• Full Story

Glacier in north Greenland breaks off huge iceberg

Print

Greenland glacier breaks off huge iceberg

3News NZ

An iceberg twice the size of Manhattan tore off one of Greenland's largest glaciers (NASA)

An iceberg twice the size of Manhattan tore off one of Greenland's largest glaciers (NASA)

By Seth Borenstein

An iceberg twice the size of Manhattan tore off one of Greenland's largest glaciers, illustrating another dramatic change to the warming island.

For several years, scientists had been watching a long crack near the tip of the northerly Petermann Glacier. On Monday, NASA satellites showed it had broken completely, freeing an iceberg measuring 46 square miles.

A massive ice sheet covers about four-fifths of Greenland. Petermann Glacier is mostly on land, but a segment sticks out over water like a frozen tongue, and that's where the break occurred.

The same glacier spawned an iceberg twice that size two years ago. Together, the breaks made a large change that's got the attention of researchers.

"It's dramatic. It's disturbing," said University of Delaware professor Andreas Muenchow, who was one of the first researchers to notice the break. "We have data for 150 years and we see changes that we have not seen before."

"It's one of the manifestations that Greenland is changing very fast," he said.

Researchers suspect global warming is to blame, but can't prove it conclusively yet. Glaciers do calve icebergs naturally, but what's happened in the last three years to Petermann is unprecedented, Muenchow and other scientists say.

"This is not part of natural variations anymore," said NASA glaciologist Eric Rignot, who camped on Petermann 10 years ago.

Ohio State University ice scientist Ian Howat said there is still a chance it could be normal calving, like losing a fingernail that has grown too long, but any further loss would show it's not natural: "We're still in the phase of scratching our heads and figuring out how big a deal this really is."

Many of Greenland's southern glaciers have been melting at an unusually rapid pace. The Petermann break brings large ice loss much farther north than in the past, said Ted Scambos, lead scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo.

If it continues, and more of the Petermann is lost, the melting would push up sea levels, he said. The ice lost so far was already floating, so the breaks don't add to global sea levels.

Northern Greenland and Canada have been warming five times faster than the average global temperature, Muenchow said. Temperatures have increased there by about 4degF in the last 30 years, Scambos said.

The new iceberg is likely to follow the path of the one in 2010, Muenchow said. That broke apart into smaller icebergs headed north, then west and last year started landing in Newfoundland, he said.

It's more than glaciers in Greenland that are melting. Scientists also reported this week that the Arctic had the largest sea ice loss on record for June.

AP

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

18/07/2012 11:06:02 p.m.

Andrew wrote:

Mike, you are implying that the Himalayas were once drowned by the ocean. This is not strictly so. The Himalayas and European Alps are comparatively recent thanks to uplifting due to continental drift. As they rose from the oceans or from the surrounding land mass so did the fossil evidence.

18/07/2012 1:25:11 p.m.

Mike wrote:

Chirstchurch record the lowest high on record in the last few months. 1.7 deg C lower than the previous record.

If one picks selective outliers as indicative of anything one can argue that the earth is warming up or cooling down both at the same time by selecting different outliers.

In more recent years the world is also making many more measurements, this by itself generates more outliers. We have satelite imagery which can map 3D and can also show more accurate modelling, but for some reason the global warmists are avoiding the satelite imagery? Why? does it not support thier claims?

Eg I've seen global warming blamed for rising sea levels for Bangkok. There the city is sinking, it isn't rising sea levels at all. NZ has had an effective sea rise of around 5mm in the last 100 years, yet most of that is we are on one pacific plate and its dropping. Its not dropping much, hence so little effective sea level change. Almost all the claims being attributed to global warming have other reasons.

The boxing day tidal wave had a huge chunk of sea floor pushed up, this by itself changed world sea levels towards 0.5mm just by itself.

The Tibetian mountians have sea fossils that show that it used to be under sea water, even though its thousands of meters above sea level now.

Greenland glaciers have speed up, yet the surface temperatures (still below freezing) do not support the increase of speed from global warming. Is it volcanic ativity below warming the glacier, ie lubricating the movement? A glacier wearing down rock will over time smooth the rock, smoother rock will allow faster glacier movement.

We live in a dynamic world where change happens.