into thousands of small icebergs that will not pose an unusual threat to shipping when they emerge into the Atlantic.


Figure 1. The 100 square-mile ice island that broke off the Petermann Glacier heads out of the Petermann Fjord in this image taken by NASA's Aqua satellite on August 21, 2010. Image credit: NASA. I've constructed a 7-frame satellite animation available here that shows the calving and break-up of the Petermann Glacier ice island. The animation begins on August 5, 2010, and ends on September 21, with images spaced about 8 days apart. The images were taken by NASA's Aqua and Terra satellites.

Petermann Glacier spawned smaller ice islands in 2001 (34 square miles) and in 2008 (10 square miles). In 2005, the Ayles Ice Shelf, about 60 miles to the west of Petermann Glacier, disintegrated and became a 34 square-mile ice island. The August 2010 Petermann Glacier calving event created the largest iceberg observed in the Arctic since 1962, when the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf on the north coast of Canada's Ellesmere Island calved off a massive 230 square mile chunk. The Ward Hunt Ice Shelf also calved off a huge 21 square mile ice island a few days after the August 2010 Petermann Glacier calving event. According to an article in livescience.com, "Driftwood and narwhal remains found along the Ellesmere coast have radiocarbon dates from roughly 3,000 to 6,800 years ago, implying that the ice has been intact since those remains were deposited." All of the these calving events are evidence that the ice sheets in the Arctic are responding as one would expect to significantly warmer temperatures.

Warmer ocean temperatures cause significant melting of Greenland's glaciers
At a talk last December at the world's largest conference on climate change, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) meeting in San Francisco, glacier expert Eric Rignot of UC-Irvine implicated ocean warming as a key reason for the calving of the Petermann Glacier's ice island. The ocean waters near the glacier have warmed by 1 - 2°C over the past three years, he said, and all of the periphery of Greenland has seen ocean heat increases in recent years, with the result that 20 - 80% of all the mass lost by Greenland's glaciers in recent years could be attributed to melting of the glaciers by warmer waters attacking them from beneath. Ocean temperatures along the southwest coast of Greenland (60N to 70N, 60W to 50W) computed from the UK Hadley Center data set during 2010 were 2.9°C (5.2°F) above average--a truly remarkable anomaly, and far warmer than the previous record of 1.5°C above average set in 2003. Sea surface temperature records for Greenland began in the 1920s. A study earlier this year published in the journal Science (Spielhagen et al., 2011) found that ocean temperatures on the east side of Greenland are now at their warmest levels in at least 2,000 years. The researchers studied a sediment core containing fossil remains of planktic foraminifers, which vary as a function of water temperature. The study noted that not only have the waters flowing northward on the east side of Greenland warmed significantly, the volume of water flowing north has also increased, resulting in a large transport of heat into the Arctic. "Such an increased heat input has far-reaching consequences," they wrote.


Figure 2. Departure of sea surface temperature from average for 2010 from the NOAA Daily Optimum Interpolation SST Anomaly data set for October 2010. Areas colored red are warmer than the 1971-2000 average, areas colored blue are cooler than that average. A large region of record warm water temperatures extended along the west coast of Greenland, leading to record warm air temperatures and record melting along the western portion of Greenland in 2010. Ocean temperatures along the southwest coast of Greenland (60N to 70N, 60W to 50W) computed from the UK Hadley Center data set during 2010 were 2.9°C (5.2°F) above average--a truly remarkable anomaly, surpassing the previous record of 1.5°C set in 2003. Sea surface temperature records for Greenland began in the 1920s. Image credit: NOAA Visualization Lab.

Record warmth and melting in Greenland during 2010
Greenland's climate in 2010 was marked by record-setting high air temperatures, the greatest ice loss by melting since accurate records began in 1958, and the greatest mass loss of ocean-terminating glaciers on record. That was the conclusion of the 2010 Arctic Report Card, a collaborative effort between NOAA and European Arctic experts that comes out each year. Was 2010 the warmest year in Greenland's history? That is difficult to judge. We know it was also very warm in the late 1920s and 1930s in Greenland, but we only have two stations, Godtahab Nuuk and Angmagssalik, with weather records that go back that far (Figure 3.) Godtahab Nuuk set a record high in 2010, but temperatures at Angmagssalik in 2010 were similar to what was observed during several years in the 1920s and 1930s. Marco Tedesco of the City College of New York's Cryosphere Processes Laboratory remarked that last year's record warmth and melting in Greenland began when an unusually early spring warm spell reduced and "aged" the snow on the surface of the ice sheet, so that the snow became less reflective, allowing it to absorb more heat from the sun. This accelerated snow melt even further, exposing the bare ice, which is less reflective than snow and absorbs more heat. This feedback loop extended Greenland's record melting season well into the fall.


