From Global Change Biology: “Accelerated mass loss from the Greenland ice sheet leads to glacier retreat and an increasing input of glacial meltwater to the fjords and coastal waters around Greenland. These high latitude ecosystems are highly productive and sustain important fisheries, yet it remains uncertain how they will respond to future changes in the Arctic cryosphere. Here we show that marine-terminating glaciers play a crucial role in sustaining high productivity of the fjord ecosystems.”
From Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: “Since the late 1990s, most closed lakes in the interior TP expanded and deepened dramatically, in sharp contrast with lake shrinkage in the southern TP. Although some evidence shows that glacier melting and permafrost thawing within some lakes may influence lake level changes, they can not explain the overall lake expansion, especially for lakes without glacier supply. More and more evidence from lake water balance modeling indicated that the overall lake expansion across the interior TP may be mainly attributed to a significant increase in precipitation and associated runoff.”
Scott Pruit (EPA) Fires Shots at Glacier Enthusiasts
From The Onion: “Oh my god, what is it with you people? It’s like you’re obsessed. It’s all you ever talk about: Wah, wah, wah, the glaciers are melting! We just can’t live without our precious glaciers! I hear it so often I’m seriously starting to wonder if maybe there isn’t something else going on here. So tell me, are you guys totally in love with glaciers, or what?”
The Trump administration is assessing a 545-page draft report about the causes and impacts of global warming, including the imminent threat of glacial retreat. This draft report known as the Climate Science Special Report is part of the fourth National Climate Assessment, and it is undergoing a final interagency review by the administration, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and 12 other agencies. The New York Times published the draft report on August 7th, which brought a good deal of attention to the document, even though the information had been available at the Internet Archive, a nonprofit internet digital library, since January.
On August 20th, the Trump administration took initial steps to weaken the effectiveness of the draft report bydisbanding the federal advisory panel for the National Climate Assessment, the group that guides the report and helps policymakers and private-sector officials integrate climate analysis into long-term planning, raising questions about the future of the report. The charter for the advisory committee will expire on Sunday, August 27th, and the panel will not be renewed.
The report was written by a team of more than 300 experts from 13 federal agencies. The National Climate Assessment is one of the most rigorously sourced and vetted documents produced by the federal government, based on “peer reviewed journal articles, technical reports by federal agencies, scientific assessments, etc” and produced every four years since 1990. The latest assessment, which ultimately could be rejected by the Trump administration, concludes that the average annual temperature will continue to rise throughout the century, with global temperatures increasing between 0.5 and 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit over the next two decades. This could result in longer heat waves, disappearing snow cover, shrinking sea ice, and melting glaciers.
Mark Carey, a professor of history and environmental studies at the University of Oregon, told GlacierHub that shrinking glaciers actually have notable impacts. “For one, they help regulate water flow in glacier-fed rivers, providing meltwater for downstream water use in dry summer months when farmers and hydroelectric power stations most need the water,” he said. “Glacier retreat can also unleash outburst floods and avalanches from the unstable glaciers.”
According to the assessment, the annually averaged ice mass from 37 global reference glaciers “has decreased every year since 1984, a decline expected to continue even if climate were to stabilize.” The findings stirred public interest because they refute statements from the Trump administration about the causes and effects of climate change. The Trump administration, including his cabinet members, have taken a different approach to combatting global warming, repealing environmental regulations and defunding climate research. Earlier this year, Trump pulled the United States out of the Paris climate accord and rolled back policies that former President Barack Obama put in place, such as the Clean Power Plan, which limits greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. power plants.
The Trump administration also worked hard to save the coal industry and promised to increase oil and gas production by drilling in protected areas of the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans, which will increase emissions. Additionally, Trump has appointed members to his cabinet who openly deny anthropogenic climate change. Agency scientists have found that discussing climate change with EPA leadership has become taboo. The Interior and Agriculture departments have also banned climate change talk and cancelled meetings with climate change experts. The report is one of the administration’s biggest tests to date in regard to the their public opinion on climate change.
Scott Pruitt, the head of the EPA, recently told CNBC, “I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see.” Since Pruitt’s arrival at the EPA, the agency has moved away from its historic practice of publicly posting data collections of emissions from oil and gas companies. To date, the EPA has also taken down more than 1,900 agency web pages that contain climate change information. It is also attempting to undo a water protection rule in order to dismantle previous regulations.
