© Samuel J Cole/Getty ImagesA23a is a gigantic iceberg with a surface area more than three times greater than New York City.
Scientists are now closely monitoring the icy slab's slow march toward oblivion in hopes of learning more about the temporary hidden ecosystem it may support.
A23a, which is often dubbed a "megaberg," has a surface area roughly three times larger than New York City and weighs just under 1 trillion tons. It first broke off from Antarctica's Filchner Ice Shelf in 1986 but became trapped on the seafloor just a few miles offshore, which has significantly slowed its melt rate. Over the last few decades, it has held the title of "world's largest iceberg" on multiple occasions, most recently since May 2023, when the previous largest berg — A-76A — broke apart.
Late last year, A23a finally broke free from its seafloor tether and began moving away from Antarctica. But it didn't get far. Just a few months later, the enormous ice island got trapped to the east of the South Orkney Islands in a Taylor column — a giant mass of rotating water caused by ocean currents circling an underwater mountain, or seamount. At its maximum spin speed, the berg was rotating about 15 degrees counterclockwise every day, researchers wrote on YouTube.
But as of Dec. 13, the megaberg has escaped from the Taylor column and resumed its journey away from the South Pole, according to a statement by the British Antarctic Survey (BAS).
"It's exciting to see A23a on the move again after periods of being stuck," Andrew Meijers, an oceanographer at BAS, said in the statement. "We are interested to see if it will take the same route the other large icebergs that have calved off Antarctica have taken. And more importantly what impact this will have on the local ecosystem."
Drake Passage, the 'iceberg graveyard'
Most massive icebergs that break off from Antarctica drift north through a section of the Southern Ocean known as the Drake Passage, which has become known as the "iceberg graveyard" because it propels icebergs north into warmer waters, where they eventually break apart.
This is what happened to A-76A last year and its predecessor A68a, which also passed through this region before being ripped in half by ocean currents in 2020.
© Omar Zaghloul/Anadolu via Getty Images using data from the British Antarctic SurveyThis graphic shows how A23a has gradually moved away from Antarctica and where it got stuck in the Taylor column (in the rectangular box).
"We know that these giant icebergs can provide nutrients to the waters they pass through, creating thriving ecosystems in otherwise less productive areas," Laura Taylor, a doctoral candidate in biogeochemistry with BAS, said in the statement. "What we don't know is what difference particular icebergs, their scale, and their origins can make to that process."
Scientists have taken water samples throughout the iceberg's predicted path and will continue to take samples in its wake. Comparing these samples with one another should help shed light on this mystery.
Reader Comments
El nino, cosmic dust, the Inter Tropical convergence zone - all those become irrelevant symptoms in favor of "global-warming-global-warming" which intends to provide an intellectual framework - it looks like an ideology, namely "an intellectual foundation on which to base a perception of reality" - people start with it, it's like a lens, and they then explain things starting from it
I understand normal people don't want to interest themselves about El nino and the Oceanic flows but they have to understand that "global warming" is an ideology and that it's a wrong one
I just see people explaining everything from it
the reasons for it, I agree are way oversimplified, as are the end results. The outcomes can and will vary significantly just as hurricane tracking lines do. No one knows how each inch forward will effect the other variables and what the ultimate outcome will be.
I believe global warming is like a pendulum. As in the farther one way it swings, the farther the other way it will return. Global warming therefore in my opinion will give way to equal cooling. Natural oscillations in a natural process. Anthropogenic CO2 driven global warming is a farce.
It's a scam being utilized for control over society wrapped in a guilt complex.
I have some two cents about global warming:
The equator belt features some form of "monsoon" like wet & hot climate. This is called "The Inter Tropical Convergence Zone". For reasons that I have forgotten, this belt is moving upwards and thus provides its monsooning a bit above of where it should!
This is why we have been able to spectate events such as "The Valencia flood".
Where it's headed is that it would eventually continue to move north until it starts impacting the Northern hemisphere abit mroe seriously - triggering an interaction with all the ice stuffs - this would bounce back in the form of much snow, ice etc. I suppose it has to do with a belt of rain that meets a cold: result is of course snow.
I hope I have been able to sum up things very logically and plainly! This is what has been said recently so I wanted to share something accurate for the interested readers!
Thank you sbc for positively endorsing my statement that "global warming" benefits from a basic oversimplification; I believe this is a problem and actually some form of palliative for people to stick teh finger on "the harm of our world". "It's global warming it's global warming". People are becoming hysterical at it and I noticed it was really stopping at those two words. When asked about clarifications, they would speak of polar bears and melting glaciers.
I could not prevent myself from seeing some form of scam in the minds of people. They have been given a shortcut for explaining why they suffer. "Global warming". This shows that people need and want to know why they suffer - and I mourn this because they have been made to think it's their fault. My mom and dad stopped eatings red meat and animal fat "in order to preserve the climate" - that's to tell you. Now they got hearth disease, been put under statins - go tell them to eat animal fat... Cannot do anything. They will probably die because of this and it's hard to tell them anything.
"Eating less red meat" has been identified, by normal people, as a top-priority in what the elites would do and do. In so, normal people include this in their natural world view. There, people just acquire a new opinion without doing research and they include it in their world view without ponderation.
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions."
G.K. Chesterton [Link]
There is content & matter in it - and I enjoyed digging for the origin of the quotes (for example)...
But above all I enjoyed much the intellectual structure and the inner progression of the text. We feel there are choices to be made and that the author selected a "plan" - some road map - and in the end it's successful. It makes the reading very pleasant, really I wished to know more about the kind of logic that allows to write like that! That's funny, I have very recently been in touch with the basic definition of "ideology" - and I felt I had been missing an elephant in the room for some YEARS: The above is what the French wiki says - ideology has many different definitions but the above one is very interesting and I believe you may understand it as I do if not already the case.
The thing that I had been looking for - basically saying things around *some* lines your linked article says - and I re-quoted the christianity excerpt - is that an ideology puts the thinker in some sort of basic grounds where a firm set of thoughts define the perception of things.
There is a constant referring to the fixed opinions that the ideology says. When somebody acts, we would consult the ideology and see what to do. I believe I have been functionning out of this sort of let's say "mode" and that I was ideologically amazed by another person - result was that I was constantly inner referring to this person, asking myself "what would this person have done" "what would this person say". I believe the above could be damaging if exclusively done and that we may want to have some specs and tweaks and data. I have to add that I am currently seeing as well that whatever we believe could be considered as an ideology - in the sense of "the referring mecanism" - so I suppose the key is to be flexible. The article you posted has room for such kind of distinction: Great article! I liked it much! On Substack there are many people who write a lot like this
I believe in God, and although I am not a 'Christian', I measure everything against what I see as a 'Christ consciousness' to show me 'good' from 'bad'. It informs my common sense (most days) and allows me to better respond to whatever gets thrown in my path.
I appreciate Chesterton's outlook on life - his philosophy - but I don't have to agree with 'everything' he writes or says.
Glad you liked the post. Peace be with You!