Antarctic ice sheet. Brief statistics of Antarctica The greatest thickness of ice in Antarctica reaches
You've probably noticed that there is a lot of information about melting on the Internet and in the press. Arctic, the North Pole of the Earth - how quickly this process progresses, freeing more and more spaces from ice and what consequences this can lead to. But what you probably haven't heard about is melting ice of Antarctica (Antarctica). If global warming is causing the polar ice caps to melt, then why don't we hear about Antarctica melting?
Antarctica (Antarctica) is the south pole of the Earth, the repository of 70% of the planet's fresh water reserves. Antarctica has the harshest climate on Earth - the lowest temperatures, the strongest snow storms. Average winter Antarctic temperature-60°C., and in summer -30°C. The fauna of Antarctica is represented by seals, whales, fur seals, seabirds, including penguins, skuas and albatrosses. Ecology of Antarctica protected by international law.
Ice sheets of Antarctica they still melt. And we don’t hear about this in the news because, fortunately, this is happening extremely slowly, compared to the Arctic.
Surprisingly, according to satellite imagery of the area, last summer saw the slowest melting of Antarctic glaciers in the last 30 years.
But there is no reason for joy here. Because the halt in Antarctic melting is only temporary. As scientists have found, this is due to the thinning of the ozone layer in the stratosphere above the continent. As a result of this process, the polar winds became stronger and created a kind of cold barrier. Winds in Antarctica are now the strongest they have been in 40 years and are effectively shielding much of the continent from the effects of global warming.
As the hole in the ozone heals, in the coming decades, winds will weaken, the continent will become much warmer and melting will increase.
Here's why it's scary. Antarctica's ice sheets contain enough frozen water to raise global ocean levels by 60 meters. The earth gives us a break. And it is in people's interests to find a way not to wake up this icy sleeping giant.
What will happen if the glaciers of Antarctica melt?
Antarctica is the least studied continent located in the south of the globe. Most of its surface has ice cover up to 4.8 km thick. The Antarctic ice sheet contains 90% (!) of all the ice on our planet. It is so heavy that the continent beneath it has sunk almost 500 m. Today the world is seeing the first signs of global warming in Antarctica: large glaciers are collapsing, new lakes are appearing, and the soil is losing its ice cover. Let's simulate the situation of what will happen if Antarctica loses its ice.
How will Antarctica itself change?
Today the area of Antarctica is 14,107,000 km². If the glaciers melt, these numbers will be reduced by a third. The mainland will become almost unrecognizable. Under the ice there are numerous mountain ranges and massifs. The western part will definitely become an archipelago, and the eastern part will remain a continent, although given the rise of ocean waters, it will not retain this status for long.
At the moment, on the Antarctic Peninsula, islands and coastal oases, many representatives of the plant world are found: flowers, ferns, lichens, algae, and recently their diversity has been gradually increasing. There are fungi and some bacteria there, and the coasts are occupied by seals and penguins. Already now, on the same Antarctic Peninsula, the appearance of tundra is observed, and scientists are confident that with warming there will be trees and new representatives of the animal world. By the way, Antarctica holds several records: the lowest recorded temperature on Earth is 89.2 degrees below zero; the largest crater on Earth is located there; the strongest and longest winds. Today there is no permanent population on the territory of Antarctica. Only employees of scientific stations are there, and sometimes tourists visit it. With climate change, the former cold continent may become suitable for permanent human habitation, but now it is difficult to talk about this with confidence - everything will depend on the current climatic situation.
How will the world change due to melting glaciers?
Rising water levels in the world's oceans So, scientists have calculated that after the melting of the ice cover, the level of the world's oceans will rise by almost 60 meters. And this is a lot and will amount to a global catastrophe. The coastline will shift significantly, and today's coastal zone of the continents will be under water.
If we talk about Russia, its central part will not suffer much. In particular, Moscow is located 130 meters above the current sea level, so the flood will not reach it. Large cities such as Astrakhan, Arkhangelsk, St. Petersburg, Novgorod and Makhachkala will go under water. Crimea will turn into an island - only its mountainous part will rise above the sea. And in the Krasnodar Territory only Novorossiysk, Anapa and Sochi will be insulated. Siberia and the Urals will not be subject to too much flooding - mostly residents of coastal settlements will have to be resettled.
The Black Sea will grow - in addition to the northern part of Crimea and Odessa, Istanbul will also be taken over. The cities that will be under water have been signed. The Baltic states, Denmark and Holland will almost completely disappear. In general, European cities such as London, Rome, Venice, Amsterdam and Copenhagen will go under water along with all their cultural heritage, so while you have time, be sure to visit them and post photos on Instagram, because your grandchildren will probably already have done so they won't be able to. It will also be hard for the Americans, who will definitely be left without Washington, New York, Boston, San Francisco, Los Angeles and many other large coastal cities.
What will happen to North America? Signed cities that will be under water
The climate will already undergo unpleasant changes that will lead to the melting of the ice sheet. According to ecologists, the ice of Antarctica, Antarctica and those found on mountain peaks help maintain the temperature balance on the planet by cooling its atmosphere. Without them, this balance will be disrupted. The entry of large amounts of fresh water into the world's oceans will likely affect the direction of large ocean currents, which largely determine the climatic conditions in many regions. So it is not yet possible to say with certainty what will happen to our weather.
