Giant Ice Shelf Breaks Off In Arctic
Ice Chunk Spanning 7 Square Miles Is Largest Piece To Break Off Since 2005
-
Photo
A chunk of ice is shown drifting after it separated from the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf off the north coast of Ellesmere Island in Canada's far north on July 27, 2008. (AP)
-
Interactive
Global Warming
The greenhouse effect, a look at the Kyoto Protocol and a history of the Earth's climate.
Derek Mueller, a research at Trent University, was careful not to blame global warming, but said the event was consistent with the theory that the current Arctic climate isn't rebuilding ice sheets.
"We're in a different climate now," he said. "It's not conducive to regrowing them. It's a one-way process."
Mueller said the sheet broke away last week from the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf off the north coast of Ellesmere Island in Canada's far north. He said a crack in the shelf was first spotted in 2002 and a survey this spring found a network of fissures.
The sheet is the biggest piece shed by one of Canada's six ice shelves since the Ayles shelf broke loose in 2005 from the coast of Ellesmere, about 500 miles from the North Pole.
Formed by accumulating snow and freezing meltwater, ice shelves are large platforms of thick, ancient sea ice that float on the ocean's surface. Ellesmere Island was once entirely ringed by a single enormous ice shelf that broke up in the early 1900s.
At 170 square miles and 130-feet thick, the Ward Hunt shelf is the largest of those remnants. Mueller said it has been steadily declining since the 1930s.
Gary Stern, co-leader of an international research program on sea ice, said it's the same story all around the Arctic.
Speaking from the Coast Guard icebreaker Amundsen in Canada's north, Stern said He hadn't seen any ice in weeks. Plans to set up an ice camp last February had to be abandoned when usually dependable ice didn't form for the second year in a row, he said.
"Nobody on the ship is surprised anymore," Stern said. "We've been trying to get the word out for the longest time now that things are happening fast and they're going to continue to happen fast."
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 8
- next
See all 360 CommentsWe''ve been burning coal in large quantities since the 1830''s. Still it seems reasonable that ice shelf breakages preceding 1930 or so are unrelated to modern global warming. To those for whom this is ALL just a delayed reaction to the end of the last ice age, I usually say: "If I told you, you were about to get hit by a tidal wave, you''d tell me the tide''s been rising all morning". Its two different things, with one thing in common: Polar ice reacts very slowly to these kinds of forcings. Very definitely, even if we took gigantic steps today to forestall global warming, things would get much worse in the Polar regions before they''d get better. I don''t know why global warming deniers are somehow comforted by that thought...
Posted by MyOpinion1 at 11:25 AM : Jul 30, 2008
--------------------
I hope you''re right, my friend! I REALLY do!
But, I doubt it.
I doubt this is normal, cyclical activity! Whether and how much instability it may cause in the weather cycle, we shall see! But, it''s not good.
when will humans stop thinking that they are on top the the proverbial food chain...when this planet decides to get cool or warm..it will do so..
+ report abuse
************
correction" ''NOT'' on top of the food chain
Posted by MyOpinion1 at 11:25 AM : Jul 30, 2008
--------------------
I hope you''''re right, my friend! I REALLY do!
But, I doubt it.
I doubt this is normal, cyclical activity! Whether and how much instability it may cause in the weather cycle, we shall see! But, it''''s not good.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by stn_sage at 11:40 AM : Jul 30, 2008
+ report abuse
************
al gore already had his share..and every now and then when that coffer goes low or that notariety goes down..they ''milk'' the environment again..
But for the idiot who claims discussions of climate change are about the rich stealing for the poor we need to freeze your brain and let scientists study it about 10,000 years from now when there just might be enough knowledge to understand such idiocy.
Record levels of change in the last 15 years.
Record levels of change in the last 15 years.
Stupid.
Posted by libsluv2spit at 11:51 AM : Jul 30, 2008
----------------------
Well, whatever!
1. I don''t care what Gore has to say about the environment! I consider him suspect.
2. Gore isn''t the only one making money off the environment---abusively, as you insinuate---the oil companies have been doing it for decades!
3. People who are now suggesting that those who are sounding the alarm on the environment are wrong---will---in a few short years, be talking out the other side of their faces!
4. MY study and research suggests to ME that there is a definite problem! You have to be blind not to see it!
And you will see that the ice is actually growing and is much larger this year then last at the same time. This scare must be your first time with a sky is falling scam.
Posted by Terrapin78 at 01:06 PM : Jul 30, 2008
That''s right. How could we not be?
As far as I''m concerned, President Bush has far more legitimate clout than Al does.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Terrapin78 at 01:06 PM : Jul 30, 2008
Well, until you''ve got more than a hunch, I''m not in favor of Gore''s scheme to have the U.S. pay nearly $27 trillion to other nations for "carbon penalties". No wonder the Euros LOVE Nobama.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by erasmus81 at 01:04 PM : Jul 30, 2008
Especially after the record cold winter we just had. Global warming lemmings can ride their pony''s to work but I will fight their efforts to put their FASCIST BELIEFS on the populace.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by ibzjem at 12:44 PM : Jul 30, 2008
How much did Gore make from his global warming foundation last year? Sucker!
You tell me. How much?
Dont think the US is going to 27 trillion to anybody. How stupid is that. Let them eat dirt cake
No doubt the same bunch that still insist there was WMD in Iraq.
It is reported that he has made over $100,000,000 on global warming propaganda. According to reports his house uses twenty times as much energy as the average house. He is one of the big carbon credit pushers, but I don''''t see how you accomplish much if you can buy credits and still pollute.
Posted by dmw1167
Hey DiMWit, Gore made his fortune in cable TV and high tech. Try just a little research next time.
