Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-7cz98 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-20T23:29:29.498Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Statistical-Dynamical Model of Accumulation on the Greenland Ice Sheet

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Richard A. Keen*
Affiliation:
Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, Campus Box 449, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, U.S.A.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A relatively simple, three-parameter model is used to simulate the annual precipitation (accumulation) distribution for the Greenland ice sheet and surrounding regions. The three parameters are (1) the flux of relative vorticity at the 500 mbar level (a measure of cyclonic activity), (2) atmospheric moisture content, and (3) surface terrain. The climatological (1946–79) precipitation distribution predicted by the model displays major features of the observed distribution derived from pit studies. However, the model suggests that, due to changes in storm tracks during this period of 33 a, accumulation distribution maps based on pit studies for varying periods of record may not be representative of a true mean for a uniform period of record. The model is then applied to reconstructed ice-age conditions. Compared to present conditions, accumulation reductions of 60¾ or more are indicated for much of the southern half of Greenland; only slight reductions are noted for northern Greenland.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 1984
Figure 0

Fig. 1 27-year vector mean vorticity flux index for the Greenland region. The lengths of the arrows are proportional to the magnitude of the ; the horizontal scale line indicates a magnitude of 10−4 m sec−2. Bases of the arrows are located at the computational grid points.

Figure 1

Fig. 2 Contribution to mean annual precipitation predicted by the dynamic component of the accumulation model. Major contour interval: 20 cm water equivalent. A, B, and C locate the three grid points used to calibrate the model.

Figure 2

Fig. 3 Contribution to mean annual precipitation predicted by the orographic component of the accumulation model. Contour interval: 5 cm water equivalent; zero contour omitted for clarity.

Figure 3

Fig. 4 Mean annual precipitation distribution predicted by combined dynamic and orographic components of the accumulation model. Major contour interval: 20 cm water equivalent.

Figure 4

Fig. 5 Gridpolnt values of mean annual accumulation (cm water equivalent), spatially smoothed to the 400 km grid resolution from observations published in Benson (1962) and Barry and Kiladis (1982).

Figure 5

Fig. 6 Comparison of model precipitation (solid line) with observed accumulation (dashed line) for the three grid points used to calibrate the model (see Fig.2).

Figure 6

Fig. 7 Departure of the reconstructed annual mean 500 mbar height field for 18 ka BP from present climatology. Contour interval: 10 dm.

Figure 7

Fig. 8 Reconstructed annual mean for 18 ka BP. Meaning of arrows as in Figure 1.

Figure 8

Fig. 9 Departure of reconstructed annual mean 500 mbar dewpoint temperatures for 18 ka BP from present climatology. Contour interval: 2°C.

Figure 9

Fig. 10 Smoothed terrain used in the accumulation model; 1 km contour interval. Estimated conditions for 18 ka BP are shown; these differ from present terrain only in the south-western corner of the map.

Figure 10

Fig. 11 Reconstructed annual precipitation distribution predicted by the accumulation model for 18 ka BP. Major contour interval: 20 cm water equivalent.

Figure 11

Fig. 12 Reconstructed annual precipitation for 18 ka BP, expressed as a percentage of 1946–79 average model precipitation for each grid point. Major contour interval: 20%.