Is Global Warming Real? Evidence: Antarctic Ice

77
rate or flag this page
Facebook

By William R. Wilson

Global warming is in the news lately, with the media frenzy about Climategate and the Copenhagen conference. This hub is part of a series about the evidence for global warming.

Previous hubs dealt with global temperature records, declining snow cover, and the shrinking Arctic ice cap.

This hub examines global warming at the South Pole. It is a bit longer than earlier hubs, because Antarctica is so much more complicated than the Arctic.

If you want the short and sweet version, here it is:

  • Western Antarctica has warmed significantly. The rest of Antarctica has seen little to no warming - which is in line with global warming predictions.
  • Antarctic sea ice is increasing in area
  • but the Antarctic ice sheet as a whole is getting thinner (even though some parts are getting thicker - I told you it was complicated) and
  • Antarctic land ice is melting into the sea.

Now, if you want the nitty gritty, read on.

Mt. Hershel, in Antarctica.  Image from Wikimedia Commons.
Mt. Hershel, in Antarctica. Image from Wikimedia Commons.

The ice at the North pole is in obvious decline. The evidence from the South Pole, however, is a little more complicated. Is the ice thickening? Shrinking? Both? Is it warming or cooling?

In fact, the Antarctic sea ice area has increased by about 100,000 square miles over the past few decades. But the land ice is melting more and more.

Antarctica Isn't Supposed to Warm Up So Fast!

The 2001 IPCC Assessment on Global Climate Change, as well as many early climate models, predicted that Antarctica would not warm as fast as the rest of the globe. One reason for this is the nature of ocean currents at the Antarctic, which pull warm surface water down quickly, Another factor leading to less warming over the Antarctic continent is the hole in the Ozone, which affects wind patterns, diverting warmer air away from the interior. The National Snow and Ice Data Center has more information here.

However, there are definite signs of warming.

Most of the warming is due to warmer winters and longer summers. Parts of the continent are warming significantly, while others are not.

Changes in Antarctic temperature since 1957.  The darker reds indicate more warming.  White indicates no warming.
Changes in Antarctic temperature since 1957. The darker reds indicate more warming. White indicates no warming.

More info about the image above is available here.

The most drastic warming is seen on the Antarctic Peninsula, where average temperature has risen by approximately 2.5°C/4.5°F since monitoring started in the 1950s. Western Antarctica also shows significant warming. Temperatures in the interior of the continent, however, have increased somewhat less, with many stations showing no warming at all. A report just released by the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) puts the warming over all of Antarctica at 0.2 degrees Celsius since the 19th century (more on that report below) - and most of that warming occurred before 1960.

While the overall trend of less warming predicted by the climate models seems to be borne out by observations, Antarctic ice seems to be losing mass.

In 2006, scientists from the University of Chicago analyzed data from the GRACE satellites, which measure small changes in the earth's gravitational field. They found significant loss of mass in Antarctica (Velicogna et al, Measurements of Time-Variable Gravity Show Mass Loss in Antarctica, Science Express March 2006).

An analysis of ice sheet losses in 2008 also found an overall loss of ice mass.(Rignot et al, Recent Antarctic ice mass loss from radar interferometry and regional climate modelling, Nature Geoscience 1, Jan 2008)

A new paper from the University of Texas, also looking at GRACE satellite data, indicates that the rate of ice loss has accelerated since 2006. (Chen et. al, Accelerated Antarctic ice loss from satellite gravity measurements, Nature Geoscience 2, Nov. 2009)

So - while sea Ice area has increased, the ice overall is getting thinner - even though it is also thickening in parts of Antarctica.

Lake Fryxell in Antarctica.  The blue ice is from glacial meltwater.  Image from Wikimedia commons.
Lake Fryxell in Antarctica. The blue ice is from glacial meltwater. Image from Wikimedia commons.

Other signs of warming around Antarctica:

The report on Antarctic Climate Change and the Environment (AACE) (large PDF file), from The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research was just released on December 2, 2009, and makes the following statements about the Antarctic:

  • The Antarctic troposphere has warmed at 5 km above sea level, and the stratosphere above it has cooled over the last 30 years. This is what we would expect from warming caused by greenhouse gases. (ACCE p. xvii)
  • "Warming has caused retreat of ice shelves on both sides of the Peninsula.... Removal of ice shelves has led to the speeding up of glacier flow from inland."
  • Some formerly snow- and ice-covered islands are now increasingly snow-free during the summer.
  • Glaciers on Heard Island reduced by 11% since the 1940s, and several coastal lagoons have formed there.
  • On South Georgia, 28 of 36 surveyed glaciers are retreating, 2 are advancing, and 6 are stable.
  • On Signy Island ice cover has reduced by around 40%.
  • Of the 244 marine glaciers that drain the ice sheet and associated islands of the Antarctic Peninsula, 212 (87%) have shown overall retreat since 1953. The other 32 glaciers have shown small advances.
  • The Amundsen Sea sector is the most rapidly changing region of the Antarctic ice sheet. Thegrounding line at Pine Island has retreated, and the Pine Island Glacier is now moving at speeds 60% higher than in the 1970s. The Thwaites Glacier and four other glaciers in this sector show accelerated thinning. Smith Glacier has increased flow speed 83% since 1992.
  • The Pine Island and adjacent glacier systems are currently more than 40% out of balance, discharging 280 ± 9 Gt per year of ice, while they receive only 177 ± 25 Gt per year of new snowfall. The current rate of mass loss from the Amundsen Sea embayment ranges from 50 to 137 Gt per year, equivalent to the current rate of mass loss from the entire Greenland ice sheet, and making a significant contribution to sea level rise.
  • The changes result from warming of the sea beneath the ice shelves connected to the glaciers.
  • The ice sheet shows interior thickening at modest rates and a mixture of modest thickening and strong thinning among the fringing ice shelves. Increasing coastal melt is suggested by recent passive microwave data. (ACCE p. xviii)
  • The waters around Antarctica have warmed more rapidly than oceans in the rest of the world. The changes are consistent with greenhouse gas forcing.(ACCE p. xix)

Further evidence of warming in Antarctica is the fact that Antarctic Hair Grass populations have increased by 25 times, and Antarctic Pearlwort has increased fivefold. These are the only two plants native to Antarctica, and they have spread rapidly over the past few years.


Still not convinced that the Earth is warming?

There's still more evidence in the next hub! Thanks for reading so far.

Do you believe that global warming is happening?

  • Yes, it's happening and it's caused by greenhouse gases emitted by humans.
  • Yes it's happening but it's natural.
  • No it's not happening. The earth is cooling.
See results without voting

Comments

barryrutherford profile image

barryrutherford Level 4 Commenter 2 years ago

Excellent article. Well done! lots of useful information. What worries me is there is a net loss in ice & this will cause sea levels to rise and put Islands such as Tuvalu and other low lying pacific islands in short term danger of innundation.

I you want I will put a link to your hub from mine ?

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thank you Barry, a link would be great! Yes, you are right, the sea ice is not what we need to worry about as far as causing sea levels to rise. The land ice is the problem.

Amanda Severn profile image

Amanda Severn Level 4 Commenter 2 years ago

There's such a lot to digest here, but it's a useful and informative hub, William.

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thank you Amanda! I know this one is pretty long, but there was so much information to present. Thanks for reading.

carolina muscle profile image

carolina muscle Level 1 Commenter 2 years ago

William... well researched and an interesting read!!

Ralph Deeds profile image

Ralph Deeds Level 6 Commenter 2 years ago

Well done.

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thank you Ralph and Mr. Muscle!

barryrutherford profile image

barryrutherford Level 4 Commenter 2 years ago

William & others heres an interesting article from the ABC Science reporter Robin Williams on the "fake emails."http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/13/2770

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thanks Barry - interesting article. I agree with the writer, global warming is the most important political issue of our time - and the opposition is well organized.

cally2 profile image

cally2 2 years ago

Well done. Great series.

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thank you cally2!

apricot profile image

apricot 2 years ago

An excellent hub - up to the standard I would have imagined! You certainly did a lot of research! I did vote but, I think you can guess what I voted..!

I think as your article shows (and I can see it must have been quite a job for you sifting through it all) there's just so much information, some of it contradictory, some of it unclear that my impression is this - if the antarctic was warming there wouldn't be all this confusion. As Prof Lindzen say 'the truth is actually quite simple'. For me, Prof Lindzen makes sense. As regards listening to climate experts my maxim would be the same as that for chosing a brand from the supermarket - stick with the one you trust. Prof Lindzen, for me, tells things as they are - he also knows a lot about what goes on backstage at the IPCC through his involvement with them. For me, the numerous conflicting theories are just another way of shrouding the truth. I'm sticking with my one faithful brand!

Hope I haven't bored you with my thoughts! Thanks for the read!

Jeff May profile image

Jeff May Level 3 Commenter 2 years ago

Good research, and convincing evidence. Thanks. -- askwritefish.com

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thank you Jeff!

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Hi Apricot - thanks for stopping by and commenting.