If the Trump administration rejects the information in the latest assessment, the move would be another step away from the global consensus, which recognizes melting glaciers, disappearing snow cover, and the reduction in the volume of mountain glaciers and continental ice sheets. By rejecting the report, Trump’s administration would directly contradict scientific conclusion that “many lines of evidence demonstrate that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse (heat-trapping) gases, are primarily responsible for recent observed climate change.” Specifically, the report concluded that the planet has rapidly warmed over the last 150 years, finding it “extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.”
In an interview with GlacierHub, Mauri Pelto, a professor of environmental science at Nichols College in Massachusetts and director of the North Cascades Glacier Climate Project, stated that the report’s disapproval would put in disarray the carefully constructed practices and approach used to build the report, but it would also further galvanize the scientific community to bring more science directly into the public eye. “A report from a different configuration of science organizations would certainly emerge,” Pelto said. “In the short run it will be a challenge to the community, but in the long run it will strengthen this community. Less dependence on the government for both funding and sanctioning is the challenge and the opportunity.”
From HuffPost: “Perry went on to defend his and others’ denial of near-universally accepted climate science, suggesting that those who question the scientific community’s findings are more intelligent. Also in June, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said glaciers in Montana’s Glacier National Park started melting ‘right after the end of the Ice Age’ and that it has ‘been a consistent melt.’ He also dismissed the notion that government scientists can predict with certainty how much warming will occur by 2100 under a business-as-usual scenario.”
Read more about the Trump cabinet and its tenuous relationship to evidence here.
Ski No More
From Reuters: “High temperatures that have hit Italy over the past weeks have taken their toll on the country’s glaciers, with a summer ski resort at the Stelvio Pass having to make the historic decision to suspend its activities due to worsening conditions at the Alpine glacier. Swathes of southern and eastern Europe have sweltered in temperatures above 40 degrees Celsius (104°F) this week in a heat wave nicknamed ‘Lucifer’ that has fanned forest fires, triggered weather warning alerts and damaged crops.”
From the Bellingham Herald: “12 runners set out from Bellingham Bay for the top of snow-capped Mount Baker in the distance. To get there and back — a round trip of 108 miles during a hot, sunny weekend — they ran, hiked and climbed to the 10,781-foot summit of Mount Baker over two nights and two days. Eleven of them completed the arduous journey, a trek known as the Mount Baker Ultra Run.”
Mercury contamination has long been a threat to animal carnivores and human residents in the Arctic. Mercury exports from river basins to the ocean form a significant component of the Arctic mercury cycle, and are consequently of importance in understanding and addressing this contamination. Jens Søndergaard of the Arctic Research Centre of Aarhus University, Denmark and his colleagues have been conducting research on this topic in Greenland for a number of years. They published results of their work in the journal Science of the Total Environment in February 2015. Søndergaard and his colleagues assessed the mercury concentrations in and exports from the Zackenberg River Basin in northeast Greenland for the period 2009 – 2013. This basin is about 514 square kilometers in area, of which 106 square kilometers are covered by glaciers. Glacial outburst floods have been regularly observed in Zackenberg River since 1996. This study hypothesized that the frequency, magnitude, and timing of the glacial outburst floods and associated meteorological conditions would significantly influence the riverine mercury budget. Indeed, they found significant variation from year to year, reflecting weather and floods. The total annual mercury release varied from 0.71 kg to over 1.57 kg. These are significant amounts of such a highly toxic substance.
Søndergaard and his colleagues found that sediment-bound mercury contributed more to total releases than mercury that was dissolved in the river. Initial snowmelt, sudden erosion events, and glacial lake outburst floods all influenced daily riverine mercury exports from Zackenberg River Basin during the summer, the major period of river flow. The glacial lake outburst floods were responsible for about 31 percent of the total annual riverine mercury release. Summer temperatures and the amount of snowfall from the previous winter also played important roles in affecting the annual levels of mercury release. The authors note that releases are likely to increase, because global warming is contributing to greater levels of permafrost thawing in the region; this process, in turn, destabilizes river banks, allowing mercury contained in them to be discharged into rivers.
Mercury produces adverse health effects even at low levels. It is commonly known that mercury is toxic to the nervous system. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), consuming mercury-contaminated fish accounts for the primary route of exposure for most human populations. Mercury can also threaten the health of the seabirds and marine mammals which consume fish—and which Greenlandic populations. The release of riverine mercury in Zackenberg might not have strong influence in this remote region of northeast Greenland, far from human settlements and with few fisheries to date. However, the total yearly released mercury from all the river basins in Greenland is more significant, and is growing. There is a significant risk of transport in marine ecosystems through food chains, causing mercury poisoning among humans and wildlife in Greenland and in adjacent coastal countries.