Greenland’s ice melt has doubled in frequency since the mid-20th century, leading to significant global and regional climate implications, including risks to Europe’s weather patterns, stressing the critical need for reduced greenhouse emissions.
Global warming is causing Greenland’s ice to melt at an increasingly alarming rate, posing serious threats to both the Arctic and the wider global climate. New research led by the University of Barcelona reveals that extreme melting episodes — periods of rapid snow and ice melt- have been nearly twice as frequent during summers in recent decades compared to the period 1950-1990.
The study, published in the American Meteorological Society’s Journal of Climate, shows that the last decade has seen peak years of extreme melting in Greenland. For example, during the summer of 2012, 610 gigatonnes of ice (the equivalent of 244 million Olympic-size swimming pools) melted, and in 2019, 560 gigatonnes (224 million Olympic-size swimming pools) melted.
The research was conducted by the Antarctica, Arctic, and Alpine (ANTALP) research group of the UB’s Department of Geography. It was led by lecturers and researchers from the Faculty of Geography and History Josep Bonsoms and Marc Oliva, Juan Ignacio López-Moreno, a researcher at the Pyrenean Institute of Ecology (IPE-CSIC), and Xavier Fettweis, from the University of Liège (Belgium).
Research Insights on Ice Melt Dynamics
The researchers analyzed extreme melt episodes in Greenland between 1950 and 2022. The results show meltwater loss figures that, on average, have reached about 300 gigatonnes per year — the equivalent of a volume of about 48 million Olympic-size swimming pools per year — between 1980 and 2010. In addition, about 40% of the melting episodes have been extreme in recent decades. This figure rises to 50% in the coldest areas in the north and northwest of the island.
“This loss of surface glacial melt must be added to that of other dynamic processes, such as the detachment of icebergs directly into the sea and the flow of glaciers into the ocean, both of which are accelerated by increased melting,” adds the UB researchers.
Increasing Risks from Ice Loss
Ice melting phenomena have been directly linked to global warming, with recent studies showing that the Arctic is warming at four times the global average rate due to increased greenhouse gases. The authors of the study explain that “increased melting is closely related to episodes of extreme warmth caused by more frequent, warmer, and wetter anticyclonic air masses from more northern latitudes.”
“These atmospheric patterns keep the air over Greenland stagnant during the summer, increase solar radiation, and reduce the albedo (sunlight reflectance) of snow and ice, which further accelerates warming and melting,” they add.
According to UB researchers, melting is occurring in higher areas of the ice cap, where no ice melt was previously observed between 1950 and 1990. This has created cracks and other structural changes in the ice sheet, and increases the risk of large blocks of ice breaking off into the ocean. “International climate reports anticipate a significant increase in temperatures in the polar regions, which would accelerate the trend we have observed in this study,” the researchers said.
Global Impacts and European Climate Changes
Greenland’s melting ice has global consequences, as it is a major contributor to sea level rise and it also affects atmospheric circulation patterns. According to the researchers, these alterations may also influence Europe’s climate. “These changes in temperature and precipitation patterns could impact on socio-economic activities, ecosystems and may contribute to increased climate extremes in nearby regions of the North Atlantic,” the experts note.
In addition, the researchers also warn that projected climate scenarios indicate an increase in these episodes: “This highlights the urgency of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate the impacts of climate change in the coming decades,” they conclude.
Reference: “Rising Extreme Meltwater Trends in Greenland Ice Sheet (1950–2022): Surface Energy Balance and Large-Scale Circulation Changes” by Josep Bonsoms, Marc Oliva, Juan I. López-Moreno and Xavier Fettweis, 27 August 2024, Journal of Climate.
DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-23-0396.1
Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
Follow us on Google and Google News.
21 Comments
Nonsense numbers. Three decades before these records began were so much colder than the 1920s 30s and 40s, that scientists were predicting a new ice age. The Northern Hemisphere built up ice during that time, and now that ice is melting and we are returning to a normal withdrawal from the last ice age
NONSENSE is what you said. It is a very tired denier SLOGAN.
There were SIX TIMES as many peer reviewed studies on Anthropogenic Global Warming, from our CO2 emissions in the 1970s.
And nothing within a light year of consensus on cooling.
7 studies, that researched what would happen if humans increased sulfur dioxide aerosols in the atmosphere Four Fold. SO2 (actually becomes sulfuric acid aerosols in the atmosphere) reflects sunlight back out into space – the same as happens when volcanoes erupt.