Figure 3. Historic temperatures in Greenland for the six stations with at least 50 years of data, as archived by NASA. Three of the six stations set record highs in 2010. However, only two of the six stations (Godtahab Nuuk and Angmagssalik) have data going back beyond the 1930s, which was a period of warmth in Greenland similar to the warmth of the current decade. Godtahab Nuuk set a record high in 2010, but 2003 still ranks as Angmagssalik's hottest year on record.


Figure 4. The 2010 summer melt season was lasted more than 40 days longer (purple colors) than the mean melt season from 1979 - 2007. Image credit: Arctic Report Card.

Why Greenland matters: sea level rise
The major concern with a warming climate in Greenland is melting of the Greenland ice sheet, which currently contributes about 25% of the observed 3 mm/year (1.2 inches per decade) global rise in sea level. Higher sea levels mean increased storm surge inundation, coastal erosion, loss of low-lying land areas, and salt water contamination of underground drinking water supplies. Greenland ice mass loss is accelerating over the long term, according to independent estimates using three different techniques (Figure 5), with more mass being lost each year than the previous year. According to Rignot et al., 2011, ice mass loss is also accelerating in Antarctica, and "the magnitude of the acceleration suggests that ice sheets will be the dominant contributors to sea level rise in forthcoming decades, and will likely exceed the IPCC projections for the contribution of ice sheets to sea level rise in the 21st century." As I discussed in a 2009 blog post, How much will global sea level rise this century?, the IPCC in 2007 estimated that global sea level would rise 0.6 - 1.9 feet by 2100, but several studies since then predict a higher range of 1.6 - 6.6 feet.

During the warm period 125,000 years ago, before the most recent ice age, roughly half of the Greenland ice sheet melted. This melting plus the melting of other smaller Arctic ice fields is thought to have caused 7.2 - 11.2 feet (2.2 - 3.4 meters) of the 13 - 20 foot (4 - 6 meter) sea level rise observed during that period. Temperatures in Greenland are predicted to rise 3°C by 2100, to levels similar to 125,000 years ago. If this level of warming occurs, we can expect sea levels to rise 13 - 20 feet several centuries from now. There's enough water locked away in the ice sheet to raise sea level to rise 23 feet (7 meters), should the entire Greenland ice sheet melt.


Figure 5. Loss of mass from Greenland's ice sheet in gigatons per year from 1992 through 2009, as computed from satellite gravity measurements from the GRACE satellites (red line) and from a mass balance method. The mass balance method computes the amount of snow on the surface, the amount of ice mass lost to wind and melt, and the amount of ice lost computed from glacier velocity and ice thickness. Adding together these terms gives the total amount of ice lost or gained over the ice sheet. The acceleration is given in gigatons per year squared. Another paper by Zwally et al. (2011) used a third method, laser satellite altimetry, to determine Greenland mass loss. Between 2003 to 2007, the ice sheet lost 171 gigatons of mass per year. Between 1992 to 2002, Greenland was only losing only 7 gigatons per year. Image credit: Rignot et al., 2011, Geophysical Research Letters.

References
Rignot, E., et al., 2011: Acceleration of the contribution of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets to sea level rise, Geophysical Research Letters, in press, doi:10.1029/2011GL046583.

Spielhagen, et al., 2011, Enhanced Modern Heat Transfer to the Arctic by Warm Atlantic Water, Science 28 January 2011: Vol. 331 no. 6016 pp. 450-453 DOI: 10.1126/science.1197397

Zwally, J., et al., 2011, Greenland ice sheet mass balance: distribution of increased mass loss with climate warming; 2003 - 07 versus 19922 - 2002, Journal of Glaciology, Vol. 57, No. 201, 2011.

Wunderground's climate change section has a Greenland web page with detailed information and references.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 639 - 589

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22Blog Index

636, drama? checked it out with coffee this morning :)

http://journalofcosmology.com/Life100.html

I hate smart phones, LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Anyway, I'm out for the evening. But before I go, this, which, if true, will go down as one of the most momentous scientific statements in history:

"...the well-preserved mineralized trichomic filaments with carbonaceous sheaths found embedded in freshly fractured interior surfaces of the Alais, Ivuna, and Orgueil CI1 carbonaceous meteorites are interpreted as the fossilized remains of prokaryotic microorganisms that grew in liquid regimes on the parent body of the meteorites before they entered the Earth’s atmosphere...the absence of nitrogen in the cyanobacterial filaments detected in the CI1 carbonaceous meteorites indicates that the filaments represent the remains of extraterrestrial life forms that grew on the parent bodies of the meteorites when liquid water was present, long before the meteorites entered the Earth’s atmosphere"

I spent several hours this evening reading, re-reading, and re-re-reading the unpublished paper that hit the news this morning, and--while I'm certainly no cosmologist or astrobiologist--the parts of the very dense paper I can understand certainly seem to be pointing in an extremely interesting direction.

