Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-g96k6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T20:41:28.001Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Understanding ice-sheet mass balance: progress in satellite altimetry and gravimetry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2017

H.D. Pritchard
Affiliation:
British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ET, UK E-mail: hprit@bas.ac.uk
S.B. Luthcke
Affiliation:
Planetary Geodynamics Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 698, Greenbelt, Maryland 20771, USA
A.H. Fleming
Affiliation:
British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ET, UK E-mail: hprit@bas.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Satellite remote sensing has come to dominate the measurement of glacier and ice-sheet change. Three independent methods now exist for assessing ice-sheet mass balance and we focus on progress in two: satellite altimetry (ICESat) and gravimetry (GRACE). With improved spatial and temporal sampling, and synergy with ice flow measurements, both the mechanisms and causes changing mass balance can be investigated. We present examples of mass losses due to widespread, intensifying glacier dynamic thinning in northwest Greenland, but local ablation rates in the northeast that are unchanged for decades. Advances in GRACE processing reveal Greenland net ice-sheet mass loss continuing into 2010, at 195 ± 30 Gta-1. A similarly negative trend in the Gulf of Alaska has significant spatial and temporal variation, that highlights the importance of intense summer melting here. Strong summer melt on the Antarctic Peninsula also precipitated recent ice-shelf collapse and prompted rapid dynamic thinning of tributary glaciers at up to 70 m a-1. Thinning continued for years to decades after collapse and propagated far inland. While understanding of the physical mechanisms of change continues to improve, estimates of future behaviour, and in particular the near-future glacial sea-level contribution, still rely on projections from such observations. We introduce the suite of new sensors that will monitor the ice sheets into the future.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 2010
Figure 0

Fig. 1. A perspective view of Evans, Green and Crane glaciers, Antarctic Peninsula, thinning dynamically after the collapse of the Larsen B ice shelf. Coloured tracks show the rate of surface height change from ICESat, draped over an elevation model and images from the highresolution Syste`me Probatoire pour l’Observation de la Terre (SPOT) satellite sensor (SPOT 5 stereoscopic survey of Polar Ice: Reference Images and Topographies (SPIRIT) project). Only the main glacier trunks – the fast-flowing ice – are thinning. A, B, C and D refer to time series in Figure 2.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Rates of surface-height change on Crane Glacier through time. Horizontal bars show the period covered by each measurement. Vertical bars show measurement uncertainty. (a) Rapid acceleration of thinning following the collapse of the Larsen B ice shelf, peaking at ˜70 ma–-1 before falling linearly to ˜10 ma–-1 in 2007/08 (some error bars not visible at this scale). (b, c) The thinning signal arrived later and was attenuated in mid-glacier. (d) Slight thinning is apparent in the upper glacier. (Note change in scale on y-axes.) Location of sites marked in Figure 1.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Thinning of Antarctic Peninsula former ice-shelf tributaries after collapse, for the period 2003–08. (a) Sjo¨gren Glacier following collapse of the Prince Gustav Ice Shelf in 1993 (inset: former shelf extent (1959) in red). (b) Drygalski Glacier following collapse of Larsen A ice shelf in 1995 (inset: former extent of Larsen A and B in red). (c) Fleming Glacier after the late-1980s collapse of the Wordie Ice Shelf (inset: former shelf extent in red). All three glaciers continue to thin strongly high up into their drainage basins. Contours are altitude (500m intervals); background images are from the Landsat Image Mosaic of Antarctica (LIMA) (a, b) and the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Mosaic of Antarctica (MOA) (c).

Figure 3

Fig. 4. The distribution and magnitude of dynamic thinning (red) and thickening (blue) in Greenland derived from ICESat laser altimetry (Pritchard and others, 2009). Circle diameter represents magnitude of change in ma–1. Crosses show studied glaciers that are unchanging. Measurements are maxima from the lower reaches of individual glaciers, where ICESat data are available.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Change in rate of dH/dt for central and northern Greenland between early-period ICESat (2003/04 to 2005/06 (centred around April 2004 and October 2005 respectively)) and late-period ICESat (2004/05 to 2006/07 (centred around March 2005 and September 2006 respectively)). The average time interval (dt) for the two periods is 676 and 668 days. Gridding is 10 km; averaging is over a 50 km radius. ICESat tracks are shown as grey lines.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Tracks of surface dH/dt on Storstrømmen and L. Bistrup Bræ, northeast Greenland, from ICESat (2003–07) (coloured tracks, horizontal scale bar), superimposed on Storstrømmen emergence/ submergence velocities calculated from InSAR strain measurements (coloured polygons, vertical legend): a 25 km long zone of the stagnating lower glacier has an emergence/submergence velocity of 0 ± 0.2ma–1 (Reeh and others, 2003).

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Surface height change rate with altitude (2003–07) for stagnant ice in the ablation area of Storstrømmen. (WGS84: World Geodetic System 1984 ellipsoid.)

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Detail of glacier region mascons 1−12 (Arendt and others, 2008).

Figure 8

Fig. 9. GRACE-derived time series of mass from the St Elias mascon and the Yakutat mascon showing significant interannual mass loss and strong seasonal variability (blue dots: 10 day solutions with error bars; green line: 10 day Gaussian filter). (Update to Luthcke and others, 2008.)

Figure 9

Fig. 10. Total GoA glacier mascon solution time series computed from the sum of mascons 1–12. The largest losses are observed during the 2004 melt season (blue dots: 10 day solutions with error bars; green line: 10 day Gaussian filter). (Update to Luthcke and others, 2008.)

Figure 10

Table 1. Winter (Bw), summer (Bs) and net balances (B) for the total GoA glacier mascon region between 2003 and 2009, determined as the difference between yearly maximum and minimum in the mascon time series (Fig. 3). Balance years begin in the fall of the previous calendar year. (Update to Luthcke and others, 2008)

Figure 11

Fig. 11. GIS mass time series; comparing techniques (mascon versus averaging kernel) and Level-1B data processing represented by different processing centres: Center for Space Research (CSR), GeoForschungZentrum (GFZ) and Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC).

Figure 12

Table 2. Comparison of GRACE GIS mass time series, 1 August 2003 to 1 August 2009. (Avg. ker.: averaging kernel)

Figure 13

Fig. 12. Past, present and future remote-sensing satellites applicable to glaciology. Labels with dashed lines indicate missions that have not