Where did the water come from in Antarctica?

  • Thread starter Columbo
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Water
In summary, the water in Antarctica comes from a combination of sources such as snowfall, ice melt, and ocean currents. The majority of the water on the continent is in the form of ice, with the Antarctic ice sheet holding about 70% of the world's fresh water. However, there are also numerous lakes and rivers that contribute to the water supply, as well as underground aquifers. The surrounding ocean also plays a significant role in providing water to Antarctica through sea ice formation and melting. Overall, the water in Antarctica is constantly moving and cycling between these different sources, making it essential for the continent's unique ecosystem to thrive.
  • #1
Columbo
5
2
Sorry if this is a stupid question but I've searched google and I haven't found an answer. So I've been researching Antarctica and I've found a few details that don't add up. So supposedly if the ice melts on Antarctica then sea levels will rise by 200 feet - Antarctica contains 70% of Earth's fresh water.

So here's where I'm having trouble finding out information. Supposedly 65 million years ago or so (I may be wrong on the numbers, but it doesn't matter), Antarctica was a hot place that had lush forests - then suddenly it got cold and turned into the Antarctica we know and love today. So where did the water come from? If the ice on Antarctica melted, then the sea levels would rise by 200 feet...if a few million years ago, Antarctica was hot then obviously it didn't contain anywhere near the amount of water it contains now...so where did all that water come from? Were the sea levels 200 feet higher than they are now in the past? Or did water evaporate from the rest of the lands around the world before being transported to Antarctica, then frozen and dumped there? When Antarctica was hot, where was that 70% of Earth's fresh water stored?

Thank you so much in advance for any answers. It seems like such a basic question but I'm having real trouble finding an answer. So thank you very much for taking the time to read my silly question.

P.s a bonus follow up question. If the world does heat up and the ice on Antarctica melts, won't the increase in the temperature increase humidity thus causing more rain around the world? Instead of the seas rising, will all that extra water just get redistributed around the world as rain?
 
Last edited:
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #3
phinds said:

I must be extra dumb because I've read that but it still doesn't answer my question - where was the fresh water originally? Were the sea levels 200 feet higher in the past and the ice came from the sea evaporating? Or was the world covered in much more fresh water that got redistributed and eventually fell on Antarctica as snow?
 
  • #5
I think the simple answer to your question is, yes, the sea level was at least 200 feet higher before the antarctic ice sheet formed. Look at this graph from this Wikipedia page. 65 million years ago, sea level was about 150-200 meters higher than today

Phanerozoic_Sea_Level.png
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes pinball1970 and phinds
  • #6
Columbo said:
Were the sea levels 200 feet higher in the past and the ice came from the sea evaporating?

That seems likely to me. I assume the water evaporated from the sea and was deposited on land by precipitation over the course of millions of years.
 
  • Like
Likes Steelwolf
  • #7
Thanks so much for the replies guys - trying to wade through all the conflicting data from the climate alarmists and the climate sceptics is proving to be impossible. It doesn't help that I'm pretty stupid to start with. At least I have one piece of the puzzle sorted, so thank you.
 
  • Like
Likes Tom.G and Nik_2213
  • #8
Skeptics. Skeptics. Not sceptics lmao...that was not an intentional freudian slip...
 
  • #9
Columbo said:
Skeptics. Skeptics. Not sceptics lmao...that was not an intentional freudian slip...

It's "sceptics" in British English. Not to be confused with "septic", as in "septic tank".
 
  • #10
PeroK said:
It's "sceptics" in British English. Not to be confused with "septic", as in "septic tank".
Hahaha - what chance do I have of understanding the climate if I can't even spell lol :)
 
  • #11
Neither can I.
That's what spell checkers are for.
 
  • #12
Columbo said:
When Antarctica was hot, where was that 70% of Earth's fresh water stored?

Water cycle is the key here. It doesn't need to be stored as fresh water, it is the evaporation and raining cycle that produces fresh water, from the oceans.

Columbo said:
P.s a bonus follow up question. If the world does heat up and the ice on Antarctica melts, won't the increase in the temperature increase humidity thus causing more rain around the world? Instead of the seas rising, will all that extra water just get redistributed around the world as rain?

Again, think about it like it is the water cycle, as a balance between water fluxes and what will happens if they are unbalanced. Increasing temperature increases both evaporation and condensation. When the storage capacity on land is entirely filled (lake, groundwater etc.), the sea levels won't change because raining and evaporation are balancing each other. The residence time of the water in the rivers are not long enough and the fluxes not big enough to mess with the balance.
 
  • #13
phyzguy said:
I think the simple answer to your question is, yes, the sea level was at least 200 feet higher before the antarctic ice sheet formed. Look at this graph from this Wikipedia page. 65 million years ago, sea level was about 150-200 meters higher than today

View attachment 250211
Genava said:
Water cycle is the key here. It doesn't need to be stored as fresh water, it is the evaporation and raining cycle that produces fresh water, from the oceans.
Again, think about it like it is the water cycle, as a balance between water fluxes and what will happens if they are unbalanced. Increasing temperature increases both evaporation and condensation. When the storage capacity on land is entirely filled (lake, groundwater etc.), the sea levels won't change because raining and evaporation are balancing each other. The residence time of the water in the rivers are not long enough and the fluxes not big enough to mess with the balance.
Some things to consider. Only ice that is not floating on oceans would be able to raise ocean levels. As we know ice floats because it expands. Once it melts it returns to the same volume the ice displaced (why your glass doesn't overflow when it has a lot of ice in it.
The average temp in Antarctica is -10 to -60 centigrade from near the coast to the coldest place, so it would take at least 10 degrees of warming to start melting and I understand that is way below present predictions. http://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-antarctica/environment/weather.
We would also have to know the land mass created by the plates at the time of the highest ocean rise. Does anyone know how much land mass there was when the oceans rose 200 ft higher.Obviously, more land mass, higher ocean.
Finally, how much water was actually on the earth, as I understand we gradually are losing water to space, just like, but not nearly as fast as Mars did. Is that significant?
 
