Fastest-moving Glaciers

[frobert]

In Antarctica, Two Crucial Glaciers Accelerate Toward the Sea - The New York Times

Two of the frozen continent’s fastest-moving glaciers are shedding an increasing amount of ice into the Amundsen Sea each year.

The Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers are among the most critical in the world. They are currently holding back ice that, if melted, would raise the world’s oceans by nearly four feet over centuries, an amount that would put many coastal cities underwater.

“There isn’t a glacier in Antarctica that comes close to the ice discharge to Pine Island and Thwaites,” Dr. Rignot said. “They are the largest discharger of ice in the Antarctic right now.”

 

[Theo520]

Perhaps they are increasing their rate of discharge because the land mass itself has gained so much additional ice in recent years.

Bad alarmist journalism cherry picks a few data points that supports the narrative. We know these areas have received increased snowfall, but that wasn’t mentioned by the author as a possible explanation of increased discharge.

 

[frobert]

Bad alarmist journalism cherry picks a few data points that supports the narrative. We know these areas have received increased snowfall, but that wasn’t mentioned by the author as a possible explanation of increased discharge.

Interesting!

Why do you think the report should have contained information about snowfall?

How do you think the amount of snowfall would change the movement of the ice and the widow to study how ice shelves behave?

The movement of the ice, however, offers scientists a window into how Antarctic ice shelves might respond to rapid changes and how a runaway disintegration of the hundreds of Antarctic glaciers might look.

If the snowfall is on the land that is disintegrating wouldn’t the additional snow add to the sea rise?

 

[Theo520]

I thought I was clear, the report prooftexted their data to make an alarmist story.

They should have provided additional context to the story. I provided snowfall as a relevant example since if there is more ice being added up stream, we would expect an increase down stream.

They could also have added relevant context by mentioning the net increase/decrease across the Antarctic.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

They should have provided additional context to the story. I provided snowfall as a relevant example since if there is more ice being added up stream, we would expect an increase down stream.

I can see how additional snowfall this year might find its way to glaciers in 400 years, but I don’t see how it could affect glacier movement within a year or two. It takes a long time for snow to compact and push a glacier from behind. And that theory is at odds with the graph showing reductions in total mass. If the acceleration of the glacier were due to added snowfall from behind, we would expect to see the mass increase, no?