Authors
Hélène Seroussi, Sophie Nowicki, Antony J Payne, Heiko Goelzer, William H Lipscomb, Ayako Abe Ouchi, Cécile Agosta, Torsten Albrecht, Xylar Asay-Davis, Alice Barthel, Reinhard Calov, Richard Cullather, Christophe Dumas, Rupert Gladstone, Nicholas Golledge, Jonathan M Gregory, Ralf Greve, Tore Hatterman, Matthew J Hoffman, Angelika Humbert, Philippe Huybrechts, Nicolas C Jourdain, Thomas Kleiner, Eric Larour, Gunter R Leguy, Daniel P Lowry, Chistopher M Little, Mathieu Morlighem, Frank Pattyn, Tyler Pelle, Stephen F Price, Aurélien Quiquet, Ronja Reese, Nicole-Jeanne Schlegel, Andrew Shepherd, Erika Simon, Robin S Smith, Fiammetta Straneo, Sainan Sun, Luke D Trusel, Jonas Van Breedam, Roderik SW van de Wal, Ricarda Winkelmann, Chen Zhao, Tong Zhang, Thomas Zwinger
Publication date
2020/1/22
Journal
The Cryosphere Discussions
Volume
2020
Pages
1-54
Description
Ice flow models of the Antarctic ice sheet are commonly used to simulate its future evolution in response to different climate scenarios and inform on the mass loss that would contribute to future sea level rise. However, there is currently no consensus on estimated the future mass balance of the ice sheet, primarily because of differences in the representation of physical processes and the forcings employed. This study presents results from 18 simulations from 15 international groups focusing on the evolution of the Antarctic ice sheet during the period 2015–2100, forced with different scenarios from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) representative of the spread in climate model results. The contribution of the Antarctic ice sheet in response to increased warming during this period varies between −7.8 and 30.0 cm of Sea Level Equivalent (SLE). The evolution of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet varies widely among models, with an overall mass loss up to 21.0 cm SLE in response to changes in oceanic conditions. East Antarctica mass change varies between −6.5 and 16.5 cm SLE, with a significant increase in surface mass balance outweighing the increased ice discharge under most RCP 8.5 scenario forcings. The inclusion of ice shelf collapse, here assumed to be caused by large amounts of liquid water ponding at the surface of ice shelves, yields an additional mass loss of 8 mm compared to simulations without ice shelf collapse. The largest sources of uncertainty come from the ocean-induced melt rates, the calibration of these melt rates based on oceanic conditions taken outside of ice shelf cavities and the ice sheet …
Total citations
2020202120222023202417587410250
Scholar articles