That never happened for one thing, because we started putting pollution controls on smokestacks and vehicle exhaust soon after.
During the same time frame there were 44 studies on AGW.
The latest IPCC report was based on over 12,000 peer reviewed studies.
The current total number of peer reviewed climate studies is close to 100,000.
There is not a single professional science organization in the world, that’s relevant to earth sciences that does not agree with AGW.; Not one – of about 200 that all Agree.
The last two holdouts were the American Association of PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS and the Canadian Society of PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS.
Those SO2 aerosols have an atmospheric resident time of about 2 years.
The resident time of CO2 is measured in centuries, and methane about 12 years.
I think that you are confusing the number of publications with the quality of publications, which you say nothing about.
It has been my experience that the quality of climatology publications is inferior to the other disciplines I’m accustomed to reading, especially with respect to the proper handling of significant figures and precision, and the propagation of error in calculations.
I just look at the rapidly shrinking glacial reservoir of fresh water and the glacial support accorded rapidly uplifting mountains and consider human nature.
As for scientific publications; some are good, some are sloppy, some don’t bother to consider essential information in prior papers, but they ain’t all finger-lickin’ nit-picking bad. And some indeed do deal with speculation, but that is an integral part of scientific thinking. There are a lot of imponderables and uncertainties in climatology but if we don’t model anything until we know everything then we won’t learn from our mistakes, which is how we learn to understand what is happening in any aspect of science
This is NOT a normal withdrawal from the last ice age. The warming that ended the last ice age stopped between 9,000-8,000 years ago, at the Holocene Thermal Maximum.
Then, after a global temperature plateau of a few thousand years, a slow gradual cooling started about 7,000 to 6,000 years ago and lasted up till at least the late 1800s.
The warming we have caused since the late 1800s, is nearly 2 times the cooling that took 6 or 7 thousand years.
The world is now warming about 10 times faster, on average, than the warming that ended all the ice ages of the last 1 million years. (more properly called glacial periods)
Per NASA:
“This is NOT a normal withdrawal from the last ice age.”
We don’t really know what a “normal withdrawal” looks like with the high temporal resolution that we are accustomed to today. Time acts like a low-pass filter, suppressing peaks and broadening them, giving different slopes than would have been obtained had instruments been available to sample them at a finer resolution. Four recent interglacials is not a robust statistical sample of warming behavior.
“The world is now warming about 10 times faster, on average, than the warming that ended all the ice ages of the last 1 million years.”
That is an assertion that is difficult to defend because the thermometer wasn’t invented until 1592, and didn’t become common until fairly recently. All previous temperature estimates were low precision and accuracy, the result of using proxies of various types and with different correlations with temperature. The most abundant and reliable proxy depends on oxygen isotope ratios in marine forams. However, water, with a much higher specific heat capacity than terrestrial materials, warms much more slowly than terrestrial materials, contributing to the ‘low-pass filter’ problem I first mentioned.
And there is no measuring tape long enough to measure the distance from earth to the moon and sun. Temperature ranges can be inferred historically in many ways, such as by plant types growing at various latitudes, and growth rates (such as through tree rings), then carbon dated and/or dated by the strata in which they are found, and analyzed by people much more educated than I am.
I agree completely. There’s a reason it is called Greenland.
The massive increase in atmospheric CO2, as did the global population, kicked off in 1944-1950. The 1890s are irrelevant to the argument, with no more than 1 billion people in the world and no petrol and diesel engines, let alone aeroplanes and our huge reliance on electricity.
I wanna know who’s doing the math here? Lol. Because how is 300 gigatons of melt equal 48 million Olympic size pools of melt . 300 gigatons ×2 =600gigatons and 96 Olympic size pools. But the article says right before that 610 gigatons is = to 244 Olympic size pools of melt. So your saying 10 gigatons is equal to 148 Olympic size pools? Someone’s math is wack. Just saying
NASA Climate
6/11/2021
“UPDATE: Since 2002, Greenland and Antarctica have been losing ice mass at a combined average rate of 428 billion metric tons (BMT) per year.”
Roughly
150 billion tons Antarctica
280 billion tons Greenland
More fear mongering from idiot scientist.
More denier SLOGANS, no science
Sit down, tryhard.
“… during the summer of 2012, 610 gigatonnes of ice … melted, …”
What percentage of the total weight of ice is that? That is important because it will give us a first-order estimate of the length of time required for the melting to revert the surface to what it was during the Eemian. If the problem is getting worse, why was the number smaller for 2019?
