the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Greenland's annual and interannual mass variations from GRACE/GRACE-FO linked with climatic indices
Abstract. The ongoing global warming threatens the Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS). The GIS exhibits an overall mass loss since 1990. This ice mass loss varies annually and interannually, reflecting the intricate interactions between the ice sheet and the atmospheric and oceanic circulations. In this study, we look at the temporal variations of the GIS mass balance, from April 2002 to the end of 2023, using data from the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) and its Follow-On (GRACE-FO) missions. We analyze the common cycles and the connections between GIS mass changes, climatic indices, and meteorological parameters, namely: North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), Greenland Blocking Index (GBI), Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), temperature, precipitation, and surface albedo. Each variable is cumulated over time to align with the monthly mass variations since 2002. By applying Empirical Orthogonal Functions to mass variation data derived from the International Combination Service for Time-variable Gravity Fields (COST-G) solution, we identified five principal modes of variability, explaining 67.5 % of the total variance. The primary mode captures annual and interannual frequencies, ranging from 4 to 11 years, while subsequent modes only add information on the interannual part. Wavelet Analysis reveals significant annual correlations between ice mass changes and temperature (r = -0.88), NAO (r = 0.74) or GBI (r = -0.85). There are also notable lags such as a 3.5 year delayed response of the AMO to GIS mass variations during the 22 years of data. The delayed response can be linked to the time needed for Greenland’s lost mass of low-density water to reach the area where the AMO index is calculated. We also suggest an annual cycle connecting the GIS mass changes, the climatic indices, and the meteorological parameters. On the other hand, we observe complex interannual variations, including the role of sea surface temperature and atmospheric pressure in modulating ice mass balance, temperature, and precipitation. Results also indicate that cycles of 11 years in NAO, GBI, and temperature are strongly linked to solar activity. Furthermore, we observe cycles, lasting between 4 and 7 years, that align with studies linking them to atmospheric oscillations or the effect of the solid Earth’s internal geodynamics.
- Preprint
(1353 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-558', Anonymous Referee #1, 04 Apr 2025
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Florent Cambier, 30 May 2025
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-558', Anonymous Referee #2, 29 Apr 2025
This manuscript presents a detailed analysis of Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS) mass variations using GRACE/GRACE-FO data (2002–2023) and investigates their connections with climatic indices (NAO, GBI, AMO) and meteorological parameters (temperature, precipitation, albedo). The study employs Empirical Orthogonal Function (EOF) decomposition and wavelet analysis to identify dominant modes of variability and their relationships with external forcings. The topic is timely and relevant to understanding GIS mass balance under climate change. While the methodology is generally sound, some aspects require clarification, validation, and refinement to strengthen the conclusions.
The use of GRACE/GRACE-FO data (COST-G solutions) is appropriate, and the handling of gaps (interpolation and FFT-based gap-filling) is reasonable. Inclusion of multiple climatic indices (NAO, GBI, AMO) and meteorological parameters (temperature, precipitation, albedo) provides a holistic view of GIS mass balance drivers. The 3.5-year lag between AMO and GIS mass loss is an interesting result, plausibly explained by freshwater transport timescales.The proposed annual cycle (Fig. 5) synthesizes interactions between atmospheric, oceanic, and cryospheric processes coherently.
There are still some major issues that should be properly addressed before consideration of publication.
- The higher EOF modes (M2–M5) are less interpretable, and their physical significance is unclear. M5’s peaks in 2017–2018 could reflect interpolation artifacts rather than real signals.
- The 11-year solar cycle link seemsplausible but speculative given the short (22-year) dataset. The >15-year signal is intriguing but statistically uncertain.
- The cumulative approach for indices (NAO, GBI, AMO) is innovative but lacks a clear physical basis. How do cumulative indices better represent mass balance than raw anomalies?
- No independent validation (e.g., altimetry, regional climate models) is provided to cross-check GRACE-derived mass changes.
- Some methodological details are unclear (e.g., "time-weighted thermal availability," wavelet significance thresholds).
Overall, this study makes a valuable contribution to understanding GIS mass variability and its climatic drivers. The methodology looks sound, and the results seems plausible, but some claims (e.g., solar cycle link, >15-year periodicity) require caution due to dataset limitations.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-558-RC2 - AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Florent Cambier, 30 May 2025
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
224 | 66 | 10 | 300 | 13 | 12 |
- HTML: 224
- PDF: 66
- XML: 10
- Total: 300
- BibTeX: 13
- EndNote: 12
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1