Giant iceberg spotted south of Australia

December 9, 2009
A NASA satellite image of iceberg B17B (C), some 19 kilometres (12 miles) long, floating off West Australia

Enlarge

A NASA satellite image of iceberg B17B (C), some 19 kilometres (12 miles) long, floating southwest of the West Australian coast, between Australia and Antarctica.

A monster iceberg nearly twice the size of Hong Kong island has been spotted drifting towards Australia in what scientists Wednesday called a once-in-a-century event.

Australian glaciologist Neal Young pinpointed the slab, which is some 19 kilometres (12 miles) long and about 1,700 kilometres south of the country, using satellite imagery.

He said he was not aware of such a large iceberg being found in the area since the days when 19th century clipper ships sailed the trade route between Britain and Australia.

"I don't recall any mention of one for a long, long time," Young, of the Australian Antarctic Division and the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre, told AFP.

"I'm guessing you would probably have to go back to the times of the clipper ships."

Young said the iceberg measured about 140 square kilometres (54 square miles). Hong Kong island's surface area is about 80 square kilometres.

The glaciologist said the iceberg carved off the Antarctic about 10 years ago and had been slowly floating round the icy continent before taking the unusual route north.

He said the "very, very big" iceberg was originally about 400 square kilometres but then split into two smaller pieces.

"This one has survived in the open ocean for about a year," he said. "In that time it's slowly been coming up to the north and north east in the general direction of Western Australia."

The finding comes after two large icebergs were spotted further east, off Australia's Macquarie Island, followed by more than 100 smaller ice chunks heading towards New Zealand.

Young described the icebergs as uncommon, but said they could become more frequent if sea temperatures rise through global warming.

A long tongue of land that points northwards towards South America, the Antarctic peninsula has been hit by greater warming than almost any other region on Earth.

Scientists say that in the past 50 years, Antarctic temperatures have risen by 2.5 degrees Celsius (4.5 degrees Fahrenheit), around six times the global average.

(c) 2009 AFP

4.1 /5 (17 votes)  

Filter


Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.


Display comments: newest first

Buyck
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 2.7 / 5 (10)
"called a once-in-a-century event." Sorry in the near future it will be once in a decade event or even less. I hope that "the Kopenhagen top" will make some important decisions.
Parsec
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 2.5 / 5 (13)
I wonder what the AGW denier crowd will make of this. Probably call the whole thing a hoax made up for the media. Or claim that since it happened a century ago that proves that the climate is cooling.

Whatever it is it will be interesting. Idiocy is always fun to watch.
gwrede
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 3.3 / 5 (9)
Quick, stick a flag on it, clear an airstrip, and start selling tourist trips!! Make a fortune! Then later sell it to the Arabs for drinking water.
Doschx
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 3.5 / 5 (11)
OH NOES! Who would have ever thought that a complex system like a life-bearing planet could experience changes in temperature!? It's all happened before, and will again. That being said, humanity might be able to influence it a bit, but I think what we need are adaptations to the conditions, not the conditions forced to adapt to us.
Velanarris
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 3.2 / 5 (13)
I wonder what the AGW denier crowd will make of this. Probably call the whole thing a hoax made up for the media. Or claim that since it happened a century ago that proves that the climate is cooling.

Whatever it is it will be interesting. Idiocy is always fun to watch.


I hope you enjoy this response.

Icebergs are not a cause for concern and without some sort of tie to global warming hypothesis, completely unrelated to AGW.

Now if you'd like to try to tease how an errant iceberg is related to carbon emissions, go right ahead. Make sure to show your work.
otto1923
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 3.3 / 5 (9)
"I'm guessing you would probably have to go back to the times of the clipper ships."
So they were more common some 200 years ago? That would mean the earth is cooling off?
RayCherry
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
Insufficient evidence either way. Cutters could never accurately measure a moving object in the water from sea level, so we don't have empirical evidence that such iceburgs, (of this volume), were in fact 'common' two or three hundred years ago. This is the first in living memory, and the first of its dimension to travel so far from its origins and get recorded by satelite imagery.

The question of it's volume is less interesting that the current that has moved it to rapidly from the point where it broke off. Larger iceburgs have broken away in the past few years, (one the size of Newfoundland just a couple of years ago), but this one has travelled quickly and survived the warmer waters as a result.

What's new about that? Indicating a possible new (or recovering) fast, cold water current?
nuge
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 4 / 5 (9)
"I'm guessing you would probably have to go back to the times of the clipper ships."
So they were more common some 200 years ago? That would mean the earth is cooling off?