The number of natural disasters will increase significantly. Hurricanes, typhoons and tornadoes will claim thousands of lives. Paradoxically, due to global warming, some countries will begin to experience a shortage of fresh water. And not just because of the dry climate. The fact is that snow deposits in the mountains provide water to vast areas, and after it melts there will no longer be such a benefit.
Economy
All this will greatly affect the economy, even if the flooding process is gradual. Take the USA and China for example! Like it or not, these countries greatly influence the economic situation throughout the world. In addition to the problem of relocating tens of millions of people and the loss of their capital, the states will lose almost a quarter of their production capacity, which will ultimately hit the global economy. And China will be forced to say goodbye to its huge trading ports, which will reduce the supply of products to the world market significantly.
How are things today?
Some scientists reassure us that the observed melting of glaciers is normal, because... somewhere they disappear, and somewhere they are formed, and thus balance is maintained. Others note that there are still reasons for concern, and provide convincing evidence.
Not long ago, British scientists analyzed 50 million satellite images of Antarctic ice sheets and came to the conclusion that their melting is happening very rapidly. In particular, the giant Totten glacier, comparable in size to the territory of France, is causing concern. Researchers noticed that it was being washed away by warm salty waters, accelerating its decay. According to forecasts, this glacier can raise the level of the World Ocean by as much as 2 meters. It is assumed that the Larsen B glacier will collapse by 2020. And he, by the way, is as much as 12,000 years old.
According to the BBC, Antarctica loses as much as 160 billion ice per year. Moreover, this figure is growing rapidly. Scientists say they did not expect such a rapid melting of the southern ice.
The most unpleasant thing is that the process of melting glaciers even more influences the increase in the greenhouse effect. The fact is that the ice covers of our planet reflect part of the sunlight. Without this, heat will be retained in the Earth's atmosphere in large volumes, thereby increasing the average temperature. And the growing area of the World Ocean, whose waters collect heat, will only worsen the situation. In addition, large amounts of melt water also have a detrimental effect on glaciers. Thus, ice reserves not only in Antarctica, but throughout the globe, are melting faster and faster, which ultimately threatens big problems.
Conclusion
Scientists have very different opinions about the melting of the Antarctic ice cover, but what is known for certain is that man, through his activities, greatly influences the climate. If humanity does not solve the problem of global warming in the next 100 years, then the process will be inevitable.
Confirmation of the ancient age of the maps of Piri Reis, Orontius Phineus and Philippe Boische by the results of ice drilling in Antarctica
The thickness of the Antarctic ice cap varies from 300-400 m to 3-4 km. According to academician V.M. Kotlyakov, the results of drilling ice in Antarctica indicate that it existed for at least 400-800 thousand years. Although it is very difficult to determine his age.
A fragment from an interview with V. Kotlyakov gives an idea of the age of Antarctic ice:
"Alexander Gordon.
When was the last time Antarctica was ice-free?
Kotlyakov. Nobody knows for sure. But it is assumed that glaciation in Antarctica began no later than 5 million years ago, most likely 30-35 million years ago, this continent was constantly under ice. Thus, the development of nature in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres did not occur at all in the same way. In the Northern Hemisphere, the glacier either spread out or disappeared completely, while in the Southern Hemisphere the ice existed almost continuously.”(Antarctica: climate. Broadcast by A. Gordon)
Doctor of Geographical Sciences D. Kvasov shares the same point of view:
« 20-30 million years ago, the volume of Antarctic glaciers was already close to modern ones. At that time, a rather warm climate prevailed in temperate and polar latitudes. The ice sheet of East Antarctica was melting at the edges, but did not decrease in size - much more snow fell on its surface than now».
D. Kvasov wrote that “Warming will also lead to heavy snowfall. The largest ice sheets may even increase their thickness as a result. They will produce fewer icebergs and melt a little at the edges, but will not decrease in volume until the volume of melting exceeds the volume of snow water received by the glaciers each year. For this to happen, a warming of 10-12 degrees is needed. Only after this will the glaciers of Antarctica begin to disintegrate and the ocean level to rise... With less warming, sea levels could even drop slightly as Antarctic glaciers become thicker."(Glaciation of Antarctica, or What is considered a disaster in the history of the Earth)
Head of the marine geophysical detachment in the second Antarctic expedition 1956–1957. N.P. Grushinsky and the head of the wintering quarters of the fourth and seventh Antarctic expeditions of 1958–1959. and 1961–1962 A.G. Dralkin also wrote that the last glaciation of Antarctica occurred about 10 million years ago. This glaciation has remained constant to this day.Antarctica has not experienced much warming since the end of the Tertiary period and remains covered in ice.
(Antarctica).
Returning to the interview with academician V.M. Kotlyakov, I will also quote his following words:
« The well at Vostok station showed for the first time that the existing temperature on Earth, despite warming, one and a half degrees lower than the temperatures that were during the interglacial periods we studied
(three interglacials during the last 420 thousand years), that is, the current temperature is one and a half degrees less than the upper limit known to us. This means that over the past 400 thousand years the climate on Earth has not changed fundamentally.»
