2006
DOI: 10.3189/172756506781828584
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Calculating ice melt beneath a debris layer using meteorological data

Abstract: Generalized numerical models of sub-debris ice ablation are preferable to empirical approaches for predicting runoff and glacier response to climate change, as empirical methods are sitespecific and strongly dependent upon the conditions prevailing during the measurement period. We present a modified surface energy-balance model to calculate melt beneath a surface debris layer from daily mean meteorological variables. Despite numerous simplifications, the model performs well and modelled melt rates give a good… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

31
423
0
4

Year Published

2011
2011
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 347 publications
(458 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
31
423
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, under the assumption of uniform debris conditions over larger areas (similar grain size distribution, similar lithology, similar water content), heat transfer is governed by thermal resistance. For daily observations, a linear vertical temperature gradient within the debris column can be expected (Nicholson and Benn, 2006) and it can be assumed that energy transferred through the debris cover depends on the temperature gradient dT/dz and its thermal resistance R only (Nakawo and Takahashi, 1982):…”
Section: Characteristics Of Sub-debris Ice Meltmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, under the assumption of uniform debris conditions over larger areas (similar grain size distribution, similar lithology, similar water content), heat transfer is governed by thermal resistance. For daily observations, a linear vertical temperature gradient within the debris column can be expected (Nicholson and Benn, 2006) and it can be assumed that energy transferred through the debris cover depends on the temperature gradient dT/dz and its thermal resistance R only (Nakawo and Takahashi, 1982):…”
Section: Characteristics Of Sub-debris Ice Meltmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lambrecht et al: A comparison of glacier melt Nicholson and Benn, 2006) highlighting important differences between clear ice and sub-debris melt due to changes in individual terms of the energy balance. While net radiation is the main energy source for ice melt on debris-free glaciers, latent heat flux and conduction through the supra-glacial material determine the sub-debris melt rates .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Energybased models are nowadays available for snow and ice melt (Lehning et al 2002;Nicholson and Benn 2006;Brock et al 2007), but they may require more information, including (present, and future for projections) subdaily solar radiation, wind velocity, and air moisture that were not available here, especially in the last 30 years. In this study, for hydrological model calibration we relied upon disaggregation of monthly data to reconstruct missing daily data, which may introduce noise at the daily scale.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, there is the reduction of albedo induced by the particle cover (Warren and Wiscombe, 1980) and the resulting increase of absorbed global radiation and available melt energy. Second, there is the thermal resistance of the particle layer and the resulting decrease of heat conduction towards the glacier surface (Nicholson and Benn, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, the modification of glacier surface ablation by these types of supraglacial particle layers can be quantified by two different approaches. These are either statistics-based models that parameterize the impacts of particle covers on the basis of empirical data (Hagg and others, 2008;Lambrecht and others, 2011;Juen and others, 2014) or physics-based models that explicitly consider the heat conduction through the particle layer down to the glacier surface (Nicholson and Benn, 2006;Brock and others, 2010;Reid and Brock, 2010;Reid and others, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%