So: incredible? Or un-credible? We'll find out. To help allay any fears, there's this from the paper's introduction: "No other paper in the history of science has undergone such a thorough analysis, and no other scientific journal in the history of science has made such a profoundly important paper available to the scientific community, for comment, before it is published."


P.S. -- This is from the synopsis:

"[The author] concludes these fossilized bacteria are not Earthly contaminants but are the fossilized remains of living organisms which lived in the parent bodies of these meteors, e.g. comets, moons, and other astral bodies. The implications are that life is everywhere, and that life on Earth may have come from other planets."
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Hey Levi, I posted a little segment on the subtropical system over in the Atlantic, and posted all the vort and lower/upper con-divergence maps on the system and are quite impressive. the vort was good at 850 MB and convergence was growing near the center.

keep in mind that this is the new map, i posted the old one.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Ossqss:


Is that peer reviewed?

66 cities and 9 countries are looking right now, but where is Naples? :)

Let's calculate some stuff to see how it adds up ~ the net does not have the ability to embellish or mislead ......... Does it?

Gnight






Oh, I get it; those lying scientists again, right? Yawn. Who would've guessed that would be the best defense that could be mustered?

Yes, the journal Climate Dynamics is peer-reviewed. But since everyone involved is a manipulative, Al Gore-loving, commie pinko socialist, what difference does that make? :-)

To answer your other question, Naples--the one in which I live--is in Florida.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
The greening of the North: climate change shrinking tundra, says study

"The vast Canadian tundra, brought fully into the country's consciousness by Farley Mowat's classic 1956 children's novel Lost in the Barrens, will itself get lost in the woods this century as the treeline marches northward to the Arctic Ocean coast and all but wipes out the desolate but caribou-friendly bioregion from mainland Canada, a new international study predicts.

"Forecasting profound changes to all Arctic ecosystems 'fuelled by human-induced global warming,' the U.S.-led team of scientists has mapped the expected vanishing of moss- and lichen-covered land across much of the Canadian North, where up to 44 per cent of the terrain now classified as tundra could be replaced by invading boreal forest or shrub environments by 2099.

"The team's study, published in the latest issue of the scientific journal Climate Dynamics, concludes that tundra landscapes--characterized by deep permafrost, mossy ground cover and little other vegetation--will persist throughout Canada's High Arctic islands and even expand in Greenland as its mammoth ice sheet retreats. But huge stretches of tundra throughout mainland Canada, in Alaska and across Russia would disappear, the researchers' climate-change models indicate."

Article...


Is that peer reviewed?

66 cities and 9 countries are looking right now, but where is Naples? :)

Let's calculate some stuff to see how it adds up ~ the net does not have the ability to embellish or mislead ......... Does it?

Gnight





Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The greening of the North: climate change shrinking tundra, says study

"The vast Canadian tundra, brought fully into the country's consciousness by Farley Mowat's classic 1956 children's novel Lost in the Barrens, will itself get lost in the woods this century as the treeline marches northward to the Arctic Ocean coast and all but wipes out the desolate but caribou-friendly bioregion from mainland Canada, a new international study predicts.

"Forecasting profound changes to all Arctic ecosystems 'fuelled by human-induced global warming,' the U.S.-led team of scientists has mapped the expected vanishing of moss- and lichen-covered land across much of the Canadian North, where up to 44 per cent of the terrain now classified as tundra could be replaced by invading boreal forest or shrub environments by 2099.

"The team's study, published in the latest issue of the scientific journal Climate Dynamics, concludes that tundra landscapes--characterized by deep permafrost, mossy ground cover and little other vegetation--will persist throughout Canada's High Arctic islands and even expand in Greenland as its mammoth ice sheet retreats. But huge stretches of tundra throughout mainland Canada, in Alaska and across Russia would disappear, the researchers' climate-change models indicate."

