Estimation of PGR Induced Absolute Gravity Changes at Greenland GNET Stations

  • Emil NielsenEmail author
  • Gabriel Strykowski
  • Rene Forsberg
  • Finn Bo Madsen
Conference paper
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 139)


An important subject in the climate debate is the study of the major ice sheets mass balance. Knowledge of the mass balance provides understanding of changes in the relative sea-level (RSL). Several methods are used for mass balance studies but they are associated with large uncertainties. One reason for the uncertainty is the presence of the postglacial rebound (PGR) signal in the geodetic data used for mass balance estimates. Estimates of the PGR signal can be obtained by modelling and then being subtracted from the data to eliminate its influence. In this study, the PGR gravity signal will be investigated through modelling. The modelling of seven different scenarios shows that the PGR gravity signal in Greenland is less then 1 μGal/year (1 μGal = 10 nm/s2). Repeated absolute gravity (AG) measurements at selected Greenland network (GNET) GPS sites were initiated in 2009. These data will in the future help constrain PGR and present-day ice mass changes. The data is collected with an A10 absolute gravimeter, which has an accuracy of 10 μGal (manufacturer specification). Here we will evaluate the modelled PGR gravity signal at selected GNET sites and conclude that the signal is significantly smaller then the gravity instruments accuracy and a long time is needed to detect it. Also, it can be expected that the elastic signal will be larger and other data like GPS is needed to separate the viscous and elastic signal.


Greenland Postglacial rebound Absolute gravity 



Thanks go to Gudfinna Adalgeirsdottier (Danish Metrological Institute) for generating the SICOPOLIS ice model for Greenland and Giorgio Spada (Urbino University “Carlo Bo”) for assistance in working with his program.


