Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-6mz5d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T13:55:17.801Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The link between climate warming and break-up of ice shelves in the Antarctic Peninsula

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2017

Ted A. Scambos
Affiliation:
National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0449, U.S.A.
Christina Hulbe
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Hydrospheric Processes, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland 20771, U.S.A.
Mark Fahnestock
Affiliation:
Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, U.S.A.
Jennifer Bohlander
Affiliation:
National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0449, U.S.A.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A review of in situ and remote-sensing data covering the ice shelves of the Antarctic Peninsula provides a series of characteristics closely associated with rapid shelf retreat: deeply embayed ice fronts; calving of myriad small elongate bergs in punctuated events; increasing flow speed; and the presence of melt ponds on the ice-shelf surface in the vicinity of the break-ups. As climate has warmed in the Antarctic Peninsula region, melt-season duration and the extent of ponding have increased. Most break-up events have occurred during longer melt seasons, suggesting that meltwater itself, not just warming, is responsible. Regions that show melting without pond formation are relatively unchanged. Melt ponds thus appear to be a robust harbinger of ice-shelf retreat. We use these observations to guide a model of ice-shelf flow and the effects of meltwater. Crevasses present in a region of surface ponding will likely fill to the brim with water. We hypothesize (building on Weertman (1973), Hughes (1983) and Van der Veen (1998)) that crevasse propagation by meltwater is the main mechanism by which ice shelves weaken and retreat. A thermodynamic finite-element model is used to evaluate ice flow and the strain field, and simple extensions of this model are used to investigate crack propagation by meltwater. The model results support the hypothesis.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 2000
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Overview of the Antarctic Peninsula summarizing recent ice-shelf activity and its correlation with areas of melt-ponding The base image of the peninsula is an AVHRR mosaic compiled from scenes acquired between 1980 and1994 (from Ferrigno and others, 1996).

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Processed SAR mosaic (from the European Remote-sensing Satellite ERS-1) of the late 1992 configuration of the northern Larsen ice shelves. Flowlines derived from the ice-shelf flow model are shown annotated with time-since-grounded ticks.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Map and satellite-image summary of the recent history of the northern Larsen Ice Shelf

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Map and satellite-image summary of the recent history of the Wilkins Ice Shelf

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Annual total melt days and recent break-up events in the Antarctic Peninsula. Melt-season duration was derived from passive-microwave data using the Fahnestock and others (1998) algorithm. All major break-up events (>100 km2) that could be clearly attributed to a single year are shown. “Tear” refers to the calendar year at the end of the melt season. Asterisk for 1999 and 2000 indicates melt days for region of northernmost Larsen C, since sample region of Larsen B for previous years had partially calved away.

Figure 5

Table 1. Annual total melt days for Wilkins and Larsen B Ice Shelves, 1980–98

Figure 6

Fig. 6. Template used to create meshes for the numerical experiments. The finite-element mesh used in thermal experiments and to compute pre-1995 ice flow is inscribed within the Larsen A and B domain. Smaller, post-January 1995, domains are also used. Ice velocity and temperature conditions are specified for the Graham Land outlet glaciers noted in the figure. The inset shows the specified inflow speeds and ice thickness, with a contour interval of 20 m. Inflow gates along the grounding line are highlighted in grey.

Figure 7

Fig. 7 Map of ice-shelf temperature at mid-depth (the tenth vertical node from the base of the ice shelf) and the depth profile of temperature at the mid-shelf location marked by a solid circle lahelled “a”. The contour interval is 0.5°C. Points plotted on the vertical profile indicate vertical nodes in the numerical model domain.

Figure 8

Fig. 8. Modeled ice flow for the post-calving, Fehruary 1995 Larsen B. The contour interval in the map of ice speed is 0. 05 m d−1. Isotachs deviate toward the southern part of the shelf because margin softening has a strong effect along the southern hay wall. Profiles of ice speed and the along-flow strain rate approximate the measured profile of Rack and others (2000).

Figure 9

Fig. 9. Ice speed along the Figure 8 profile for four different ice-shelf geometries, as indicated by the labeled outlines.

Figure 10

Fig. 10. Magnitude of the model-computed principal stresses for the March 1995 and November 1998 Larsen B geometries. The contour interval in all maps is 20 kPa. A tensile stress of at least 30–80 kPa is necessary for new single-crevasse initiation. Stresses are very large along bay walls, where substantial ice softening is specified. The least compressive principal stress is used to compute stress-intensity factors at crevasse tips.

Figure 11

Fig. 11. “Critical depth” for pre-existing crevasses computed by inversion of the single-crevasse stress-intensity equations. Pre-existing crevasses deeper than the critical depth, when filled to the specified water level, would crack downward through the full ice thickness. Critical depth for three combinations of assumed surface density and water depth in the February 1995 Larsen B are shown, along with one example using the November 1998 geometry. The contour interval is 2 m. (a) Surface density, ρ, is assumed to be 850 kg m−3, and the water depth, a, is 2 m below the ice surface; (b) ρ = 850 kgm−3 and a = 0.1 m; (c) ρ = 450 kg m−3 and a = 2 m; (d) ρ = 850 kg m−3 and a = 2 m. The fracture toughness of ice is assumed to be 100 kPa m1/2.