NO, that is clearly NOT what the guy was saying. He never said they were COMMON 200 years ago, just that that's how long it has probably been since there was a report of one like this. Honestly, do you people even read the articles before you post this garbage?
NotAsleep
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 3.3 / 5 (7)
I wonder what the AGW denier crowd will make of this. Probably call the whole thing a hoax made up for the media. Or claim that since it happened a century ago that proves that the climate is cooling.


Are you implying that this is clear, irrefutable evidence of global warming? While I'm not a "disbeliever", I also er on the side of caution when it comes to bashing people with opposing opinions. Idiocy is creating a fact based on conjecture
christian_physicist
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 3 / 5 (9)
Don't conflate independent concepts Parsec. Plenty of people who believe that man's contribution to global temperatures is minimal still believe that temperatures are rising - for purely natural reasons. There are many facets to this issue.

You're also doing bad science yourself. You have no idea if this iceberg would have still broken off if temperatures were one degree cooler. No idea. You cannot attribute any one single event, with certainty, to global warming.

jimbo92107
Dec 09, 2009

Rank: 4.6 / 5 (9)
I found a ping-pong ball, therefore the world is about to be inundated with ping-pong balls.

Big iceberg. Small sample size.

Global climate change is an entirely different matter. Climatologists have been accumulating data on climate for many years. That huge pile of data points to some disturbing changes that are already underway and appear to be increasing at an accelerating rate. To ignore such information is worse than reckless, it is begging nature to press the Smite button on humanity.

It's as if the proverbial frog in the tea pot received an email saying, "You better jump out of that tea pot, it's heating up." And the frog says, "Nah, feels fine to me."

Good luck, Froggy...
CarolinaScotsman
Dec 12, 2009

Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Uh... wouldn't it require cooler water temperatures for the ice to survive longer?
fixer
Dec 13, 2009

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Ever stick a bit of putty on a ball then wonder why the ball moves?
The Earth spins in equilibrium because it is balanced like a top.
Huge masses moving into places they shouldn't be are NOT good news.
PinkElephant
Dec 14, 2009

Rank: not rated yet
Uh... wouldn't it require cooler water temperatures for the ice to survive longer?


Who (apart from you) said the ice is surviving longer?
Velanarris
Dec 14, 2009

Rank: not rated yet
Ever stick a bit of putty on a ball then wonder why the ball moves?
The Earth spins in equilibrium because it is balanced like a top.
Huge masses moving into places they shouldn't be are NOT good news.

You really need to get a sense of scale. That iceberg is less than one billionth of the weight of the Earth, you're in no danger of precessional displacement due to a single iceberg of slightly larger than average size. Especially when it simply displaces the water weight that is already present.
fixer
Dec 14, 2009

Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
Not so, it also subtracts it's mass from where it should be.
Add that to the rest of the ice that has moved from the pole towards the equator and you have a failing scenario.
As well as precession you also have to consider nutation, and the fact that the Earths crust is relatively thin.
You will be aware that the crust floats on magma, so the iceberg is a much larger factor than you think.
PinkElephant
Dec 14, 2009

Rank: not rated yet
@fixer

from what I understand the iceberg in question wasn't originally land-bound ice. It was part of an ice shelf, which floated on water.

Also, Velanarris is correct that the small size and transient nature of this event won't have any detectable influence on Earth's rotation.

I can see where you might be noticing a rather more long-term problem (e.g. what happens if all/most of Antarctica and Greenland melted off into the oceans) -- but we are unlikely to see anything like that within the next couple of centuries. Granted, loss of ice shelves would be just the first step in that process, and so these "record" calving events might well be harbingers of other things to come.
fixer
Dec 15, 2009

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
I certainly hope it will be a couple of centuries, the last comparable event (9600 bc)took out 95% of the population!
The "time of the wandering sun" is a legend that exists on every continent and is not to be sneered at, AGW subscribers take note.
PinkElephant
Dec 15, 2009

Rank: not rated yet
No, nothing that extreme either can or will happen. The Earth itself spins like a huge gyroscope; the stuff that happens on its surface is completely insignificant compared to the bulk of the planet. Consider that it's more than 6,000 km from where you're standing just to reach the center of the planet: and most of the stuff along the way is far denser and heavier than anything you'll find on the surface, and it's all spun up and keeps going pretty much no matter what. Plus, the Moon adds a stabilizing influence that controls the Earth's precession drift over ultra-long periods (we're talking millions of years here.)

Still, for us surface-dwellers mass-melting glaciers do spell a kind of peril: rising sea levels, and a jump in volcanism/earthquakes due to rebounding crust. Not, however, for another century or two.
Velanarris
Dec 15, 2009

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
I certainly hope it will be a couple of centuries, the last comparable event (9600 bc)took out 95% of the population!
The "time of the wandering sun" is a legend that exists on every continent and is not to be sneered at, AGW subscribers take note.

