Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-4ws75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-12T06:15:50.628Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Characteristic mass-balance scaling with valley glacier size

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

David B. Bahr
Affiliation:
Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, Campus Box 450, University of Colorado–Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0450, U.S.A.
Mark Dyurgerov
Affiliation:
Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, Campus Box 450, University of Colorado–Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0450, U.S.A.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous work on the relation between glacier volume and area and on accumulation area ratios suggests that balance rates measured at the glacier terminus are not constant or random from glacier to glacier but instead scale with glacier length. Using mass-balance data from a collection of 68 valley and cirque glaciers, we show that the terminus mass-balance rate scales roughly linearly with surface area and scales with length raised to an exponent constrained to fall roughly between 0.5 and 2 with 1.7 preferred if a glacier’s length is dependent on the mass-balance conditions (rather than balance being dependent on length). When these exponents are used to predict valley-glacier volume–area scaling, the results are very close to empirical volume–area observations. Although the data are noisy and the proposed fits could be modified by improved observations, the scaling trend for terminus balance vs length remains clear. Although the exact value of the scaling exponent is not well determined, establishing the existence of this scaling relation will be important for studies of climate change and the impact of glacier recession on sea level.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 1999
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Terminus balance rate vs glacier length with OLS regressions and . (The two equations are obtained by using as the dependent and independent variable, respectively.) (a) Linear plot. (b) Log–log plot.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Terminus balance raie vs glacier surface area with OLS regressions and . (a) Linear plot. (b) Log–log plot.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Glacier surface area vs length with OLS regressions S = 0.50x1.61 and S = 0.38x1.83. (a) Linear plot. (b) Log–log plot.

Figure 3

Table 1. Scaling exponents for OLS and OC regressions*