Hi all,

I have been away from geoengineering debates for some time as I was busy, 
first, with the non-scientific job I was still holding, and second, with 
renewable energies researches. Since the publishing of "21 unusual renewable 
energies for the 21st century", co-written with Renaud, I am in the process of 
being recruited as a full-time researcher - first, half-time from now to the 
summer. I hope that in the long run it will give me more time for your forum.

I've got two questions about Arctic. 

First, of course there is this very large albedo positive feedback; but don't 
you think that there'd be a less emphasized negative feedback which would 
always prevent the core of the sea ice sheet from fully disappearing, not only 
at the end of summer but all year long, as the result of a cumulative process? 
What I'm thinking of is the fact that a thick ice sheet, covered by snow, is 
probably a fairly good thermal insulator, so rather little heat can pass 
through it in the winter, and an existing ice sheet can grow only slowly in 
winter - of course it melts slowly in summer as long as it keeps white snow on 
it, so it can rather well survive. But, in winter, a completely open Arctic sea 
would lose heat at a rather high rate, so that it would efficiently cancel the 
summer albedo effect during the first winter months, and during the next ones a 
new ice sheet would rapidly be created, at least not too far from the pole. Do 
you know whether this effect is correct (maybe the dominant heat transfer is 
infrared emissions from the sea to the sky through the ice, so that I'm wrong?) 
and correctly taken into account in the models?

My second question is about Greenland ice cap flowing towards the sea as the 
result of coastal glaciers bottom being more lubricated because of water 
(melted ice or snow) reaching this bottom. I still think that an adequate 
geoingineering control (limited actions, macroscopic impact to some effects of 
climate change) could be to dig some tunnels to extract this water and letting 
it reach the sea through other ways. In the Alps, I already knew that typically 
100-km long networks of hydraulic tunnels had been dug in the 1970's to collect 
water to large dams such as the Mont-Cenis's one. I recently learnt that there 
exist tunnels under glaciers that are used as subways for ski-addicts in Tignes 
and Les Deux-Alpes. Do you think these are interesting references to prove the 
technical and economical feasibility of such action, should the Greenland ice 
cap be threatened in a rather short term?

Best regards to all,

Denis Bonnelle.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
De la part de Renaud-KdeR
Envoyé : lundi 24 janvier 2011 16:47
À : geoengineering
Objet : [geo] Albedo decline in the Arctic

M. G. Flanner, K. M. Shell, M. Barlage, D. K. Perovich, M. A.
Tschudi.
Radiative forcing and albedo feedback from the Northern Hemisphere
cryosphere between 1979 and 2008.
Nature Geoscience, 2011; DOI: 10.1038/ngeo1062

Loss of Reflectivity in the Arctic Doubles Estimate of Climate Models
ScienceDaily (Jan. 18, 2011) - A new analysis of the Northern
Hemisphere's "albedo feedback" over a 30-year period concludes that
the region's loss of reflectivity due to snow and sea ice decline is
more than double what state-of-the-art climate models estimate.
The findings are important, researchers say, because they suggest that
Arctic warming amplified by the loss of reflectivity could be even
more significant than previously thought.
The study was published online this week in Nature Geoscience. It was
funded primarily by the National Science Foundation, with data also
culled from projects funded by NASA, the Department of Energy and
others.
"The cryosphere isn't cooling the Earth as much as it did 30 years
ago, and climate model simulations do not reproduce this recent
effect," said Karen Shell, an Oregon State University atmospheric
scientist and one of the authors of the study. "Though we don't
necessarily attribute this to global warming, it is interesting to
note that none of the climate models used for the 2007 International
Panel on Climate Change report showed a decrease of this magnitude."
The cryosphere is the collective portion of the Earth's surface where
water is in solid form and includes sea ice, snow, lake and river ice,
glaciers, ice sheets and frozen ground. Most of these frozen areas are
highly reflective, and "bounce" sunlight back into the atmosphere,
keeping the Earth cooler than it would be without the cryosphere.
But as temperatures warm, ice and snow melts and reflectivity
decreases, noted Shell, an assistant professor in OSU's College of
Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences.
"Instead of being reflected back into the atmosphere, the energy of
the sun is absorbed by the Earth, which amplifies the warming," Shell
said. "Scientists have known for some time that there is this
amplification effect, but almost all of the climate models we examined
underestimated the impact -- and they contained a pretty broad range
of scenarios."
As part of the study, Shell, lead author Mark Flanner of the
University of Michigan, and their colleagues compared Northern
Hemisphere cryosphere changes between 1979 and 2008 in 18 different
climate models to changes in actual snow, ice and reflectivity
measurements of the same period. They determined that mean radiative
forcing -- or the amount of energy reflected into the atmosphere --
ranged from 4.6 to 2.2 watts per meter squared.
During the 30-year study period, cryosphere cooling declined by 0.45
watts per meter squared. The authors attribute that decline equally to
loss of snow and sea ice.
"Some of the decline may be natural climate variability," Shell said.
"Thirty years isn't a long enough time period to attribute this
entirely to 'forcing,' or anthropogenic influence. But the loss of
cooling is significant. The rate of energy being absorbed by the Earth
through cryosphere decline -- instead of being reflected back to the
atmosphere -- is almost 30 percent of the rate of extra energy
absorption due to carbon dioxide increase between pre-industrial
values and today."
The "albedo" or reflectivity process is simple, scientists say, but
difficult to measure on a broad scale. The reflectivity of ice and
snow is obviously much greater than that of darker, unfrozen ground,
or open sea water. But researchers also have discovered that
variations in the snow and ice result in different albedo impacts.
For example, pools of melted water on top of sea ice can have
significantly less reflectivity, which in essence may speed up the
warming and possibly melting of that sea ice.
"While the current group of models underestimates these Northern
Hemisphere cryosphere changes, new models will be released this year
that will have better representations of snow and ice," Shell said.
"This study will help climate modelers improve the new generation of
models to better predict the rate of cryosphere and albedo decline in
the future."


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.

Reply via email to