Global Ice melt and heat balance

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the heat absorbed by melting ice, specifically around 500 gigatons (GT) per year from various sources, including Antarctica and Greenland. Participants explore the implications of this heat on the biosphere and the overall energy balance of the Earth, touching on concepts of latent heat, albedo effects, and the potential impacts of ice loss.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests a refereed paper on the heat absorbed by melting ice, calculating it to be around 1.67 x 1023 joules per year based on latent heat of fusion.
  • Another participant corrects the initial calculation, stating that the heat absorbed should be approximately 1.6 x 1020 joules, indicating a factor of 1000 error in the first post.
  • A subsequent post acknowledges the correction regarding the heat calculation.
  • One participant argues that the loss of the high-albedo north-polar ice cap will lead to significant increases in energy absorption due to prolonged insolation, suggesting that previous estimates of energy input may be underestimated.
  • Another participant notes that the implications of the ice cap loss represent a different question from the original inquiry about heat absorption.
  • A later reply emphasizes that calculations regarding phase changes and added energy must consider albedo effects, particularly for sea ice, while also humorously questioning the purpose of umbrellas in drinks.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the implications of heat absorption and the significance of the energy balance, with multiple competing views on the impact of ice loss and the accuracy of calculations presented.

Contextual Notes

Some calculations depend on specific assumptions, such as temperature conditions for phase changes and the role of albedo, which may not be fully addressed in the discussion.

charles65
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Can anyone point to a refereed paper exploring the heat absorbed by melting around 500 GT of ie per year (Antarctic - 127 GT pa; Greenland 286 GT pa; sea ice, glaciers estim. 100 GT pa)?

As latent heat of fusion is 333.55 KJoules per Kg, I reckon the heat absorbed per year is around 1.67 X 1023 joules per year [1.67 X 1020 Kj per year].

When all the ice is gone - this heat will still be flowing but now into our biosphere. What are the likely impacts.
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
500 GT are 5*1014 kg, multiplied by 333 kJ/kg I get 1.6*1020 J, not kJ. Your numbers seem to be a factor 1000 too large.

Compare this to 1.7*1017 W overall radiation balance or 5*1024 J when multiplied by 1 year. It is negligible.
 
Yes, a check shows you are right.
 
Loss of the high-albedo north-polar ice cap in the summer means an entire ocean newly opened to 24/7 insolation, 6 months of the year. Given that, I would posit that the previous posters vastly underestimate the amount of extra energy being dumped into the system.

Arctic average temperatures are already up 3-4°C.

So, shortly, we get to find out what happens when the ice melts in our drink and the little umbrella is removed. (Wait, is that actually why the little umbrella is there in the first place ?)
 
Last edited:
hmmm27 said:
Loss of the high-albedo north-polar ice cap in the summer means an entire ocean newly opened to 24/7 insolation, 6 months of the year.
That is a different question.
 
mfb said:
That is a different question.

Like yourself, I didn't claim to be answering the OP's actual or implied question. But, if you prefer...

- a phase change calc assumes starting and ending at 0C.
- added energy calc is incomplete without accounting for albedo (granted currently negligible for continental Greenland and Antarctica, but very very sequitur for sea ice)

However, my question still stands ; Is the little umbrella in fruity drinks (deliberately) included to keep it cool under the midday sun ?
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
17K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
29K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
13K
Replies
8
Views
19K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K