Another work by V. Kotlyakov states that in certain periods of the Pleistocene (interglacial era), the temperature in Antarctica (as well as in the Arctic) increased by 10-12 degrees. This is a very interesting moment, which seems to give a chance to supporters of the 20-30 thousand year old maps of Piri Reis, Orontius Phineus, Philippe Buache and other cartographers and navigators. However, it contradicts the above statement by the same V. Kotlyakov, and is not confirmed by any other information, so I would not accept it as evidence. Moreover, the results of drilling the Antarctic ice show that in the last and penultimate ice ages (12-120 and 140-220 thousand years ago) the temperature in Antarctica was approximately 6 degrees. below modern, with temperature minimums 20, 60 and 110 thousand years ago, that is, just at the time when, according to Charles Hapgood, Antarctica was free of ice.
Moreover, also because all other data indicate that the Antarctic ice cover has remained unchanged, at least over the last 5 million years.
Confirmation of the ancient age of the maps of Piri Reis, Orontius Phineus and Philippe Boischer by paleogeodynamic reconstructions of Antarctica
Another important argument in favor of the invariability of the Antarctic glacier over the past 20-23 million years is the location of Antarctica throughout the Neogene in an area close to the modern one, that is, in close proximity to the south geographic pole. True, the position of the south pole changed several times during this period of time. However, even with a change in the tilt of the earth’s axis by 15-30 degrees, which was noted 12 thousand years ago, at least half of Antarctica always remained in polar latitudes, and the rest of it 24-12 thousand years ago should also have been covered by ice, because that the earth’s axis was then located almost vertically and almost no sunlight fell on Antarctica. That is, there is not even a hint that the temperature on it increased by more than 10-12 degrees.
The ancient age of the Piri Reis map is also evidenced by the separation of Antarctica from South America 34 (according to other sources, 23) million years ago. And on this map they are shown together.
***
Based on all of the above, we can repeat the conclusion made in the book “Battles of the ancient gods” and the work “The earliest maps of the Earth were compiled in the Paleogene” that the original maps of Piri Reis, Orontius Phineus, Philippe Buache and other cartographers and navigators were compiled in the Paleogene or the first half of the Neogene period (34-20 million years ago). And opponents of this do not have many arguments to continue the dispute.
Read my others works “The earliest maps of the Earth were compiled in the Paleogene” and “World map of Orontius Phineus 1531 - map of the bright half of the Earth in the early Miocene era (23 -16 million years ago)? "
I invite everyone to further discuss this material on the topic pages And
© A.V. Koltypin, 20
11
The value of Antarctica (Myagkov Sergey Mikhailovich)
Myagkov Sergey Mikhailovich
Born in 1933. Candidate of Geographical Sciences. Head of the problem laboratory of snow avalanches and mudflows, Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov. Participant of several Arctic and Antarctic expeditions. Author of about 40 scientific papers, two popular science essays. Lives in Moscow.
Notes from an "Exchange Scholar"
One fine autumn day in 1968, I was asked if I would like to work for a year at an American research station in Antarctica. And since then, I don’t remember a day when I didn’t do something related to Antarctica, or at least intend to do it.
I was the thirteenth Soviet specialist to participate in the US Antarctic Expedition on the basis of international scientific exchange. In 1969-1971 I worked in the Transantarctic Mountains, mainly in the area of McMurdo Station, studying the history of glaciation and the modern development of glaciers and mountainous terrain, in particular, I carried out phototheodolite surveys. By repeating such surveys from time to time, it is possible to measure with high accuracy all the changes occurring in the field of view of the camera, in our case, changes in glaciers and the slopes surrounding them.
In 1975-1976 I repeated this shooting when I visited Antarctica, this time at the special invitation of the US Antarctic Expedition, in addition to the Soviet-American scientific exchange program. The “exchange scientist” at this time was Narciss Barkov, a glaciologist from the Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute. The results of phototheodolite work turned out to be interesting enough that the benefits of their continuation became clear. So I hope to see the Transantarctic Mountains again in 1979-1980.
In general, I am in the position of that Moscow schoolboy who wrote to the newspaper: “What should I do? I love Lolita Torres!” The Transantarctic Mountains are beautiful and attractive. They are worthy and waiting for their Roerich and Kent. There it happens to discover mysterious amazing properties of glaciers and mountainous terrain that are not found anywhere north of 60° south latitude. I fell in love with this region, fell in love with Antarctica, where - alas! - I can’t visit as often as I would like.
I am clearly aware that I am, to put it mildly, not alone in this feeling. Several tens of thousands of people have already visited Antarctica. At McMurdo Station I met an auto mechanic who had been spending the northern summer in Greenland, at the Thule base, for about 10 years, and the second half of the year in Antarctica. And if I decided to notify the reader of my more than business interest in Antarctica, it was only in the hope of a better understanding.
Antarctica's mineral resources - explored and expected - must be large and include such valuable species for modern industry as diamonds and radioactive substances. In the early 1970s, the world's largest uranium deposit was discovered in Australia, which is related to Antarctica in geological history, raising the possibility of such deposits in Antarctica. Signs of oil potential have been discovered on the Antarctic shelf.
