| GLACIER ICE VOLUME AND SEA-LEVEL EQUIVALENT James S. Aber |
Table of Contents
| Last great ice sheets | Arctic glaciation |
| Timing of glaciation | Ice volume & sea level |
| Exercise | References |
Note: see ice_labs.pdf for figures.
The minimum reconstruction includes large ice sheets in North America, Greenland, and Europe that were confined mainly to existing land areas and marginal continental shelves. Smaller, thinner ice sheets/caps were located in several other areas: Iceland, Alps, Svalbard, Rockies, Andes, etc. The Laurentide Ice Sheet in North America consisted of two domes, one over southeastern Hudson Bay, the other over Keewatin. Ice thickness in the dome areas exceeded 4 km.
The minimum Scandinavian Ice Sheet had a single dome located over the northern Baltic with a thickness exceeding 3 km. It may have joined with a smaller ice sheet over the British Isles. Crustal depression beneath the Scandinavian Ice Sheet reached 800 m, whereas depression under the Laurentide Ice Sheet exceeded 1 km. The total (global) volume of glacier ice in the minimum reconstruction is estimated to be equivalent to about 130 m of sea-level decline (Hughes et al. 1981).
Ice sheets in the maximum reconstruction were thicker and extended far out onto the continental shelves. This is most noticeable in Arctic Canada and on the Barents Sea and Kara Sea shelves of northern Europe. The Laurentide Ice Sheet consisted of a single dome over Hudson Bay that was nearly 5 km thick, and crustal depression exceeded 1.2 km. The Scandinavian Ice Sheet was only slightly thicker compared with the minimum reconstruction, however, with as much as 1 km of crustal depression. The total volume of glacier ice in the maximum reconstruction is equivalent to around 160 m of sea-level decline.
In Scandinavia, it now appears that an extensive, marine-based ice
sheet was present in the Barents Sea region. Widespread glacial deposits,
ice-push deformation, and submarine ridges (moraines) demonstrate continuous
ice-sheet coverage from Norway to Svalbard during the last glaciation--see
Fig. I-3. The distribution of Holocene crustal rebound indicates that
the ice sheet was probably thickest on the shelf between Svalbard and Franz
Josef Land--see Fig. I-4.
On the other hand, both maximum and minimum reconstructions
have been proposed for the North Sea region. Based on latest
evidence from sea-floor sediments, it now appears that an
ice-free region existed on the North Sea shelf between Norway and
Scotland after 22,000 years BP--see Fig. I-5. During the previous
interval of 29,000 to 22,000 years BP, the North Sea experienced
its maximum Vistulian glaciation, as the British and Scandinavian
ice sheets coalesced (Sejrup et al. 1994).
In North America, a minimum reconstruction for the
Laurentide Ice Sheet seems to be favored at present, although
debate continues. The two-dome model for structure of the ice
sheet is certainly accepted by many, but not all, on the basis of
geomorphic zonation of glacial landforms and deposits (see Fig.
8-7 from lectures).
Most controversy concerns the extent of the last glaciation in
the Arctic region--see Fig. I-6, where geomorphic evidence
for glaciation is scarce, but crustal rebound is substantial. The
lack of glacial geomorphic features could be a result of
cold-based ice sheets, which had minimal geomorphic influence.
Other regions of uncertain ice-sheet extents during the last
glaciation include the High Plains of Alberta and Montana, the
offshore southern New England continental shelf, and the possible
connection between Greenland and Laurentide ice sheets. The
existence of floating ice shelves in the Labrador Sea and
Norwegian Sea is also a strongly debated possibility.
By late Vistulian time, the Kara Sea ice sheet was much reduced, whereas the Barents and Fennoscandian ice sheets reached their maximum sizes. Why the Kara Sea ice sheet should be out of phase with the Barents and Fennoscandian ice sheets is a mystery. Thus the maximum geographic expansion of ice sheets did not take place simultaneously in all parts of the world. Temporal uncertainty about ice sheet expansions makes estimates of global ice volumes and sea-level effects difficult.
In light of these uncertainties, maximum and minimum models have been
developed for ice-sheet volume and sea-level changes--see Table I-1.
The surface area of the modern ocean is approximately 361 million km².
In order to convert glacier ice volume into sea-level equivalent, two
steps are necessary.
Based on Hughes et al. (1981).
Glaciation of the Arctic region
The minimum and maximum reconstructions differ most in the
circum-Arctic continental shelf areas. As with many scientific
controversies, the true nature of the last great ice sheets is
probably somewhere between these two extremes. The minimum
reconstruction is supported mainly by geomorphic evidence for
multiple-dome, ice-sheet glaciation on land. The maximum model
is, conversely, favored by the record of postglacial crustal
rebound around individual centers of glaciation. Better
reconstruction of the Laurentide and Scandinavian Ice Sheets will
depend to a large extent on increased knowledge of glaciation
from the continental shelf areas.Timing of glaciation
Another problem in reconstructing the volume of ice sheets is the question of timing. It is generally thought that glaciation reached its greatest global extent during the late Wisconsin, about 18,000 to 22,000 years ago. However, it now appears that individual ice masses had quite different histories of expansion and contraction. The timing of North Sea glaciation was noted above. Another case is glaciation of the Kara Sea and Pechora Sea shelves as well as northern Russia--see Fig. I-7. Maximum expansion of the ice sheet in this region is recognized during the middle and early Vistulian, prior to 35,000 years ago (Mangerud et al. 1999; Svendsen et al. 1999; Polyak et al. 2000). The Kara Sea ice sheet experienced major advances 90,000 and 60,000 years ago according to latest information from northern Russia (Mangerud, pers. comm. 2001).
Jan Mangerud (2001).Ice volume and sea-level equivalent
During the Quaternary, global sea level rose and fell
primarily in response to the volume of water stored on land in
ice sheets and glaciers. Many attempts have been made to measure
the size of past ice sheets and corresponding changes in eustatic
sea level. The numerical results depend on assumptions about the
areas and thicknesses (volumes) of ice sheets. These estimates
are complicated by isostatic depression and rebound both beneath
the ice sheets and in the ocean basins. Further uncertainties
are caused by asynchronous growth and decay of ice sheets in
different parts of the world and by a lack of good dating control
for different phases of glaciation.
Note: this method does not take into account any possible
crustal depression or rebound either beneath ice sheets or on the
sea floor. Furthermore, it does not include correction for any
change in the area of the ocean due to higher or lower sea level.
Nonetheless, reasonable approximations can be determined for sea-level
changes resulting from glaciation.
Table I-1. Glacier ice volumes for modern and late Wisconsin glaciations (values in million km³). Glacier/Ice Sheet Modern Min. Wiscon. Max. Wiscon.
Laurentide 0.4 30.9 34.8
Greenland 2.6 2.9 5.6
Scandinavian 0.2 7.3 7.5
Barents-Kara 0.1 1.0 6.8
East Antarctic 20.0 24.2 24.2
West Antarctic 7.0 13.5 13.5
All others 2.6 4.4 5.4
Totals 32.9 84.2 97.8
Glacial sea-level exercise
References

Return to icehome or
schedule.
ES 331/767 © by J.S. Aber (2006).