Just a few years ago, the world's climate scientists predicted that Greenland wouldn't have much impact at all on sea level in the coming decades. But recent measurements show that Greenland's ice cap is melting much faster than expected.
These new data come from the NASA/German Aerospace Center's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (Grace). Launched in March 2002, the twin Grace satellites circle the globe using gravity to map changes in Earth's mass 500 kilometers (310 miles) below. They are providing a unique way to monitor and understand Earth's great ice sheets and glaciers.
Grace measurements have revealed that in just four years, from 2002 to 2006, Greenland lost between 150 and 250 cubic kilometers (36 to 60 cubic miles) of ice per year. One cubic kilometer is equal to about 264 billion gallons of water. That's enough melting ice to account for an increase in global sea level of as much as 0.5 millimeters (0.019 inches) per year, according to Isabella Velicogna and John Wahr of the University of Colorado, Boulder. They published their results in the scientific journal Nature last fall. Since global sea level has risen an average of three millimeters (0.1 inch) per year since 1993, Greenland's rapidly increasing contribution can't be overlooked.
And speaking of Greenland's ice loss contributing to the sea rise...
If what I've read is true, and I've not missed or misunderstood anything, there are two places where global warming is really cooking. The first is up north in the Arctic: Greenland is warming at a rate three times as fast as the rest of the world, frex, and may end up with a climate 15 C warmer than current (or more in the longer term). The other place is the Antarctic Peninsula.
Yes, I am on file as saying that the net change for Antarctica as a whole is neutral. That doesn't mean that the whole continent is the going to have a uniform climate. It doesn't now. The Peninsula is apparently warming five times faster than the rest of the world, but the interior is getting colder and building up even more ice and snow actually making it a net neutral. However, the Peninsula might be a nicer place to live, if it goes up 25 C in temperature.
I believe Argentina has a leg up in colonization there if so. Anyone for an Argentinian-* Antarctic Peninsula War?
Considering Greenland used to be much warmer and consisted of a lot less ice, I don't see how the melting of ice now would have a bad effect on the earth. It was a time of thriving for settlers 1,000 years ago. Why would it be worse now?
ReplyDeleteIt mostly depends on the rate of ice loss rather than if there is ice or not. You lose it too fast and it disrupts too much. I have no objection to Greenland melting. On the contrary, I'm considering a trip up and seeing what the laws are for foreign ownership of land. O:)
ReplyDeletePS What's the traditional way of making a piece of land American?
Well, obviously it would be to steal it.
ReplyDeleteThat would be one way to do view it, yes.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_%28military%29
Not that *I* would ever be an evil individual.
Now, am I being serious, or being a goof? *smirk*
I wonder how the Danes feel about all of this:)
ReplyDelete*sweet, innocent look*
ReplyDeleteDanes?
;)
Actually, the locals have been aggitating for indepence for a bit now. IIRC, they're not part of the EU despite being part of Denmark. That sounds like Puerto Rico to me! ;)
Is this Sarda or Janine?
If it's Sarda, have you read Ward's _Out of Thin Air_ and have any comments on his stuff on Romer's Gap? If it's Janine by chance would you have anything interesting to share on the Siberian Traps?