I’ve explained several times in the course of media comments that, when it comes to the sea level rise that you experience, it really matters where the water comes from. This point still seems to cause confusion so I’ve written a super fast post on it.
Waves from the Storm Surge that hit Denmark in October 2023 credit: Sebastian Pelt
We very often talk about a metre or two of sea level rise by the end of the century, but in general that refers to global average sea level. And much like a global mean temperature rise doesn’t tell you very much about the kind of temperature changes you will experience in your location due to weather or climate, global mean sea level is also not very informative when talking about preparing your local community for sea level rise. There are other local factors that are important, (see below), but here I’m going to mostly focus on gravity.
Imagine that sea level is more or less stable around the earth (which it was, more or less, before the start of the twentieth century). Just like the moon causes tides because its gravity exerts a pull on the oceans, the ice sheets are large masses and their gravity also attracts ocean water, so the average sea level is higher closer to Greenland and to Antarctica. But there is only a finite volume of water in the oceans, so a higher sea level close to the ice sheets means lower sea levels further away in the tropics for example.
As the ice sheet melts and gets smaller, its gravitational pull becomes smaller so the average height of the sea around Greenland and Antarctica is lower than it was before, but the water gets redistributed around the earth until it is in equilibrium with the gravitational pull of the ice sheets again. The sea level in other places is therefore much higher than it would have been without that gravitational effect.
And in general, the further away from an ice mass you are, the more these gravitational processes affect your local sea level change. In Northern Europe, it often surprises people (also here in Denmark) to learn that while Greenland has a small influence on our local sea level, it’s not very much because we live relatively close to it, however the loss of ice from Antarctica is much more important in affecting our local sea level rise.
Currently, most of the ice contributing to sea level is from the small glaciers around the world, and here too there is an effect. The melt of Alaska and the Andes are more important to our sea level than the Alps or Norwegian glaciers because we are far from the American glaciers but close to the European ones.
This figure below illustrates the processes:
Processes important for local sea level include changes in land height as ice melts but also the redistribution of water as the gravitational attraction of the ice sheets is reduced. The schematic representation is from the Arctic assessment SWIPA report Figure 9.1 from SWIPA 2017
This is partly why the EU funded PROTECT project on cryosphere contributions to sea level rise, which I am currently working on, has an emphasis on the science to policymakers pipeline. We describe the whole project in this Frontiers paper, which includes a graphic explaining what affects your local sea level.
As you can see, it very much depends on what time and spatial scale you’re looking at, with the two ice sheets affecting sea level on the longest time scales.
Figure 1 from Durand et al., 2021 Illustration of the processes that contribute to sea level change with respect to their temporal and spatial scales. These cover local and short term effects like storm surges, waves and tides to global and long-term changes due to the melting of ice sheets.
In the course of the project some of the partners have produced this excellent policy briefing, which should really be compulsory for anyone interested in coastal developments over the next decades to centuries. The most important points are worth highlighting here:
We expect that 2m of global mean sea level rise is more or less baked in, it will be very difficult to avoid this, even with dramatic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. But the timescale, as in when that figure will be reached, could be anything from the next hundred years to the next thousand.
Figure from PROTECT policy briefing showing how the time when average global sea level reaches 2m is strongly dependend on emissions pathway – but also that different parts of the world will reach 2m of sea level rise at very different times, with the tropics and low latitudes in general getting there first.
What the map shows is that the timing at which any individual place on earth reaches 2 m is strongly dependent on where on earth it is. In general lower latitudes close to the equator will get to 2m before higher latitudes, and while there are ocean circulation and other processes that are important here – to a large extent your local sea level is controlled by how close to the ice sheets you are and how quickly those ice sheets will lose their ice.
There are other processes that are important – especially locally, including how much the land you are on is rising or sinking, as well as changes in ocean and atmosphere circulation. I may write about these a bit more later.
Feel free to comment or ask questions in the comments below or you can catch me on mastodon:
Hands-up who is looking for a new and very cool job in ice sheet and climate modelling and developing new machine learning tools?
