Alaska Surface Glacier Melting Means More Glug Glug Glug

The vast majority of ice loss in Alaska glaciers comes from those that sit completely on land—which contributes meltwater to sea level rise. Julia Rosen reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The world’s mountain glaciers contain just 1 percent of all the ice on Earth. But their rapid melting accounts for about a third of recent sea level rise. Most of these glaciers—that start and end on land—shrink away through gradual surface melting. But others, known as tidewater glaciers, flow out into the sea. And by calving off massive icebergs, these glaciers can collapse in the blink of an eye, geologically speaking.

For example, the Columbia Glacier in Alaska’s Chugach Mountains, is a tidewater glacier that once filled a long fjord. It’s retreated 12 miles in just the last 25 years.

Shad O’Neel: “So this tiny little glacier in Alaska is capable of producing 1 percent of the sea level rise budget. And so we know that individual calving glaciers can do crazy things and can act really dramatically and can have this rapid response.”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Shad O’Neel, a glaciologist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Anchorage and co-author of a new study in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. [C. F. Larsen et al, Surface melt dominates Alaska glacier mass balance]

Scientists thought that tidewater glaciers, because of their unstable behavior, might be an important source of the torrent of meltwater flowing out of Alaska and northwest Canada, where ice has been disappearing at especially alarming rates. But all mountain glaciers, tidewater and otherwise, are notoriously hard to quantify.

So O’Neel and his colleagues undertook the daunting task of assessing the health of every glacier in the region. Using data collected from airplanes, they tracked how the masses of 116 glaciers, making up 41 percent of Alaska’s ice-covered area, changed during two decades. Then they used similarities in the shape, size and location of the remaining 27,000 glaciers to estimate how those changed, too.

The results surprised them: Tidewater glaciers accounted for just 6 percent of the region’s total ice loss. The vast majority came from surface melting of glaciers that sit completely on land.

[O'Neel:] “Your initial response is, 'Wow, this is great, the tidewater glaciers actually aren’t doing that much in Alaska.'”

That sounds like good news, because tidewater glaciers can shed a lot of ice really quickly. But scientists expect the sea-level contributions of tidewater glaciers to wind down in the near future, as they retreat up fjords and onto land.

[O'Neel:] “But the surface melt part isn’t going to decrease.”

Which we now know drives most of the region’s ice loss.

[O'Neel:] “It means that while we might have more certainty about what’s happening, that means we have more certainty that Alaska’s contribution is going to stay the same or grow if climate continues to warm.”

—Julia Rosen

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe