Thanks Sebastian. Looking at the paper that Seumas linked to at the start of this thread,
http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/9/861/2015/tcd-9-861-2015.htmlyou can see the ice flow and how it will periodically calve.
The conclusion from the paper was interesting, particularly that this event may take it back to a new minimum since the last interglacial and that it may also put the ice shelf into an unstable configuration that might lead parts of it to collapse.
The reduction in area of Larsen C Ice Shelf under Scenarios
I and II of 9 and 12% respectively will be significant, but
will of course not contribute to immediate sea level rise since
the floating ice already displaces its own weight of seawater.
The predicted ice loss is also not unprecedented: in the late
1980s a calving event removed 14% of Larsen C Ice Shelf
(Cook and Vaughan, 2010). The real significance of this new
rift to this ice shelf is two-fold. First, the predicted calving
will reduce its area to a new minimum both in terms of direct
observations, and probably since the last interglacial period
(Hodgson et al., 2006). Second, unlike during the 1980s,
but highly comparable to the development of Larsen B Ice
Shelf between 1995 and 2002, the resulting geometry may
be unstable. According to the stress-flow angle criterion, our
calving scenarios lead to a range of unstable outcomes from
partial to significant. Under our modest rift propagation Scenario
I, immediately following the predicted calving event,
the central part of the ice front will be unstable and prone to
persistent calving of small ice blocks as the principal strain
works to open existing fractures. It is not clear how quickly
the velocity of a real ice shelf will be able to adapt to the
new boundary conditions, but even if this is rapid, the margin
of stabilizing ice becomes very narrow. Under Scenario
II, the unstable part of the new ice front is considerably larger
and, even if the flow field adapts quickly to the new geometry,
parts of the calving margin remain unstable and prone
to run-away calving of a similar nature to Larsen B Ice Shelf
between 1995 and 2002. Assessing the stress field according
to Doake et al. (1998), Scenario II would also be considered
as an unstable calving front.
Our model demonstrates that the newly developing rift
presents a considerable risk to the stability of the Larsen C
Ice Shelf.