Article...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting washingtonian115:
Really?.Taz you know what happened the last time you told someone they were reported....



i got banned LOL


that was druning hurricane seasone LOL



i dont think they care what i do right now lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Chicklit:
Hi Press...when Pisces are lucky in love, they usually suffer interminably, i.e., for the rest of their lives, afterwards.

Take heart, reading this will help you to put things in perspective:
AbouttheHubbel


no greater truth has ever been spoken
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Hi Press...when Pisces are lucky in love, they usually suffer interminably, i.e., for the rest of their lives, afterwards.

Take heart, reading this will help you to put things in perspective:
AbouttheHubbel
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Chicklit:
I laughed at the time but it's not funny anymore...great line. thanks for that.
going against my theory of more than three inches is too much, I am posting the astonishing astronomy news for the week (geeks only):

Saturday, March 5
March evenings offer a great opportunity to view the zodiacal light. From the Northern Hemisphere, early spring is the best time of year to observe this elusive glow after sunset. It appears slightly fainter than the Milky Way, so you’ll need a clear moonless sky and an observing site located far from the city. Because the Moon returns to the evening sky in the next few days, tonight is one of your last chances to see the zodiacal light until late this month. Look for the cone-shaped glow, which has a broad base that points nearly straight up from the western horizon, after the last vestiges of twilight have faded away.

Sunday, March 6
As darkness falls this evening, look for a thin crescent Moon hanging low in the western sky. Although the Moon appears just 4 percent lit, the faint glow of earthshine should light up its “dark side.” Now shift your gaze a bit to the left and you’ll see a brilliant point of light: the planet Jupiter. The giant planet shines at magnitude –2.1, brighter than any other object in the evening sky except for the Moon. When viewed through a telescope, Jupiter’s globe spans 34" across its equator.

Monday, March 7
Venus dazzles in the predawn hours this week. It shines at magnitude –4.1, six times brighter than Jupiter (the second-brightest point of light in the night sky). Venus rises nearly 2 hours before the Sun and stands about 10° high in the southeast 45 minutes before sunrise. Through a telescope, Venus appears 15" across and nearly three-quarters lit.

Tuesday, March 8
One of the sky’s largest asterisms — a recognizable pattern of stars separate from a constellation’s form — occupies center stage on March evenings. To trace the so-called Winter Hexagon, start with southern Orion’s luminary, Rigel. From there, the hexagon makes a clockwise loop. The second stop is brilliant Sirius in Canis Major. Next, pick up Procyon in the faint constellation Canis Minor, then the twins Castor and Pollux in Gemini, followed by Capella in Auriga, Aldebaran in Taurus, and finally back to Rigel.

Saturn's rings open wider at opposition this year than they have since 2007. Any telescope will deliver a great view. NASA/ESA/Hubble Heritage Team

(STScI/AURA)Wednesday, March 9
Saturn rises around 8 p.m. local time this week and appears prominent in the southeast by late evening. It climbs still higher after midnight, reaching halfway to the zenith by 2 a.m. Saturn currently lies among the background stars of Virgo, not far from 1st-magnitude Spica. The planet shines at magnitude 0.5, slightly but noticeably brighter than the star. When viewed through a telescope, the dramatic ring system spans 43" and tilts 10° to our line of sight.

Mars reaches perihelion, its closest point to the Sun in its 1.88-year-long orbit, at 9 a.m. EST today. The Red Planet then lies 128.4 million miles from our star. Unfortunately, Mars currently lies on the opposite side of the Sun from Earth and so is invisible.

Thursday, March 10
The waxing crescent Moon lies high in the west early this evening. Although our nearest celestial neighbor looks pretty during twilight, the best scene awaits after darkness falls. That’s when the stars of the Pleiades star cluster (M45) come into view just above the Moon. The two objects approach within 2° of each other as they dip lower in the sky late this evening.

Friday, March 11
Mercury appears low in the west after the Sun sets this evening. Head outside about half an hour after sunset and look for brilliant Jupiter about 12° above the western horizon. (Twelve degrees is slightly more than the angle subtended by your closed fist when held at arm’s length.) Then scan about halfway from Jupiter to the horizon. Mercury glows brightly, at magnitude –1.2, and should show up against the twilight glow. (Binoculars will help you to spot it.) The innermost planet will make more news next week. It passes 2° from Jupiter on the 16th and, one day later, the MESSENGER spacecraft enters orbit around the inner world.

