‘Triple whammy’ takes toll on Arctic erosion
Coastal erosion is a growing problem related to AGW you don’t hear much about. Erosion, and habitat and property loss, is related to sea level rise, but can be compounded by other things such as changes in storm intensity and frequency and by fetch and exposure duration, which in the Arctic is increasing due to sea ice loss.
U. COLORADO—The combined effect of declining sea ice, warming seawater, and increased wave activity is causing the northern coastline of Alaska to erode by up to one-third the length of a football field each year.
Robert Anderson, associate professor of geological sciences at the University of Colorado at Boulder, says the conditions have led to the steady retreat of 30 to 45 feet a year of the 12-foot-high bluffs.
The bluffs are actually frozen blocks of silt and peat containing 50 to 80 percent ice—which are toppled into the Beaufort Sea during the summer months by a combination of large waves pounding the shoreline and warm seawater melting the base of the bluffs.
Once the blocks have fallen, the coastal seawater melts them in a matter of days, sweeping the silty material out to sea.
The problem is caused by several factors, including increased erosion along the Alaskan coastline due to longer ice-free summer conditions and warmer seawater bathing the coast, Anderson says.
The third potential factor is that the longer the sea ice is detached from the coastline, the further out to sea the sea-ice edge will be.
This open-ocean distance between the sea ice and the shore, known as the “fetch,” increases both the energy of waves crashing into the coast and the height to which warm seawater can come into contact with the frozen bluffs.
“What we are seeing now is a triple whammy effect,” Anderson says.
“Since the summer Arctic sea ice cover continues to decline and Arctic air and sea temperatures continue to rise, we really don’t see any prospect for this process ending.
Read the full story on Futurity here
2 Responses to ‘Triple whammy’ takes toll on Arctic erosion
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Archives
- January 2013 (10)
- December 2012 (2)
- November 2012 (2)
- August 2012 (4)
- July 2012 (4)
- June 2012 (3)
- May 2012 (2)
- April 2012 (4)
- March 2012 (5)
- February 2012 (6)
- January 2012 (3)
- November 2011 (3)
- October 2011 (3)
- September 2011 (2)
- August 2011 (11)
- July 2011 (11)
- June 2011 (5)
- May 2011 (17)
- April 2011 (6)
- March 2011 (5)
- February 2011 (8)
- January 2011 (9)
- December 2010 (8)
- November 2010 (15)
- October 2010 (16)
- September 2010 (6)
- August 2010 (13)
- July 2010 (8)
- June 2010 (26)
- May 2010 (18)
- April 2010 (26)
- March 2010 (42)
- February 2010 (61)
- January 2010 (24)
- December 2009 (43)
- November 2009 (30)
- October 2009 (29)
- September 2009 (36)
- August 2009 (31)
- July 2009 (33)
- June 2009 (23)
- May 2009 (19)
- April 2009 (21)
- March 2009 (19)
- February 2009 (7)
- January 2009 (19)
- December 2008 (20)
- November 2008 (15)
- October 2008 (8)
- September 2008 (13)
- August 2008 (8)
- July 2008 (12)
- June 2008 (14)
- May 2008 (17)
- April 2008 (11)
- March 2008 (11)
- February 2008 (16)
- January 2008 (11)
- December 2007 (7)
- November 2007 (18)
- October 2007 (10)
- September 2007 (18)
- August 2007 (25)
- July 2007 (18)
- June 2007 (4)






[...] more nutrients for phytoplankton in generally nutrient-poor surface waters). You might also expect greater coastal erosion (which is compounded by sea level rise) and effects on shipping, ocean oil refineries, wind farms, [...]
[...] more nutrients for phytoplankton in generally nutrient-poor surface waters). You might also expect greater coastal erosion (which is compounded by sea level rise) and effects on shipping, ocean oil refineries, wind farms, [...]