Projections of precipitation and temperatures in Greenland and the impact of spatially uniform anomalies on the evolution  of the ice sheet

Bochow, Nils; Poltronieri, Anna; Boers, Niklas

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-5825-2024

Articles | Volume 18, issue 12

https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-5825-2024

© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-5825-2024

© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 18, issue 12

Research article

|

12 Dec 2024

Research article |

| 12 Dec 2024

Projections of precipitation and temperatures in Greenland and the impact of spatially uniform anomalies on the evolution of the ice sheet

Nils Bochow, Anna Poltronieri, and Niklas Boers

Download

Final revised paper (published on 12 Dec 2024)
Preprint (discussion started on 27 Jun 2024)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on egusphere-2024-1597', Anonymous Referee #1, 31 Jul 2024

Please see attached file.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1597-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Nils Bochow, 09 Sep 2024
  
  The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-1597/egusphere-2024-1597-AC1-supplement.pdf
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1597-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on egusphere-2024-1597', Clemens Schannwell, 05 Aug 2024

Dear Authors,
please find my review in the attached pdf.
Best wishes,
Clemens Schannwell

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1597-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Nils Bochow, 09 Sep 2024
  
  The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-1597/egusphere-2024-1597-AC2-supplement.pdf
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1597-AC2

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (11 Sep 2024) by Michiel van den Broeke

AR by Nils Bochow on behalf of the Authors (30 Sep 2024) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (02 Oct 2024) by Michiel van den Broeke

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (14 Oct 2024)

RR by Clemens Schannwell (18 Oct 2024)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Overall, I am happy with the revisions made by the authors and I believe the manuscript is almost ready for publication. I only have a number of smaller comments that I think should be addressed before publication:

Abstract: L1-5 There is a lot of “assume” and “often” in the first few sentences. I suggest to rework these first few sentences and try avoiding unnecessary repetitions.

L8: Why do you not give the full range but instead write “less than 0%”?

L12: introduce abbreviation “GMT” at first mention

L15: Please mention at least one of the “key regions”. Could be done with by adding “such as…”

L37-38: I think it would be appropriate to add at least one citation of an earlier effort to include dynamic ice sheets into ESMs (not EMICS). For example Mikolajewicz et al. 2007, GRL, doi: 10.1029/2007GL031173 or Vizcaíno et al. 2008, Clim Dyn., doi: 10.1007/s00382-008-0369-7

L39-40: I am a bit biased, but I suggest to change “make it currently virtually impossible” to “currently challenging” or similar. As our group’s paper shows, simulations of the entire last deglaciation (26,000 years) are certainly feasible now (see doi.org/10.5194/cp-2024-55).

L74: change “not necessarily true” to “unlikely to be true”

L92: I did find the last section of the sentence confusing and hence suggest to delete it. If the authors would like to keep the sentence, then I suggest at least that they add that these numbers refer to the radiative forcing and that the numbers following the hyphen indicate the increase in watts per meter squared.

L94 Are “tas” and “pr” really needed? It is not used anywhere else right?

L140: parentheses missing around Zeitz et al. (2021).

L161: “We spin up” instead of “We spinup”

L211-212: I do not understand why you need to normalise the ice volume? Do your simulations not start from the same initial state anyway?

L264-L265 “almost the entire Greenland Ice Sheet shows…”

L276: Here and throughout, change “similar pictures arise” to “similar patterns are observed” or similar.

L287: “magnitudes of the temperatures”

L307 “has a moderate correlation”

L341-343 Do you mean in comparison to the historical period? Because all of the emission scenarios should be the same for the historical period, right?

L431: Delete “Little surprisingly”

Section 4: I think it is worth adding a few sentences/paragraphs that spatially varying precip. sensitivites (exp iii) do not seem to matter in your simulations.

L604: Again, I think this is too strong a statement. Such simulations exist, see comment above. My suggestion would be something like: “remain rare” or similar.

Figures:

Fig.4 Second -yaxis. I find the term “sea-level rise” not precise enough. I think something like “Ice volume [m of sea-level equivalent]“would be more appropriate.

Fig. 3 caption: Please add that the contour is white and make the contour thicker and maybe even label the contour like you do in Fig. 2

Fig. 5: Can you increase the legend fontsize?
Fig. 6 caption: Please add somewhere that dashed-dotted lines are on top of the dashed lines to the caption

Hide

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (21 Oct 2024) by Michiel van den Broeke

AR by Nils Bochow on behalf of the Authors (23 Oct 2024) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

Using the latest climate models, we update the understanding of how the Greenland ice sheet responds to climate changes. We found that precipitation and temperature changes in Greenland vary across different regions. Our findings suggest that using uniform estimates for temperature and precipitation for modelling the response of the ice sheet can overestimate ice loss in Greenland. Therefore, this study highlights the need for spatially resolved data in predicting the ice sheet's future.