A new paper has been published in GRL showing that the Antarctic is accumulating snow. The paper by Thomas, E. R., G. J. Marshall, and J. R. McConnell is entitled: ‘A doubling in snow accumulation in the western Antarctic Peninsula since 1850.’
This shouldn’t surprsie the IPCC who say “the Antarctic ice sheet will remain too cold for widespread surface melting and is expected to gain in mass due to increased snowfall.” Accumulation was measured using ice cores and the largest increase is in the Gomez area. Figure 1 (below) from the paper shows data for the Dyer Plateau, James Ross Island, and the ITASE01_05 core, which also shows an increase (since the 1970s).
Figure 1. Annual accumulation at Gomez (dashed blue) and running decadal mean accumulation at Gomez (solid blue), Dyer Plateau (red), James Ross Island (black) and ITASE01_05 (green) in meters of water equivalent per year (mweq y-1) between 1850 and 2006 (from Thomas et al., 2008)
The Abstract states:
We present results from a new medium depth (136 metres) ice core drilled in a high accumulation site (73.59°S, 70.36°W) on the south-western Antarctic Peninsula during 2007. The Gomez record reveals a doubling of accumulation since the 1850s, from a decadal average of 0.49 mweq y−1 in 1855–1864 to 1.10 mweq y−1 in 1997–2006, with acceleration in recent decades. Comparison with published accumulation records indicates that this rapid increase is the largest observed across the region. Evaluation of the relationships between Gomez accumulation and the primary modes of atmospheric circulation variability reveals a strong, temporally stable and positive relationship with the Southern Annular Mode (SAM). Furthermore, the SAM is demonstrated to be a primary factor in governing decadal variability of accumulation at the core site (r = 0.66). The association between Gomez accumulation and ENSO is complex: while sometimes statistically significant, the relationship is not temporally stable. Thus, at decadal scales we can utilise the Gomez accumulation as a suitable proxy for SAM variability but not for ENSO.
Received 31 October 2007; accepted 6 December 2007; published 12 January 2008.
Keywords: snow accumulation; Southern Annular Mode; Antarctica.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Paul: Has this paper confirmed cooling downunder?
The paper, which is about Antarctica, confirms the importance of atmospheric circulations, and we won’t be needing wellies just yet.
Ole Humlum has tracked Antarctic temperature changes since 1955:
http://www.unis.no/research/geology/Geo_research/Ole/AntarcticTemperatureChanges.htm
Clearly, EXXON anticipated the controversy and have been paying off scientists since 1955.
Paul,
To paraphrase the CO2 site – and “there’s no global warming down there either!
But the increasing mass of snow and ice at the Antarctic raises the interesting question of the HAB theory – (Hugh Auchincloss-Brown) who proposed, during the 1950’s and early 1960’s, that increasing precipitation of snow at the polar regions will result, ultimately, in so much mass that the earth becomes rotationally unstable and careens to restore rotational equilibrium.
Which means that like a tippe-toppe the earth rotates around a new axis with antarctica now at the equator, and other land masses at polar regions.
Interesting hypothesis and suggests a sort of self-regulating mechanism.
Of course the immediate impact to lands located in equatorial and temperature regions is the appearance of a sudden ice age.
Food for thought I suppose.
Doing a search for HAB theory should retrieve useful references.
How odd ?
The snow curve looks like the warming curve.
About exactly what you’d expect. Gnawing the edges and consolidation of the interior. Try considering some of the circulation systems going on instead of bogus joker card #2 which says AGW acts with a broad brush. Again an incisive example of why denialists are summarily ignored by governments and business alike. Only 5% of the leg of the elephant presented.
It’s the alarmists who use the broad brush. I gave this a straight write-up.
Luke, the point is that the alarmist who say that Antarctica is melting are wrong. Or do you care to dispute that? This is not supposed to be proof against GW, its supposed to show that the facts don’t support the idea that Antarctica is the “second canary in the coal mine”
Grow up you small pathetic child and learn to stop making imaginary enemies for yourself! “Denier” isn’t the least bit accurate, it just goes to show how truly ignorant and pathetic you are. Get a grip stupid.
