Drifting "Ice Island" iceberg could pose threat to ships, oil rigs off Canada

[CougarKing]

Associated Press link

Ice island could pose threat to oil, ships

Tue Aug 10, 5:27 PM


By Karl Ritter, The Associated Press
 
STOCKHOLM - An island of ice more than four times the size of Manhattan is drifting across the Arctic Ocean after breaking off from a glacier in Greenland.


Potentially in the path of this unstoppable giant are oil platforms and shipping lanes — and any collision could do untold damage. In a worst case scenario, large chunks could reach the heavily trafficked waters where another Greenland iceberg sank the Titanic in 1912.


It's been a summer of near biblical climatic havoc across the planet, with wildfires, heat and smog in Russia and killer floods in Asia. But the moment the Petermann glacier cracked last week — creating the biggest Arctic ice island in half a century — may symbolize a warming world like no other.


"It's so big that you can't prevent it from drifting. You can't stop it," said Jon-Ove Methlie Hagen, a glaciologist at the University of Oslo.


Few images can capture the world's climate fears like a 260-sqare-kilometre chunk of ice breaking off Greenland's vast ice sheet, a reservoir of freshwater that if it collapsed would raise global sea levels by a devastating 6 metres.


The world's newest ice island already is being used as a powerful emblem in the global warming debate, with U.S. Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts suggesting it could serve as a home for climate change skeptics.


Researchers are in a scramble to plot the trajectory of the floating ice shelf, which is moving toward the Nares Strait separating Greenland's northwestern coast and Canada's Ellsemere Island.

If it makes it into the strait before the winter freeze — due to start next month — it would likely be carried south by ocean currents, hugging Canada's east coast until it enters waters busy with oil activities and shipping off Newfoundland.


"That's where it starts to become dangerous," said Mark Drinkwater, of the European Space Agency.


The Canadian Ice Service estimates the journey will take one to two years. It's likely to break up as it bumps into other icebergs and jagged islands. The fragments would be further ground down by winds and waves and would start to melt as they move into warmer waters.


"But the fragments may still be quite large," warned Trudy Wohlleben, a Canadian ice forecaster, who first spotted the massive chunk of ice on satellite images last Thursday.


The chunks of ice could be large enough to threaten Canada's offshore platforms in the Grand Banks off Newfoundland, said Wohlleben.


(...)

 

[George Wallace]

Few images can capture the world's climate fears like a 260-sqare-kilometre chunk of ice breaking off Greenland's vast ice sheet, a reservoir of freshwater that if it collapsed would raise global sea levels by a devastating 6 metres.

:


I guess whoever made that statement has the opinion that if the ice in his drink melts, then his drink (if left unattended) will overflow.    :

Just a little bit of theatrics there.  "A devastating 6 metres" my arse.  It won't raise an inch you silly twats.  If it was going to raise the ocean levels, it would have happened already; WHEN THE ICE BROKE OFF THE GLACIER - NOT WHEN IT MELTS.  Anyone in Halifax flooded out of their homes yet?  I thought so.

 

[Jaybar]

:


I guess whoever made that statement has the opinion that if the ice in his drink melts, then his drink (if left unattended) will overflow.    :

Just a little bit of theatrics there.  "A devastating 6 metres" my arse.  It won't raise an inch you silly twats.  If it was going to raise the ocean levels, it would have happened already; WHEN THE ICE BROKE OFF THE GLACIER - NOT WHEN IT MELTS.  Anyone in Halifax flooded out of their homes yet?  I thought so.

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't ice expand when it melts? A solid is more dense then a liquid. I know that if I leave ice in a drink and it melts the level does rise.

 

[George Wallace]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't ice expand when it melts? A solid is more dense then a liquid. I know that if I leave ice in a drink and it melts the level does rise.

Does it?  Go to the Fridge and get some ice, put it in a glass with some water, mark the level, and let it melt.  Wake me in the morning, with the results of your experiment.

 

[armyvern]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't ice expand when it melts? A solid is more dense then a liquid. I know that if I leave ice in a drink and it melts the level does rise.

Well I am certainly no scientist
nor a global warming SME,
but the water in my ice cube tray
always tends to expand even higher
when I freeze it
it really seems to me.

 

[AmmoTech90]

I believe that there is some misunderstanding of the statement:

Few images can capture the world's climate fears like a 260-sqare-kilometre chunk of ice breaking off Greenland's vast ice sheet, a reservoir of freshwater that if it collapsed would raise global sea levels by a devastating 6 metres.

Take note of the comma, the intent of which is to indicate that the following statement refers to Greenland's ice sheet.  I do not know if the statement is true or not, but perhaps some people on the site should pay attention to detail and apply some critical thinking before launching into what is just an awkward sentence.

 

[ModlrMike]

[science hijack]

You're talking about the Archimedes (or displacement) principle. An object in water has already displaced it's weight by an equivalent volume of water. In the case of this ice island, if there was going to be a flood, it would have happened when the ice claved.

For example, when you step into a bathtub, the water rises. It falls again when you step out. Your weight (mass) has been displaced by an equal amount of water (volume).

[/science hijack]

 

[George Wallace]

I believe that there is some misunderstanding of the statement:
Take note of the comma, the intent of which is to indicate that the following statement refers to Greenland's ice sheet.  I do not know if the statement is true or not, but perhaps some people on the site should pay attention to detail and apply some critical thinking before launching into what is just an awkward sentence.