However, the development of Antarctic deposits is unlikely to be profitable in the near future. According to the American research organization Resources for the Future, the cost of sea transportation of goods between the coast of Antarctica and extra-Antarctic areas is rarely equal, and often ten times higher than normal. The cost of maintaining one person at a coastal station reaches approximately 20 thousand dollars per year, and at an inland station - 4-5 times more. Under these conditions, no mining activity in Antarctica will be economically justified, with the exception of the development of fairly rich coastal deposits of gold and diamonds. It is also significant that geologically poorly explored but potentially mineral-rich areas of other continents are much larger in total area than Antarctica. In general, the prospects for the development of the mining industry here in the foreseeable future are small.
The biological resources of the ice continent are negligible. They are concentrated in a coastal strip usually several tens (less often hundreds) meters wide - seal rookeries, colonies of penguins and other birds.
Climate resources are cold and frozen fresh water. Antarctica could be used as a global refrigerator to store food reserves. However, as we know, humanity does not have such a problem and does not foresee it in the future.
Fresh water is a very valuable resource. About 80 percent of the world's quantity is concentrated in the Antarctic ice sheet - an invaluable and wisely created reserve by nature. Back in the mid-60s, a large iceberg brought to the shores of Australia or the United States would have cost several million dollars. Over the past decade, the water crisis in major capitalist countries has intensified. In the summer of 1976, restrictions on the use of water for industrial, agricultural and even domestic purposes were introduced in some areas of Great Britain, France, the USA and other countries. But no one has yet undertaken to deliver an iceberg to a potential consumer due to the complexity of this task. The development of seawater desalination technology will apparently determine the oxidation of oxygenates. Although, for example, Saudi Arabia is ready to allocate huge funds to tow an Antarctic iceberg to its shores.
This category of resources also includes the attractiveness of Antarctica as a tourist destination. Commercial tourist cruises have been sailing to the Antarctic Peninsula from Argentina since 1966 and to the Ross Sea from New Zealand since 1970. According to the organization Resources for the Future, the cost of one place on the ship is several thousand dollars. The number of applicants many times exceeds the capacity of the ships.
The results of scientific research are unanimously agreed to represent the most important product of Antarctica now and in the future. The value of scientific results increases over time faster than any purely economic value. The development of methods for the rational use of the natural environment - a fundamentally new and most important scientific problem of the coming century - cannot be solved without detailed and comprehensive knowledge about Antarctica and its interaction with the ocean and atmosphere of the rest of the planet. More immediate and private benefits follow from geophysical, radiophysical, some biological and other industrial research.
The results of studying the Antarctic sometimes lead to quite strong changes in previously established scientific concepts. For example, let's take knowledge of the history of glaciation of the Earth. Back in the late 60s, the prevailing ideas were obtained from studying the traces and remains of the ice sheets of Europe and North America. The Ice Age was thought to be relatively short (last million years or so). The reasons for its onset were sought in space. The development of glaciers in the northern and southern circumpolar regions was considered synchronous, from which the conclusion was drawn about the current rapid reduction of glaciation in Antarctica and the impending rise in the level of the World Ocean for this reason. The possibility of renewed glaciation in Europe and North America was unclear. Data from the latest research in Antarctica have significantly changed this picture, which now appears as follows.
There was once a huge continent of Gondwana, which included South America, Africa, Australia, Antarctica and smaller areas of modern land. 100-150 million years ago Gondwana began to break apart. The area that included Australia and Antarctica moved its Antarctic edge from the mid-latitudes to the South Pole 50-60 million years ago. According to climate laws, a continent that finds itself at the pole is doomed to glaciation. However, the climate of Australia-Antarctica remained warm for a long time due to the warming effect of powerful ocean currents that carried tropical waters to the polar shores. Beech forests grew on the coasts of Antarctica, although in its central regions a “Yakut” climate may have already been established.
Meanwhile, the fragmentation of Gondwana continued. About 50 million years ago, Australia began to move away from Antarctica, and 25 million years ago, the bridge connecting Antarctica with South America broke. Thus, a continuous oceanic ring was formed around Antarctica, which determined the new polar direction of currents. "Water heating" by the former meridional currents has stopped. The polar continent quickly cooled and glaciation began. This happened about 25 million years ago, long before the first human ancestors appeared on Earth, at the beginning of the formation of the modern world of mammals, when on the territory of the modern islands of the Arctic Ocean the climate was like now in Ukraine, and the entire surface of the Earth was much warmer than now .
All other things being equal, the size of the ice sheet depends on the climate, and its boundaries change following climate changes. The climate of Antarctica is such that the corresponding ice sheet could be significantly larger than the existing one. But its expansion is hampered by the limited size of the continent. If on ordinary glaciers almost all ice consumption occurs by melting, then the ice consumption of the Antarctic cover occurs mainly by dumping ice into the ocean. Over the entire 25 million years of its continuous existence, fluctuations in the size of the ice sheet were determined not by climatic changes, but by changes in the boundaries of sea and land, which in turn were mainly a consequence of intraterrestrial processes. There is no reason to assume that future climate fluctuations will significantly affect the extent of glaciation in Antarctica. It is destined to last until the continent sinks (which is unlikely) or moves to warmer climes (which is likely, but this will take many millions of years).
