H. Goelzer, S. Nowicki, A. Payne, E. Larour, H. Seroussi, W. H. Lipscomb, J. Gregory, A. Abe-Ouchi, A. Shepherd, E. Simon, C. Agosta, P. Alexander, A. Aschwanden, A. Barthel, R. Calov, C. Chambers, Y. Choi, J. Cuzzone, C. Dumas, T. Edwards, D. Felikson, X. Fettweis, N. R. Golledge, R. Greve, A. Humbert, P. Huybrechts, S. Le clec'h, V. Lee, G. Leguy, C. Little, D. P. Lowry, M. Morlighem, I. Nias, A. Quiquet, M. Rückamp, N.-J. Schlegel, D. A. Slater, R. S. Smith, F. Straneo, L. Tarasov, R. van de Wal, M. van den Broeke, Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research [Utrecht] (IMAU), Utrecht University [Utrecht], Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement [Gif-sur-Yvette] (LSCE), Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), Glaces et Continents, Climats et Isotopes Stables (GLACCIOS), Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), Modélisation du climat (CLIM), University of St Andrews. Environmental Change Research Group, University of St Andrews. School of Geography & Sustainable Development, Earth System Sciences, Geography, Physical Geography, Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Marine and Atmospheric Research, Sub Dynamics Meteorology, Proceskunde, and Sub Algemeen Marine & Atmospheric Res
The Greenland ice sheet is one of the largest contributors to global meansea-level rise today and is expected to continue to lose mass as the Arcticcontinues to warm. The two predominant mass loss mechanisms are increasedsurface meltwater run-off and mass loss associated with the retreat ofmarine-terminating outlet glaciers. In this paper we use a large ensemble ofGreenland ice sheet models forced by output from a representative subset ofthe Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) global climate models to project ice sheet changes and sea-level risecontributions over the 21st century. The simulations are part of theIce Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). We estimate thesea-level contribution together with uncertainties due to future climateforcing, ice sheet model formulations and ocean forcing for the twogreenhouse gas concentration scenarios RCP8.5 and RCP2.6. The resultsindicate that the Greenland ice sheet will continue to lose mass in bothscenarios until 2100, with contributions of 90±50 and 32±17 mm to sea-level rise for RCP8.5 and RCP2.6, respectively. The largestmass loss is expected from the south-west of Greenland, which is governed bysurface mass balance changes, continuing what is already observed today.Because the contributions are calculated against an unforced controlexperiment, these numbers do not include any committed mass loss, i.e. massloss that would occur over the coming century if the climate forcingremained constant. Under RCP8.5 forcing, ice sheet model uncertaintyexplains an ensemble spread of 40 mm, while climate model uncertainty andocean forcing uncertainty account for a spread of 36 and 19 mm,respectively. Apart from those formally derived uncertainty ranges, thelargest gap in our knowledge is about the physical understanding andimplementation of the calving process, i.e. the interaction of the ice sheetwith the ocean., info:eu-repo/semantics/published