  1. Argus DF, Peltier WR (2010) Constraining models of postglacial rebound using space geodesy: a detailed assessment of model ICE-5G (VM2) and its relatives. Geophys J Int 181:697–723Google Scholar
  2. Barletta VR, Sabadini R, Bordoni A (2008) Isolating the PGR signal in the GRACE data: impact on mass balance estimates in Antarctica and Greenland. Geophys J Int 172:18–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bevis M, Kendrick E, Smalley R Jr, Dalziel I, Caccamise D, Sasgen I, Helsen M, Taylor FW, Zhou H, Brown A, Raleigh D, Willis M, Wilson T, Konfal S (2009) Geodetic measurements of vertical crustal velocity in West Antarctica and the implications for ice mass balance. Geochem Geophys Geosyst 10:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Derbyshire FA, Larsen TB, Mosegaard K, Dahl-Jensen T, Gudmundsson O, Bach T, Gregersen S, Pedersen HA, Hanka W (2004) A first look at the Greenland lithosphere and upper mantle using Rayleigh wave tomography. Geophys J Int 158:267–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dziewonski AM, Anderson DL (1981) Preliminary reference Earth model. Phys Earth Planet Inter 25:297–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Falk R, Müller J, Lux H, Wilmes H, Wziontek H (2009) Precise gravimetric surveys with the field absolute gravimeter A10. Geodesy for planet Earth: proceedings of the 2009 IAG symposium, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 31 August to 9 September. Springer, Berlin, pp 273–279Google Scholar
  7. Farrell WE, Clark JA (1976) On postglacial sea level. Geophys J R Astron Soc 46:647–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Greve R (1997) Application of a polythermal three-dimensional ice sheet model to the Greenland ice sheet—response to steady-state and transient climate scenarios. J Climate 10:901–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Khan SA, Liu L, Wahr J, Howat I, Joughin I, van Dam T, Fleming K (2010) GPS measurements of crustal uplift near Jakobshavn Isbræ due to glacial ice mass loss. J Geophys Res 115:1–13Google Scholar
  10. Lidberg M, Johansson JM, Scherneck HG, Milne GA (2010) Recent results based on continuous GPS observations of the GIA process in Fennoscandia from BIFROST. J Geodyn 50:8–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mazzotti S, Lambert A, Henton J, James TS, Courtier N (2011) Absolute gravity calibration of GPS velocities and glacial isostatic in mid-continent North America. Geophys Res Lett 38:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mémin A, Rogister Y, Hinderer J, Omang OC, Luck B (2011) Secular gravity variation at Svalbard (Norway) from ground observations and GRACE satellite data. Geophys J Int 184:1119–1130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mémin A, Hinderer J, Rogister Y (2011) Separation of the geodetic consequences of past and present ice-mass change: influence of topography with application to Svalbard (Norway). Pure Appl Geophys. doi:10.1007/s00024-011-0399-7Google Scholar
  14. Mitrovica JX, Peltier WR (1989) Pleistocene deglaciation and the global gravity field. J Geophys Res 94:651–671Google Scholar
  15. Mitrovica J, Peltier W (1991) On postglacial geoid subsidence over the equatorial oceans. J Geophys Res 96:53–71Google Scholar
  16. Okubo S, Yoshida S, Sato T, Tamura Y, Imanishi Y (1997) Verifying the precision of a new generation absolute gravimeter FG5—comparison with superconducting gravimeters and detection of oceanic loading tide. Geophys Res Lett 24:489–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Okuno J, Nakada M (2001) Effects of water load on geophysical signals due to glacial rebound and implications for mantle viscosity. Earth Planets Space 53:1121–1135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Peltier WR (1998) Postglacial variations in the level of the sea: implications for climate dynamics and solid earth geodynamics. Rev Geophys 36:603–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Peltier WR (2004) Global glacial isostasy and the surface of the ice-age Earth: the ICE-5G (VM2) model and GRACE. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 32:111–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Peltier WR, Tushingham AM (1993) Relative Sea Level Database. IGBP PAGES/World Data Center for Paleoclimatology Data Contribution. NOAA/NCDC Paleoclimatology Program, pp 93–016Google Scholar
  21. Sella GF, Stein S, Dixon TH, Craymer M, James TS, Mazzotti S, Dokka RK (2007) Observation of glacial isostatic adjustment in stable North America with GPS. Geophys Res Lett 34:1–6. doi:10.1029/2006GL027081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Spada G, Stocchi P (2007) SELEN—A Fortran 90 program for solving the sea-level-equation. Comput Geosci 33:538–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Spada G, Barletta VR, Klemann V, Riva REM, Martinec Z, Gasperini P, Lund B, Wolf D, Vermeersen LLA, King MA (2011) A benchmark study for glacial isostatic adjustment codes. Geophys J Int 185:106–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Steffen H, Gitlein O, Denker H, Müller J, Timmen L (2009) Present rate of uplift in Fennoscandia from GRACE and absolute gravimetry. Tectonophysics 474:69–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sun W, Miura S, Sato T, Sugano T, Freymueller J, Kaufman M, Larsen CF, Cross R, Inazu D (2010) Gravity measurements in southeastern Alaska reveal negative gravity rate of change caused by Glacial Isostatic Adjustment. J Geophys Res 115:1–40Google Scholar
  26. Tushingham AM, Peltier WR (1991) Ice-3G—a new global model of late Pleistocene deglaciation based upon geophysical predictions of post-glacial relative sea level change. J Geophys Res 96:4497–4523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Van Dam T, Larson K, Wahr J, Francis O (2000) Using GPS and gravity to infer ice mass changes in Greenland. EOS Trans Am Geophys Union 81:421–427Google Scholar
  28. Wahr J, Dazhong H (1997) Prediction of crustal deformations caused by changing polar ice on a viscoelastic Earth. Surv Geophys 18: 303–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wahr J, van Dam T, Larson K, Francis O (2001) Geodetic measurements in Greenland and their implications. J Geophys Res 106:567–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Whitehouse P (2009) Glacial isostatic adjustment and sea-level change—state of the art report. Durham University/Svensk Kärnbränslehantering ABGoogle Scholar
  31. Wu P, Peltier WR (1983) Glacial isostatic adjustment and the free air gravity anomaly as a constraint on the deep mantle viscosity. Geophys J R Astron Soc 74:377–449Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emil Nielsen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Gabriel Strykowski
    • 1
  • Rene Forsberg
    • 1
  • Finn Bo Madsen
    • 2
  1. 1.DTU Space - GeodynamicsCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.DTU Space - GeodesyCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations