Last weekend, I found myself in Chilean Patagonia, face to face with a cluster of icebergs at the foot of a glacier in Torres del Paine National Park.
Seeing something in person that I’d previously seen only in photographs was a powerful experience.
The guide mentioned that the glacier is receding at a clip of 4 kilometers per year.
That’s fast.
But nothing was more powerful than seeing–and hearing– two chunks of an iceberg crack and begin to float away towards the shore.
If you were wondering whether global warming is real, get down to Patagonia fast… those icebergs are going, going, almost gone.
Photos: Julie Schwietert Collazo (Matador Travel)
About the Author
More By This Author
- Matadorian Camden Luxford opens hostel in Peru (12 comments)
- Fall 2010 Glimpse Correspondents announced (2 comments)
- Meet a Matador Team Member: Lindsay Clark (3 comments)
Related Posts
16 Comments... join the discussion!
-
-
4 km a year is huge. Millions of people in South America are in big, big trouble if those glaciers go.
↵ -
incredible photos Julie. Two years ago I looked at some patagonian glaciers on the mountain Tronador near Bariloche. I was with Lau's father, who had first seen the area more than 50 years ago. We were looking at an almost bare mountainside; he remembered when it was all covered by a glacier. I agree with you: you can't really feel any of this until you're down there seeing it for yourself.
↵ -
its natural
↵ -
I'm agree with you. This is an important theme. Congratulations for your post.
↵ -
Maybe so, but I still enjoy reading Michael Crichton's State of Fear.
↵ -
nice pictures julie, i see that you finally got some good weather in Patagonia. I must tell you that the information that the guide give to you is wrong, Grey Glacier is receiding 30 meters per year and that is fast. anyway but not 4kilometers per year. Grey Glacier is 12 kilometers long from the base of the mountains to the front at the border of Grey Glacier so if it were receiding 4 kilometers per year it would dissapear in just 3 years….and i would find myself without job. There are some glaciers that advances or retreat some kilometers per year but not Grey Glacier. I have checked this information with Gino Cassasa a local glaciologist who has studied during years the South Pagonia Icefield. I am sorry having to tell this but some guides inside Torres del Paine National Park are not well informed abaut aspects like geology, flora and fauna, many of them are not local guides and no have studied enough.. By other way that a glacier lost ice during summer is normal, they recover the mass lost during winter, on an ideal situation there is equilibrium between the mass lost in summer and the ice formed in winter, problem with global warming is that the equilibrium has been broke and the mass lost in summer is much more than mass formed in winter. Greetings from Patagonia Patricio
↵ -
- We should be more concerned about Global Warming and Climate Change because Typhoons are getting much stronger and there are greater incidence of Flooding. take for example the recent Typhoon Ketsana which devastated some countries in South East Asia.
↵ -
Global warming is becoming such an obvious problem that someone somewhere other than the US President needs to step up to help drive a massive campaign which aims to reduce Global Warming.
↵ -
Sunshine speeded 1940s Swiss glacier melt: scientists
Dec 14 01:14 PM US/Eastern
A surge in sunshine more than 60 years ago helped Swiss mountain glaciers melt faster than today, even though warmer average temperatures are being recorded now, Swiss researchers said Monday.Their study into the impact of solar radiation on Alpine glaciers made the “surprising discovery” that in the 1940s, and especially summer 1947, the ice floes lost the most ice since measurements begin 95 years ago, according to Zurich’s Federal Institute of Technology (ETHZ).
Yet, average temperatures have been rising in the past two decades and scientists have said glacier melt is accelerating at unprecedented levels under the impact of climate change.
“The surprising thing is that this paradox can be explained relatively easily with radiation,” said one the ETHZ researchers, Matthias Huss, in the university’s online review.
“This should not lead people to conclude that the current period of global warming is not really as big of a problem for the glaciers as previously assumed,” he added.
The researchers found from historic data on three Swiss glaciers, as well as radiation recordings from the eastern Alpine town of Davos, that the level of sunshine in the 1940s was eight percent higher than average and significantly higher than now.
As a result, snow and ice melted by about four percent.
A phase of less sunshine — global dimming — from the 1950s to 1980s also corresponded with the advance in the snout of glaciers.
However, the ETHZ scientists said they also found that “temperature-based opposing mechanisms” came into play about 30 years ago and have been sustained.
The study published in the peer reviewed journal “Geophysical Research Letters” is part of broader reseach into the impact of climate change on the Alps and the role of solar radiation in climate models.
Studies have shown that solar radiation can vary substantially due to cloud cover and aerosols — particles and gases — in the atmosphere.
http://www.physorg.com/news180024364.html
↵ -
According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007 – and even the most committed global warming activists do not dispute this.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html
↵ -
No Rise of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Fraction in Past 150 Years, New Research Finds
ScienceDaily (Dec. 31, 2009) — Most of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activity does not remain in the atmosphere, but is instead absorbed by the oceans and terrestrial ecosystems. In fact, only about 45 percent of emitted carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere.
However, some studies have suggested that the ability of oceans and plants to absorb carbon dioxide recently may have begun to decline and that the airborne fraction of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions is therefore beginning to increase.
Many climate models also assume that the airborne fraction will increase. Because understanding of the airborne fraction of carbon dioxide is important for predicting future climate change, it is essential to have accurate knowledge of whether that fraction is changing or will change as emissions increase.
To assess whether the airborne fraction is indeed increasing, Wolfgang Knorr of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Bristol reanalyzed available atmospheric carbon dioxide and emissions data since 1850 and considers the uncertainties in the data.
In contradiction to some recent studies, he finds that the airborne fraction of carbon dioxide has not increased either during the past 150 years or during the most recent five decades.
The research is published in Geophysical Research Letters.
Journal Reference:
1. Knorr, W. Is the airborne fraction of anthropogenic CO2 emissions increasing? Geophysical Research Letters, 2009; 36 (21): L21710 DOI: 10.1029/2009GL040613
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091230184221.htm
↵ -
Hi:
Super photos and congrats on your trip.
Glaciers contract and expand depending on the season. The glacier you visited was contracting, at the time of your visit. You claim that the cause of the glacial contraction can be explained by the Global Warming Theory. I contend that you could be correct, but then you could just as likely be incorrect Were other factors even considered? I believe that that there is currently an el-nino in the ocean off Chile. How has the glacier behaved during time of past el-ninos?
Visiting someplace for a few days does not begin to offer you enough insight to claim that the glaciers melting can be explained by the Global Warming Theory. Another comment posted by Patricio Perez seems to confirm this.
↵ -
The Global Warming Theory fear mongering makes it very profitable. Look at Copenhagen. 1200 Limos required to take deep pockets from luxury hotel suites to meeting hall down the road. Taking a Taxi was out of the question. Not enough Limos avaliable in Demark so many had to be driven in from Germany and other European coountries. Limo kept nice and warm for passengers. Massive CO2 emmissions.do not aplly to them.
140 luxury private jets were used to fly deep pockets to Copenhagen. PM of Britain took a 127 passenger jet to take him and 20 assistants to Copenhagen. Same day Prince Charles took a seperate private luxury jet to Copenhagen. I guess the dozen or so commercial flights going to Copenhagen that very same day were for the little tax payers. NO concern about massive CO2 emissions and Global Warming..
The Airport in Copenhagen ran out os space to park the Luxury jets. Deep pockets were let out in Copenhagen while Luxury jet were then flown to Norway to park. Heck with Global Warming.
Yes the Global Warming Theory is very profitable – for some. The problem is that the majority of little people will end up filling the deep pockets of the few. Why else spend so much money going to Copenhagen. No one ever asks that question.
THere are many reasons why the glacier you visited is melting. Could be a cyclicl phase it goes thru – another comments seems to indicate that. Your brief stay visiting the Glacier did not warrant implying that the glacier is melting because of Global Warming. But then fear mongering usually has little basis in fact. Too much trouble to let inconvenient facts get in the way
↵ -
Best place to check for Global Warming is on Carbon Trading Exchange.
http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/market/data/daily.jsf
Carbon offsets down to 10 cents per ton. Soon President Obama will have to rescue the banks from their loses from buying and selling Carbon Offsets – just as done last year with Credit Default Swaps and AIG. If it stays at 10 cents per ton, Global Warming will no longer be profitable and will quietly disappear.As an aside. They just checked the Antarctic Ice. The models were “wrong again” (no surprise there). The water is not warming under the ice and the ice is “not” melting.
http://fimbul.npolar.no/en/news/current/Nye_data.html
Global Warming is definitely Man Made – by the scientists who created the models to show something that cannot be backed up by actual data.
Oh well another inconvenient truthful comment which you will make disappear.
↵
