I can't follow Aiden's comment at all. The land ice would be glacial and possibly 100's of meters deep. The land ice is on land otherwise it is floating in the sea. If the glacier is on land we can presume much of it must also be above sea level as generally the term land means the areas not in the sea.

How could water from the sea possibly travel uphill under the full length of the glacier and then start melting the glacier from below? What is stopping this mystery/magical water from freezing when it makes contact with the glacier?

Aiden's description of the science causing the 'melting of the Artic' or Antarctic is a perfect example of Warmist logic. They quote "facts" with total disregard to common sense. When we have an extra hot summer it's the proof of global warming but the opposite doesn't apply if we have an extra cold winter. Sun spots, the effects of La Nina and El Nino's or volcanic eruptions never mentioned as possible contributing factors effecting a change in climate.

Even the IPCC's figures show the sea level increase over the past 200 years (since the so called mini-ice age in the mid-1700's) has only been increasing at a consistent rate of 0.02 centimetres per decade (1.7 - 2.0mm per year). At this rate the sea level will rise by about one inch over the next hundred years. (e.g. 10 x 10 decades being 10 X 2mm = 2 centimetres; slightly less than an inch).

The Warmists use such statistics (the sea level is rising) as proof we face coastal flooding in the near future. Yet the empirical evidence and the math clearly show there is no threat. One inch is no where near the 3 - 6 meter increase in sea level they say is coming in the not too distant future.

The ice surrounding the Antarctic is grounded in a number of places, that is to say the ice is actually sitting on the sea bed, if you have any problem with that idea consider what happens when you place a block of ice a meter high in a container with water to a depth of 1 cm. the ice will obviously not float because its water line would be around 90cm.

The problem that arises is where the ice shelf meets the warm ocean water, it undermines the grounded ice melting it from below and allowing warm water to penetrate further and further under the ice.

The increase in sea ice (floating) surrounding the Antarctic is seasonal; the extent of winter ice has increased slightly but not that of summer ice. The most likely explanation is a reduction in saltiness of surface layers of the ocean around Antarctic due to increased due to an influx of fresh water from melting ice.

Re sea level the current rate of sea level rise is estimated at 3.3mm per year and is expected to increase, at the current rate that works out 330 mm or over 1 foot in the next 100 years

The original report I referred to highlighted how climate change will also impact on bushfires in South Australia, particularly southern areas, very much directly related to a drying climate.

A lightning-sparked bushfire in the town of Waroona south of Perth has been declared an emergency. The fire has escaped containment lines, threatening homes in Nanga Brook Scarp Road, Woodley Heights, Forrington Heights and Invarell Road.The blaze is moving fast in a westerly direction and is out of control and unpredictable, the Western Australia emergency services department warns - Friday January 30 2015.

http://media.telstra.com.au/home.html

The recent bushfires (in South Australia) saw around 30 homes lost and people will try to get their lives back in order. The insurance costs across the board will be large - and the costs to the taxpayer (through centrelink payments) are to be in the millions of dollars.

I will say it again; You are worrying about the wrong problem.
Tight oil production is winding down and even if the price does not
remain low, it is believed the capital will not be available to restart drilling.
Crude oil is declining at around 4% a year, that is greater than any
CO2 reduction scheme.

Have a look at these figures;

Energy Return on Energy Invested for oil & coal.

YEAR OIL COAL
1930 100 80
1970 30 30
2005 10 to 18 coal nbr not available

The software of this site makes tables difficult.
Once any energy source gets below about 7 the curve net energy really
rolls over and the source becomes useless. Wind and solar are around 5 to 7.

What those figures show is that the cost of extracting oil & coal is
rising steeply and will continue until finally they will only be
extracted on a minor scale for medical plastics and the like.

So what you should be worrying about is how to get an efficient new
energy regime going. It is now known that wind and solar cannot do
it on its own and that some other backup system other than gas & coal is needed.
Also demand for energy must reduce by similar scales as to that
achieved with led lighting.

You and the pollies have been warned about this for years but you
poo pooed it and now we do not have the time or probably the money to fix it.

I forgot;
About a week or so after that announcement that last year was the
hottest on an all time record, another announcement was made that it
was in fact the third warmest year on record.

Hmmm
Doesn't matter anyway.

Bazz, it was measured as THE WORLD'S warmest year on record, though not by much.
It was also measured as AUSTRALIA'S third warmest year on record.

And you're assigning too much significance to EROEI. What counts for corporations is financial return, not energy return.