“Greenland’s melting ice has global consequences, as it is a major contributor to sea level rise ….”
Where in the article is there any information on the amount of sea level rise and the correlation with the melting episodes?
” why was the number smaller for 2019?”
There is natural short term variability. For example, 2012 still is the year with the lowest Arctic sea ice extent on record, because it was an unusual year for storms with high winds that drove sea ice out into the Atlantic Ocean. The last few years came close to that low however.
“a first-order estimate of the length of time required for the melting to revert the surface to what it was during the Eemian”
Maybe, maybe not. Were other factors exactly the same during the Eemian?
It is not easy to calculate how fast ice sheets/glaciers will recede, because it’s not just some melt rate. It’s also sudden collapses, like when huge pieces of the ice shelves that hold back glaciers from advancing into the sea, suddenly break off.
Yes, 2012 set a record, so it is difficult to honestly rule out that the trend has changed.
“It is not easy to calculate how fast ice sheets/glaciers will recede, because it’s not just some melt rate.”
That is a point I made above, that time is like a ‘low-pass filter,’ where all the processes over a long time are integrated, while today we are able to measure temperature and snow depth and see all the minor changes.
“…, like when huge pieces of the ice shelves that HOLD BACK glaciers from advancing into the sea, …”
That is a commonly made claim that I think is poorly supported with theory or time-lapse satellite imagery I have observed. Primarily, one should not expect tension cracks in the ice shelf if it is resisting the forward movement of the glacier. What is probably being observed is the inverse causality. That is, glaciers commonly surge. If it slows down because of transient increased basal resistance, the leading edge retains the former momentum and breaks away if it is floating past the grounding line. If the glacier then surges again, it gives the false impression of accelerating because of the loss of the hypothesized buttressing effect.
I have just checked the Danish Arctic research institution (polar portal)
According to their satellite data approximately 570 gigatons of snow fell during the winter of 2023/2024 (approximately).
According to their satellite data approximately 200 gigatons of that snow melted, in fact it was a completely average yearly melt according to their satellite data.
Which leaves approximately 370 gigatons of snow/ice left over from the summer melt, if you got each ton of ice and stacked them on top of each other it would reach the sun 2 and a half times, which when you think about it is pretty mind blowing.
Why is the Internet full of fake headlines like the one I am replying to, according to the polar portal which I understand is a Danish government organisation, the headlines in this article just didn’t happen, all that ice didn’t melt, the ice might have been lost by it falling into the sea, but it didn’t melt.
Please note that the polar portal year year ran from September 1st 2023 through to August 31st 2024, the previous year even less ice melted
I have just read the article again, sorry, they are referring to 2012 which did happen, it was an exceptionally warm year in the Arctic that year.
The article does fail to mention that in a 2 year period since 2012, of 1200+ gigatons of snow that fell during these 2 consecutive winters over 1000 gigatons of snow survived the summer melts, that 1 trillion tons of ice that
survived.
The period I am referring to is September 1st 2016 to August 31st 2018.
If you got each ton of ice that survived the summer melt for this period and stacked them on top of each other, this column of ice would stretch to the sun nearly 7 times.
My calculations are correct, so is the data.
I guess it was a very cold 2 year period.
The sun is 150 million kilometres away
I have cherry picked this period the same as the authors of the above article have.
They say that 610 gigatons of ice melted in the summer of 2012, they fail to mention that 600 gigatons accumulated the previous year.
The numbers don’t add up.
610 GTs of ice melting, equivalent to 244 million Olympic swimming pools, yet 300 GTs is only equivalent to 48 million Olympic swimming pools.???
The nuance that is nowhere mentioned in all of these erudite comments on snow and ice is the 144 BTUs/# of heat energy that ice absorbs as it melts, and 30 million tons of Greenland ice are melting EVERY HOUR. You do the math. As for the warming (heating) of 321 million cubic miles of oceans, the top 2,000 m (?) has heated to 70 degF, which explains the 1-1.4 trillion tons of water vapor evaporating daily and, thus, the rain and flooding events now in the news. It’s the heat energy equivalent of 20+ Hiroshima nuclear bomb blasts PER SECOND we’re pumping into the atmosphere, the enormous heat energy imbalance, that’s rapidly changing our weather and driving us toward an extinction level event for all life on this over burdened planet.