What I have found is that the media reports are confusing and biased - this is true on both sides of the fence.

But the scientific evidence, and the scientific reports, are pretty convincing. Antarctic ice is thinning out. Many skeptic news organizations and websites have seized on the increasing sea ice area and claimed that Antarctica is cooling. But they are confusing area with volume. Antarctica is losing mass because of melting ice.

Ibrahim Berr 2 years ago

Absolutely great hub, we really need to do something about global warming and our first step is too admit it, and to educate others about it, i thank you for writing such a good hub.

AdsenseStrategies profile image

AdsenseStrategies 2 years ago

I'm going to start sounding like a broken record, because I have written this so often in the forums, but to those who do not believe in global warming, I say, fine, forget global warming...

Nevertheless, spewing hydrocarbons into the air and into our water tables (from which we drink), chopping down rain forests so fast they could be gone within decades, and relying so heavily on plastics we'll be swimming in landfills by the end of the century, are all undeniably problematic activities.

It just so happens that all of these things happen also to produce carbon dioxide. Happy coincidence really, because tackling the issues I highlight above would happen therefore incidentally to please the climate-changers.

In addition, looking to power ourselves with clean, cheap, and green energy is just common sense. Period. And it stops us having to kiss the backsides of Saudi Arabia, and having to get involved with places like Iran and Iraq (oil-rich countries).

john 2 years ago

could you please advise me: Do you earn any money from this page and roughly how much... I am just trying to consider weather its worth creating such a page( on a different topic)?

john 2 years ago

sorry for posting that last quiestion twice... accident, but a rough figure would be appreciated if you are able to help?

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Ibrahim: thank you!

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Adsense: you are totally right. I think that it may be more productive to frame the carbon problem in the way you present it, rather than in the global warming debate. So many "green" changes would have multiple beneficial effects.

But global warming is what seems to get people's attention. And it sticks in my craw when people don't recognize the science. So, here I am, still in the same old debate that's been going on for years.

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

John - I haven't made a penny from this hub so far. To early to see if I will or not, depends on if the search engines like it I guess.

If you want to make money online you are probably better off writing about practical things (how-to articles) and things that people want to buy.

Judge 2 years ago

I am not a person well grounded in science, however, I do travel the world and the environmental changes I see isn't good. Those countries I visit with retreating resources aren't going to remain a passive observer for very long. Those crazy Hollywood flicks "the world at war" may not be that far fetch.

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thanks for reading Judge!

ColdWarBaby 2 years ago

This is an excellent and informative series William. You've very obviously spent a lot of time and effort in the research. Thank you.

Amez profile image

Amez 2 years ago

Excellant Hub, Alot to digest, but its all worth, knowing, keep up the summaries, they help alot, to better understand the details and stats. Do you think we will have a 10 ft ri se or higher, around our Country in 7 years as I believe someone perdicted. and which part of our country will it affect the worst. Thanks for all your research.

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thanks for reading Amez. It's very unlikely that sea level rise will affect the US in the next 7 years. Many of these changes are predicted to take centuries.

In the next decade we are more likely to see weather changes like heavy rain leading to flooding, droughts, possibly more hurricanes.

Most of the real catastrophes will not happen in the US, but in places like India, where millions of people depend on glacier melt for fresh water, and Indonesia, where millions of people live at sea level.

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thank you for reading CWB.

Springboard profile image

Springboard Level 6 Commenter 2 years ago

I've been a long time advocate for being environmentally responsible. Having said that, I don't dispute that climate change exists. Of course it does. I think we have enough evidence in our geological record to prove that. We've been through tropical periods, ice ages, there are bodies of water now where there were deserts before and deserts now where there were bodies of water before. The question is really "are humans contributing to climate change?" It's there where I think the evidence loses it's major portion of support. BECAUSE we've had so much, and very dramatic, climate changes throughout the history of the planet. The data then suggests to me not that it is false, but that it is unlikely a result of humans activity.

Now, again, having said THAT, I go back to my original statement. "I've long been an advocate for being environmentally responsible."

I think we ARE polluting the air we breathe, the waters we drink, and there are environmental issues that concern our health and well-being, as well as causes harm to the ecosystem as a whole. These are important issues and these are the issues we should be in support of pollution reduction for.

I think, really, what the climate change or global warming, or whatever we are calling it now, aims to do is get into the human psyche to change their behavior. To frame it in a way that says "This is going to kill US." When we were talking about the animals, the ecosystem, most people felt separated from the consequences. "Hey, this is the cost of progress, get over it." The current climate change push, and the disaster scenarios are designed to cause people to pause and look at themselves so that we can have another look, and perhaps a more successful go, at addressing environmental issues.

But climate change itself will happen no matter what. The environmental issues being, nonetheless, addressed will allow us at least a better quality of life in the interim.

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thanks for reading Springboard, and thanks for the excellent comment.

I agree, sometimes we probably get so caught up in the debate about global warming that we forget the other environmental problems we face. And most global warming skeptics probably feel the same way you do, that there are more important things to worry about.

And - cutting fossil fuels will have many benefits beyond reducing CO2.

However, I am working on a hub right now that shows the evidence that human CO2 emissions are at the root of current global warming. I hope you'll check it out - maybe it will change your mind! :)

Springboard profile image

Springboard Level 6 Commenter 2 years ago

I'll definitely keep reading, and with an open mind of course. But might I add that every time we exhale we emit CO2, and plants convert the gas to oxygen. Granted, too much of anything is not a good thing. If you eat 30 oranges a day you may not quite get the real benefits of an orange, for example. :)

I'm still for addressing environmental conerns however, and feel it is an important issue. And I also agree that reducing our dependence on foreign oil has far reaching positives for us. But there again, it's a complex issue with a ton of unintended consequences if we aren't careful about how we get it done.

Ralph Deeds profile image

Ralph Deeds Level 6 Commenter 2 years ago

Another effect of carbon burning--acidification of the oceans

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091218/ap_on_sc/clima

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Ralph, why you want to give me something else to worry about?

;)

Kathy Rimel profile image

Kathy Rimel 2 years ago

Unfortunately, I disagree with you. I am all for environmental responsibility but I think this is all a part of the cycle the earth goes through. First of all we haven't been keeeping records for along enough. This old world has been around for a long, long time and has found many ways to restore itself or adapt to changing conditions. I definately think as human beings inhabiting this world we have a responsibility to be enviromentally responsibile, but give the old girl as chance, my bet is she will pull through once again.

ColdWarBaby 2 years ago

Sure she will. After she gets rid of us.

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Heh. That's what I was going to say CWB.

ColdWarBaby 2 years ago

If we insist on being matricidal, we will be exterminated. The laws of nature cannot be defied and her forces cannot be subjugated or defeated in battle. What part of this do we not understand?

Springboard profile image

Springboard Level 6 Commenter 2 years ago

BTW, I'd like to vote in your poll but I can't give an opinion in any direction. I do not believe global warming is true, but I do think climate change is real. I'm at a crossroads. :)

BobLloyd profile image

BobLloyd 2 years ago

This series is superb and I wish it was carried on the front pages of national newspapers. I am sick and tired of people using the idea that there is some uncertainty in scientific data to imply that we therefore should draw no conclusions from what we do know.

And I've seen so many paranoid scare stories about eastern european communists infiltrating the green movement to try to set up communist world government, that I find myself questioning the rationality of entire national populations... It seems incredible to me that anyone could conceivably believe such nonsense.

Your articles are the perfect antidote for them, if we could only get them to read the material...

William R. Wilson profile image

William R. Wilson Hub Author 2 years ago

Thank you so much Bob. Yeah, it's mind blowing to hear some of the claims that people make in these comments. Thanks for reading!

Robert Kernodle profile image

Robert Kernodle Level 3 Commenter 2 years ago

It's cooling but it's not. It's growing but it's shrinking. This study says it's hotter. That study says it's warmer.

Using Anarctica, either side could make a case, depending on which method of data analysis they use or which parts of the region they choose to focus on.

This hub prooves NOT that human-caused global warming is real but that it is really up for question. And I believe the overall long-sighted view of the ice ages goes more towards answering the question than the myopic view of the current era.

I replied to your comment in my most recent hub entitled,

GLACIERS - The Cold Hard Facts Of Climate Change

Robert Kernodle profile image

Robert Kernodle Level 3 Commenter 2 years ago

The GRACE satellite data referenced in this hub covered only a span of time from 2002 to 2005 --a mere four years--

Pardon me, but this seems laughable as far as determining a real trend for ice sheet melting.

All ice masses on Earth are still melting down from a previous glacial era -- melting NO faster than they were melting since the 1800's when the most recent melting trend began.

Think eeons, NOT years. That's the problem -- short-term observations like these are myopic, and they fuel hysterical fears needlessly.

Sooner28 Level 3 Commenter 2 days ago

Appreciate you informing people about the dangers of climate change. Keep it up!

Submit a Comment
Members and Guests

Sign in or sign up and post using a hubpages account.



    • No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked
    • Comments are not for promoting your Hubs or other sites

    working