
Some Glaciers Will Vanish No Matter What, Study Finds
There's news about glaciers, and it's grim.
Regardless of climate mitigation strategies, the world's glaciers are on track to shrink significantly over hundreds of years, according to new study published on Thursday. They're locked in to losing ice.
Even if global temperatures stayed where they are today for the next thousand years, essentially an impossibility, glaciers outside of ice sheets would lose roughly one-third of their mass, researchers estimated.
But there's still hope to avoid the most severe losses, the assessment said. Limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, above the preindustrial average could save about twice as much ice in a millennium than if the planet warmed by 2.7 degrees Celsius, the trajectory the world is currently on for 2100, according to the study.
'Every tenth of a degree less of warming will help preserve glacial ice,' said Lilian Schuster, a glacial modeler at the University of Innsbruck in Austria who helped lead the research, which was published in the journal Science. 'With ambitious climate measures, we can save a lot of ice.'
The massive ice sheets that cover Antarctica and Greenland get a lot of attention in the climate change discussion; if they melted, sea levels would rise more than 200 feet, flooding coastal cities around the world.
But glaciers found in mountains and near the margins of ice sheets play a small but significant role in the climate change story, too. They make up less than half of 1 percent of the world's ice and, if they melt, they would contribute about a foot to global sea level rise.
As glaciers melt, they can also increase the risk of deadly floods and landslides. A glacial collapse in Switzerland this week destroyed most of an Alpine village. And if glaciers shrink enough, communities can lose crucial sources of freshwater for drinking, irrigation and hydropower.
Glaciers are melting much more rapidly than ice sheets in response to global warming, in part because they are smaller.
'Glaciers are really symbolic of climate change,' said Harry Zekollari, a glaciologist at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, a Belgian research university, who contributed to the new study.
Glacier retreat has captured much attention in recent years, but the losses so far appear to be only a harbinger of bigger problems to come.
Using eight different glacial models and excluding ice sheets, the researchers analyzed how more than 200,000 of the world's glaciers would respond to 80 different climate scenarios, over thousands of years, in which the planet reached a certain temperature and then stopped warming. The models showed the researchers how long it would take these glaciers to stabilize, or stop changing in response to the initial climate warming.
Even if warming stops at 1.2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels, the average warming over roughly the last decade, glaciers are on track to lose significant volumes of ice within a millennium, the study found. The median ice loss was about 40 percent, which would add about 10 centimeters to sea level rise.
Because the planet has already warmed at least 1.2 degrees Celsius, that ice loss and its resulting sea level rise are unavoidable.
Bigger and flatter glaciers with more ice respond more slowly to climate change, taking hundreds, if not thousands, of years to stabilize after a temperature shift, the study found. But most climate models stop at 2100.
'We project the loss for the rest of the century, but we don't really know what happens next,' said Romain Hugonnet, an Earth scientist at the University of Alaska Fairbanks who uses remote sensing to study glacier change and was not involved in the study. 'It's really important to look at it this way.'
If warming instead stopped at 1.5 degrees Celsius, the median estimate suggests that glacial ice loss would creep up to nearly half the current global mass. And at 2.7 degrees Celsius, the Climate Action Tracker estimate for 2100 based on current climate pledges, the median value for glaciers' ice loss would be about 75 percent of their mass.
'A large chunk of these glaciers are going to be lost regardless of what we do,' said Mauri Pelto, a glaciologist at Nichols College in Dudley, Mass., who was not involved in the new study. Still, policies around mitigating climate change and reducing emissions can help avoid the most severe ice-loss scenarios and save the larger glaciers, both he and the study authors stressed.
'We have time to alter the climate,' Dr. Pelto said. 'We have time to preserve those glaciers.'
Scientists are also exploring 'overshooting' warming thresholds, where the world warms beyond a given temperature and then cools down again. Another study by Dr. Schuster, published in the journal Nature this month, found that overshooting to 3 degrees Celsius of warming and then returning to 1.5 degrees Celsius would cause about 11 percent more glacial ice to be lost by 2500, in addition to the unavoidable ice loss.
The results were about what was expected but still alarming, Dr. Hugonnet said. Having multiple models from multiple teams around the world home in on the same outcomes, even with somewhat wide ranges, made the results more robust.
'There's probably more work to be done to see which models perform the best,' Dr. Hugonnet said. 'But we know there will be a substantial loss pretty confidently.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Soaring Temperatures Threaten Crops, So Scientists Are Looking to Alter the Plants
The world's bread baskets are heating up, threatening the global food supply. Climate change has already shrunk yields for major crops like wheat and maize, and crop losses are likely to worsen in the coming decades. But researchers are trying to avoid that future by helping plants deal with heat. 'There's a lot of excitement in identifying why it is that some crops that are grown in the most extreme conditions are able to survive,' said Carl Bernacchi, a crop researcher at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the author of one of a trio of papers on crop modification that were published Thursday in the journal Science. Farmers can help crops beat the heat with water-based cooling, but that method has limitations. Modifying crops, either through traditional crossbreeding, artificially sped-up mutation or direct genetic editing, offers control over how plants respond to heat. Photosynthesis, the process through which plants get energy, grinds to a halt between 40 and 45 degrees Celsius, or 104 to 113 degrees Fahrenheit, temperatures that are becoming more common in many of the world's agricultural regions. 'Photosynthesis really dictates the currency plants have to use,' Dr. Bernacchi said. 'If photosynthesis falters, plants run out of energy and die.' Dr. Bernacchi and his co-authors reviewed the potential of editing rubisco, the key enzyme that transforms carbon into sugar, and its partner, rubisco activase. In plants that grow in warm climates, rubisco activase seems to work better at helping rubisco function. Transferring that molecule from hot-climate plants to cool-climate plants can help cool-climate plants adapt to heat. Simply boosting its activity could help, too. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.


New York Times
5 hours ago
- New York Times
The Problem With SPF Makeup (and How to Solve It)
To be clear, it isn't that SPF makeup is less effective than plain sunscreen at blocking the sun's harmful rays. Makeup products with SPF can, in fact, contain the same active ingredients in the same (or very similar) proportions as several plain old sunscreens. The issue is that no matter what SPF product you use, you have to apply 2 milligrams of it to every square centimeter of your skin to achieve the level of protection promised on the packaging, according to Michelle Wong, a chemist and science communicator at Lab Muffin Beauty Science and the author of the book The Science of Beauty . Usually I wear two pumps of liquid foundation. A quarter teaspoon — the generally recommended amount of sunscreen product that most faces need to be well protected from the sun's harmful rays — of SPF liquid foundation may be too much makeup for your liking. Connie Park/NYT Wirecutter, Rose Maura Lorre/NYT Wirecutter That means that the amount of SPF makeup you would need to have adequate sun protection is the same as the amount of sunscreen you need. The big difference, of course, is that sunscreens are formulated to disappear into the skin, whereas makeup is designed to sit atop the skin and deliver more pigment the more you apply. 'You need about a quarter teaspoon of [SPF] product on your face for adequate coverage,' Wong said in a video interview. (Other sources gauge the amount at about the size of a nickel, which could be anywhere from a quarter teaspoon to a half teaspoon.) 'If you actually put that much foundation on, you will look like you have a massive, thick layer of makeup on your face.' Wong demonstrated this in a video she shared on her popular Instagram channel, labmuffinbeautyscience. After measuring the surface area of her face, she determined that she would need 0.76 gram of SPF foundation to get the level of protection promised on the product's packaging. That 0.76 gram equaled 13 pumps of foundation — but in her normal makeup routine, she uses only about one and a half pumps. When we conducted a similar test with a liquid foundation, we found that five pumps of the product were necessary to reach a quarter teaspoon. (If you already use SPF foundation and want to see if you're using enough for adequate sun protection, count the number of pumps it takes to fill a ¼ teaspoon measuring spoon and see how that amount looks and feels on your face.) For years, I've used a CC cream with SPF as my foundation, normally applying one or two pumps to my face. Here is what one pump looks like on my fingers (left) and then scraped into a ¼ teaspoon measuring spoon (right). The spoon is far from being even half full. Completely filling the measuring spoon took six pumps of the cream. Rose Maura Lorre/NYT Wirecutter Other SPF makeup products, such as BB creams, CC creams, and powdered foundation, have the same problem. Although these tend to be more sheer than typical foundations, which may allow you to layer them on a bit thicker, 'I don't think I've ever seen one where you can actually get the full amount of protection and not look a bit ridiculous,' Wong said. (When we repeated the above test with a CC cream, we found that six pumps equaled a quarter teaspoon.) As for powdered sunscreen, the company Colorescience, known for its Sunforgettable Total Protection Brush-On Shield SPF 50 powdered sunscreen, states in a blog post, 'Generally speaking, the SPF ingredients in makeup aren't strong enough to fully protect your skin from sun damage all on their own and should be applied in conjunction with a sunscreen product.' If you layer SPF makeup over sunscreen, you will potentially get a more-is-more, cumulative boost of protection. Exactly how much of a boost would be especially difficult to calculate, Wong said, but it's likely to be quite small. However, a 2021 study suggests that wearing SPF-free makeup could also increase (again, if ever so little) your overall sun protection. That's because 'all makeup … contains filters similar to those found in physical sunscreens,' as The New York Times previously reported.


Bloomberg
8 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Europe's Nuclear Ambitions Face €241 Billion Funding Challenge
The European Union's ambition to scale up nuclear energy as part of its 2050 climate neutrality goal will cost €241 billion ($280 billion), posing funding challenges, according to a draft document. More than four-fifths of investment under that base-case scenario would go on building new reactors, taking the bloc's capacity to 109 gigawatts by 2050, according to a draft of the European Commission's Nuclear Illustrative Program seen by Bloomberg News.