...
GIA Correction
Glacial Isostatic Adjustment (GIA) denotes the surface deformation of the solid Earth (lithosphere and mantle) caused by ice-mass redistribution over the last 100,000 years, dominated by the termination of the last glacial cycle. Due to the Earth's viscoelastic response to mass redistribution between the ice sheets and the ocean, the Earth's gravity field is affected by long term secular trends mainly in previously glaciated regions such as North America, Fennoscandia and Antarctica. Moreover, also coefficients of low degrees and orders are affected.
The Level-2B/Level-3 products provided here are corrected using a GIA model based on ICE-5G ice load history (Peltier, 2004) as applied to the 3D-Viscoelastic Lithosphere and Mantle Model VILMA (Martinec, 2000; Klemann et al., 2008).[/size]
…
[/quote]
I believe that the GIA correction for GRACE-FO uses the same isostatic model used by GRACE not because it is an accurate model but rather because of a shortage of field data (see the first linked reference); however, the second linked reference indicates that corrections from this model is likely 40% too low for the ASE area:
Li, F., Ma, C., Zhang, S. et al. Evaluation of the glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) models for Antarctica based on GPS vertical velocities. Sci. China Earth Sci. (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-018-9532-5https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11430-018-9532-5Abstract: "Due to the scarcity of data, modeling the glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) for Antarctica is more difficult than it is for the ancient ice sheet area in North America and Northern Europe. Large uncertainties are observed in existing GIA models for Antarctica. Modern space-based geodetic measurements provide checks and constraints for GIA models. The present-day uplift velocities of global positioning system (GPS) stations at 73 stations in Antarctica and adjacent regions from 1996 to 2014 have been estimated using GAMIT/GLOBK version 10.5 with a colored noise model. To easily analyze the effect of difference sources on the vertical velocities, and for easy comparison with both GIA model predictions and GPS results from Argus et al. (2014) and Thomas et al. (2011), seven sub-regions are divided. They are the northern Antarctic Peninsula, the Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf, the Amundsen Sea coast, the Ross Ice Shelf, Mount Erebus, inland Southwest Antarctica and the East Antarctic coast, respectively. The results show that the fast uplift in the north Antarctic Peninsula and Pine Island Bay regions may be caused by the elastic response to snow and ice mass loss. The fast subsidence near Mount Erebus may be related to the activity of a magma body. The uplift or subsidence near the East Antarctic coast is very slow while the uplift for the rest regions is mainly caused by GIA. By analyzing the correlation and the associated weighted root mean square (WRMS) between the GIA predictions and the GPS velocities, we found that the ICE-6G_C (VM5a) model and the Geruo13 model show the most consistency with our GPS results, while the W12a and IJ05_R2 series models show poor consistency with our GPS results. Although improved greatly in recent years, the GIA modeling in Antarctica still lags behind the modeling of the North American. Some GPS stations, for example the Bennett Nunatak station (BENN), have observed large discrepancies between GIA predictions and GPS velocities. Because of the large uncertainties in calculating elastic responses due to the significant variations of ice and snow loads, the GPS velocities still cannot be used as a precise constraint on GIA models."
Therefore, I am re-posting the following from Reply #71 of the "Surge" thread, reminding all that the GRACE satellite SLR contributions previously reported by NASA are probably 40% too low for at least the ASE area and probably for all of the WAIS due to treating the GIA correction for the WAIS like any other part of the earth when, as I have indicated in my prior posts in this thread, West Antarctica has a relatively unique tectonic history and current condition:
A. Groh; H. Ewert, M. Scheinert, M. Fritsche, A. Rülke, A. Richter, R. Rosenau, R. Dietrich (2012), "An investigation of Glacial Isostatic Adjustment over the Amundsen Sea sector, West Antarctica", Global and Planetary Change, Vol 98-99, pp 45-53,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2012.08.001https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818112001567?via%3Dihub"Abstract
The present study focuses on the Amundsen Sea sector which is the most dynamical region of the Antarctic Ice Sheet (AIS). Based on basin estimates of mass changes observed by the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) and volume changes observed by the Ice, Cloud and Land Elevation Satellite (ICESat), the mean mass change induced by Glacial Isostatic Adjustment (GIA) is derived. This mean GIA-induced mass change is found to be 34.1 ± 11.9 Gt/yr, which is significantly larger than the predictions of current GIA models. We show that the corresponding mean elevation change of 23.3 ± 7.7 mm/yr in the Amundsen Sea sector is in good agreement with the uplift rates obtained from observations at three GPS sites. Utilising ICESat observations, the observed uplift rates were corrected for elastic deformations due to present-day ice-mass changes. Based on the GRACE-derived mass change estimate and the inferred GIA correction, we inferred a present-day ice-mass loss of − 98.9 ± 13.7 Gt/yr for the Amundsen Sea sector. This is equivalent to a global eustatic sea-level rise of 0.27 ± 0.04 mm/yr. Compared to the results relying on GIA model predictions, this corresponds to an increase of the ice-mass loss or sea-level rise, respectively, of about 40%."
The first accompanying figure shows an overview of the Amundsen Sea sector, West Antarctica. The red line defines the generalized drainage basins of Pine Island Glacier, Thwaites Glacier and Smith Glacier (PITS). Locations of three GPS campaign sites are marked by red triangles.
The second figures shows the GRACE data from 2003 to 2009 which the papers says needs to be corrected to indicate about 40% more ice mass loss than previously reported