The glaciation of Antarctica arose on the warm Earth as a result of the displacement of the continent and its isolation from warm ocean currents. Once it began, it itself began to change the Earth's climate. The water cooling near the shores of the icy continent sank to the bottom and gradually filled the deep areas of all oceans. Now the bottom ocean waters, even near the equator, have a temperature of only 2°C, 8° lower than before the glaciation of Antarctica.
The cooling of the ocean led to the cooling of the entire planet. Slowly but steadily, tropical forests were reduced, tundra emerged, and modern natural zonation was established. 1-3 million years ago it became cold enough for glaciers to form on other continents, especially around the Arctic Ocean. However, in the middle latitudes the climate was not and cannot become cold enough to ensure the continuous existence of glaciation, as is the case in Antarctica and as would be the case in the Arctic if land took the place of the ocean here. The ice sheets of Eurasia and North America appeared only during the cold phases of climate fluctuations and were greatly reduced or disappeared during the warm phases. The last time ice sheets existed here was approximately 25 to 10 thousand years ago. Since the causes of glaciation persist (the general Antarctic cooling of the planet plus cyclical climate fluctuations independent of it), we should expect a renewal of the ice sheets of Eurasia and North America in the future.
This is the brief history of the glaciation of Antarctica and its influence on the nature of the rest of the planet. The picture depicted, as you can see, is fundamentally different from the ideas that existed 5-10 years ago. It allows us to foresee such a significant change in the natural environment as the onset of a new glaciation in Eurasia and North America. It is clear that it is useful to know about such an event in advance, so that you have time to find out exactly when it will happen and decide what should be done about it. (According to existing estimates, this will not happen for at least several centuries.)
Interestingly, all past climate changes from warm to glacial (usually cooling by several degrees) are called “climate deterioration” in the scientific literature. Apparently, the unknown scientist who came up with this obviously unfair term was very cold. The fact is that the appearance of the Antarctic ice sheet caused a chain of important natural changes: an increase in temperature contrasts on Earth, an intensification and enrichment of natural zonality, an increase in the diversity of living conditions, acceleration of biological evolution, in particular human evolution, an increase in the diversity of forms of flora and fauna . Is this "deterioration"?
As for the future probable cooling of the climate and the resumption of ice sheets in Europe and North America, there is, of course, nothing to rejoice at. The cooling itself will most likely be slow, almost unnoticeable against the backdrop of short-term climate changes. A significant problem, of course, will be the reduction (glaciation) of the area suitable for habitation, especially if we remember that existing futurological forecasts already threaten humanity with a lack of territory and natural resources in the next 100-200 years.
What would a person prefer - war or peaceful coexistence with glaciation? Any speculation about this now is baseless. We still know too little when and how great natural forces will confront man and what energy capabilities he will have by that time. We don’t even know yet whether the involuntary man-made impact on the atmosphere will lead to climate changes that are deeper and faster than natural ones. Of course, it would be nice to know all this in advance. And further research in Antarctica cannot be done here.
Let us return, however, to the question of the overall value of knowledge obtained in Antarctica. There is one characteristic difference in Soviet and American assessments on this matter regarding the experience of planning and organizing work. The leaders of Soviet Antarctic research do not particularly highlight this aspect of the matter from a number of others, which is natural, since detailed planning and clearly coordinated implementation of tasks of a very different nature and degree of complexity is one of the long-established norms of running the national economy of our country. The Antarctic experience in this regard is interesting.
At the same time, this experience is irreplaceable for the United States. In particular, it was carefully analyzed during the initial planning period for American lunar exploration. Leading figures from the National Space Administration (NASA) made a special trip to Antarctica. They found that space and Antarctic exploration share important commonalities: scientific objectives; complexity and high cost of logistics; the enormous value of scientific results, not expressed in monetary terms; the independent value of the required technological development, as well as the resulting planning and management experience; education of groups of highly qualified scientists and managers.
It is known that a good plan is half the battle. I was very interested to learn how US Antarctic research is planned. The entire matter is in the hands of the National Science Foundation's Division of Polar Research. The NSF is a government agency that invests funds (state budget and private, donated) in the development of basic scientific research. The NSF tries not to go beyond administrative functions. To determine the best way to spend available funds, the NSF seeks the advice of scientists. Thus, at the Division of Polar Programs there is a kind of advisory group, on the basis of election and periodic renewal of the composition, which includes leading scientists and specialists on problems related to the polar regions. This group evaluates current and completed research and develops recommendations for the future: strategic goals, main problems, desired deadlines, basic measures for logistical support of Antarctic research.
The main goals are indicated for the foreseeable future. So, in the early 60s, the task was set to complete all reconnaissance and survey research in five to ten years, in order to then, after a thorough analysis of the collected data, determine further strategic goals.
Particular tasks are indicated for the next five years and are updated annually, that is, there is a kind of rolling five-year plan for current scientific tasks. The plan is communicated to interested research institutions. At their own discretion, these institutions - universities and colleges, research centers of the state and, less often, private ones - take on the implementation of one or another task, competing with each other - sometimes openly, more often secretly.
Proposed work plans and estimates are reviewed by the Division of Polar Programs with the participation of an advisory group. Preference is given to the most complex, most advanced scientific ideas and methods, and, other things being equal, to the cheapest projects. The best plans are accepted and receive a “grant,” that is, funding from the NSF. The NSF budget is unstable and can change dramatically from year to year. Therefore, the “grant” is not given for the entire duration of the program (usually three to five years), but is renewed annually. The procedure for renewing the “grant” is preceded by a critical assessment of the progress of work and the results obtained. If they were not successful enough, the "grant" may not be renewed.
The generic image of the "taxpayer" - the taxpayer funding your research and wanting to get real value for your dollars - is constantly present in the speeches of the leaders of the Division of Polar Programs. “Ruble control” is well organized and ensures the quick death of protracted, unimportant, stupid research. However, not everything here is as clear and useful as we would like. Firstly, behind the idealized image of the “taxpayer” lies Congress, whose decisions on the budget, to put it mildly, do not always seem justified (the annual increase in the US military budget is tens of times greater than the annual expenditure on Antarctic research, the results of which are the Americans themselves, including congressmen recognize as invaluable). Secondly, the desire to win a competition for obtaining and then renewing a grant leads in many cases to such harmful consequences for science as claims to the global significance of the findings obtained, a clear taste of sensationalism, disregard for priority, restraint of scientific and purely human contacts between potentially competing groups , even under expedition conditions. However, as they say, “what has been said does not detract...”. Many American scientists have always been at the forefront of Antarctica's exploration, especially in the technical development of new ideas.
Through the distribution of grants, the NSF Division of Polar Programs (OPP) organizes and directly manages the US Antarctic Expedition. Beyond these responsibilities, the role of the PPP is most noticeable in the development of general research technology (justification and implementation of the idea of transportable stations, special types of ground transport, “flying laboratory”, automation of various types of observations, etc.). OPP employees also made a great contribution to the development of international cooperation in Antarctica.
International cooperation, its establishment and accumulated experience are undoubtedly one of the main values of Antarctic research. Everyone or almost everyone knows that Antarctica is the coldest place. But few people realize that this is also the place where the Cold War ended first. In 1959, the Antarctic Treaty was drawn up and ratified in 1961, declaring the south polar region demilitarized and open to peaceful scientific research. When a US military icebreaker arrives in the Ross Sea, a large unpainted spot and four bolt holes can be seen on its deck - a sign of a removed gun. Juhan Smuul in his "Ice Book" mentions an episode of a fireworks display using hunting rifles at Mirny station in early 1958. After the conclusion of the Antarctic Treaty, flare guns were used for fireworks. General and complete disarmament with free and arbitrarily broad mutual control is the ideal for the rest of the planet.
Is détente irreversible in Antarctica? How can it be strengthened? To answer, you need to know history.
"If you reach the magnetic pole, you must plant the flag of the United Kingdom on it and, in the name of the expedition, declare this area part of the British Empire." “At 3:30 p.m. we uncovered our heads and raised the English flag. According to instructions, I said loudly: “This area, covering the magnetic pole, I accept as the possession of the British Empire.” Then we shouted “hurray” three times in honor of His Majesty the King.” . These are excerpts from the instructions and diary of Professor T. David, a member of the British Antarctic Expedition of 1908-1910. Professor David's colleagues, participants in Antarctic expeditions from other countries, performed similar rituals in other areas of Antarctica until the late 40s. Was it before international cooperation? A good two-thirds of the continent was “captured” by Britain with its dominions, the rest by Argentina, Chile, Norway, and France.
But now the imperial excitement is over. Over time, it became clear that the territories “taken into possession” were far from Eldorado, and sealing and whale fishing in the Antarctic waters had become rather scarce. On the other hand, the scientific and technological revolution decisively required numerous scientific information, including from the south polar region, where fairly rapid success could only be achieved through joint efforts. This is where international cooperation in scientific research was established, as each participant came to the conclusion that this was more profitable than anything he could do in Antarctica. It must be emphasized that the similar positive positions of the USA and the USSR, countries with the highest scientific and technical potential, which do not have their own or support others’ territorial claims in Antarctica, played a positive role in the speedy achievement of cooperation.
From this it is clear that detente and international cooperation in Antarctica will be stronger the more cooperative the ongoing scientific research and the more valuable its results. With this in mind, the leaders of national expeditions, among the first being Soviet polar explorers, are constantly striving for progress in this matter. During the International Geophysical Year, in the late 50s, cooperation was expressed in the exchange of scientists for a one-year period and in the exchange of factual information received (through the Soviet and American international data centers). In the 60s, direct joint implementation of certain studies began to be practiced sporadically (for example, Soviet-French glaciological work in East Antarctica from 1963-1964). Since the early 70s, multi-year large international research programs have already been carried out (for example, the International Glaciological Project for the Study of East Antarctica with the participation of groups of scientists from the USSR, USA, France, Australia, and Great Britain).
There is every reason to hope that the detente of international tension in Antarctica will continue to be imbued with new and real content. All Soviet polar explorers are pleased to know that their pioneering experience of extensive international scientific cooperation served as a model for the development of numerous now international ocean and atmospheric research projects.