What in the hell are you talking about?
fixer
Dec 15, 2009

Rank: not rated yet
Studies in the 60's on magnetic anomolies in the earths crust demonstrated that the crust has "skidded" around the magma ball at least twice, as shown by the magnetic field imprinted in the geology pointing many degrees from north.
Modern rock has its magnetic field north and south as expected, but older rock points to a magnetic north about 2000 miles from it's current position.
I have too much time on my hands, I read a lot.
Keep an open mind regarding place names, but have a look here. http://www.flem-ath.com/.
This may be a bit of artistic licence, but it is based on solid research.
PinkElephant
Dec 15, 2009

Rank: not rated yet
No fixer, that's not a signature of the crust "skidding". It is a signature of magnetic pole moving. The magnetic field of our planet is not a constant entity. There have been numerous times in the past when the polarity of the field reversed. The magnetic poles move all the time. Even now, there are indications that a magnetic field reversal may be under way.
fixer
Dec 15, 2009

Rank: not rated yet
In order for the poles to have moved, there must be a difference in position between the magnetic pole generated by the magma and it's position on the surface.
If it drifts slowly then it would be measurable over a couple of hundred years and we have the data from maps to show this isn't so.
No so true with portolans however, these ancient maps show things differently and the geology agrees with them.
Polarity in rock means that poles have been fixed for millenia, If this no longer lines up with modern polar positions then this can only mean a sudden and violent shift.
Rank 4.1 /5 (17 votes)
Related Stories
Relevant PhysicsForums posts
  • Discrepancy between oxygen and carbon-dioxide levels
    createdFeb 09, 2012
  • where gems are found in the world
    createdFeb 09, 2012
  • Wind Waves in Reservoir ~ Wind run-up and Wind set-up
    createdFeb 08, 2012
  • Balance of oxygen in the atmosphere
    createdFeb 01, 2012
  • The case for a methanol-based economy
    createdJan 30, 2012
  • Weather in a rotating cylinder
    createdJan 25, 2012
  • More from Physics Forums - Earth

More news stories

Humans may have helped the decline of African rainforests 3000 years ago

(PhysOrg.com) -- Large areas of rainforests in Central Africa mysteriously disappeared over three thousand years ago, to be replaced by savannas. The prevailing theory has been that the cause was a change ...

Space & Earth / Environment

created 21 hours ago | popularity 4.3 / 5 (12) | comments 12 | with audio podcast report

Could Venus be shifting gear?

(PhysOrg.com) -- ESA’s Venus Express spacecraft has discovered that our cloud-covered neighbour spins a little slower than previously measured. Peering through the dense atmosphere in the infrared, the ...

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created 17 hours ago | popularity 5 / 5 (7) | comments 7 | with audio podcast

NASA budget will axe Mars deal with Europe: scientists

US President Barack Obama's budget proposal to be submitted next week for 2013 will cut NASA's budget by 20 percent and eliminate a major partnership with Europe on Mars exploration, scientists said Thursday.

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created 20 hours ago | popularity 5 / 5 (2) | comments 18

Two new moons for Jupiter

Advances in technology have lead to the discovery of new planets outside of our Solar System, and now even new moons in our own backyard.

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created 17 hours ago | popularity 4 / 5 (1) | comments 7

Mars Science Laboratory computer issue resolved

(PhysOrg.com) -- Engineers have found the root cause of a computer reset that occurred two months ago on NASA's Mars Science Laboratory and have determined how to correct it.

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created 18 hours ago | popularity 4.7 / 5 (6) | comments 3 | with audio podcast


Anonymous knocks CIA website offline (Update)

The website of the Central Intelligence Agency was inaccessible on Friday after the hacker group Anonymous claimed to have knocked it offline.

Google users warned of threat to smartphone wallets

Users of Google smartphone wallets were being warned on Friday that there is a way to crack pass codes intended to thwart thieves from going on illicit shopping sprees.

New error-correcting codes guarantee the fastest possible rate of data transmission

Error-correcting codes are one of the triumphs of the digital age. They’re a way of encoding information so that it can be transmitted across a communication channel — such as an optical fiber o ...

New power source discovered

(PhysOrg.com) -- Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and RMIT University have made a breakthrough in energy storage and power generation.

Small modular reactor design could be a 'SUPERSTAR'

(PhysOrg.com) -- Though most of today's nuclear reactors are cooled by water, we've long known that there are alternatives; in fact, the world's first nuclear-powered electricity in 1951 came from a reactor ...

The power of estrogen -- male snakes attract other males

A new study has shown that boosting the estrogen levels of male garter snakes causes them to secrete the same pheromones that females use to attract suitors, and turned the males into just about the sexiest ...