RSN May Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Excerpt: "Preliminary results from the European Space Agency's CryoSat-2 probe indicate that 900 cubic kilometers of summer sea ice has disappeared from the Arctic ocean over the past year. This rate of loss is 50% higher than most scenarios outlined by polar scientists."

The view from a yacht's mast. Summer pack ice is showing a rate of loss 50% higher than anticipated. (photo: Mike Powell/Corbis)
The view from a yacht's mast. Summer pack ice is showing a rate of loss 50% higher than anticipated. (photo: Mike Powell/Corbis)



Rate of Arctic Summer Sea Ice Loss Is 50% Higher Than Predicted

By Robin McKie, Guardian UK

13 August 12

 

New satellite images show polar ice coverage dwindling in extent and thickness.

ea ice in the Arctic is disappearing at a far greater rate than previously expected, according to data from the first purpose-built satellite launched to study the thickness of the Earth's polar caps.

Preliminary results from the European Space Agency's CryoSat-2 probe indicate that 900 cubic kilometres of summer sea ice has disappeared from the Arctic ocean over the past year.

This rate of loss is 50% higher than most scenarios outlined by polar scientists and suggests that global warming, triggered by rising greenhouse gas emissions, is beginning to have a major impact on the region. In a few years the Arctic ocean could be free of ice in summer, triggering a rush to exploit its fish stocks, oil, minerals and sea routes.

Using instruments on earlier satellites, scientists could see that the area covered by summer sea ice in the Arctic has been dwindling rapidly. But the new measurements indicate that this ice has been thinning dramatically at the same time. For example, in regions north of Canada and Greenland, where ice thickness regularly stayed at around five to six metres in summer a decade ago, levels have dropped to one to three metres.

"Preliminary analysis of our data indicates that the rate of loss of sea ice volume in summer in the Arctic may be far larger than we had previously suspected," said Dr Seymour Laxon, of the Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling at University College London (UCL), where CryoSat-2 data is being analysed. "Very soon we may experience the iconic moment when, one day in the summer, we look at satellite images and see no sea ice coverage in the Arctic, just open water."

The consequences of losing the Arctic's ice coverage, even for only part of the year, could be profound. Without the cap's white brilliance to reflect sunlight back into space, the region will heat up even more than at present. As a result, ocean temperatures will rise and methane deposits on the ocean floor could melt, evaporate and bubble into the atmosphere. Scientists have recently reported evidence that methane plumes are now appearing in many areas. Methane is a particularly powerful greenhouse gas and rising levels of it in the atmosphere are only likely to accelerate global warming. And with the disappearance of sea ice around the shores of Greenland, its glaciers could melt faster and raise sea levels even more rapidly than at present.

Professor Chris Rapley of UCL said: "With the temperature gradient between the Arctic and equator dropping, as is happening now, it is also possible that the jet stream in the upper atmosphere could become more unstable. That could mean increasing volatility in weather in lower latitudes, similar to that experienced this year."

CryoSat-2 is the world's first satellite to be built specifically to study sea-ice thickness and was launched on a Dniepr rocket from Baikonur cosmodrome, Kazakhstan, on 8 April, 2010. Previous Earth monitoring satellites had mapped the extent of sea-ice coverage in the Arctic. However, the thickness of that ice proved more difficult to measure.

The US probe ICESat made some important measurements of ice thickness but operated intermittently in only a few regions before it stopped working completely in 2009. CryoSat was designed specifically to tackle the issue of ice thickness, both in the Arctic and the Antarctic. It was fitted with radar that can see through clouds. (ICESat's lasers could not penetrate clouds.) CryoSat's orbit was also designed to give better coverage of the Arctic sea.

"Before CryoSat, we could see summer ice coverage was dropping markedly in the Arctic," said Rapley. "But we only had glimpses of what was happening to ice thickness. Obviously if it was dropping as well, the loss of summer ice was even more significant. We needed to know what was happening - and now CryoSat has given us the answer. It has shown that the Arctic sea cap is not only shrinking in area but is also thinning dramatically."

Sea-ice cover in the Arctic varies considerably throughout the year, reaching a maximum in March. By combining earlier results from ICESat and data from other studies, including measurements made by submarines travelling under the polar ice cap, Laxon said preliminary analysis now gave a clear indication of Arctic sea-ice loss over the past eight years, both in winter and in summer.

In winter 2004, the volume of sea ice in the central Arctic was approximately 17,000 cubic kilometres. This winter it was 14,000, according to CryoSat.

However, the summer figures provide the real shock. In 2004 there was about 13,000 cubic kilometres of sea ice in the Arctic. In 2012, there is 7,000 cubic kilometres, almost half the figure eight years ago. If the current annual loss of around 900 cubic kilometres continues, summer ice coverage could disappear in about a decade in the Arctic.

However, Laxon urged caution, saying: "First, this is based on preliminary studies of CryoSat figures, so we should take care before rushing to conclusions. In addition, the current rate of ice volume decline could change." Nevertheless, experts say computer models indicate rates of ice volume decline are only likely to increase over the next decade.

As to the accuracy of the measurements made by CryoSat, these have been calibrated by comparing them to measurements made on the ice surface by scientists including Laxon; by planes flying beneath the satellite's orbit; and by data supplied by underwater sonar stations that have analysed ice thickness at selected places in the Arctic. "We can now say with confidence that CryoSat's maps of ice thickness are correct to within 10cm," Laxon added.

