English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

. In north-western Tibet (34.0 ∘  N, 82.2 ∘  E) nearlake Aru Co, the entire ablation areas of two glaciers (Aru-1 and Aru-2)suddenly collapsed on 17 July and 21 September 2016. Themasses transformed into ice avalanches with volumes of 68 and 83×106  m 3 and ran out up to 7 km in horizontal distance, killing ninepeople. The only similar event currently documented is the 130×106  m 3 Kolka Glacier rock and ice avalanche of 2002 (CaucasusMountains). Using climatic reanalysis, remote sensing, and three-dimensionalthermo-mechanical modelling, we reconstructed the Aru glaciers'thermal regimes, thicknesses, velocities, basal shear stresses, and icedamage prior to the collapse in detail. Thereby, we highlight the potential of usingemergence velocities to constrain basal friction in mountain glacier models.We show that the frictional change leading to the Aru collapses occurred inthe temperate areas of the polythermal glaciers and is not related to arapid thawing of cold-based ice. The two glaciers experienced a similarstress transfer from predominant basal drag towards predominant lateralshearing in the detachment areas and during the 5–6 years before thecollapses. A high-friction patch is found under the Aru-2 glacier tongue,but not under the Aru-1 glacier. This difference led to disparate behaviourof both glaciers, making the development of the instability more visible forthe Aru-1 glacier through enhanced crevassing and terminus advance over alonger period. In comparison, these signs were observable only over a fewdays to weeks (crevasses) or were absent (advance) for the Aru-2 glacier. Fieldinvestigations reveal that those two glaciers were underlain by soft, highlyerodible, and fine-grained sedimentary lithologies. We propose that the specificbedrock lithology played a key role in the two Tibet and the CaucasusMountains giant glacier collapses documented to date by producing low bedroughness and large amounts of till, rich in clay and silt with a low frictionangle. The twin 2016 Aru collapses would thus have been driven by a failingbasal substrate linked to increasing pore water pressure in the subglacialdrainage system in response to increases in surface melting and rainduring the 5–6 years preceding the collapse dates.

Mechanisms leading to the 2016 giant twin glacier collapses, Aru Range, Tibet