cc: Kevin Trenberth , jwillebrand@ifm-geomar.de, Brian Hoskins , Martin.Manning@noaa.gov, Matilde Rusticucci , Phil Jones , Nathan Bindoff , zhenlin chen , Melinda Marquis date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 20:02:00 +0100 from: Peter Lemke subject: Re: IPCC WG1 Observations ppt to: Susan Solomon Dear Kevin et al., I am happy with your suggestion for the summary of snow, sea ice and permafrost. Concerning glaciers, I also agree that we should not show both panels of my first slide (The difference between the panel is just the total area. By the way, the European glaciers have indeed grown until 1995.) I suggest to keep the right panel with the SLE. I prefer this over the Oerlemans figure (4.13). I have chosen 4.15 because only this figure addresses SPM-312 and 314: the increase in melting since the early 1990s. I also agree that we do not have to show the Greenland glacier speed up, when we show the Larsen B case. The left 3 panels in the Larsen B slide show that only those glaciers are speeding up, where the ice shelf is lost. The Flask glacier did not speed up, because it still has its ice shelf. It is 8 pm now and I have to catch my train home. I will send you an update set of slides tomorrow. Best regards, Peter ************************************** Please note my new e-mail address: Peter.Lemke@awi.de ************************************** Prof. Dr. Peter Lemke Alfred-Wegener-Institute for Polar and Marine Research Postfach 120161 27515 Bremerhaven GERMANY e-mail: Peter.Lemke@awi.de Phone: ++49 (0)471 - 4831 - 1751/1750 FAX: ++49 (0)471 - 4831 - 1797 http://www.awi.de ************************************** Susan Solomon schrieb: > Dear All, > Thanks for looking and thinking about this. > > I should clarify that some of what Peter kindly put into his > presentation may link to the sea level presentation, so may be better > moved there. We should consider that carefully. I suspect that > Peter was trying to avoid undue emphasis on Larsen B alone - because > other places are showing similar things. So we should evaluate that > too. While none of the figures themselves are explicitly shown in > Figure 4 (including the Larsen B one), the material referenced is > assessed there and Peter has carefully given the papers - so if we > believe this is needed, it could be considered. > > I do like Figure 4.13 but think it would be clearer for this audience > if it showed just the volume changes rather than the two panels. I > understand why the technical expert likes both but for this audience > perhaps just something showing the changes in glacier volume (SLR) > would be clearer. > > bests, > Susan > > > At 9:49 AM -0700 1/12/07, Kevin Trenberth wrote: >> Hi Peter >> I am a bit alarmed about all of these slides as being too complex and >> not using material from the chapters enough. >> >> For instance Fig 4.13 I found easy to understand but your first slide >> is not easy: why is Europe in blue going up in a and level in b when >> the glaciers are retreating? The reason is because this shows the >> rate of change not the result of the change isn't it? >> >> In your second slide I do like the Larsen B ice shelf picture and >> that provides a nice back drop for some explanation of the new bullet >> (which is good). But why include the 3 panels on the left? What do >> they add? >> >> I am not sure the next two are needed especially in their current >> form. None of these are in the chapter. They add too much new >> material. In my last ppt version I added some place holders taking >> some figures from the chapter as they are part of the picture that >> "global warming is unequivocal". I would urge you to include the >> first two I had, plus one of yours based on the Larsen B slide but >> with the message from the bullet added, or something like that. >> >> Regards >> Kevin >> >> >> >> >> Peter Lemke wrote: >>> Dear Colleagues, >>> please find enclosed a ppt-file addressing issues of Chapter 4. >>> Slide 1: addresses SPM-312 and 314. I suggest to accept 312. The >>> figure (4.15 from the chapter) indicates an increased rate of change >>> after about 1990. But I do not think that we have an indication of >>> an acceleration (continuously increasing rate of change). >>> Slides 2,3 and 4: address the increased flow speed of tributary >>> glaciers after retreat/thinning/loss of ice shelves or floating >>> glacier tongues in Antarctica and Greenland (comments SPM-349 to 353) >>> >>> I did not find any critical comments concerning snow, sea ice and >>> frozen ground. Therefore I did not prepare any slides for theses >>> topics. >>> Best regards, >>> Peter >>> >>> ************************************** >>> Please note my new e-mail address: >>> >>> Peter.Lemke@awi.de >>> >>> ************************************** >>> Prof. Dr. Peter Lemke >>> Alfred-Wegener-Institute >>> for Polar and Marine Research >>> Postfach 120161 >>> 27515 Bremerhaven >>> GERMANY >>> >>> e-mail: Peter.Lemke@awi.de >>> Phone: ++49 (0)471 - 4831 - 1751/1750 >>> FAX: ++49 (0)471 - 4831 - 1797 >>> http://www.awi.de >>> ************************************** >> >> -- >> **************** >> Kevin E. Trenberth e-mail: trenbert@ucar.edu >> Climate Analysis Section, www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html >> NCAR >> P. O. Box 3000, (303) 497 1318 >> Boulder, CO 80307 (303) 497 1333 (fax) >> >> Street address: 1850 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, CO 80305 >