Does it matter how awkward the sentence is?  If the whole Polar Ice Cap did melt, it would be the same as ice cubes in a glass.  We will still not see Halifax under water.

 

[armyvern]

I believe that there is some misunderstanding of the statement:
Take note of the comma, the intent of which is to indicate that the following statement refers to Greenland's ice sheet.  I do not know if the statement is true or not, but perhaps some people on the site should pay attention to detail and apply some critical thinking before launching into what is just an awkward sentence.

I fully understoof the sentence to be a reference to "all of the ice-sheet" resulting in a rise of 6m.

Still doesn't change my observation that water in my tray gets larger when frozen vice the opposite. So, in the name of science, global warming, and in an attempt to clarify my observations and back them up with useful data ---

I will now go perform numerous experimentations utilizing ice cubes in my rum & coke in an effort to figure out the truth. Statisticly speaking, how many independant drink experiments would have to occur to obtain accurate results that either support, or not, my theory??  >  I'm thinking I may need a chaperone to observe said experimentation as I may have difficulty (after experiment number X) recording my observational data in any kind of legible manner.

 

[armyvern]

[science hijack]

You're talking about the Archimedes (or displacement) principle. An object in water has already displaced it's weight by an equivalent volume of water. In the case of this ice island, if there was going to be a flood, it would have happened when the ice claved.

For example, when you step into a bathtub, the water rises. It falls again when you step out. Your weight (mass) has been displaced by an equal amount of water (volume).

[/science hijack]

Don't go getting all sciencey on me ... I have important work to do!!  8)

 

[George Wallace]

I will now go perform numerous experimentations utilizing ice cubes in my rum & coke in an effort to figure out the truth. Statisticly speaking, how many independant drink experiments would have to occur to obtain accurate results that either support, or not, my theory??  >  I'm thinking I may need a chaperone to observe said experimentation as I may have difficulty (after experiment number X) recording my observational data in any kind of legible manner.

Now you have really complicated the experiment.  We will now have to measure levels as the ice initially is placed in the drink, the levels taken for what you drank, the amount of fluids passed through the body, the amount of fluids that may or may not have been filtered by the body, calculate amount of fluids retained by the body, weight of an unladened African swallow, and the amount of time between initial application of ice to rum and final measurements of contents of empty glass.

 

[Oh No a Canadian]

A few dozen hundred harpoon missiles would do the trick  ;D

 

[armyvern]

Now you have really complicated the experiment.  We will now have to measure levels as the ice initially is placed in the drink, the levels taken for what you drank, the amount of fluids passed through the body, the amount of fluids that may or may not have been filtered by the body, calculate amount of fluids retained by the body, weight of an unladened African swallow, and the amount of time between initial application of ice to rum and final measurements of contents of empty glass.

OK!!

;D

 

[Oh No a Canadian]

Does it matter how awkward the sentence is?  If the whole Polar Ice Cap did melt, it would be the same as ice cubes in a glass.  We will still not see Halifax under water.

Ice is a solid, it doesn't flow like a liquid...

Remember not all the ice is underwater.

 

[ModlrMike]

I fully understoof the sentence to be a reference to "all of the ice-sheet" resulting in a rise of 6m.

Still doesn't change my observation that water in my tray gets larger when frozen vice the opposite. So, in the name of science, global warming, and in an attempt to clarify my observations and back them up with useful data ---

I will now go perform numerous experimentations utilizing ice cubes in my rum & coke in an effort to figure out the truth. Statisticly speaking, how many independant drink experiments would have to occur to obtain accurate results that either support, or not, my theory??  >  I'm thinking I may need a chaperone to observe said experimentation as I may have difficulty (after experiment number X) recording my observational data in any kind of legible manner.

I can explain that one too, but I don't want to ruin your fun. Or a good night's drinking.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Just more scare mongering by the Al Gore crowd.


Nothing to see here. Move along.

 

[George Wallace]

Ice is a solid, it doesn't flow like a liquid...

Remember not all the ice is underwater.

Ice melts.

90% or so is underwater.  Ice floats.  It melts. 

This experiment has been done millions of times.  I am sure, tomorrow morning dozens who have read this thread will have tried the experiment.



Fact for you Trivial Pursuit buffs:  Glass is a liquid.

 

[armyvern]

Not all the ice is in the water.

I have poured a rum & coke.

It has 5 ice cubes in it.

I have marked the level as to where the liquid is now (NB: not ALL the ice is "in" the drink, but it is ALL "in" the glass  ).

I will mark the level where the liquid is when the ice converts into water (and thus is then ALL "in" the drink).

I will NOT drink this drink  (until after the ice has melted & I have noted whether the liquid level has risen or fallen  ;D).

Right now, I will pour yet another rum & coke - with ice - so that I may watch the other ice melt and become one with the liquid (hoping it's not watching toast).

Will report back the findings whenever that is complete.


Sigh ~ the things I do for science and all things 'green'. Perhaps, I'll have to run for leader of the Green Party next ...

 

[Stoker]

Something like 90% of the ice in the world is at the South Pole and is thousands of feet thick, if that was to melt it would raise sea levels to around 200 feet. There is no warming of the south pole. The ice in the north is fairly thin anyways and it mostly floats, so it totally melted it wouldn't affect sea levels at all. Now if the Greenland ice sheet totally melted it would rise sea levels at least 20 feet.

 

[George Wallace]

....... There is no warming of the south pole.

Not the news that I have been watching.  Large chunks of Antarctica, that make this berg look tiny, have broken free and are adrift.  Halifax is still above water.