Greenland study

Sea-level rise could be double IPCC projections 1

Last year, Nature Geoscience and Science (PDF) published major articles suggesting that the consensus projection for sea-level rise this century was far too low -- and could be as high as five feet. Now the Journal of Glaciology joins in with a remarkable analysis, "Intermittent thinning of Jakobshavn Isbræ, West Greenland, since the Little Ice Age" (PDF).

The lead author, Beata Csatho from the University of Buffalo, explains implications of this work for the traditionally very simplified ice sheet models, such as those used by United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to make projections of sea-level rise:

Ice sheet models usually don't include all the complexity of ice dynamics that can happen in nature. This research will give ice sheet modelers more precise, more detailed data.

If current climate models from the IPCC included data from ice dynamics in Greenland, the sea level rise estimated during this century could be twice as high as what they are currently projecting.

jakob.jpgThe study "focuses on Jakobshavn Isbræ, Greenland's fastest moving glacier and its largest, measuring four miles wide." It documents the behavior of Jakobshavn Isbræ since the late 1800s by combining "field mapping, remote sensing, satellite imaging and the application of digital techniques in order to glean 'hidden' data from historic aerial photographs as many as 60 years after they were taken." It is a very impressive piece of work. (The photo on the right is from 1944 -- click to enlarge.)

For the record, five feet of sea-level rise would displace more than 100 million people worldwide -- the equivalent of 200 Hurricane Katrinas!

This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Joseph Romm is the editor of Climate Progress and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. Sam Wells Posted 11:27 am
    12 Feb 2008

    Good point, but IPCC said ice model was badI think any prediction a century out is rather bogus, but it is true the rate of existing erosion of arctic ice and northern glacial ice is at a much faster rate than anticipated by IPCC.
    One thing causes me some difficulty because most polar ice melt models assume the Earth is flat; that is, if "x" many billion tons of glacier ice melts, the ocean would rise uniformly as "y" in millimeters per year, similar to pouring water into a cookie sheet for baking.
    Well the Earth is not flat, nor is it perfectly spherical. Trust me, the ocean turns out to be quite lumpy.

    -sam

    Onward through the fog

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement