Austrian glaciers shrink dramatically

Oct 02, 2011
The Khumbu Glacier is seen here in Kathmandu in 2009. Austria's glaciers shrank dramatically this summer, the most since a record hot period in 2003, principally because of low amounts of snow the preceding winter, scientists said.

Austria's glaciers shrank dramatically this summer, the most since a record hot period in 2003, principally because of low amounts of snow the preceding winter, scientists said.

The Goldbergkees glacier in the Alps, for instance, is on average two metres (6.5 feet) thinner than in 2010, losing around seven percent of its mass, the ZAMG national meteorological institute said.

generally shrink in the summer months and grow again in the winter, and in recent years more has generally melted than has been replaced. This year however the loss has been particularly marked, the ZAMG said.

"Although 2011's summer wasn't particularly hot, the losses are as extreme as during the 2003 summer of the century," climatologist Berhard Hynek said.

Snow levels were much lower than normal in the eastern Alps after an unusually warm and dry winter. On the 3,000-metre (10,000-feet) Hoher Sonnblick, for example, the level was only two-thirds of the 80-year average on May 1.

and in both hemispheres have retreated in the past few decades because of changes to the Earth's climate blamed by the vast majority of scientists on the rise in .

Explore further: Cuba looks to mangroves to fend off rising seas

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Global glacier melt continues

Jan 29, 2009

Glaciers around the globe continue to melt at high rates. Tentative figures for the year 2007, of the World Glacier Monitoring Service at the University of Zurich, Switzerland, indicate a further loss of average ice thickness ...

Permanent ice fields are resisting global warming

May 16, 2007

The small ice caps of Mont Blanc and the Dôme du Goûter are not melting, or at least, not yet. This is what CNRS researchers have announced in the Journal of Geophysical Research. At very high altitudes (above ...

Recommended for you

'Shocking' underground water loss in US drought

19 minutes ago

A major drought across the western United States has sapped underground water resources, posing a greater threat to the water supply than previously understood, scientists said Thursday.

User comments : 14

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Vendicar_Decarian
2.1 / 5 (10) Oct 02, 2011
This melting is just theory. How do we know that their meter sticks didn't get 7 percent longer from the previous year and that as a result the glacier stayed the same size?

Answer me that Mr. Scientist.
OverweightAmerican
1 / 5 (10) Oct 02, 2011
What a bunch of hogwash. Australia doesn't have glaciers - it's the 2nd driest and hottest contenent on earth!
PinkElephant
2.3 / 5 (3) Oct 02, 2011
Answer me that Mr. Scientist.
It's all just natural cycles. The unnaturalness is completely natural, you're just too brainwashed by the greenies to realize it. :P
What a bunch of hogwash. Australia doesn't have glaciers - it's the 2nd driest and hottest contenent on earth!
I can't quite decide: is that a bad pun, dyslexia, or a bad dyslexic pun?
PinkElephant
3.9 / 5 (7) Oct 02, 2011
@ohmytumor,

I'm starting to report your posts as "abuse" from here on. Not only are you off-topic, you're now cross-posting (copy-pasting) the same garbage across multiple threads. You've turned from an unhinged crank into an outright spammer.

Oh, as for:
"variable heat source": solar flares are the hidden truth?
[1]: economic fraud = scientific fraud?
[2]: What they call "pulsar" is not what you think, as is OBVIOUS from the five-sentence abstract.
[3]: more tooting of your own cranking horn.
[4]: Elvis? Really??

Just take your pills, and go back to whatever mental asylum you've escaped from.

Neutron stars don't disintegrate on their own. The galaxy does not contain less than 8 solar masses worth of material. No gas can be present next to a neutron star at non-relativistic velocities, without falling onto the neutron star and becoming part of it.

Your grasp of physics does not even begin to approach your grasp of your children's genitals. Begone, troll.
Callippo
1 / 5 (2) Oct 02, 2011
It's interesting, while the global atmosphere temperatures are stagnating, the global warming - as measured with shrinkage of glaciers and temperature of oceans - still continues with original rate. IMO it could serve as an indicia of my theory of geovolcanic origin of global warming triggered with neutrinos.

http://www.scienc...3301.htm
PinkElephant
2.3 / 5 (3) Oct 02, 2011
@Callippo,
the global atmosphere temperatures are stagnating
Please explain where, in the actual data, do you see any evidence of "stagnating":

http://data.giss..../graphs/
Nanobanano
1 / 5 (2) Oct 02, 2011
It's interesting, while the global atmosphere temperatures are stagnating, the global warming - as measured with shrinkage of glaciers and temperature of oceans - still continues with original rate.


Ice and cold water serve as a temporary heat sink for the excess heat.

Do not be deceived. Just because the "temperature" rise may level off doesn't mean it isn't getting "hotter". The specifice heat capacity of water is higher than air, and the heat of melting of water is around 80 times the specific heat capacity of water.

Once all the ice melts, the ocean temperatures and air temperatures will rise much faster: around 80 times faster, actually...
PinkElephant
3 / 5 (2) Oct 02, 2011
Do not be deceived. Just because the "temperature" rise may level off
As pointed out above, there is no actual evidence of any such leveling off. So it is quite unclear at the moment, who is being deceived, vs. trying to perpetrate deception.
Once all the ice melts, the ocean temperatures and air temperatures will rise much faster: around 80 times faster
Not really. Yes, phase transitions are a constant-temperature process but most of Earth is not covered by ice.

Once all the glaciers are gone, the resultant more rapid warming may manifest in the high latitudes (though I doubt any factor approaching 80 would come into play -- partly because those are HIGH latitudes, receiving relatively little sun in the first place.)

In the mid-to-low latitudes, the effect is probably negligible, as there isn't THAT much heat transport to/from the poles relative to direct gain from the Sun and loss of heat to space.
Nanobanano
1 / 5 (1) Oct 02, 2011
Earth's annual mean albedo will be changed by around 10% by the time all the ice melts.

AT 1.5 meter/second flow rate, it takes around 80 days for warm water to flow from the tropical region to the arctic, which is part of the reason the peak of melt season is offset by an entire season from the longest day of the year.

The circulation of ocean water is colder on the NE side of basins in the N hemisphere because cold, melted water flows south from the melted ice.

As we heat up, isotherms on the W side of basins stretch farther and farther N, but the easter side of the basins lags behind, because of the buffer of ice in the N oceans.

Whenever the ice is gone, this buffer will be gone, and the isotherms will even out more and more. The water temps on the E. Atlantic will end up being about the same as the temps on the W. atlantic at the same lattitude.

I'm talking maybe 2045, several years after first complete sea ice melt down (minus any greenland calving...)
jsdarkdestruction
5 / 5 (3) Oct 02, 2011
What a bunch of hogwash. Australia doesn't have glaciers - it's the 2nd driest and hottest contenent on earth!

look closer. its austria, not australia.
Ethelred
3 / 5 (4) Oct 03, 2011
The Spammer strikes again. How many threads this time?

Space.com did no such thing. That article did not support you in anyway. For that matter neither have you.

So just how do Neutron Stars form when neutron repulsion is alleged by you to be so powerful that it stops Black Holes from forming no matter how large the mass?

Ignoring the question won't magically make you right Oliver. The ideas are contradictory and I bet even the Plasma Universe Cranks can see that now that it has been pointed out.

Ethelred
jsdarkdestruction
1 / 5 (1) Oct 04, 2011
Oliver, do you not know of phase 2 of the plan? see kissinger and nixon knew about neutron repulsion and it being the main source of the suns and the universes power but chairman mao did not. as the world all followed their lead in the conspiracy they said it was to prevent nuclear war. however under the guise of that the united states had different reasons. as the climatoligists/scientists destroy our economy and power while funneling money to third world nations for supportung the scam the chinese will soon grow too strong and overpopulated for anyone but the us to even have a chance of stopping the chinese from taking over the world, at that moment neutron repulsion will be officially "discovered" and cheap easy neutron repulsion energy will be used both to power production of weapons and supplies and as weapons of mass destruction themselves in neutron repulsion bombs. saving the united states and allowing us to finally take over the whole world without looking like the bad guys...
Husky
not rated yet Oct 08, 2011
oliver seems to suffer from neuron logic repulsion
Callippo
1 / 5 (1) Oct 08, 2011