REMINDER: 4 days left to apply for this PhD position with me at DMI looking at Antarctic Ice Sheet mass budget processes and developing new Machine Learning models and processes.
UPDATE 2: The PhD position on Antarctica is now live here. Deadline for Applications 18th February!
UPDATE: It’s not technically a PRECISE job, but if you’re a student in Copenhagen and are looking for a part-time study job (Note that this is a specific limited hours job-type for students in higher education in Dnmark) , DMI have got 2 positions open right now, at least one of which will be dedicated to very related work – namely working out how well climate and ice sheet models work when compared with satellite data. It’s part of a European Space Agency funded project that I and my ace colleague Shuting Yang, PI on the new TipESM project, are running. Apply. Apply. Apply…
This is a quick post to announce that our recruitment drive is now open. We’re split across three institutes. We are two in Copenhagen, ourselves at DMI and the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen, and then the University of Northumbria in Newcastle, UK.
The PI at the Niels Bohr Institute is the supremely talented Professor Christine Hvidberg, aided by material scientist and head of the institute, Joachim Mathiesen. I am leading for DMI, and the Northumbria work is led by Professor Hilmar Gudmundsson. We are also very fortunate to have the talents of Aslak Grindsted, Helle Schmidt, Nicolas Rathmann and Nicolaj Hansen already on board.
The project is already very cohesive between institutes, we’ve been working together for some time already and know each other well.
We have a good budget for travel and exchanges between groups, workshops, symposia, summer schools and the like, but perhaps more importantly, all the positions are focused at the very cutting edge (apologies for the cliche) of climate and ice sheet modelling. We are developing not just existing models and new ways to parameterise physical processes, but we also want to focus on machine learning to incorporate new processes, speed-up the production of projections for sea level rise, not forgetting an active interface with the primary stakeholders who will need to use the outcomes of the project to prepare society for the coming changes.
There’s also a healthy fieldwork component (particularly in Greenland, I don’t rule out Antarctica either), and if you’re that way inclined, some ice core isotope work too. So, if you’re looking for a new direction, feel free to give me a shout. I’m happy to talk further.
Links to all the openings, will be updated as they come out, these are currently open and have deadlines at the end of January:
The International Cryosphere Climate Initiative has put together a new petition for scientists to sign. I’m a little sceptical that this kind of “clicktivism” makes much difference, but there are many many lobbyists from polluting industries at the COP28 and rather fewer scientists. And how else to draw attention to what is one of the most visible and urgent effects of climate change?
The petition is aimed at:
” all cryosphere scientists globally; as well as those working on emissions pathways: and those in the social sciences with research on adaptation, loss and damage and health impacts. This includes research and field associates, as well as doctoral students — because you are the future, and will be dealing with the impacts of climate change in the global cryosphere throughout your lives, as well as your professional careers.”
ICCI
The list of signatories so far already includes many rather senior scientists, so take this as a challenge to add your signature if you work in the cryosphere/climate space. It takes only a minute to sign and there are many familiar names on the list.
I’m not sure how else to emphasise the urgency of real action at COP 28.
As a coincidence though, and as I posted on mastodon the image below appears in Momentum, a plug-in on my web browser with a new photo every day. Today’s is this beautiful image of the Marmolada glacier in Italy by Vicentiu Solomon.
It’s a gorgeous but very sad picture – this is one of the faster disappearing #glaciers in the world and to hear more about the consequences of cryosphere loss, take a look at the policy brief produced by the PROTECT project on the sea level rise contributions from glaciers and ice sheets. It also contains this eye opening graphic:
A 2 metre rise in sea level is almost inevitable. The uncertainty is on the timing which is somewhere between one century and the next 2 thousand years, depending on where you are in the world, but, more importantly given COP28, how fast fossil fuels are phased out. You can download the whole thing here.