If the main problem of modern humanity is to achieve mutual understanding and eliminate wars forever, then the Antarctic experience is invaluable.
There are about 40 people in the world who will spend at least a year of their lives behind this phrase. These are Soviet and American “exchange scientists”, each of them spent the winter at a station in another country. If only we could all get together one day and write a book! I think it would turn out to be something between “Robinson Crusoe” and “The Star Diaries of Ion the Quiet”... In the meantime, the reader is offered some individual impressions, for all possible errors of which one author is responsible.
The closer you get to the day when you find yourself among strangers, your future colleagues and friends, the more excitement you get: how will everything turn out? You feel like such a strange figure that you have never been before. You are a real person with all the shortcomings (oh, why was I too lazy to eradicate them!), you are also an abstraction, since you are a “representative of the country”. Your scientific program has been approved in advance by the host country. But in general, this side somehow managed without your activities and can continue to do so. You know (from your predecessors) that you are destined for special honorable attention from the American authorities, but even without you they have worries above their heads. But everything is getting better. The main thing is to be yourself and not try to look better. I received this advice on the eve of leaving to join the Americans in Antarctica, and I don’t know any better advice for an “exchange scientist.” Is it only for the “exchange scientist”?
Gradually everything is getting better. A week after arriving at the Antarctic station, you begin to distinguish faces - first your neighbors in the House, then your neighbors in the laboratory. All the Americans at the station turn out to be unusually calm and patient people. You are convinced of this when you try to speak English with them - your English! Then this gets better too.
And now the work has already begun, has begun, is in full swing. She will go on like this for almost a year. And the rest of the term will go twice as fast, because suddenly a lot of terribly interesting questions and tasks have appeared, and there is only a pinch of time left! It’s fun and annoying that you can’t stay a couple more weeks: after all, the equipment is debugged, the work area has been mastered, the management is familiar, and the helicopter pilots are friends. But you really can’t linger. So it’s better for you to find an hour or two to sit away from people on the shore, look at the rocks, water, floating ice floes, the mountains beyond the bay and the sky above them. To remember forever. "We leave heart particles in distant lands..."
You fly north no longer as an abstraction from abstract Americans, but as a living person from living people. A year ago, your superiors met you at the airport. Now your friends are seeing you off, and there are more of them than those who met you. It feels good when you suddenly realize this. And it's sad because it won't happen again.
Of course, the touching nature of the moment does not deprive you of sobriety in your assessments. You can hardly forget how, in the midst of winter, you suddenly discovered that not one of the Americans you interviewed even suspected the fascist past of Wernher von Braun, the pillar of American space technology. And that, in the opinion of many, Russia contributed almost nothing to defeat Hitler, it only consumed Studebakers and American pork stew. That of those who are familiar with the name “Babi Yar”, not a single one is sure whether it was the Russians who shot the Jews there... Well, what can I say! Your wintering colleagues are the Cold War generation. It is better to remember that they do not trust propaganda too much and would like to come to visit you to look at everything with their own eyes. Or how on May Day you were presented with a luxurious cake with a homemade flag on the top and you clumsily cut this cake, unexpectedly finding yourself the host of a holiday party. Or how the helicopter pilots made a detour to bring you to your field camp a local small-circulation magazine with sensational headlines: “The Soviet Army is in the USA! American defense has been defeated by the Reds!” - we were talking about CSKA hockey players. Well, if you really remember it seriously. What comes first? The faces and names of those six guys who at different times were your volunteer assistants in field work. You spoke terrible English, couldn’t understand the labels of canned food to prepare a normal dinner, were simply zero in terms of radio communication with the base, etc., etc. The guys demolished all this without blinking an eye. Since there were six of them, and you were one, the main credit goes to them for the fact that something worthwhile came out of your work.
“When you return to your native land and begin to remember what you have experienced, you realize that you have seen and discovered such a land on this planet where the people of the Earth can live and work in complete reconciliation and brotherhood,” wrote Leroy Sharon, geophysicist, former American “exchange scientist in the Soviet Antarctic expedition.
Isn’t the main value of Antarctica the possibility of such discoveries?
Sanatoriums in the hot spring, Krasnodar region, the best sanatoriums in the hot spring.
The Antarctic glacier is the largest on Earth. Its area is 13 million 660 thousand square km, which is 1.6 times larger than the surface of Australia. Judging by radar measurements, the average thickness of this cover is almost 2.2 km, the maximum thickness exceeds 4.7 km, and the total volume of Antarctic ice is close to 26 - 27 million cubic km - this is almost 90% of the volume of all natural ice on the planet. Complete melting of the Antarctic ice sheet would result in sea levels rising by 60 to 65 meters. The Antarctic ice sheet has a complex structure. It is formed by the merger of the colossal land shield of East Antarctica, the “marine” ice sheet of West Antarctica, the floating ice shelves of Ross, Ronne-Filchner and others, as well as several mountain-cover complexes of the Antarctic Peninsula. As will be discussed below, the largest ice sheets of the past had precisely this structure. Therefore, they are sometimes called Antarctic-type glaciers.