Track down Enceladus the night of March 12/13, when this dim moon passes near Tethys, which glows 1.5 magnitudes brighter. Astronomy: Roen KellySaturday, March 12
Earth’s Moon isn’t the only solar system satellite worth targeting this evening. If you point a 10-inch or larger telescope at Saturn tonight, you have a good chance of spotting mysterious Enceladus — Saturn’s geologically active moon that features erupting geysers (invisible from Earth, unfortunately). Tonight’s a good night to spy the 12th-magnitude moon because it lies just 3" south of 10th-magnitude Tethys between 10 and 11 p.m. EST. The two saturnian satellites quickly drift apart during the next few hours.

Just proving that rules are made to be broken.
Night folks!



but...I'm a Pisces....Will I be lucky in love?!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Tazmanian:
Really?.Taz you know what happened the last time you told someone they were reported....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I laughed at the time but it's not funny anymore...great line. thanks for that.
going against my theory of more than three inches is too much, I am posting the astonishing astronomy news for the week (geeks only):

Saturday, March 5
March evenings offer a great opportunity to view the zodiacal light. From the Northern Hemisphere, early spring is the best time of year to observe this elusive glow after sunset. It appears slightly fainter than the Milky Way, so you’ll need a clear moonless sky and an observing site located far from the city. Because the Moon returns to the evening sky in the next few days, tonight is one of your last chances to see the zodiacal light until late this month. Look for the cone-shaped glow, which has a broad base that points nearly straight up from the western horizon, after the last vestiges of twilight have faded away.

Sunday, March 6
As darkness falls this evening, look for a thin crescent Moon hanging low in the western sky. Although the Moon appears just 4 percent lit, the faint glow of earthshine should light up its “dark side.” Now shift your gaze a bit to the left and you’ll see a brilliant point of light: the planet Jupiter. The giant planet shines at magnitude –2.1, brighter than any other object in the evening sky except for the Moon. When viewed through a telescope, Jupiter’s globe spans 34" across its equator.

Monday, March 7
Venus dazzles in the predawn hours this week. It shines at magnitude –4.1, six times brighter than Jupiter (the second-brightest point of light in the night sky). Venus rises nearly 2 hours before the Sun and stands about 10° high in the southeast 45 minutes before sunrise. Through a telescope, Venus appears 15" across and nearly three-quarters lit.

Tuesday, March 8
One of the sky’s largest asterisms — a recognizable pattern of stars separate from a constellation’s form — occupies center stage on March evenings. To trace the so-called Winter Hexagon, start with southern Orion’s luminary, Rigel. From there, the hexagon makes a clockwise loop. The second stop is brilliant Sirius in Canis Major. Next, pick up Procyon in the faint constellation Canis Minor, then the twins Castor and Pollux in Gemini, followed by Capella in Auriga, Aldebaran in Taurus, and finally back to Rigel.

Saturn's rings open wider at opposition this year than they have since 2007. Any telescope will deliver a great view. NASA/ESA/Hubble Heritage Team

(STScI/AURA)Wednesday, March 9
Saturn rises around 8 p.m. local time this week and appears prominent in the southeast by late evening. It climbs still higher after midnight, reaching halfway to the zenith by 2 a.m. Saturn currently lies among the background stars of Virgo, not far from 1st-magnitude Spica. The planet shines at magnitude 0.5, slightly but noticeably brighter than the star. When viewed through a telescope, the dramatic ring system spans 43" and tilts 10° to our line of sight.

Mars reaches perihelion, its closest point to the Sun in its 1.88-year-long orbit, at 9 a.m. EST today. The Red Planet then lies 128.4 million miles from our star. Unfortunately, Mars currently lies on the opposite side of the Sun from Earth and so is invisible.

Thursday, March 10
The waxing crescent Moon lies high in the west early this evening. Although our nearest celestial neighbor looks pretty during twilight, the best scene awaits after darkness falls. That’s when the stars of the Pleiades star cluster (M45) come into view just above the Moon. The two objects approach within 2° of each other as they dip lower in the sky late this evening.

Friday, March 11
Mercury appears low in the west after the Sun sets this evening. Head outside about half an hour after sunset and look for brilliant Jupiter about 12° above the western horizon. (Twelve degrees is slightly more than the angle subtended by your closed fist when held at arm’s length.) Then scan about halfway from Jupiter to the horizon. Mercury glows brightly, at magnitude –1.2, and should show up against the twilight glow. (Binoculars will help you to spot it.) The innermost planet will make more news next week. It passes 2° from Jupiter on the 16th and, one day later, the MESSENGER spacecraft enters orbit around the inner world.

Track down Enceladus the night of March 12/13, when this dim moon passes near Tethys, which glows 1.5 magnitudes brighter. Astronomy: Roen KellySaturday, March 12
Earth’s Moon isn’t the only solar system satellite worth targeting this evening. If you point a 10-inch or larger telescope at Saturn tonight, you have a good chance of spotting mysterious Enceladus — Saturn’s geologically active moon that features erupting geysers (invisible from Earth, unfortunately). Tonight’s a good night to spy the 12th-magnitude moon because it lies just 3" south of 10th-magnitude Tethys between 10 and 11 p.m. EST. The two saturnian satellites quickly drift apart during the next few hours.

Just proving that rules are made to be broken.
Night folks!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I think a reason so few non-scientists accept the reality of climate change is lack of understanding. The educational systems don't make it easy. For example, where I live they require four years of gym but only one year of science to graduate from high school.

A good interface between science knowledge and public knowledge is NPR's Science Friday with Ira Flatow. Yesterday he spoke with Rear Admiral David Titley, the Oceanographer of the Navy, about climate change. Admiral Titley was a GW skeptic but became convinced it's real by preponderance of the evidence.
Link

A long time ago I heard, "The American public won't accept global warming until the people in Miami are treading water." I laughed at the time, but it's not funny any more.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:


1164 has a delta-class magnetic field. A good research item for ya :)

SDO below ~~

http://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Only a few chances to go for this NASA program. My kids entire schools have participated on the last mission. Wanna do something that would be considered "pretty cool" even by today's kids standards?

Here ya go :)

https://faceinspace.nasa.gov/index.aspx

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting rod2635:
Are we so confident at this point to allocate a trillion dollars worldwide on an action plan or should we wait ten years when more research is done. That in itself is a hard decision.


But it's not a hard decision for those who've been following the science; something needs to be done, and done now. As far as waiting ten years? Forget it. It may very well be close to too late already; waiting another 10 years would only succeed in an additional 2 million million tons of CO2 to enter the atmosphere and the oceans--at which time I'm fairly certain the professional denialists would claim that we should wait another ten years to see how things work out...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Hi Neapolitan,
Well, my geography is not that great, so I will have to say maybe Texas, then San Francisco, Seoul, Stuttgart, Manchester, then back here to Florida.
It's going to be fun.
Just got a very good friend today to agree to stay at my house for a month while I'm gone so the cat and dog are cared for. Am very excited! I work average 10-12 hours per day during my seaon (Sept-May), so this is very special!
Will take the lap top to keep tabs on all of you.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Chicklit:
All excited tonight because after all my brutal, difficult hard work this year I have decided to literally circumnavigate the globe during my summer vacation (4 wks!) from Jun 15 to Jul 15.
Frosting on the cake (besides not working and getting to travel) is, I will be visiting my loved ones.

Wow, congrats! So how many continents are you going to hit? How many countries?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
All excited tonight because after all my brutal, difficult hard work this year I have decided to literally circumnavigate the globe during my summer vacation (4 wks!) from Jun 15 to Jul 15.
Frosting on the cake (besides not working and getting to travel) is, I will be visiting my loved ones.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
When a comment goes beyond two or three inches, I cannot read it...just goes against the context of what we are doing here.

Anyway, evening folks and this excerpt from Dr. Jeff's blog (above) bears repeating:

Ocean temperatures along the southwest coast of Greenland (60N to 70N, 60W to 50W) computed from the UK Hadley Center data set during 2010 were 2.9°C (5.2°F) above average--a truly remarkable anomaly, and far warmer than the previous record of 1.5°C above average set in 2003.
Sea surface temperature records for Greenland began in the 1920s. A study earlier this year published in the journal Science (Spielhagen et al., 2011) found that ocean temperatures on the east side of Greenland are now at their warmest levels in at least 2,000 years.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting rod2635:


The changes in the Greenland Ice Cap are a matter of observed fact. And you are quite correct in that things don't change because the 'climate feels like it'. There must be a reason, more likely multiple reasons. Modeling, whether done for short term forecasting or longer term endeavors is an evolving science. The more scientific data we can collect, not just on the ppm of various greenhouse gases, but on all aspects of our planet and the influences from beyond its atmosphere, the better we can differentiate between man made vs other impacts.

We need to know what we can fix vs what we cannot. We need to know the result of massive investment in changing what we do as we may not get a second chance. Are we so confident at this point to allocate a trillion dollars worldwide on an action plan or should we wait ten years when more research is done. That in itself is a hard decision.

A period of extended global warming would have enormous impacts for us as a species. It would seem to justify a commensurate expenditure to understand both man made and other impacts, increase paleoclimatic research, oceanographic studies, etc.

