Grim Picture of Polar Ice-Sheet Loss

ananyo writes "A global team of researchers has come up with the most accurate estimate yet for melting of the polar ice sheets, ending decades of uncertainty about whether the sheets will melt further or actually gain mass in the face of climate change. The ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting at an ever-quickening pace. Since 1992, they have contributed 11 millimeters — or one-fifth — of the total global sea-level rise, say the researchers. The two polar regions are now losing mass three times faster than they were 20 years ago, with Greenland alone now shedding ice at about five times the rate observed in the early 1990s. This latest estimate, published this week in Science, draws on up to 32 years of ice-sheet simulations and 20 years of satellite data to give an estimate two to three times more accurate than that in the last IPCC report."

Comments

My prediction for this discussion

[actiondan]

I predict:

People who don't believe in AGW/man made climate change will think that this study is just part of the conspiracy

Most people who do believe in AGW/man made climate change will continue to suggest remedies that just will not happen due to economics/human nature

The small amount of actually useful discussion of how we can adapt to a changing climate (no matter what it's cause) will be drowned out in the accusations and counter accusations

Re:My prediction for this discussion

[ratbag]

I mean, seriously, why do you care if Earth becomes another Venus?

My twin nieces, Ruby and Winnie. My nephews Leo and Max.

Sorry to appeal to emotion, but I find your attitude a little cold, a little remote, a little shitty.

Re:My prediction for this discussion

[interkin3tic]

The small amount of actually useful discussion of how we can adapt to a changing climate (no matter what it's cause) will be drowned out in the accusations and counter accusations

Well, the good news is that the status of the atmosphere, and the survival of the human species, does not depend on discussions on slashdot.

The bad news is that it instead depends on discussions between politicians, lobbyists, and voters.

Re:My prediction for this discussion

[Mindcontrolled]

Guys, guys.... Engage brain before a) posting and b) modding "informative". 1000 years ago Greenland had a couple of ice-free bays with just enough land for a handful of settlements. Which fared poorly. You do not seriously believe that then whole inland ice of Greenland was gone 1000 years ago?

Re:GW is real

[agentgonzo]

There's a difference between coming out of an ice-age (a natural process over tens of thousands of years) and global warming, where there is a noticeable change in temperature/ice-caps over a period of years/decades.
And it's trolls like you spreading FUD that don't help matters.

Sea Level

[deimtee]

Easiest way to fix sea level rises is to dig two channels.
Connect the Caspian Sea and the Dead Sea (and the rest of the Great Rift Valley) to the open ocean and watch the water level drop.

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years!

[hsthompson69]

Everything is AGW related - hot spells, cold spells, droughts, floods, riots, earthquakes, locusts, hurricanes, doldrums - that's a cop out.

The fact of the matter here is that 11mm in 20 years, or 55mm in 20 years, is ridiculously small. Seriously, 6 *centimeters* in 20 years. Even with a thirty year horizon, that's not more than 10 *centimeters*.

Quick quiz: how much did ocean levels rise from 1900-2000, and how many acres of real estate were devalued because of it?

As for acceleration, sea level rise is actually *slowing* - there's simply no possible plausible scenario that is going to turn *millimeters* of change into *meters* of change in in 20 years, or even 100 for that matter.

Re:Oh noes! 11 mm in 20 years!

[Mindcontrolled]

The refugees squatting on your front lawn might drastically lower the value, though.

Return to the Jurassic World [Re:GW is real]

[Geoffrey.landis]

So where the ice was 100 years ago before global warming started is exactly where "normal" is and where the ice should always have and forever have stayed?

Depends what you mean by the word "normal." The dinosaurs lived perfectly well in a world that had no ice caps at all, and in which the entire center of the United States was a shallow ocean that stretched from Colorado to Pennsylvania. You could call that "normal" if you like.

However, there would be a great deal of disruption to human civilization to change to that state. We have an ecosystem (and an economic system) that is well adapted for the climate we have now, not one that is significantly warmer and with significantly higher sea levels. It would cause trillions of dollars of costs just to relocate the part of the population that lives in places that will be underwater, not even to mention changing the agricultural infrastructure. Doing this slowly is one thing. Doing ten thousand years worth of climate change in fifty years is another.

It would be nice for Canada, Norway, and Siberia, though. Not so nice for the United States (except for Alaska); we have a very good climate for agriculture right now, and don't really want to have the climate of Mexico move up to Kansas. Oddly, Canada, Norway and Russia are the most adamant of the countries that are trying to block restrictions on greenhouse effect gas emissions. That's probably just a coincidence, though, since those countries are also major fossil-fuel exporters.