Ocean mass from GRACE and glacial isostatic adjustment

Chambers, Don P.; Wahr, John; Tamisiea, Mark E.; Nerem, R. Steven. 2010 Ocean mass from GRACE and glacial isostatic adjustment. Journal of Geophysical Research, 115, B11415. 9, pp. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JB007530

Before downloading, please read NORA policies.

Preview

Text 2010JGR,_B007530_Tamisiea_2010.pdf - Published Version Download (1MB)

Abstract/Summary

We examine geoid rates and ocean mass corrections from two published global glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) models, both of which have been used in previous studies to estimate ocean mass trends from Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite gravity data. These two models are different implementations of the same ice loading history and use similar mantle viscosity profiles. The model results are compared with each other and with geoid rates determined from GRACE during August 2002 to November 2009. When averaged over the global ocean, the two models have rates that differ by nearly 1 mm yr (1) of ocean mass, with the first model giving a correction closer to 2 mm yr (1) and the second closer to 1 mm yr (1). By comparing the two models, we have discovered that 50% of the difference is caused by a global (land + ocean) mean in the first model. While it is appropriate to include this mean when subtracting GIA effects from measurements of sea level change measured by tide gauges or satellite altimetry, the mean should not be included when subtracting GIA effects from ocean mass variations derived from satellite gravity data. When this mean is removed, the ocean mass corrections from the two models still disagree by 0.4 mm yr(-1). We trace the residual difference to the fact that the first model also has large trends over the ocean related to large rates in its predicted degree 2, order 1 geoid coefficients. Such oceanic trends are not observed by GRACE nor are they predicted by the second model, and they are shown to be inconsistent with the polar wander rates predicted by the first model itself. If these two problems are corrected, we find that the two model predictions agree at the 3% level. On the basis of this analysis, we conclude that the ocean mass correction for GRACE is closer to 1 mm yr(-1) than 2 mm yr(-1), although significant uncertainties remain

Item Type:	Publication - Article
Digital Object Identifier (DOI):	https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JB007530
Programmes:	Oceans 2025 > Climate, ocean circulation and sea level
ISSN:	0148-0227
Additional Information. Not used in RCUK Gateway to Research.:	Chambers, Don P. Wahr, John Tamisiea, Mark E. Nerem, R. Steven: NASA Interdisciplinary Science Team ; NERC Oceans 2025 program ; Jet Propulsion Laboratory [1259025, 1390432] The GRACE data are furnished by the GRACE Science Data System and are available at the NASA Physical Oceanography Distributed Active Archive Center (PO.DAAC) at Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California. We are grateful to W. R. Peltier for providing his predicted GIA geoid rates, to Geruo A and Shijie Zhong for help with the Paulson et al. model, to J. Willis for providing steric data from the Argo profilers, and to Riccardo Riva and three anonymous reviewers/editors for their comments on the text. This research was carried out under a grant from the NASA Interdisciplinary Science Team and the NERC Oceans 2025 program. Work at the University of Colorado was partially supported by contracts 1259025 and 1390432 from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Amer geophysical union Washington
Additional Keywords:	ICE AGE EARTH; SURFACE BUDGET
NORA Subject Terms:	Marine Sciences
Date made live:	24 Feb 2011 17:36 +0 (UTC)
URI:	https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/13624

Actions (login required)

View Item

Document Downloads

More statistics for this item...