UPDATE THE MORNING AFTER (21/10/2023): water levels are now falling rapidly to normal and the worst of the gales are past, so it’s time for the clean-up and to take stock of what worked and where it went wrong. It’s quite clear that we had a hundred year storm flood event in many regions, though the official body that determines this has not yet announced it. Their judgement is important as it will trigger emergency financial help with the cost of the clean-up.
In most places the dikes, sandbags and barriers mostly worked to keep water out, but in a few places they could not deal with the water and temporary dikes (filled pvc tubes of water km long in some cases) actually burst under the pressure, emergency sluice gates and pumps could also not withstand the pressure in one or two places.
Trains and ferries were delayed or cancelled and a large ship broke free from the quayside at Frederikshavn and is still to be shepherded back into place.
Public broadcaster DR has a good overview of the worst affected places here.
Water levels reached well over 2m in multiple places around the Danish coast and in some places, water measurements actually failed during the storm..
In other places, measurements show clearly that the waters are pretty rapidly declining. So. A foretaste of the future perhaps? We will expect to see more of these “100 year flood” events happening, not because we will have more storms necessarily but because of the background sea level rising. It has already risen 20cm since 1900, 10cm of that was since 1991, the last few years global mean sea level has risen around 4 – 4.5 mm per year. The smart thing to do is to learn from this flood to prepare better for the next one.
But we as a society also to assess how we handle it when a “hundred year” flood happens every other year…
-Fin-
Like much of northern Europe we have been battening down the hatches, almost literally, against storm Babet in Denmark this week. DMI have issued a rare red weather warning for southern Denmark, including the area I often go kayaking in.
Weather warning issued by DMI 20th October 2023 There are three levels, blue signifies the lowest, yellow is medium and the highest is red, which is rather rarely issued. The boxed text applies to the red zome around southern Denmark and states it relates to a water level of between 1.4 and 1.8m above the usual.
I should probably start by saying that this storm is not caused by climate change, though of course in a warming atmosphere, it is likely to have been intensified by it, and the higher the sea level rises on average, the more destructive a storm surge becomes, and the more frequent the return period!
Neither are storm surges unknown in Denmark -there is a whole interesting history to be written there, not least because the great storm of 1872 brought a huge storm surge to eastern Denmark and probably led directly to the founding of my employer, the Danish Meterological Institute. My brilliant DMI colleague Martin Stendel persuasively argues that the current storm surge event is very similar to the 1872 event in fact, suggesting that maybe we have learnt something in the last 150 years…
However, back to today: the peak water is expected tonight, and the reason why storm surges affect southern and eastern Denmark differently to western Denmark is pretty clear in the prognosis shown below for water height (top produced by my brilliant colleagues in the storm surge forecasting section naturally) and winds (bottom, produced by my other brilliant colleagues in numerical weather prediction):
Basically, the strong westerly winds associated with the storm pushed a large amount of water from the North Sea through the Kattegat and past the Danish islands into the Baltic Sea over the last few days. Imagine the Baltic is a bath tub, if you push the water one way it will then flow back again when you stop pushing. Which is exactly what it is now doing, but now, it is also pushed by strong winds from the east as shown in the forecast shown above. These water is being driven even higher against the coasts of the southern and eastern danish islands.
These kind of storm surges are sometimes known as silent storm surges by my colleagues in the forecasting department because they often occur after the full fury of the storm has passed. I wrote about one tangentially in 2017. This time, adding to the chaos, are those gale force easterly winds, forecast to be 20 – 23 m/s, or gale force 9 on the Beaufort Scale if you prefer old money, which will certainly bring big waves that are even more problematic to deal with that a slowly rising sea, AND torrential rain. So while the charts on dmi.dk which allow us to follow the rising seas (see below for a screengrab of a tide gauge in an area I know fairly well from the sea side), water companies, coastal defences and municipalities also need to prepare for large amounts of rain, that rivers and streams will struggle to evacuate.
Water height forecast for Køge a town in Eastern Sjælland not far from Copenhagen. The yellow line indicates the 20 year return period for this height. Blue line shows measurements and dashed black lines show the forecast from the DMI ocean model. You can find more observations here.
In Køge the local utilities company is asking people to avoid running washing machines, dishwashers and to avoid flushing toilets over night where possible to avoid overwhelming sewage works when the storm and the rain is at the maximum.
This brings me to the main lessons that I think we can learn from this weather (perhaps super-charged by climate) event.
Firstly, it’s the value of preparedness, and learning from past events. There will certainly be damage from this event, thanks to previous events, we have a system of dykes and other defence measures in place to minimse that damage and we know where the biggest impacts are likely to be.
Secondly, the miracle, or quiet revolution if you will, of weather and storm forecasting means we can prepare for these events days before they happen, allowing the deployment of temporary barrages, evacuations and the stopping of electricity and other services before they become a problem.
This is even more important for the 3rd lesson, that weather emergencies rarely happen alone – it’s the compound nature of these events that makes them challenging – not just rising seas but also winds and heavy rain. And local conditions matter – water levels in western Denmark are frequently higher, the region is much more tidally influenced than the eastern Danish waters. This is basically another way of saying that risk is about hazard and vulnerability.
Finally, there are the behavioural measures that mean people can mitigate the worst impacts by changing how they behave when disaster strikes. Of course, this stuff doesn’t happen by itself. It requires the slightly dull but worthy services to be in place, for different agencies to communicate with each other and for a bit of financial head room so far-sighted agencies can invest in measures “just in case”. We are fortunate indeed that municipalities have a legal obligation to prepare for climate change and that local utilities are mostly locally owned on a cooporative like basis – rather than having to be profit-making enterprises for large shareholders..
This piece is already too long, but there is one more aspect to consider. The harbour at Hesnæe Havn has just recorded a 100 year event, that is a storm surge like this would be expected to occur once ever hundred years, in this case the water is now 188cm. The previous record of 170cm was set in 2017. We need to prepare for rising seas and the economic costs they will bring. The sea will slowly eat away at Denmark’s coasts, but the frequency of storm surges is going to change – 20cm of sea level rise can turn a 100 year return event into a 20 year return event and a 20 year return event into an ever year event.
Screenshot of the observations of sea level from Hesnæs
We need to start having the conversation NOW about how we’re going to handle that disruption to our coastlines and towns.
We are expanding quite rapidly at DMI currently – part of a strategic plan to ensure that we are primed for a generational shift at DMI, but also reflecting some of the themes I touched on yesterday – an expansion into climate services and the development of new machine learning based models and advanced statistical techniques for weather and climaet applications. Note also that the remote sensing part of NCKF
UPDATE: A new position advert has been added:
0) Climate Scientist with Focus on Decadal Climate Prediction
Our sister units also have some interesting postings out that would also crossover with the work we do in our section on the climate of Denmark and Greenland.
4) Remote sensing and/or machine learning specialist for automated sea ice classification from satellite data – building on the very successful project ASIP
We are expanding quite rapidly at DMI currently – part of a strategic plan to ensure that we are primed for a generational shift at DMI, but also reflecting some of the themes I touched on yesterday – an expansion into climate services and the development of new machine learning based models and advanced statistical techniques for weather and climaet applications. Note also that the remote sensing part of NCKF
UPDATE: A new position advert has been added:
0) Climate Scientist with Focus on Decadal Climate Prediction
Our sister units also have some interesting postings out that would also crossover with the work we do in our section on the climate of Denmark and Greenland.
4) Remote sensing and/or machine learning specialist for automated sea ice classification from satellite data – building on the very successful project ASIP
Climate adaptation will also most likely (going by previous history), be unevenly spread and probably not focussed on those feeling the biggest impacts, but those most able to pay for it.
This is something I’ve been pondering for a while, and I’m not really sure how to grasp it, but perhaps more and better work with the social scientists is necessary?
I was struck yesterday by this related snippet from the IPCC AR6 WGII report, posted by David Ho (and I gather courtesy Eric Rostrom), pointing out that heatwave impacts will be unevenly distributed between high and low income people.
At the same time, I also read an interesting piece in the Danish newspaper this weekend suggesting that heatwave exposure is a new marker of class, even in Europe. With the working class toiling in fields, roads, kitchens and on building sites, while the higher educated white collar professionals both able to take advantage of air conditioning and to afford time off in cooler places. This is not a new argument. But it is yet another argument for unions and robust government regulation to try to limit heatwave morbidity and mortality where this is possible. Trades unions may not be able to solve all problems, but they can definitely help when it comes to working conditions!
On a similar note, but outside Europe, the Economist has an unexpectedly excellent piece on how meteorology can help to mitigate weather and climate driven disasters . The whole piece is worth a read as it very much aligns with developments I can see at DMI. They point out for example the great possibilities offered by AI methods in weather forecasting, and how they can be applied to climate models (something I hope to start working on this year), as well as the dangers that AI could be used to undermine the robust national infrastructure that machine learning models are in fact built on.
However, the most important point is that so often, the main challenge is getting extreme weather warnings and other important information out to people affected.
“24 hours’ notice of a destructive weather event could cut damage by 30%, and that a $800m investment in early-warning systems for developing countries could prevent annual losses of $3bn-16bn.”
No breakthroughs are required to put this right, just some modest investment, detailed planning, focused discussion and enough political determination to overcome the inevitable institutional barriers. It is not an effort in the Promethean tradition of MANIAC’s [sic – an early pioneering weather supercomputer] begetters; it will neither set the world on fire nor model the ways in which it is already smouldering. But it should save thousands of lives and millions of livelihoods.
And this is probably generally true of the way we should think about climate change adaptation in the near and short term: how to leverage the best possible information to help make decisions and nudge behaviour to remove people from harm.
I was talking to some friends today about climate change – in the light of the latest #AMOC paper, suggesting a tipping point. I’m far from an expert on AMOC so if you’re here for that I suggest this comprehensive piece on real climate from Stefan Rahmstorf.
It’s been hot, in short and even if July has been cooler and rainy in Denmark, May and June were hot and record dry..
And it’s fair to say that, as when I’m asked why, or similar questions by journalists, there is an almost overwhelming temptation to say “we told you so”. I think that’s what Antonio Guttieres is getting at here too.
There’s of global boiling is upon us. Apparently. It certainly felt like it on my summer holiday this year…
However, that’s not what I was mostly musing on. Given the apocalyptic heatwaves, strange patterns of warming in the ocean and the Antarctic sea ice loss, it feels a little like end of days.
However, in the long-term (and I do mean really long-term – on the century to millennia scale), we’re facing something more existential. We’re going to lose a lot of Danish land to sea level rise. Exactly how much will largely be determined over the next 20 to 50 years as there’s a pretty clear relationship between greenhouse gases and melting ice.
But we do have time to prepare for it- and most importantly to have some grown up conversations about our priorities as a society. This is going to require a good bit more social and behavioural science. In the medium term, we will need to prepare for ever more storm surges, but adaptation to coastal flooding also falls into the engineering category.
Of course, these local to regional risks still need dealing with and that is largely why my employer has created the awesome Danish climate atlas – to give accurate but also useful climate information to those who need to plan for the future. I suspect an ever greater part of my job will be focused on producing usable projections and climate service information. This is certainly also something we will focus on in the PRECISE project. Being able to make useful sea level rise projections is about more than identifying if an ice sheet is stable* or not, it’s also about how quickly, how likely and how much it is likely to retreat. As we have also focused on at a regional level in the PROTECT project
So that’s ice sheets and sea level. The tl;dr is, we know they’re melting, we still don’t know by how much and how fast they’ll ultimately melt but we still have time to deal with it, at least in wealthy well educated societies like Denmark,.
There is a whole nother discussion to be had about the global south and less equal societies which I don’t feel confident enough to discuss here.
And then there is some evidence that multiple heatwaves could occur concurrently, threatening food production in compound events across several key regions. Perhaps working out how to make the global food chain less vulnerable to disruption at key points should be more of a focus than it is?
