Slashdot Mirror
Near-Perfect Storms Hits Antarctic Icebergs
Joe writes "A unique, July 20th, satellite "photo" of a near-perfect, tightly-wound, hurricane-like storm in Antarctica
(now in the throes of a typical, bitterly cold, austral winter with temps sometimes ranging below -90 F., or -68 C.) can be seen here. The
storm is seen in the image near two huge icebergs, B-15A and B-15B, that had calved from the Ross Ice Shelf in March as parts of one monster iceberg, B-15 (186 miles long and 23 miles wide, or 4200 square miles; it's about 2% of the entire area of the Ross Ice Shelf, the largest ice shelf in the world). Iceberg B-15 is also the largest ever recorded in the 24-year database of icebergs maintained at the National Ice
Center. (Members of the Coriolis fan club will also
happily note the storm's clockwise circulation, the common characteristic of storms in the Southern Hemisphere). It should be
interesting to see what effect the storm will have on the positions of these two huge icebergs. N. B., Three other huge icebergs,
A-43A, A-43B, and A-44, totaling about 4000 square miles in area, calved from the Ronne Ice Shelf (second largest in the world) in May. They were not near the storm on July 20. It's not just Greenland's ice that's disappearing!" I'm afraid that I lack the background to really understand what's going on here, but a link to the "National Ice Center" was too much to pass up. Betcha didn't even know the U.S. had a National Ice Center, did you. Are these photos interesting because a) the ice cap is melting, b) these huge icebergs are going to wander into shipping lanes, c) they're just so damn big, or d) some other reason?
No, the melting of floating ice doesn't change the surface level. If you fill a glass of water up, and put a big ice cube in it, mark the side at the water level, and let the cube melt, you will see that the water level doesn't change.
Because as the ice melts it gets smaller and fits into the hole in the water it was taking up. Exactly fits. That's what it means to be floating -- you displace your wieght, and if you turn to water, then obviously you fit into the space you were displacing.
So the whole of floating ice on the north pole (tens of feet thick at most, I believe) and the ice shelves (much thicker in places) can melt with out changing the water level.
If the absence of the floating shelf causes more ice to slide off the land and into the ocean, then the level will go up. As soon as that ice is in the water, not when that ice melts -- just like the water in a glass rises when you put an ice cube in it.
All this talk of ice cubes and ice bergs makes me want to play some rap.
I think the world wouldn't loose much if the lower parts flooded anyway. Those are generally the sucky parts, take NYC for example. But of course those loosers will then start moving inland and ruining it for the rest of us.
No. It's shelf ice, not land (cap) ice. Their melting will have no effect on sea level, unlike land (icecap) ice.
Unlikely. Not many ships go down there. Slightly fewer return. Most ships have radar now anyway.
Yes.
Yes. Breakup of the shelf ice is thought to be a symptom of a warming Southern Ocean.
WWJD -- What Would Jimi Do?
I am quite civilized, and I should be brought a beer immediately. -- Bruce Sterling
If the forum is that 10gramspoppylatex thing, then I already knew about it. (forgot about it, but knew about it). I was on that mailing list, I just hadn't posted anything in a while, so I assumed I was off.