Just because we can measure one thing well doesn't mean it should be the sole focus of thought. The consequences of climate change, whether in cycles spanning one human life or multiple lives, or millenia, should allow for a large enough 'tent' to encompass serious multi-displinary work and cooperation. And that takes leadership, money, and political will.

That combination got us to the moon in an absurdly short time span from start to finish. But that was a tangible, popular, media visible goal. Climate, as you rightly point out is about averages and longer term consequences, not instant gratificatiion.

As such there may not be a serious 'moon shot' equivalent directed to climate issues until the wolves (or the waves as the case may be) are at our doorsteps.





Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting freem:
JEFF

YOU HAVE RUINED YOUR WEB PAGE. IT WORKED FOR 16 YEARS; NOW YOU DON'T OFFER THE 'CLASSIC VIEW' ANYMORE. I CAN NO LONGER RECOMMEND THIS SITE TO MY FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES.

JOHN




am happy too report that you been REPORTED
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting freem:
JEFF

YOU HAVE RUINED YOUR WEB PAGE. IT WORKED FOR 16 YEARS; NOW YOU DON'T OFFER THE 'CLASSIC VIEW' ANYMORE. I CAN NO LONGER RECOMMEND THIS SITE TO MY FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES.

JOHN

Wow,..The world has stopped in it's track by someone that types only in capital letters....Not too convincing
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:
I would be ok with the new page if I could still click straight to the comments page from the blog list without clicking on the blog first and hunting for the see comments button.


When I click on each blog title under the "Latest Entry" column it takes me straight to the page with the comments.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Xyrus2000:


There is no question that natural variation plays a part in periodic climate change. However, those climate changes happened due to something destabilizing (quite rapidly, relatively speaking) the existing climate. Planetary climate does not change just because it "feels like it". Nor do temperatures rise without the input and/or capture of additional energy.

Unless you can demonstrate another way in which temperatures can rise planet wide that is not attributable to the greenhouse effect, it's highly probable that the warming we are seeing is a result of anthropogenic causes.



2. Active stations in Greenland reported similar warmth in the 1920's and 1930's...there were less than 2 billion of us then vs 6 billion now




Yes. And? No one has claimed that there can't be variations. Ocean circulations and weather patterns do shift from time to time, resulting in such occurrences.

Climate isn't about extremes, it's about averages. Weather can swing about wildly, and even periods as long as ten years are too noisy to draw much conclusion from.

The warming trend we are seeing now has been going on for many decades. This implies additional energy is being added to the system and is not being radiated off into space. At the very least, this should make people curious about why that's the case and what impacts such a change can have.



3. We are emerging from what some term the Little Ice Age of the period from the early 1300s to around 1850, so one might just expect things to be warmer as a result.



NASA has this to say about it:

A cold period that lasted from about A.D. 1550 to about A.D. 1850 in Europe, North America, and Asia. This period was marked by rapid expansion of mountain glaciers, especially in the Alps, Norway, Ireland, and Alaska. There were three maxima, beginning about 1650, about 1770, and 1850, each separated by slight warming intervals.

And again, the planet doesn't warm for no reason. The variation in solar energy is minimal, therefore something on the planet is acting to either trap or produce heat. Anything producing enough heat on the planet to cause the amount of warming we've seen would be quite noticeable, so that's out. Which means SOMETHING is trapping heat.



4. With a predictive accuracy on short term weather forecasts under 50% after 3-4 days it seems a bit presumptious to forecast sea level conditions 100 years hence when we know ever so little about the complex dynamics of the full three dimensional oceans, the interactions of its currents at all levels and the thermodynamic variables layered on top of those formidable precursors.



You do understand that there is a pretty big difference between how a weather model operates and how a climate model operates, right? Because this statement seems to indicate that you don't.

You can get real climate and ocean model source code online and see just how complex they are. The easiest ones to get started with are probably ModelE and MOM4. However, you're going to need some serious background to understand the math and physics involved. You'll also need some serious computing power if you want to run anything other the basic low res runs.

Now, if you can demonstrate that these models are worthless and make no worthwhile predictions, and build a solid enough case that you can get your research peer reviewed, I guarantee you'll win a Nobel Prize. However, these models have been used to make predictions and they have been pretty good at it if science journal articles are anything to go by, so you've got a pretty high mountain to climb in that regard.

Or in other words, any idiot on the web can dismiss anything anyone says. But when it comes to science, you've got to back up your claims. Opinions mean very little in the scientific community.



