Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T03:02:27.436Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Prediction of possible changes in glacio-hydrological characteristics under global warming: southeastern Alaska, U.S.A.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

N.V. Davidovich
Affiliation:
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences Moscow 109017,Russia
M.D. Ananicheva
Affiliation:
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences Moscow 109017,Russia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We use the Wetherald and Manabe climate model to predict the response of mountain glaciers to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The response is measured in terms of a change in the equilibrium-line altitude (ELA) and the glacier terminus altitude (GTA), net accumulation–ablation on these altitudes and the melt runoff for 12 mountain-glacier regions in southeastern Alaska, U.S.A. The methods we use involve extrapolating climate-model temperature fields to a glacier’s location, and empirical–statistical relationships between air temperature and percentage of solid precipitation, and between summer air temperature and ablation and melt runoff. Our study shows that, under global warming, glaciation in southeastern Alaska will not disappear, but mass exchange of glaciers will be more intensive and the ELA value will increase by 300–760 m, depending on the glacier’s distance from the ocean.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 1996
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Difference in Tsum at 1000 m a.s.l. in the 1 × CO2 and 2 × CO2 situations. Circles show grid points of Wetherald and Manabe scenario.

Figure 1

Table 1. Glacio-hydrological characteristics of southeastern Alaska: changes under global warming. Regions A–F, oceanic climate; G, transitional climate; H–L, continental climate. Regions E, F, western slopes; H, northern slopes; J–L, eastern slopes.

Figure 2

Fig. 2. The ratio between Xsol in the 1 × CO2 and 2 × CO2 situations.

Figure 3

Fig. 3. Change of air temperature νs altitude of a mountain-glacier basin: a, over glacier surface; b, over non-glacier surface, (Δt temperature leap); c, glacier terminus altitude.

Figure 4

Fig. 4. Examples of vertical ablation and accumulation distribution for oceanic regions (А, В, C) and continental ones (H, J, K) for the 1 × CO2 (solid line) and 2 × CO2 (broken line) situations.

Figure 5

Fig. 5. The scheme of GTA profiles in the 2 × CO2 situation: I, temperature profile (modem data): II, the same for 2 × CO2; OA, height of glacier terminus for 1 × CO2; OB, the same for 2 × CO2.

Figure 6

Fig. 6. Forecast values (meters) of ΔGTA for 2 × CO2 situation.

Figure 7

Fig. 7. Forecast values (meters) of ΔELA for 2 × CO2 situation.

Figure 8

Fig. 8. Forecast increase of Tsum at the ELA in the 2 × CO2 over the 1 × CO2 situation.