Been here Andrew?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/13/71511/6614/278/436017
AFAIK, the Antarctic has been too cold for precipitation. As it warms, you will see more of it. So the increased snowfall is in line with projections.
Or here?
http://www.climatechangenews.org/nCanaries.html
Wow, didn’t take long for standards to slip. Did you run out of valium Andrew?
So Paul, what do you mean by ‘we won’t need the wellies yet?’. Are you suggesting sea level rise might be tempered by increased snow fall?
Andrew – bit sensitive on the denier tag are we – make you a deal – you campaign here against use of the words alarmist, marxists and catastrophe and we’ll see what we can do. Was that something about improved blog standards again. Cuts both ways but some only see one side – check a few years of archives matey. In the new 2008 improved blog standards here you should get a severe reprimand for gratuitous abuse too.
To your point – there was a raft of papers last year or the eyar before showing accelerated mass loss in some areas. The GRACE gravity satellite concluded a net loss but with high error bars. Is it a decadal effect or something else? Well we’ll see won’t we. The Antarctic and Southern Hemisphere is quite different to the boreal half of the globe.
Anyway – would we expect to see a massive signal at this point? What would the first stress cracks actually look like if something was starting.
What is interesting is the mid-troposphere above Antarctica is warming considerably – why – not sure really.
The IPCC themselves only calculate a modest sea level rise over a century but that doesn’t take into account that ice sheets probably disintergrate more than simply melt. We clearly don’t know enough.
Go home and wash the dog Luke
What’s the explanation for record (since 1979) Antarctic sea ice coverage in 2007?
Dunno – got a theory? Combination of circumstances or start of a trend? Big La Nina ?All very interesting though.
Volcanoes.
OK, looking at the data, one of 5 stations saw an increase in annual snowfall from about 18 inches to about 38 inches. One place, snowfall increased by inches.
I’m going to go piss over the porch railing and end the drought.
And the sea ice is basically in the same range it’s been for decades, not showing a statistically significant change.
OK, looking at the data, one of 5 stations saw an increase in annual snowfall from about 18 inches to about 38 inches. One place, snowfall increased by inches.
I’m going to go piss over the porch railing and end the drought.
And the sea ice is basically in the same range it’s been for decades, not showing a statistically significant change.
My guess is that as cloud formation has some link to cosmic ray input, then sea ice propogation might be linked to the cosmic rays that produce the polar auroras. (I am using mainstream terms here rather than more specific plasma science ones).
Think on it.
Hint: Water has some interesting molecular properties, whether suspended in air, as ice or liquid.
Life, as we know it, depends on it, utterly.
the other. When a man of fortune spends his revenue chiefly in hospitality, umGoTGpVHp http://www.infodesigns.com/comments.html
Don’t think you’re going to get any intelligent discussion on this one Paul…. fizzle …
Davy they dragged a thermal probe over that volcano near the Peninsula – made a poompteenth difference. Hardly noticeable.
Luke,
Arrr…no, no, no, no, yes…volcanoes…and the sea shall boil, and great monsters shall appear… there is consensus that we are doomed, unless you put a stop order, in my favour, on your VISA card. Choose your own amount of $20, $100, or $500 a month. Remember, I am fighting the evil global capitalists and their denialist lackeys on your behalf. I can also send you my glossy brochure of sensational merchandise, including Antarctic pumice stone, bio-organic soap, and recycled magma. Act now to save the planet! Hurry, before it is too late!
Off the hooch GREEN “sell-out” Davey.
How about a bottle of my bio-organic distilled krill liqueur? Only $200 (plus GST), proceeds to Green Fleece. Should bring a smile to your dial.
P.S. The krill are certified to have died of natural causes, like the cabbages in Erehwon.
Make that Erewhon – see Wiki.