5. But that's why we have blogs.


Indeed.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I would be ok with the new page if I could still click straight to the comments page from the blog list without clicking on the blog first and hunting for the see comments button.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting freem:
JEFF

YOU HAVE RUINED YOUR WEB PAGE. IT WORKED FOR 16 YEARS; NOW YOU DON'T OFFER THE 'CLASSIC VIEW' ANYMORE. I CAN NO LONGER RECOMMEND THIS SITE TO MY FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES.

JOHN


This for your first comment ever on the site?

I have to say, I don't see what the big deal is. It took a day or two to get used to the new format, but I prefer it now.

Anyway, the link to the classic version is below. Bookmark it and you won't have to use the updated version--for as long as the link is active, of course.

http://classic.wunderground.com/

Added: № 608 beat me to it. Anyway, I'll leave it up since it links to the main page.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

http://classic.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/ comment.html?entrynum=1757

Maybe bookmark it for yer future
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 426 Comments: 129093
607. freem
JEFF

YOU HAVE RUINED YOUR WEB PAGE. IT WORKED FOR 16 YEARS; NOW YOU DON'T OFFER THE 'CLASSIC VIEW' ANYMORE. I CAN NO LONGER RECOMMEND THIS SITE TO MY FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES.

JOHN
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Sky, I live about 15 due west of the launch and it was nice to see.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
605. Skyepony (Mod)
X-37B Launch from my house. The rest of the series is in Wunderphotos.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Tim Hawkins - The Government Can
Member Since: October 1, 2007 Posts: 81 Comments: 26511
603. flsky
Mother dies protecting daughter during LA tornado.
Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
602. beell
Quoting Levi32:


Actually, it is the only origin possible this time of year lol.


eh, maybe so.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting beell:


It will surely have a most unique origin for this time of year. Regardless of what happens!


Actually, it is the only origin possible this time of year lol.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
600. beell
Quoting Levi32:


It's biggest chance is still yet to come. Right now is its worst spot.


It will surely have a most unique origin for this time of year. Regardless of what happens!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
GFS still likes the interaction with the upper low that pulls it north, but we'll see.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting beell:


Having a little trouble finding the Sub Tropical System this evening.

It certainly had a small chance at one time.


It's biggest chance is still yet to come. Right now is its worst spot.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
597. beell
Quoting HurricaneDean07:
The Subtropical System is not shown because it's not officially detatched from the frontal system even though it is a low pressure system


Having a little trouble finding the Sub Tropical System this evening.

It certainly had a small chance at one time.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
596. beell
TROPICAL WEATHER DISCUSSION
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL
105 PM EST SAT MAR 05 2011


ATLANTIC OCEAN...
... A STATIONARY FRONTAL BOUNDARY ANALYZED INTO THE
DISCUSSION AREA NEAR 32N54W TO 31N56W BECOMING A SURFACE TROUGH
ALONG 28N60W TO 25N69W TO THE WINDWARD PASSAGE NEAR 20N74W
. THIS
BOUNDARY IS LARGELY SUPPORTED ALOFT BY AN UPPER LEVEL TROUGH WITH AXIS ALONG 62W. LOW-LEVEL CONVERGENCE NEAR THE STATIONARY
FRONT AND SURFACE TROUGH...ALONG WITH MIDDLE TO UPPER LEVEL LIFT
ASSOCIATED WITH THE UPPER LEVEL FEATURE IS GENERATING AN AREA OF
SCATTERED SHOWERS AND ISOLATED TSTMS
COVERING THE AREA N OF 24N
BETWEEN 52W-60W...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting beell:
No low on this chart.
The Subtropical System is not shown because it's not officially detatched from the frontal system even though it is a low pressure system
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
Here comes your snow 115...:)
Also in our loco forecast they have rain,and no snow with a high of 57.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
Here comes your snow 115...:)
Noo I don't belive it I won't belive it!!..(Puts hand on face,and turn away from screen)Lol.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
592. beell
No low on this chart.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting washingtonian115:
Looks like all the bad weather was centered around the Louisiana area,and not the Alabama/Mississippi like Hypuweather said.In terms of tornadoes.
Here comes your snow 115...:)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Okay see that big blob north of the Leeward and virgin island, that's the subtropical low that Levi was talking about yesturday, and the vort map is at 850 MB

This is 700 MB

This is 500 MB is a little sloppy.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Looks like all the bad weather was centered around the Louisiana area,and not the Alabama/Mississippi like Hypuweather said.In terms of tornadoes.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 639 - 589

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Local Weather

Overcast
41 °F
Overcast