Greenland ice sheet faces 'tipping point in 10 years'

There are 6 comments on the Aug 10, 2010, Guardian Unlimited story titled Greenland ice sheet faces 'tipping point in 10 years'. In it, Guardian Unlimited reports that:

Scientists warn that temperature rise of between 2C and 7C would cause ice to melt, resulting in 23ft rise in sea level Greenland's ice sheet could break up if the temperature rises by as little as 2C.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Guardian Unlimited.

LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#1 Aug 10, 2010
Robert Bindschadler, a research scientist at the University of Maryland, told the briefing: "While we don't believe it is possible to lose an ice sheet within a decade, we do believe it is possible to reach a tipping point in a few decades in which we would lose the ice sheet in a century."

I wonder if this is solid?

Positive feedbacks are certainly a major risk in the currrent polar areas as sea ice decreases and open water increases ( albedo goes from 90% reflected to 90% captured). And the 'ice shelves' and ice pack that normally retard ice flow from glaciers is definitely declining.

One thing that many will not be aware of is that MUCH of the snow that adds to the central peak in Greenland is from 'Adiabatic cooling' as wet winds are forced to altitude over the ice sheet precipitation their moisture ( 1C per 100 meters altitude).

The combination of warmer winds and lower elevations may seriously 'choke off' this source of ice gain and this will definitely cause a 'tipping point' change towards melting.

A few decades though? I doubt if it will take that long.
dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#2 Aug 10, 2010
Today, we have great news. Another tipping point prediction!
In one of the shortest time frames of scientific predictions (1 Decade), we have a proposition that all of Greenland's Ice will melt resulting in a fore casted rise in sea level in excess of 24 inches per year, on a decadel average.
That should be noticeable in the next couple of years...should it not? Five years at the most.
Finally, something to "hang one's hat on".
If this forecast, or prediction, or model (call it anything one desires) comes true does it validate AGW, If not, why not?
If all of Venice and Miami and Los Angeles are not below sea level in five to ten years does this diminish the credibility of catastrophic AGW? If not, why not?
Frankly... IMO, this deserves inclusion on the "Warmlist".
-koolaid
dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#3 Aug 10, 2010
Mr. Muenchow seems to be under financial stress... does his ten year forecast offer any hope of financial relief (funding)?

"Muenchow told the briefing that over the last seven years he had only received funding to measure ocean temperatures near the Petermann Glacier for a total of three days."

And to think this forecast is based on, in part, THREE DAYS of ocean temperature measurements over a 7 year period. Wow! Was there something else that contributed to Mr. Muenchow's scary scenario?

"He was also reduced, because of a lack of funding, to paying his own airfare and that of his students to they could join up with a Canadian icebreaker on a joint research project in the Arctic."

Follow the Money
-koolaid

Post Script:
Is there not even a small part of this story that (raises a red flag) deserves some level of skepticism?... anything?
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#5 Aug 11, 2010
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
Today, we have great news. Another tipping point prediction!
You seem 'unclear on the concept' of tipping points and/or 'good news'.
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
In one of the shortest time frames of scientific predictions (1 Decade), we have a proposition that all of Greenland's Ice will melt resulting in a fore casted rise in sea level in excess of 24 inches per year, on a decadel average.
Once we pass the tipping point in 'a few decades'.
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
That should be noticeable in the next couple of years...should it not? Five years at the most.
This is what I mean about 'unclear on the concept'.
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
Finally, something to "hang one's hat on".
You could try putting it on your head. It isn't good for much else that I can detect.
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
If this forecast, or prediction, or model (call it anything one desires) comes true does it validate AGW, If not, why not?
It would count as a 'risk potential' and no, it isn't considered a 'prophecy', a 'prediction' or even a 'forecast' at this point in the science.
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
If all of Venice and Miami and Los Angeles are not below sea level in five to ten years does this diminish the credibility of catastrophic AGW? If not, why not?
Because the current rate of decline only adds a few cm a decade so until we get PAST the tipping point in a few decades ( lets give it thirty years) there will be only a small increase in ice loss. That is why they CALL it a 'tipping point'. Because there is a sharp BEND in the graph at the 'cusp'.
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
Frankly... IMO, this deserves inclusion on the "Warmlist".
-koolaid
Frankly... IMO, you deserve an award for the most clueless post of the day. But I'm sure you will exceed it soon.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#6 Aug 11, 2010
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
Mr. Muenchow seems to be under financial stress... does his ten year forecast offer any hope of financial relief (funding)?
See. I was right. An even more clueless post. And yes, research is not well funded. Academics often have to 'put in' a bit out of their wages to fill in 'gaps' in the process. And in the 'publish or perish' world of academia, it is also necessary to get the data or you don't keep your job, so there is pressure to get the job done even when the funding doesn't arrive.

Exactly how does this make him suspect?? The usual argument is that academics will say anything to get funding and to hell with the facts. Here he is obviously saying to hell with the funding and getting the science!!!
Earthling

Spain

#7 Aug 11, 2010
Tipping points have come and gone, yet another will soon get a mention.
-
Meanwhile, our English speaking Canuck spells metre the American way, meter, which in British English is a device that measures flow.
-
Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for proof that forty was ever spelled fourty in any dictionary printed within the last 60 or even 100 years that was distributed to Canadian schools.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Oceanography Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Inter-decadal Pacific Oscillation Explains Glob... Apr 16 SpaceBlues 1
News Japanese reactor radiation detected off B.C. coast Apr 10 RDL 2
News Shrinking of Ice Shelves Raises Sea Level Concerns Apr 8 Earthling-1 10
News Pakistan earthquake island belching poisonous gas (Sep '13) Mar 30 MOMIN ANSARI 17
News Head of Episcopal Church: Denying Climate Chang... Mar 25 Cordwainer Trout 2
News Women in Oceanography: Lots of Students, Not So... Mar '15 SpaceBlues 1
News Sea level rise: It's worse than we thought (Jul '09) Feb '15 Earthling-1 3,326
More from around the web