  • #14
AceHigh said:
as I understand we gradually are losing water to space, just like, but not nearly as fast as Mars did. Is that significant?

No, it is an insignificant amount over even long geological times.
 
  • #15
AceHigh said:
Does anyone know how much land mass there was when the oceans rose 200 ft higher.Obviously, more land mass, higher ocean.
It does not really work that way. Earth's thin crust floats on the fluid mantle.

One effect is that when sea level is raised 4 metres, the added weight of water on the sea floor would push that down by about one metre, leaving a 3 metre difference on the coast. But pushing the oceans down lifts the land, which gives back more than a metre because there is more area of sea than land, so it lifts the mountains slightly. That is called isostasy.

The real problem is finding something solid to measure sea level against.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isostasy#Isostatic_effects_of_ice_sheets
 
  • Like
Likes Laroxe, Bystander and Drakkith
  • #16
Baluncore said:
It does not really work that way. Earth's thin crust floats on the fluid mantle.
It is misleading to describe the mantle as fluid. The mantle is solid, bar isolated pockets where partial melting produce a small proportion (generally less than 10%) of magma.

The uppermost portion of the mantle is rigid and, with the overlying crust, forms the lithosphere. Below that lies the asthenosphere, which temperature and mineralogy render ductile. This is what responds isostatically to fluctuating loads from ice, rock and water.
 
  • Like
Likes BillTre
  • #17
Ophiolite said:
It is misleading to describe the mantle as fluid.
I am talking about the longer isostatic time scale. I would agree that the mantle is a very viscose fluid, but it only has to move 10 cm per year, enough to allow for continental drift, and isostasy.
 
  • Like
Likes 256bits
  • #18
AceHigh said:
The average temp in Antarctica is -10 to -60 centigrade from near the coast to the coldest place, so it would take at least 10 degrees of warming to start melting and I understand that is way below present predictions. http://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-antarctica/environment/weather.
There is more to melting Antarctic ice than simply warming it up in situ. In simple terms: Antarctica is a very high plateau of ice which gradually flows to the ocean via the very extensive network of glaciers. The glacial ice melts (slowly) on contact with the ocean. As the ocean warms the rate of melting increases, particularly on the underside of the glacial tongues. In turn this leads to glaciers which are less "grounded" and hence flow faster. This in turn means that Antarctica loses ice. And you know where that leads...
Cheers
Ian
 
  • #19
Bit late to thread, but may I point out that, due to isostasis, a lot of the vast Antarctic ice-cap sits on land it has depressed to or below sea-level. Which means that, unlike much of Greenland, the ice is vulnerable to rapid undercutting by comparatively warm sea-water. Fortunately, 'grounded' ice-sheets and ice-shelves mitigate this. Okay, Northern Greenland has that deep, ice-concealed 'ria', but its hidden mouth is only exposed to 'polar' waters, rather than Antarctica's turbulent Southern Ocean...

Should Arctic ice continue to decline...
https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
... and Summers become sufficiently ice-free, the deep Greenland 'ria' ice is at risk...
 
  • #20
It came from space
 
  • #21
smithasonja said:
It came from space
Welcome to PF. We require links to the scientific literature when you make a claim like that. Please post a link or two to your reading on this. Thanks.
 

1. How did water originally form in Antarctica?

Water in Antarctica primarily originated from atmospheric precipitation and the accumulation of snow over millennia. The continent was once much warmer and able to support more substantial liquid water bodies. Over time, with the cooling of Earth's climate, this precipitation turned into ice, forming the ice sheets we see today.

2. Does Antarctica have any liquid water?

Yes, despite its icy exterior, Antarctica does have reservoirs of liquid water. These are mostly found as subglacial lakes, where the water remains liquid due to the immense pressure of the ice above and geothermal heat from below. The largest of these is Lake Vostok.

3. Has the water in Antarctica always been frozen?

No, Antarctica has not always been the frozen desert it is today. During different geological periods, such as the Cretaceous period, the climate was much warmer, and Antarctica was home to dense forests and diverse wildlife. The transition to its current icy state began with the gradual cooling of the Earth's climate millions of years ago.

4. How does climate change affect the water in Antarctica?

Climate change is impacting the water in Antarctica primarily by increasing ice melt and altering patterns of snowfall and ice formation. This leads to changes in sea level and can potentially disrupt global ocean currents and weather patterns due to the influx of fresh water into saltwater ecosystems.

5. What is the significance of discovering water in Antarctica?

Discovering water in Antarctica, especially liquid water, is significant for several reasons. It helps scientists understand past climate conditions and the history of Earth's geology and climate. Additionally, subglacial lakes may harbor unique life forms, offering insights into biology and the possibilities of life in extreme conditions. The study of Antarctic ice and water also provides critical data for understanding and predicting future climate change impacts.

Similar threads

  • Earth Sciences
Replies
9
Views
18K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
21
Views
13K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
12K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
27
Views
5K
Back
Top