The East Antarctic Ice Sheet is a huge ice sheet with an area of 10 million square km and a diameter of more than 4 thousand km. It rests on a rocky bed, partly flat and partly mountainous; in its main areas this bed is located above sea level, which is why this shield is called terrestrial. The ice surface, hidden under 100-150 meters of snow and firn, forms a huge plateau with an average height of about 3 km and a maximum height of up to 4 km in its center. It has been established that the average ice thickness of East Antarctica is 2.5 km, and the maximum is almost 4.8 km. Until recently, such a thickness of ice in modern glaciers was not even suspected.
The West Antarctic Ice Sheet is significantly smaller. Its area is less than 2 million square km, the average thickness is only 1.1 km, and the surface does not rise above 2 km. The bed of this shield over large areas is submerged below ocean level, its average depth is about 400 m. So the glacier of West Antarctica is a real “marine” ice sheet, the only one currently existing on Earth.
Of particular interest are the ice shelves of Antarctica, which serve as a floating continuation of its land and “sea” covers. There are practically no such glaciers outside Antarctica. Their total area is 1.5 million square km, and the largest of them, the Ross and Ronne-Filchner ice shelves, occupying the inland parts of the Ross and Weddell Seas, have an area of 0.6 million square km each. The floating ice of these glaciers is separated from the “main” sheet by abutment lines, and its outer boundaries are formed by frontal cliffs, or barriers, which are constantly renewed due to the calving of icebergs. The ice thickness at the rear boundaries can reach up to 1–1.3 km; near the barriers it rarely exceeds 150–200 m.
Antarctic ice spreads from several centers to the periphery of the ice sheet. In different parts of it this movement occurs at different speeds. In the center of Antarctica, as in Greenland, ice moves slowly; near the glacial edge its speed increases to many tens and hundreds of meters per year. And this is where ice flows move fastest, discharging into the open ocean. Their speeds often reach a kilometer per year, and one of the ice streams of West Antarctica, the Pine Island Glacier, “does” several kilometers per year.
However, most ice streams do not flow into the ocean, but into ice shelves. Ice streams of this type move more slowly, their speeds do not exceed 300–800 m/year. This “slowness” is usually explained by resistance from ice shelves, which themselves, as a rule, are inhibited by shores and shoals. In this regard, experts predict that global warming may cause a kind of “domino effect”: temperatures will rise - ice shelves will collapse, these glaciers will no longer exist - ice streams will be freed, their speeds will increase sharply, giving rise to a massive “descent” of ice into the ocean. And this could lead to a catastrophically rapid rise in sea levels, promising major troubles for all coastal areas of the Earth, including those far from Antarctica.
The climate of Antarctica is cold and dry. Moisture-carrying cyclones, which arise due to temperature contrasts between the Southern Ocean and the ice sheet, affect only the coastal parts of the mainland. They rarely penetrate into its interior regions, which are dominated by the Antarctic anticyclone. This determines the distribution of precipitation: the high internal plateau of East Antarctica annually receives only 5–10 g/sq. cm of snow; on the lower West Antarctic shield this amount doubles, and in coastal areas it increases to 60–90 g/sq. cm.
Antarctica is characterized by an extremely low position of the food limit. It lies at sea level, so the entire glacial surface is a continuous feeding area. Therefore, although little snow falls here, its total arrival is many times greater than the loss from melting. However, the ice sheet is not growing. The increase in ice mass is also balanced by consumption, in which, however, the main role belongs not to melting, but to losses associated with the breaking off of icebergs.
After a long study of the mass balance of Antarctica, researchers came to the conclusion that its inputs amount to about 2 thousand cubic km of ice, and its output, in which iceberg runoff plays a major role, exceeds this value. And although the total ice consumption here is known only approximately, the prevailing opinion is that this balance is negative and the ice cover is shrinking. Although there are many experts who disagree with this and believe that, on the contrary, it is growing. So our knowledge of Antarctica is still insufficient to say with certainty what the nature of its modern evolution is, what its response to upcoming climate changes will be and, finally, what role it may play in current changes in sea levels. However, recent advances in geosciences give us hope that we are on the verge of solving this mystery. The source of optimism lies in the enormous opportunities opening up in connection with the development of space imaging and satellite geodesy methods. It is already possible to count and measure icebergs in the Southern Ocean, and it is possible to directly determine, through repeated measurements from space, changes in the height and area of the ice sheet. Let's be patient and wait for the results.
The glaciation of Greenland and Antarctica is typically cover. The shape and structure of both covers, the nature of their movement, the degree of impact on the surrounding nature suggest their exceptional proximity to the glacial covers of the past. I want to step on their ice and exclaim: “Here they are, the ice monsters of Agassiz, who once buried Europe and America!” And there is no exaggeration in this, they are genuine people from the Ice Age, its remnants. Judging by the excellent preservation and abundant snow supply of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, they are not at all poorly adapted to the conditions of the modern era.
Of course, the entire glacial shell of the planet is now not the same as it was 20 thousand years ago, but it has not disappeared, it has only shrunk. It has contracted more than once in the past, after which it has been restored again and again. Large fluctuations in glaciation are a characteristic feature of the Ice Age, which is still ongoing.
Loading...