Who'd have thought it...
I'm sure Steig et al would disagree :-)
More seriously, it's an interesting explanation for increased melt and would appear to be yet another discovery that tells us just how much more we have to learn about the planet we inhabit. I'd hope that it would also make those who like to try to sell AGW on the basis of catastrophe just a little more cautious in their output, but I doubt it.
I feel obliged to add a disclaimer. I'm not a 'denier', just rather sceptical when it comes to *some* of the attributions and claims that are made for the effects of anthropogenic CO2