And that’s after the latest banditry from Russia, destroying perfectly good foodstocks and the means to distribute them, has given us a clear wake-up call on the interdependence of human society.
(Anders Puck Nielsen a military commentator has an interesting take on that from a strategic point of view here: https://youtu.be/fvPcPZP-6os which is very interesting for Ukraine watchers)
If I were a wise and concerned government I think I’d be thinking about how exactly we’re going to be feeding our population over the next 5-20 years. Where will be able to produce like Spain and Italy today? Or will diets have to change? How do we persuade people to eat more healthily and ensure that food is equitably spread through society?
This is of course also a part of the job of the other working groups, 2 and 3 of the IPCC – and it’s possibly not just an accident or indeed good lobbying that the new IPCC chair, Jim Skea, is a former WG3 coordinator. Perhaps the IPCC also sees that we have now moved into a new world.
So, these are just some of the things I’m thinking about as I prepare to go back to the office after the summer break next week.
As I observed on Mastodon after the IUGG meeting, and online with this excellent heatmap article. Climate science is entering a new phase. It’s the end of the beginning and it’s time to prepare.
*On the subject of ice sheet stability, Jeremy Bassis has an excellent thread on what this does and does not mean over on Mastodon. Worth checking out
The project is led by Professor Christine Hvidberg at the Niels Bohr Institute and there is a really nice interview with her on their website about our plans that’s worth a read. I’m co-PI and lead on surface mass balance processes and coupled climate models within the project so I thought it might be worth giving a quick overview of what we hope to achieve.
TL;DR? We will be improving estimates of and assessing the uncertainties in sea level rise projections from the two big ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica.
Every science proposal has a graphic like this somewhere showing how the whole project hangs together. This is ours…
Slightly longer version: we’re using new approaches from materials science to incorporate “new” physics in ice sheet models. We’re also integrating in-situ observations and satellite data into our model frameworks and using these to train machine-learning tools. My work package will emulate our physics based numerical climate models to expand the ensemble and generate a statistical approach for assessing ice sheet stability as well as investigating important feedbacks between different elements of the earth system. Finally, we (or rather my colleague Christian Rodehacke and his postdoc) will run our coupled climate – ice sheet model (EC-EARTH-PISM), including these advances, to generate new sea level rise projections.
The outputs from all these experiments will be communicated and developed in collaboration with the Danish Klima Atlas (Climate Atlas) to ensure we are focused on the right kind of data and time periods for use by stakeholders and local populations when it comes to adaptation planning.
Current projections of change in average sea level around Denmark from the klima atlas
So why this project?
One of the most iconic images to come out of the last IPCC 6th asessment report (at least in my little corner of the climate science universe) is this one on sea level rise projections out to 2100.
Much of climate science has, at least to some extent been “solved”. At least in the sense that we understand the mechanisms and processes quite well and the remaining uncertainty is to some extent tinkering around the edges, often bound up with uncertainty on scenario, or related to impacts – there’s still quite large uncertainty on what will happen to the Amazon rainforest at different levels of emissions for example. However, sea level rise is really an exception to this. It’s very difficult to be sure that some very unpleasant surprises are really implausible.
The IPCC for example, concluded that sea level rise of 15 metres or more by 2300 can’t be ruled out, even if it seems rather unlikely. And this poses a pretty large problem to planners, politicians, stakeholders and providers of coastal services. Working out how far and how fast we expect the sea to rise is really our challenge.
But there is also a risk of abrupt and extreme sea level rise that could come round the corner to surprise us. However, it’s hard to know how likely this is or even how to evaluate that risk.
Where PRECISE differs is that we have the flexibility within this project to develop new and innovative techniques that we’re not quite sure will work: especially the development of machine learning tools.
The EU science budget is a brilliant thing, but risky research is difficult to get through, the Move Nordisk challenge centres allow us to try really new and, yes, risky techniques. Though climate is a new topic for them, so we’re very much test bunnies in this new phase of funding science for them.
So what are we going to be doing practically?
Measuring snow pack properties in Greenland, with the help of the Lego scientists..
Our partners at NBI include Joachim Mathiesen, Helle Astrid Kjær, Aslak Grinsted and Nicholas Rathmann. They will be focusing on assembling field data from both ice sheets, and developing new physical solutions for ice sheet models based on solutions from materials science. They will be looking at phase field approaches for ice flow, at new solutions for calving and ice fracture and integrating these into ice dynamical models. NBI will also be doing fieldwork to collect new surface mass budget (SMB) data from the ice sheets.
A new ice fracture appears, how to understand and model these is a key part of the NBI contribution in PRECISE project.
The SMB part of the work is part that I’m especially involved in. Not just in modelling SMB with our climate and weather models as we do on the polar portal but also in getting a much better understanding on the uncertainty in these models associated with precipitation (which is much higher than that associated with e.g. temperature, especially when it is snowfall). So new observations with a high time resolution will be key for improving our current snowpack models.
A shallow ice core, in this case sea ice, but part of the fieldwork will focus on taking more of these samples and doing isotope analysis on situ to get high quality data on snowfall accumulation
We will also be working on bringing regional climate emulators into use over both ice sheets to see how varying starting conditions will vary the outcomes. We know that on a chaotic system like weather starting conditions are key and emulators allow us to do many many more experiments than with our physics based numerical codes alone. It’s pretty cutting edge stuff right now but I know several groups are working on this – including this fantastic paper that recently came out of the Delft/Leuven group, which really shows what is possible
Our other collaborator, Hilmar Gudmundsson at University Northumbria Newcastle will be working on implementing these processes in ice sheet models and examining how plausible instability in ice sheet simulations is using ensembles of multiple model simulations. They will also be using and developing their ice shelf emulator to look at basal melting and investigating the potential instabilities in Antarctic ice shelves that could lead to abrupt sea level rise.
The project will receive 42 million Danish kroner in total (about 5 million euros) of which 8 million dkk will fund work at DMI, work to be carried out by 2 postdocs and a PhD student (so if this sounds like something you’d be interested in working on do get in touch) over the next 6 years from September. In fact most of the funding we have received will go directly to early career scientists, there is nothing in the budget for us seniors! Naturally this has some disadvantages, but given the rapidly aging population wihtin Europe and European science, I see it as a positive and we have lots of cool summer schools, bootcamps and other networking activities planned that will hopefully reach out beyonf PRECISE to the rest of the ice sheet – climate community.
Yesterday, I attended a mini conference on power to X and the potential to generate green synthetic fuels in Greenland.
Power to X became a big thing in Denmark a few years ago and the government is keen to promote it. Danish company Topsoe are currently building a green fuel facility in Herning and they have a nice explainer on their website of the concept.
In Greenland the fuels could be anything from hydrogen to methanol (though I learnt methanol is least likely as it requires a CO2 source that Greenland doesn’t have, ammonia seems the most plausible initially).
It was an interesting meeting, lots of different companies, institutions and the Greenlandic MP Aaja Chemnitz as well as academics were in the room. The emphasis was very much on the social and economic aspects of power to X, but as the title implied: Greenland has the potential to be the “world’s largest energy island.” From a local point of view, Greenland has very high per capita emissions and is heavily dependent on energy imports for transport, though a majority of electricity, at least in the south west, is already hydropower.
Many other smaller and more remote communities however are dependent on diesel generators for heating and power as well as for shipping, fishing and flying between communities.* Transitioning away from these fuels will be challenging but the potential for much larger developments is clear.
Head of development at NunaGreen (the recently rebranded and reoriented NunaOil), Rasmus Wendt, emphasised just how cheap and in theory at least, abundant, Greenland hydropower is. Probably some of the cheapest electricity in the world is generated by Greenlandic dams already operating or planned. And indeed the potential is massive. As the ice sheet melts, enormous amounts of water are produced more or less endlessly in Greenland. It will take at least a thousand years to melt the whole ice sheet, even under a high emissions scenario. We’re not going to run out of water soon.
