supported by the
majority of responses to one of the quantitative
questions (to which 13 out of 20 participants
responded on a five-point Likert scale—strongly
agree, agree, neither agree or disagree, disagree,
strongly disagree), where 11 respondents “agreed”
that the activities in the workshop helped them to
share their views and opinions with others, and the
other two “neither agreed nor disagreed
/media/loftslag/Moellenkampetal_etal-2010.pdf
Roald, L.A. and Engen-Skaugen, T.
Projected effects of climate change on the hydrology of Norway ........................................................................ 80
Duncan, N.J., Harrison, G.P. and Wallace, A.R.
Modelling the Scottish hydropower resource ........................................................................................................ 82
Einarsson, B
/media/ces/ces-oslo2010_proceedings.pdf
conditions as a lower
boundary condition from the driving GCM. The RCAO model-output is from a pan-arctic
run for the years 1960–2080 at approx. 50 km resolution. The first 20 years of the model run
must be considered as spin-up time for the ocean module. The RCAO run is experimental
since the model is in a development state and the output has not yet been evaluated over
Greenland (Ralf Döscher, personal
/media/ces/ces_geus_paakitsoq_full_report.pdf
mass balance of three small ice caps (with areas from 15 to 80 km2) over 6 to
20 years, were efficiently estimated from maps of glacier elevation changes deduced by SPOT
5 HRS, EMISAR and aerial photographs
• Accuracy of estimating the elevation changes, was greatly improved by using the highly precise
EMISAR DEM as a reference for co-registration and offset correction
EMISAR
Co-registration
/media/ces/glacier_mass_balance_poster.pdf
and glaciers. The former trend is mainly visible in the
Westfjords, an area in northwest Iceland, in the winter (see Figure 8a and 8b) and in northeast
Iceland in the summer, especially east of Akureyri in the RCP8.5 scenario (see Figures 8c
and d). The latter trend is most clearly seen during summer and in cases with the RCM RCA4
with RCP8.5.
Extreme temperature trends
In a previous section we
/media/vedurstofan-utgafa-2017/VI_2017_009.pdf
the Fljótsdalsheiði region . . . . . . . 47
18 Seasonal mean wind power density within the Fljótsdalsheiði region . . . . . . . . 48
19 Directional mean wind power density within the Gufuskálar region . . . . . . . . . 49
20 Seasonal mean wind power density within the Gufuskálar region . . . . . . . . . . 50
21 Directional mean wind power density within the Hellisheiði region . . . . . . . . . 51
22 Seasonal mean
/media/vedurstofan/utgafa/skyrslur/2013/2013_001_Nawri_et_al.pdf
Reykjavík, 139 pp.
Paterson, W.S.B. 1994. The Physics of
Glaciers (Third Edition). Pergamon. 480
pp.
Vogt, P.R., G.L. Johnson and L. Kristjánsson
1980. Morphology and magnetic anomalies
north of Iceland. J. of Geophysics 47, 67-80.
Walker, G.P.L. 1974. Eruptive mechanisms in
Iceland. In L. Kristjánsson, ed. Geodynamics
of Iceland and the North Atlantic Area. D.
Reidel, Dordrecht
/media/jar/Jokull-guidlines.pdf