The rate of sea level rise is accelerating?

[pricestar8]

“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. – J Robert Oppenheimer.

Is The Rate Of Sea Level Rise Accelerating?

 

By Paul Homewood

 

http://sealevel.colorado.edu/

 

Sea level alarmists often claim that the rate of sea level rise is increasing. They need to do this to convince the public that the innocuous 7” or so of sea level rise experienced in the 20thC is suddenly going to turn into meters by 2100.

They use two tricks to back up this claim:

 

1) They splice the satellite record, which only started in 1993, onto the tidal gauge records.

According to satellites, sea levels have been rising at 3.4mm/yr. Whether this figure is right or not, no half competent scientist would dream of splicing two totally different sets of data together in such a way.

Worse still, their banner figure of 3.4mm includes what is known as glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA), which accounts for the fact that the ocean basins are getting slightly larger since the end of the last glacial cycle.

In other words, if the basins were not getting larger, sea levels would rise more. To account for this, they add 0.3mm a year to their sea level figures.

This is all well and good, if it were not for the fact that tidal gauges do not include such an adjustment, so the comparison of satellites and gauges becomes incompatible.

 

2) They compare recent sea level rise with the 20thC average.

However, sea levels were not rising at an even pace during the last century. There were times when it was rising at rates similar to today, and others, notably between 1950 and 1980 when global temperatures were falling, which saw a lower rate of rise.

As the IPCC stated in its 2013 AR5 report:

It is very likely that the mean rate of global averaged sea level rise was 1.7 [1.5 to 1.9] mm/yr between 1901 and 2010 and 3.2 [2.8 to 3.6] mm/yr between 1993 and 2010. Tide gauge and satellite altimeter data are consistent regarding the higher rate during the latter period. It is likely that similarly high rates occurred between 1920 and 1950

http://ar5-syr.ipcc.ch/topic_observedchanges.php#node11

So, the current rate of rise is not unprecedented, and does not “prove” that the rise will continue to accelerate. Indeed, if the 20thC record is anything to go by, it could well slow down again, as part of a natural cycle.

The year 1993 is also not a very reliable place to start from, because it was just after the Pinatubo eruption in 1991. This lowered global temperatures, leaving sea levels also lower than they would otherwise have been, consequently increasing the subsequent upward trend.

Interestingly, University of Colorado sea level page refers to this, in a paper by John Fasullo:

Abstract:

Global mean sea level rise estimated from satellite altimetry provides a strong constraint on climate variability and change and is expected to accelerate as the rates of both ocean warming and cryospheric mass loss increase over time. In stark contrast to this expectation however, current altimeter products show the rate of sea level rise to have decreased from the first to second decades of the altimeter era. Here, a combined analysis of altimeter data and specially designed climate model simulations shows the 1991 eruption of Mt Pinatubo to likely have masked the acceleration that would have otherwise occurred. This masking arose largely from a recovery in ocean heat content through the mid to late 1990 s subsequent to major heat content reductions in the years following the eruption. A consequence of this finding is that barring another major volcanic eruption, a detectable acceleration is likely to emerge from the noise of internal climate variability in the coming decade.

http://sealevel.colorado.edu/

 

So we learn two things:

a) The rate of sea level rise has actually slowed down in the last decade.

The rate of rise in the first decade of satellite data was artificially high, because of the recovery in ocean heat content in the mid 1990s, when the effects of Pinatubo had disappeared.

A 2013 paper by Chen et al also found a similar slowdown in sea level rise:

It is found that the GMSL rises with the rate of 3.2 ± 0.4 mm/yr during 1993–2003 and started decelerating since 2004 to a rate of 1.8 ± 0.9 mm/yr in 2012.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818113002397

 

In any event, expert oceanographers know full well that measuring trends over just a decade or two is meaningless. Top ocean scientist, Bruce Douglas, wrote a paper, “Global Sea Rise: a Redetermination”, in 1996, with the Abstract stating:

It is well established that sea level trends obtained from tide gauge records shorter than about 50-60 years are corrupted by interdecadal sea level variation.

 

In particular, sea levels are particularly influenced by ENSO changes, as CU show.

During El Ninos sea levels rise:

http://sealevel.colorado.edu/

 

One more complication is groundwater depletion, via irrigation, water use etc. A study by Yoshide Wada in 2012 estimated that this had added 0.44mm/yr to sea levels since 1993.

So, far from the scary headlines put about, the rate of recent sea level rise has not been unprecedented, is not accelerating, and shows no sign doing so in years to come.

Advertisements

Share this:

• Twitter
• Facebook9
•  

Related

Some Background To Sea Level MeasurementsIn "Climate Change"

Sea Level Rise Lower Than Thought!In "Climate Change"

Is Sea Level Rise Accelerating?In "Climate Change"

June 29, 20176 Replies

 

« Previous

Leave a Reply 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment 

Name *

Email *

Website

 Notify me of new comments via email.

 Notify me of new posts via email.

1. Curious George on June 29, 2017 at 6:56 pm

   I don’t believe that the satellite altimetry can measure the sea level, with all its waves up to 29 m tall, with a precision under a millimeter. I don’t believe that the satellite altimetry can measure the elevation of the coast with all its vertical relief with a precision under 1 mm. The practical level of sea level rise is the difference of the two – doubling the uncertainty.

   Reply
2. MikeW on June 29, 2017 at 7:03 pm

   Global mean sea level is meaningless. The sea level at any given location is dominated by land movements, not by global sea level. And the satellite-based Deltares Aqua Monitor has measured that coastal land areas have actually increased over the past 30 years more than they have decreased. Sea level alarmism is a manufactured hysteria from the Global Warming of Doom cult http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n9/full/nclimate3111.html

   Reply
3. John F. Hultquist on June 29, 2017 at 7:17 pm

   About once each year, I trot this out:
   My(?) “Easy Ice” hypothesis: The low latitude and low elevation ice melted. Charts like this one document the post-glacial melt and show the typical curve for this sort of event:
   

   Remaining ice is high latitude and or high elevation. Such ice will not melt as easily as the ice that was in Puget Sound or in the central mid-west of the USA.

   Reply
4. Brian Vaux on June 29, 2017 at 7:40 pm

   Of course it is all measured at Standard, Temperature and Pressure. I remember it all now!

   Reply
5. Broadlands on June 29, 2017 at 8:08 pm

   Haven’t we been over this sea-level-rise topic before?

   http://na.unep.net/geas/getUNEPPageWithArticleIDScript.php?article_id=56

   “Another study related to sea-level rise (Webb and Kench 2010) appears to contradict the general anticipation that the impacts of climate change will eventually make low-lying reef islands unable to support human occupation. It uses aerial and satellite images taken over the past 60 years, a time during which there is evidence that sea levels have risen, to compare the landform dynamics of 27 atoll islands in the central Pacific Ocean. The study found that as a whole, instead of declining, the islands grew in land area by a total of 63 ha or seven percent. The research findings show that although sea level in the central Pacific Ocean rose by about 2.0 mm/yr over the study period and that all 27 islands changed physically during that time, there is considerable variation in the amount and style of change between and among the islands, with an overall net increase in land area; 86 percent of the islands remained relatively stable or their outline or shape increased in size. Twelve of the 27 islands increased in size by more than three percent but only four islands reduced in area by more than three percent.”

   2.0 mm/yr for 60 years… 4.75 inches.

   The IPCC focused on the decrease…?

   Reply
6. Hifast on June 29, 2017 at 8:32 pm

   Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

   Reply

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,205 other followers

Blog Stats

• 5,134,298 hits

Recent Posts

• Is The Rate Of Sea Level Rise Accelerating?
• Toxic Waste From Solar Panels: 300 Times That of Nuclear Power
• The truth about the global warming pause
• More Evidence of the Great 21st Century Warming Pause
• Carbon capture and storage technology remains a ‘utopian dream’ claims professor
• What Will Happen When The Wind Forgets To Blow In Ireland?
• Northern Ireland’s onshore wind surges (But they still rely on fossil fuels for 74%)
• UK must face up to falling road emissions to avoid £23bn tax gap
• Hinkley nuclear costs climb as deadlines slip again
• India’s Electricity Transformation

Recent Comments

	oldbrew on The truth about the global war…
	Hifast on Is The Rate Of Sea Level Rise…
	Broadlands on Is The Rate Of Sea Level Rise…
	John F. Hultquist on Toxic Waste From Solar Panels:…
	John F. Hultquist on Toxic Waste From Solar Panels:…
	Brian Vaux on Is The Rate Of Sea Level Rise…
	John F. Hultquist on Is The Rate Of Sea Level Rise…
	MikeW on Is The Rate Of Sea Level Rise…
	Curious George on Is The Rate Of Sea Level Rise…
	mwhite on Toxic Waste From Solar Panels:…

 

1970's Africa AMO Antarctic ArcticAustralia BBC biomass booker californiacapacity market China climate change act Climate Models CO2 CoalDrought Droughts Electric Cars Electricityel nino energy eu extreme rain Extreme weather Floods germany GHCN GISSglaciers Greenland Guardian Gummer HayhoeHeatwave heatwaves Holocene hurricaneHurricanes Iceland india IPCC jet streamKansas Lamb lia Met Office mwp NCDCnuclear paris Precipitation recordsRenewables Sea Level shale gas slingo Snowsolar sst storms summer Temperature Adjustments Texas tidal power Tornadoestyphoon UHI UK uk precipitation USAwildfires wind wind power Winter