Figure 2 from Aschwanden et al., 2019. Observed 2008 state and simulations of the Greenland Ice Sheet at year 3000. (A) Observed 2008 ice extent (53). (B to D) Likelihood (percentiles) of ice cover as percentage of the ensemble simulations with nonzero ice thickness. Likelihoods less than the 16th percentile are masked. (E) Multiyear composite of observed surface speeds (61). (F to H) Surface speeds from the control simulation. Basin names shown in (A) in clockwise order are southwest (SW), central-west (CW), northwest (NW), north (NO), northeast (NE), and southeast (SE). RCP 2.6 (B and F), RCP 4.5 (C and G), and RCP 8.5 (D and H). Topography in meters above sea level (m a.s.l.) [(A) to (H)].
Wind energy too is extremely underdeveloped but potentially huge in Greenland. The problem is of course, all that potential energy is a long way from the end users as this screenshot from the global wind atlas, shared by energy scenario planner Brian Vad Mathiessen shows well.
Screenshot from the global wind atlas showing wind energy potential in Greenland and the north Atlantic margin of Europe
By sheer coincidence, this morning I stumbled over this article in the Dutch newspaper NRC on mastodon about the large green hydrogen facility currently under construction by Shell in Rotterdam.
It’s a really interesting read – (if you don’t speak Dutch try DeepL translation) and I was struck by many of the same issues being raised there as in the Greenland meeting: lack of trained staff, uncertain commercial environment, cost and competitiveness with other energy sources. Unlike in Greenland, energy in the Netherlands for producing synthetic fuels is scarce, but the market for using the energy is huge and nearby, and given the EU’s ambitions to produce and, crucially, import large amounts of hydrogen fuel by 2030, it seems like many of the important stars are aligning. Importing ammonia to Rotterdam for cracking back into hydrogen seems like it could actually be a viable future for Greenlandic generated fuels in Greenland he medium to long term.
We at DMI are shortly starting a project within the National Centre for Climate Research framework looking at exactly the potential to generate renewable energy from a climate and weather angle. But what I took away from yesterday’s meeting is that while the physical potential in Greenland really is HUGE, the regulatory environment – and probably the local population – is supportive, the economic certainty is not quite there yet.
It felt a bit like being in a bunch of young seabirds clustered on the edge of the cliff, none quite daring to take the flight, in spite of the undoubted rewards. And indeed, this seems the situation in the Netherlands too. I was especially struck by this quote in the NRC piece:
“Another problem is that many parties are just waiting for each other to take the first step so that they themselves dare to go. Producers, for instance, invest only sparingly because they are not sure whether there will soon be customers, and customers in turn hesitate because they are not sure whether the producers will deliver. The classic chicken-and-egg story.” (Translated with DeepL)
Chris Hensen, NRC, 17thnMay 2023 “De Europese waterstofambities zijn groot, maar bedrijven zijn nog altijd afwachtend”
Perhaps the diving in of Shell, a company that can afford to risk investing a billion Euros in a new facility in Rotterdam, is what the development of Power to X needs?
BP, Air liquide and Uniper already have plans to build follow on plants in Rotterdam. Once one of the birds have taken flight, others will surely follow.
Thanks to Aalborg University,and especially my Danish Arctic Research Forum colleague Carina Ren for an interesting and inspiring meeting.
*(As an aside, I was reflecting while on fieldwork just how difficult removing fossil fuels from scientific work in Greenland will be. We rely on petrol generators to power equipment and oil stoves to warm tents. What if we could develop an easy to operate “tabletop” (or even just room sized) electrolysis system to generate clean fuels from e.g. wind energy, that we could burn instead of paraffin and/petrol? I’d invest in that and it would be a quick win for Greenland science.)
Inside of the tent during fieldwork, note the primus stove, running on petrol, for melting ice for water and food and the paraffin powered oven to keep the inside warm and dry while camping.
Sterna Paradisaea 