This is an old revision of the document!
Table of Contents
Last Deglaciation Ice Sheets
Go back to the main core experiment design page.
Go back to the main working group page.
Please note, this page is a work in progress and is not ready for discussion yet.
Please use the Discussion section below to specifically comment on the choice of ice sheet reconstructions for the core experiment.
Foreword
For the core experiment, there is a choice of two global ice sheet reconstructions:
- ICE6G_C, provided by Dick Peltier, Rosmarie Drummond and co-authors
- Lev Tarasov's reconstruction, provided by Lev Tarasov and co-authors.
Please one of these reconstructions for your Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) experiment, as per the LGM working group requirements, and continue to use the same reconstruction through the transient last deglaciation core simulation.
Those groups that are able may wish to carry out two simulations; one with each ice sheet reconstruction.
ICE6G_C Reconstruction
Key references:
- Argus, D. F., Peltier, W. R., Drummond, R. & Moore, A. W. The Antarctica component of postglacial rebound model ICE-6G_C (VM5a) based on GPS positioning, exposure age dating of ice thicknesses, and relative sea level histories. Geophys. J. Int. ggu140 (2014).
- Peltier, W. R., Argus, D. F. & Drummond, R. Space geodesy constrains ice age terminal deglaciation: The global ICE-6G_C (VM5a) model. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2014JB011176 (2015).
Ice Evolution, 21-0 ka
The ice mask in this reconstruction is fractional. For the purpose of the animations (below), we have used > 80 % ice cover per grid cell.1)
Sea Level Equivalent
The information in this section was provided directly by Dick Peltier et al., October 2014:
ICE6G_C Ice Sheets
Time dependent ice-equivalent contribution to eustatic sea level rise [relatice to present day] from each of the primary geographical regions from which grounded ice loss occurred during the [last] deglaciation process. 2)
ICE6G_C compared to previous versions
| Ice-equivalent contribution to eustatic sea level rise (m) 3) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Final ICE-4G | ICE-5G v1.2 | ICE6G_C | |
| 26 ka | |||
| N. America (incl. Inuit area) | 54.92 | 83.71 | 87.01 |
| Greenland & Iceland | 5.43 | 2.45 | 2.39 |
| Fennoscandia | 8.91 | 11.79 | 11.95 |
| Barents/Kara Seas | 12.26 | 9.29 | 10.61 |
| U.K. | 0.35 | 1.65 | 0.83 |
| Patagonia | 0.47 | 0.55 | 0.87 |
| W. Antarctica | 8.33 | 9.68 | 7.37 |
| E. Antarctica | 7.12 | 8.36 | 6.21 |
| TOTAL | 97.79 | 127.48 | 127.25 |
| 21 ka | |||
| N. America (incl. Innuit area) | 64.24 | 81.47 | 78.82 |
| Greenland & Iceland | 6.38 | 2.49 | 2.41 |
| Fennoscandia | 10.39 | 11.19 | 10.10 |
| Barents/Kara Seas | 14.05 | 8.43 | 7.34 |
| U.K. | 0.42 | 1.48 | 0.57 |
| Patagonia | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.82 |
| W. Antarctica | 9.74 | 9.68 | 7.37 |
| E. Antarctica | 8.35 | 8.36 | 6.21 |
| TOTAL | 114.12 | 123.65 | 113.68 |
Lev Tarasov's Reconstruction
Key references:
- To be updated.
Ice Evolution, 21-0 ka
The ice mask in this reconstruction is based on 100 % ice or 0 % ice.4)
Points To Discuss
Please think about the following points and add any comments on these or any other aspects of the experiment design to the discussion section below: [Topics will be added here as they are raised below or by email.]
- No specific points yet.
References
- Argus, D. F., Peltier, W. R., Drummond, R. & Moore, A. W. The Antarctica component of postglacial rebound model ICE-6G_C (VM5a) based on GPS positioning, exposure age dating of ice thicknesses, and relative sea level histories. Geophys. J. Int. ggu140 (2014).
- Peltier, W. R., Argus, D. F. & Drummond, R. Space geodesy constrains ice age terminal deglaciation: The global ICE-6G_C (VM5a) model. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2014JB011176 (2015).
[ PMIP3 Wiki Home ] - [ Help! ] - [ Wiki syntax ]
Discussion on core experiment ice sheets
In answer to your question:
Should ICE-6G_C be provided here in its smoothed format, as offered by Dick Peltier (above; smoothed_fields), its original unsmoothed format, or both?
For CESM, we would like both the smoothed and original unsmoothed versions of ICE-6G_C.
Dick has provided us with 10 arcminute resolution data. Will this suffice instead of the smoothed fields? Which he says will take longer to provide.
Yes, this works very well for CESM. We need as input not only the topography but also estimates of its subgrid variability.