Search

In Greenland, 87% of the glacierized area terminates in the ocean, but mass lost at the ice‐ocean interface, or frontal ablation, has not yet been fully quantified. Using measurements and models we calculate frontal ablation of Greenland's 213 outlet and 537 peripheral glaciers and find a total frontal ablation of 481.8 ± 24.0 for 2000–2010 and 510.2 ± 18.6 Gt a−1 for 2010–2020. Ice discharge accounted for ∼90% of frontal ablation during both periods, while mass loss due to terminus retreat comprised the remainder. Only 16 glaciers were responsible for the majority (>50%) of frontal ablation from 2010 to 2020. These estimates, along with the climatic‐basal balance, allow for a more complete accounting of Greenland Ice Sheet and peripheral glacier mass balance. In total, Greenland accounted for ∼90% of Northern Hemisphere frontal ablation for 2000–2010 and 2010–2020. Plain Language Summary: We estimate the mass of ice lost from all Greenland glaciers that entered the ocean during each of the last two decades. This ice loss at the front of these marine‐terminating glaciers is called frontal ablation and is approximately equal to the mass of icebergs entering the ocean. Frontal ablation is important because 87% of glacier area in Greenland ends in the ocean, through 750 outlets, and previous work has only approximated frontal ablation. This study quantifies it for the first time, helping to close the mass budget for the Greenland Ice Sheet and better partition its mass balance into components. We find that Greenland accounts for ∼90% of all Northern Hemisphere frontal ablation and, of that contribution, just 17 glaciers for 2000–2010 and 16 glaciers for 2010–2020 account for more than half of total Greenland frontal ablation. Key Points: Frontal ablation of the Greenland Ice Sheet averaged 510.2 ± 18.6 Gt a−1 for 2010–2020, ∼90% of which came from ice dischargeThe frontal ablation we measured is larger than the total mass loss from the ice sheet, indicating a positive climatic‐basal balanceOnly 16 glaciers account for 50% of the total frontal ablation from the Greenland Ice Sheet [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge of frontal ablation from marine-terminating glaciers (i.e., mass lost at the calving face) is critical for constraining glacier mass balance, improving projections of mass change, and identifying the processes that govern frontal mass loss. Here, we discuss the challenges involved in computing frontal ablation and the unique issues pertaining to both glaciers and ice sheets. Frontal ablation estimates require numerous datasets, including glacier terminus area change, thickness, surface velocity, density, and climatic mass balance. Observations and models of these variables have improved over the past decade, but significant gaps and regional discrepancies remain, and better quantification of temporal variability in frontal ablation is needed. Despite major advances in satellite-derived large-scale datasets, large uncertainties remain with respect to ice thickness, depth-averaged velocities, and the bulk density of glacier ice close to calving termini or grounding lines. We suggest ways in which we can move toward globally complete frontal ablation estimates, highlighting areas where we need improved datasets and increased collaboration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Glacier velocity measurements are essential to understand ice flow mechanics, monitor natural hazards, and make accurate projections of future sea-level rise. Despite these important applications, the method most commonly used to derive glacier velocity maps, feature tracking, relies on empirical parameter choices that rarely account for glacier physics or uncertainty. Here we test two statistics- and physics-based metrics to assess velocity maps from a range of existing feature-tracking workflows at Kaskawulsh Glacier, Canada. Based on inter-comparisons with ground-truth data, velocity maps with metrics falling within our recommended ranges contain fewer erroneous measurements and more spatially correlated noise than velocity maps with metrics that deviate from those ranges. Thus, these metric ranges are suitable for refining feature-tracking workflows and evaluating the resulting velocity products. We have released an open-source software package for computing and visualizing these metrics, the GLAcier Feature Tracking testkit (GLAFT). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]