Laxon also pointed out that the rate of ice loss in winter was much slower than that in summer. "That suggests that, as winter starts, ice is growing more rapidly than it did in the past and that this effect is compensating, partially, for the loss of summer ice." Overall, the trend for ice coverage in Arctic is definitely downwards, particularly in summer, however - a point recently backed by Professor Peter Wadham, who this year used aircraft and submarine surveys of ice sheets to make estimates of ice volume loss. These also suggest major reductions in the volume of summer sea ice, around 70% over the past 30 years.

"The Arctic is particularly vulnerable to the impact of global warming," said Rapley. "Temperatures there are rising far faster than they are at the equator. Hence the shrinking of sea-ice coverage we have observed. It is telling us that something highly significant is happening to Earth. The weather systems of the planet are interconnected so what happens in the high latitudes affects us all."

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
-20 # portiz 2012-08-13 08:15
Climate change is a hoax. This proves it. :-/

http://lolgod.blogspot.com/2012/06/duck-of-gaps.html
 
 
+7 # portiz 2012-08-13 09:08
Wow, a bunch of thumb-downs... you folks should check the link (and also look up the definition of "sarcasm") before deciding 'weather' you agree, or not!!!!
 
 
+6 # Jim Young 2012-08-13 09:29
Quoting portiz:
Wow, a bunch of thumb-downs... you folks should check the link (and also look up the definition of "sarcasm") before deciding 'weather' you agree, or not!!!!


Sorry, I was guilty of anticipating the typical response, deduct one thumb down/add on thumb up.

Was off in another train of thought about the generally accepted "We had to destroy the village to save the village" type thinking.

Is it becoming the more callous "We have to destroy the world to save the world"?
 
 
+3 # portiz 2012-08-13 09:53
Thanks, Jim!
 
 
+2 # Texas Aggie 2012-08-13 19:57
That was good. Thank you.

Somehow I don't think everyone will appreciate the humor.
 
 
+8 # Douglas Jack 2012-08-13 09:12
portiz, The question humanity faces is not about disputing scientific evidence, which point to patterns of climate change as well as documented sea rise, hurricanes, tornados, droughts & loss of the biosphere's productive trees. The question humanity faces is whether to implement 'precaution' (taking responsibility for our actions) from industrial humanity's collective destruction of the biosphere. The rate at which industrial & war-making (arms-producers ) nations are laying waste to lands, rivers, air, orchard-forests through physical exploitation or through toxic release is something you might want to reconsider in terms of life-style. Come & join the rest of us 'conservationis ts' (quality conservatives) who are willing to become the change we want to see in the world and are willing to join together in solidarity. www.indigenecommunity.info Would you engage in a 'Both-Sides-Now , equal-time, recorded & published dialogue? https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/structure/1-both-sides-now-article
 
 
+11 # portiz 2012-08-13 09:39
I suppose that my sense of humor is entirely lost on you (and, judging by the 'thumb-downs' that I am collecting, everyone else). Did you even look at the link that I posted??

FWIW, as a scientist, educator, journalist, blogger and citizen, I couldn't possibly be more involved in climate activism.
 
 
0 # Texas Aggie 2012-08-13 19:59
The question indeed IS about disputing scientific evidence. Just read the comments by the deniers whenever there is an article about global warming or evolution.
 
 
+4 # reiverpacific 2012-08-13 10:30
Of course some commercial enterprises are welcoming this as a final opening of the long-sought "Northwest Passage" and further drilling, extraction and pillaging of the planet -and to Hell with the consequences to indigenous peoples, animals and tundra.
And don't expect the US owner-media and it's infotainment-du lled populace to address or recognize it, even when the sea is lapping at their front door stoops as long as the can tune in to their soaps, sitcoms, game shows, "reality"-fanta sies (there is an ironic juxtaposition if you will) and sports spectaculars.
But ask some of the lower-lying oceanic Islanders who are even now beginning to feel the effects. They were passionate and outspoken at the last climate "Summits" and were largely diplomatically ignored by those who represent countries that were the main causes, especially the US.
 
 
+1 # 666 2012-08-13 10:59
What? More oil drilling sites, new cruise routes to explore, and my front yard turned into a beach for free? where's the downside?
 
 
+1 # Adoregon 2012-08-13 11:03
Can you hear the howling?

That's the screwed pooch you hear.
 
 
+5 # happycamper690 2012-08-13 11:36
For the life of me (and our planet) I do not understand why this is not the number one issue before us. Yet we will conclude the next three months' run up to the elections without one, single meaningful word being spoken about the environment. Who will step forward and hang the bell on the cat?
 
 
0 # robcarter.vn 2012-08-13 16:54
May I respectfully suggest that someone more qualified and knowledgeable than myself investigate the effects of the sub-Pacific Volcano eruption 1000km (of miles I forget) off New Zealand as evidenced a few days ago by the 10,000+ m2 of pumise stone floating on sea surface. I wonder did not that hot water go north to join the Gulf Stream and melt Greenland and/or Iceland areas?

Please pity and remember I qualified this start as a non scientist idea/question to the experts.
 
 
0 # Texas Aggie 2012-08-13 20:04
The hot water went north in the Pacific to join the Gulf Stream in the Atlantic and melted the Greenland and/or Iceland areas? I would doubt it, especially as there hasn't been any unusual unaccounted for melting between the south Pacific and the north Atlantic where the water would have to go either around the southern end of South America past Antarctica or over the northern part of Canada.
 
 
0 # Texas Aggie 2012-08-13 20:06
Well, I guess this article just proves the point by the deniers that the models are imperfect. The models say this shouldn't be happening yet and here it is already. So since the models are too conservative, does that mean we should ignore the whole thing? (See Duck of Gaps above.)
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN