Giant Iceberg the size of Greater London has broken away from the Brunt Ice Shelf in Antarctica.

[Social Media]

The British Antarctic Survey (BAS) said the calving happened a decade after scientists first detected the growth of vast cracks in the ice. They relocated the Halley research station 23km inland in 2016 after what they called Chasm One began to widen.

[Scott]

Brunt Ice Shelf in Antarctica calves giant iceberg

ANTARCTICA – 23 January 2023. A huge iceberg (1550 km²), almost the size of Greater London, has broken off the 150m thick Brunt Ice Shelf. It calved after cracks that have been developing naturally over the last few years extended across the entire ice shelf, causing the new iceberg to break free. This occurred on Sunday 22 January between 19.00 and 20.00 UTC during a spring tide. 

The iceberg calved when the crack known as Chasm-1 fully extended through the ice shelf. The break off is the second major calving from this area in the last two years and has taken place a decade after scientists at British Antarctic Survey (BAS) first detected growth of vast cracks in the ice. 

https://www.bas.ac.uk/media-post/brunt-ice-shelf-in-antarctica-calves-giant-iceberg/

 

[Credo]

From the article:

 “This calving event has been expected and is part of the natural behaviour of the Brunt Ice Shelf. It is not linked to climate change.

 

I am sure this isn't going to bode well for rising water levels whether it's related to Climate Change or not.

 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, Credo said:

From the article:

 “This calving event has been expected and is part of the natural behaviour of the Brunt Ice Shelf. It is not linked to climate change.

 

I am sure this isn't going to bode well for rising water levels whether it's related to Climate Change or not.

 

 

 

It will make no significant difference. Floating sea ice doesn't raise sea level much when it melts.

Put an ice cube in a glass of water. When it melts, does the water level rise?

The ice cap on the land would have to melt to change sea level.

 

https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/170/1/145/2019346

If all the extant sea ice and floating shelf ice melted, the global sea level would rise about 4 cm.

[Pattaya Spotter]

Maybe they can bag it into those "Artic" (in this case "Antarctic") ice-cubes they sell in stores ???? 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Pattaya Spotter

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It will make no significant difference. Floating sea ice doesn't raise sea level much when it melts.

Put an ice cube in a glass of water. When it melts, does the water level rise?

The ice cap on the land would have to melt to change sea level.

 

https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/170/1/145/2019346

If all the extant sea ice and floating shelf ice melted, the global sea level would rise about 4 cm.

False. The ice cap on land wouldn't have to melt. Well, just a little bit on the surface. The glaciers on land would simply have to migrate to the sea at an accelerated pace. Which is already happening. And that's partially because the floating ice shelf, which holds back that migration, is melting much faster than in the past.

[roquefort]

17 hours ago, Credo said:

From the article:

 “This calving event has been expected and is part of the natural behaviour of the Brunt Ice Shelf. It is not linked to climate change.

 

 

 

I'm sure that won't stop the climate change cult claiming it's due to increased CO2/fossil fuels/animal farts and that we've all got to live in caves and eat bugs to stop natural weather cycles that have been going for millenia.

[KhunLA]

'size of greater London' ...

... so a small one then @ 1550 km².

 

Since one was as large as Jamaica

Iceberg B-15 @ 11,000 km²

[Elkski]

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It will make no significant difference. Floating sea ice doesn't raise sea level much when it melts.

Put an ice cube in a glass of water. When it melts, does the water level rise?

The ice cap on the land would have to melt to change sea level.

 

https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/170/1/145/2019346

If all the extant sea ice and floating shelf ice melted, the global sea level would rise about 4 cm.

Your claims and link are not related to what effect fresh water ice shelf does to the ocean levels.   Stick to not worrying about if the ice in your  beer will raise the level in the glass.  

Calving ice bergs are fresh water and they are not floating in the ocean until they calve.    It may be in the funding interest of this ice station to say ice calving is normal but it has been increasing at an alarming rate.   And if a London size was common they would not have made a big deal out of this one.  

I agree ice ages have come and gone for millions of years.    But this much CO has never been found in the atmosphere samples that weee trapped deep in these glaciers.   Rather than deny science why don't you go but ocean side property?  Put your money where your mouth is. 

[KhunLA]

Maybe in 500 yrs, our house will be beachfront.

 

My morning surfside scooter ride got cancelled today.   Damn you Climate Change / Global Warming.

 

Didn't someone say the ice caps are supposed to be melted already.  Got a damn Nobel prize for it.  Still waiting.

 

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Elkski said:

Your claims and link are not related to what effect fresh water ice shelf does to the ocean levels.   Stick to not worrying about if the ice in your  beer will raise the level in the glass.  

Calving ice bergs are fresh water and they are not floating in the ocean until they calve.    It may be in the funding interest of this ice station to say ice calving is normal but it has been increasing at an alarming rate.   And if a London size was common they would not have made a big deal out of this one.  

I agree ice ages have come and gone for millions of years.    But this much CO has never been found in the atmosphere samples that weee trapped deep in these glaciers.   Rather than deny science why don't you go but ocean side property?  Put your money where your mouth is. 

It doesn't matter whether or not the iceberg is made of fresh water. What matter is whether its floating on the water or is located on land. When water turns to ice its volume increases by about 10%. So when it floats on water about 10% of the ice is above the water line. When it melts, it shrinks back again t0 90% of its former volume. So it's pretty much a wash, In more ways than one.

On the other hand, these floating ice shelves are slows the motion of glaciers on dry land to the sea. So if these ice floating ice shelves melt or break apart more quickly, than the glaciers will flow faster into the sea. And that will raise sea levels.

As it turn out, there is increased amount of relatively warm water that is undermining this ice shelf. So global warming is hastening glacial flow into the sea.

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, roquefort said:

I'm sure that won't stop the climate change cult claiming it's due to increased CO2/fossil fuels/animal farts and that we've all got to live in caves and eat bugs to stop natural weather cycles that have been going for millenia.

 

Wrong!

 

"The British Antarctic Survey (BAS) said the formation of the new iceberg was not due to climate change – which is accelerating the loss of sea ice in the Arctic and parts of Antarctica – but to a natural process called “calving”.

“This calving event has been expected and is part of the natural behaviour of the Brunt Ice Shelf,” said BAS glaciologist Dominic Hodgson. “It is not linked to climate change.”

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/1/25/giant-iceberg-breaks-off-near-antarctica-research-station#:~:text=The British Antarctic Survey (BAS,natural process called “calving”.

Edited January 25, 2023 by metisdead
Oversize font reset to normal.

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Maybe in 500 yrs, our house will be beachfront.

 

My morning surfside scooter ride got cancelled today.   Damn you Climate Change / Global Warming.

 

Didn't someone say the ice caps are supposed to be melted already.  Got a damn Nobel prize for it.  Still waiting.

 

Most people try to conceal their ignorance. But there are some few who advertise it.

Maybe you should find another somebody to explain to you the difference between weather and climate.

And who cares what your anonymous somebody says? It's what climatologists say that counts.

Edited January 25, 2023 by placeholder

[placeholder]

5 hours ago, roquefort said:

I'm sure that won't stop the climate change cult claiming it's due to increased CO2/fossil fuels/animal farts and that we've all got to live in caves and eat bugs to stop natural weather cycles that have been going for millenia.

I did a little experiment and did a google search with the phrase "Brunt calving due to climate change". All the results that came up said in one way or another that the event was not due to  climate change.

[Credo]

6 hours ago, roquefort said:

I'm sure that won't stop the climate change cult claiming it's due to increased CO2/fossil fuels/animal farts and that we've all got to live in caves and eat bugs to stop natural weather cycles that have been going for millenia.

Climate Change is real and it is due to a rise in CO2 levels.  Otherwise, your post seems to be a little on the hysterical order.  

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, Credo said:

Climate Change is real and it is due to a rise in CO2 levels.  Otherwise, your post seems to be a little on the hysterical order.  

When they start raving about bugs and caves, the only thing their comments deserve is ridicule.

[thaibeachlovers]

11 hours ago, Elkski said:

Your claims and link are not related to what effect fresh water ice shelf does to the ocean levels.   Stick to not worrying about if the ice in your  beer will raise the level in the glass.  

Calving ice bergs are fresh water and they are not floating in the ocean until they calve.    It may be in the funding interest of this ice station to say ice calving is normal but it has been increasing at an alarming rate.   And if a London size was common they would not have made a big deal out of this one.  

I agree ice ages have come and gone for millions of years.    But this much CO has never been found in the atmosphere samples that weee trapped deep in these glaciers.   Rather than deny science why don't you go but ocean side property?  Put your money where your mouth is. 

Oh dear, try again.

All those fresh water icebergs you are so worried about have been calving as long as the ice cap has been moving outwards into the ocean, which is as long as there has been an ice cap. It's not static, which is why you won't find Scott's death site any more- probably fell into the ocean long ago.

Anyway, any fresh water added in the Antarctic will probably be balanced by evaporation in warmer climes.

 

BTW an area the size of London is nothing in comparison to the amount of water in the planet's oceans.

Edited January 25, 2023 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, Credo said:

Climate Change is real and it is due to a rise in CO2 levels.  Otherwise, your post seems to be a little on the hysterical order.  

But IMO pretty accurate.

Edited January 25, 2023 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

11 hours ago, Elkski said:

Rather than deny science why don't you go but ocean side property?  Put your money where your mouth is. 

Lend me the money and I will. I can't buy any property, as price of houses has gone insane.

[KhunLA]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Anyway, any fresh water added in the Antarctic will probably be balanced by evaporation in warmer climes.

 

BTW an area the size of London is nothing in comparison to the amount of water in the planet's oceans.

Yes, it's all relative.  Think 1 ice cube floating in the largest pool you've ever seen, and that's not even close.  Scenes from 'WaterWorld' ain't happening.

 

People always seem to point out some imaginary negative aspect of everything.  How about the positive, of more fresh water added to the ecosystem.  What goes up, must come down, and if on land, adds to the drinking water table, which in some place, is desperately needed.

 

More drinking water would definitely be a plus.  Besides, in the not so near future, countries will be sticking their desalination drinking straws into the seas, as we run out of clean drinking water, and possibly counter any rising of the seas.  If not start to 'drain' them ????

 

If seas rising at the rate they say, it would take centuries to have any real impact anywhere.  Besides, we'll exterminate mankind, oops, personkind by then, with some other means of self destruction.

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

Anyway, any fresh water added in the Antarctic will probably be balanced by evaporation in warmer climes.

I don't know about you but when I was a kid in primary school, I learned about something called the water cycle. And I learned that the reason it's called a cycle is that when water evaporates, it's not a one way trip. It actually returns to the land and the oceans as rain, snow, hail, sleet. You know, precipitation. The point being it doesn't just stay up in the atmosphere forever.

NASA offers a site for children that explains this in some detail:

https://gpm.nasa.gov/education/water-cycle

[JayClay]

9 hours ago, placeholder said:

When they start raving about bugs and caves, the only thing their comments deserve is ridicule.

Do you happen to have any link to people raving about bugs and caves in context of the OP?

[placeholder]

18 minutes ago, JayClay said:

Do you happen to have any link to people raving about bugs and caves in context of the OP?

 

[Hummin]

23 hours ago, placeholder said:

False. The ice cap on land wouldn't have to melt. Well, just a little bit on the surface. The glaciers on land would simply have to migrate to the sea at an accelerated pace. Which is already happening. And that's partially because the floating ice shelf, which holds back that migration, is melting much faster than in the past.

Everyone should take their time to read this one. No doomsday predictions, sober and well explained what they know and do not know. 

 

 

Glaciers in motion

RISING SEA LEVELS

Glaciers are constantly in motion, and seasonal melting and growth are part of a natural cycle. It’s normal for glaciers to flow and for parts of them to break off as icebergs (known as calving). It’s also normal for glaciers to melt during the summer and grow during the winter.

Ice sheets shrink when the amount of ice lost through calvings and melting is greater than the amount of new snow and ice added to the ice sheet through fresh snowfall.

https://www.asoc.org/learn/antarctic-ice-and-rising-sea-levels/

[JayClay]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

 

Sorry. Maybe I've missed the point that you were trying to make. It's genuine possible and apologise if so.

 

I thought that you were trying to say that climate activists were going on about bugs and caves, not a denier from this thread.

 

Apologies again for any misunderstanding.

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Everyone should take their time to read this one. No doomsday predictions, sober and well explained what they know and do not know. 

 

 

Glaciers in motion

RISING SEA LEVELS

Glaciers are constantly in motion, and seasonal melting and growth are part of a natural cycle. It’s normal for glaciers to flow and for parts of them to break off as icebergs (known as calving). It’s also normal for glaciers to melt during the summer and grow during the winter.

Ice sheets shrink when the amount of ice lost through calvings and melting is greater than the amount of new snow and ice added to the ice sheet through fresh snowfall.

https://www.asoc.org/learn/antarctic-ice-and-rising-sea-levels/

That's true but that's always been the case. What hasn't always been the case is that the net rate of loss of antarctic glaciers has increased by 6 times over the space of the last 30 years.

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, JayClay said:

Sorry. Maybe I've missed the point that you were trying to make. It's genuine possible and apologise if so.

 

I thought that you were trying to say that climate activists were going on about bugs and caves, not a denier from this thread.

 

Apologies again for any misunderstanding.

You did miss the point. Congratulations on joining that exclusive club made up of every member of aseannow.com! A designer dunce cap will be sent to you shortly. 

[Hummin]

36 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Yes, it's all relative.  Think 1 ice cube floating in the largest pool you've ever seen, and that's not even close.  Scenes from 'WaterWorld' ain't happening.

 

People always seem to point out some imaginary negative aspect of everything.  How about the positive, of more fresh water added to the ecosystem.  What goes up, must come down, and if on land, adds to the drinking water table, which in some place, is desperately needed.

 

More drinking water would definitely be a plus.  Besides, in the not so near future, countries will be sticking their desalination drinking straws into the seas, as we run out of clean drinking water, and possibly counter any rising of the seas.  If not start to 'drain' them ????

 

If seas rising at the rate they say, it would take centuries to have any real impact anywhere.  Besides, we'll exterminate mankind, oops, personkind by then, with some other means of self destruction.

The warmer climate world wide, will change wind and sea streams. Warm clouds travel to cooler areas, and will not benefit dry climates as you think. 

 

We also know humans did set fire on forests to hunt and grow maybe already 50 000 years ago.

Sahara had the biggest lake and huge river systems as well forests. What happened. 

 

One question, if simultaneously happenings with volcano eruption or asteroid hitting earth and our human activity on top of it, we just do not have any buffer left do we? I mean if someone believes human activity do not harm us significant enough to create a climate crises?  We know we will have either sooner or later. And we should calculate for it. 

 

The dark winter is coming 

[KhunLA]

7 minutes ago, Hummin said:

The warmer climate world wide, will change wind and sea streams. Warm clouds travel to cooler areas, and will not benefit dry climates as you think. 

 

We also know humans did set fire on forests to hunt and grow maybe already 50 000 years ago.

Sahara had the biggest lake and huge river systems as well forests. What happened. 

 

One question, if simultaneously happenings with volcano eruption or asteroid hitting earth and our human activity on top of it, we just do not have any buffer left do we? I mean if someone believes human activity do not harm us significant enough to create a climate crises?  We know we will have either sooner or later. And we should calculate for it. 

 

The dark winter is coming 

 

[Hummin]

18 minutes ago, placeholder said:

That's true but that's always been the case. What hasn't always been the case is that the net rate of loss of antarctic glaciers has increased by 6 times over the space of the last 30 years.

Yes, and if you read the article, it is well explained there as well. It is a cycle, warm sense clouds search for cooler areas and some parts have growth of ice, and other parts losing rapidly more than ever. Sober prediction on water rise in 100 years is significant high and will lead to catastrophic scenarios for many countries and humans, even 28 cm doesn't say much for some, but if you live by the sea, and know how water level changes with wind, moon, waves you know 28cm is dramatic. But not going to spend time to try to explain, you have experience it yourself to understand the consequences.