I believe the correct answer is probably NOTHING! Al Gore GIVES HIS TIME AND MONEY to it.
From Wiki:
The Alliance for Climate Protection is an organization in the US aiming to ''persuade people of the importance, urgency and feasibility of adopting and implementing effective and comprehensive solutions for the climate crisis''. The founder and current chairman of the alliance is former US Vice President Al Gore.
Paramount Classics, distributor of Gore''s documentary An Inconvenient Truth announced in August 2006 that it would donate 5% of all box office receipts to the Alliance. Al Gore is also donating all his proceeds from the film to the Alliance.
Some of the profits from the Live Earth concerts, and profits from the associated book - The Live Earth Global Warming Survival Handbook, will also be used to fund the alliance, which is also seeking contributions from other donors.
Prior to launch it was expected that more than 60% of the funding will be used for ''national and local media projects aimed at mass persuasion'', with the rest used to support grassroots groups and institutions that educate the public about climate change.
After receiving the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, Al Gore pledged to donate 100% of his share of the prize (approximately $1.5 million) to the Alliance.
Posted by marizara at 01:42 PM : Jul 30, 2008
Actually, there is something we can do. 1 million miles from Earth ''sunward'' there is a stable orbit point. NASA has plans to use this point to study ''deep space'' w/o ''losing'' the instrument package. All we need to do is to send a buttload of talcum powder to this point in space, spread it out so that it blocks the properly calculated % of the sun''s energy (sort of like pf40 sunscreen, and viola !, science & technology triumph again. We will not ever have to worry re: global warming again. Of course, if this heating & cooling does come in cycles, we are (insert appropriate descriptive noun here)
Question: If it''s the LARGEST piece to break off since 2005, doesn''t that mean it has been accumulating since before then?
I mean, should they be getting smaller and smaller (cause of ALGore''s glooooooooooooobal warrrrrrrrrrming)? Just a thought.
Posted by mbcsmith at 01:26 PM : Jul 30, 2008
Typical neo con - the environment is suffering because of us, yet he refuses to even acknowledge it, much less do anything about it.
See-"Posted by IDNNSG at 02:16 PM : Jul 30, 2008"
So there!!
Posted by mbcsmith
I normally keep my mouth shut on global warming discussions because I am neutral waiting on further evidience. Your statement here though shows such a level of misunderstanding that I have to say something. Imagaine global warming to be the stock market over a year. During that year there will be days it is up and days it way down, however, the trend over the year is generally upwards at 5 - 7%. Just because the market/temperature drops 100 points/2degC in a day/year it does not mean the overall trend is not upwards. The big question where most of the debate is is on the rate of increase in temperature. The pro groups see evidence for a rate increase hence human involvement, the anti groups see no change in the rate hence it''s natural. Everyone agrees the temperature is rising.
Posted by bigwhtpony
I bet it was a very lonely thought :)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by getoffmine at 02:25 PM : Jul 30, 2008
---------------------
On the contrary "getoff." The cost to you for doing nothing to curb fossil fuel emissions and their heat-trapping consequences will be severe. Better get on the bandwagon.
I mean, should they be getting smaller and smaller (cause of ALGore''''s glooooooooooooobal warrrrrrrrrrming)? Just a thought.
Posted by bigwhtpony
Eventually there will be no more to break off, so yes the icebergs will get smaller and smaller. As of right now there is still enough ice for these huge bergs to fall off once in a while. What''s more worrying is that the crew of the reporting ship is seeing no ice where they do expect it.
Y''all just keep up the ignorance and move to the coast. Then you''ll be the first to see who''s right.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by downsteamjim at 02:22 PM : Jul 30, 2008
-------------------------
You are out of date, downsteamjim...
The former vice president has installed solar panels, a rainwater-collection system and geothermal heating. He also replaced all incandescent lights with compact fluorescent or light-emitting diode bulbs -- even on his Christmas tree.
"Short of tearing it down and staring anew, I don''t know how it could have been rated any higher," said Kim Shinn of the U.S. Green Building Council, which gave the house its second-highest rating for sustainable design.
Gore''s improvements cut the home''s summer electrical consumption by 11 percent compared with a year ago, according to utility records reviewed by The Associated Press. Most Nashville homes used 20 percent to 30 percent more electricity during the same period because of a record heat wave.
With the state that your country is in right now, I can understand your reasoning.
I don''t mind putting out a bit of money to make changes, but only what I can afford.
Everyone has their limits to what they can afford. Even Al Gore. He may have more money, but he also has to spend more money to live. I heard he was installing solar panels in his house.
Al Gore is doing more than spending huge sums to erase his own carbon footprint (see below). He is putting his money where his mouth is in helping educate people like downsteamjim and others in here.
Al Gore took the wraps off a colossal new $300m ad campaign intended to (forcefully) inject the topic of climate change into the presidential contest. As we and many other commentators have noted in the past few months, a substantive dialogue on climate change has been strangely missing from the current discussions, with most top reporters and pundits failing to raise the topic all together - preferring instead to expound on the importance of $600 haircuts and UFO sightings.
The climate guru''s ads will hopefully help blunt Big Coal''s recent ad buys, centering around the supposedly reassuring concept of "clean coal" being trumpeted by the classily-named Americans for Balanced Energy Choices (ABEC), and push back against many of the skeptics out there who continue pressing their contrarian (and wholly unfounded) views. To fund this Alliance for Climate Protection initiative, Gore will be donating all the profits from the An Inconvenient Truth book and movie; in addition, he will be donating his Nobel prize money and a matching sum from his personal fortune.
Everyone is contributing to global warming.
Are YOU going to "downgrade"? Are you going to sell your house and move to a lesser house? Why should Al Gore? He is making changes to his house. What are YOU doing?
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 8
- next
See all 360 Comments