Global Sea Level rise appears to be responding to ice melt

[The_Global_Warmer]

2012_rel4: Global Mean Sea Level Time Series (seasonal signals removed)

2010.0085 48.612

2010.0356 46.129

2010.0628 42.212

2010.0899 38.938

2010.1171 46.395

2010.1442 52.670

2010.1714 54.409

2010.1985 45.092

2010.2257 42.233

2010.2528 43.532

2010.2800 47.110

2010.3071 49.688

2010.3343 50.495

2010.3614 45.515

2010.3886 46.751

2010.4157 45.503

2010.4429 50.362

2010.4700 53.071

2010.4971 52.794

2010.5243 48.283

2010.5514 46.790

2010.5786 45.924

2010.6057 45.930

2010.6329 51.802

2010.6600 46.340

2010.6872 43.676

2010.7143 41.635

2010.7415 40.536

2010.7686 42.899

2010.7958 49.397

2010.8229 47.666

2010.8501 44.273

2010.8772 41.110

2010.9044 38.045

2010.9315 44.868

2010.9587 46.636

2010.9858 46.518

2011.0130 42.922

2011.0401 40.483

2011.0673 40.101

2011.0944 44.111

2011.1216 47.344

2011.1487 47.311

2011.1759 40.473

2011.2030 37.814

2011.2301 38.534

2011.2573 44.147

2011.2844 45.251

2011.3116 44.166

2011.3387 40.055

2011.3659 39.522

2011.3930 40.849

2011.4202 44.920

2011.4473 49.387

2011.4745 50.102

2011.5016 43.330

2011.5288 43.060

2011.5559 44.792

2011.5831 48.102

2011.6102 54.653

2011.6374 51.183

2011.6645 48.556

2011.6917 46.403

2011.7188 44.981

2011.7460 48.443

2011.7731 53.475

2011.8003 49.337

2011.8274 44.095

2011.8546 41.617

2011.8817 42.606

2011.9089 51.542

2011.9360 52.485

2011.9631 48.697

2011.9903 47.117

2012.0174 50.063

2012.0446 51.233

2012.0717 56.079

2012.0989 54.703

2012.1260 53.683

2012.1532 49.905

2012.1803 45.530

2012.2075 50.785

2012.2346 56.309

2012.2618 54.458

2012.2889 52.406

2012.3161 51.122

2012.3432 48.814

2012.3704 53.174

2012.3975 53.888

2012.4247 56.258

2012.4518 58.336

We can see the big difference between 2010, 2011, and 2012. This is through May. So it excludes the Greenland melt this summer. It is likely the combo of lag and El Nino has helped 2012 race to new heights through May.

We can see on the seasonal graph that after a very quick dip 2012 is going up.

http://sealevel.colorado.edu/files/2012_rel4/sl_global.txt

You can see that data in the link.

Thanking Bob Tisdale for this graph:

While OHC 700M and 2000M dropped from JFM to AMJ SST's have risen. But through May thermal expansion would be lower. Yet Sea Level Rise is quite substantial even with a developing NINO.

Given Greenland I expect to see quite the rise in June-Sept.

[The_Global_Warmer]

This is the only one to update with June and July data and it appears we might be seeing a large uptick with Greenland and ENSO.

[TerryM]

A foot a century sounds like something we can live with - you don't suppose it might accelerate do you?

Terry

[Jonger]

A foot a century sounds like something we can live with - you don't suppose it might accelerate do you?

Terry

There is 47 years of oil left, 100 years of natural gas and 400 years of coal. Coal is becoming harder to extract, the other two are running out.

[TerryM]

There is 47 years of oil left, 100 years of natural gas and 400 years of coal. Coal is becoming harder to extract, the other two are running out.

Jong

The problem as I see it is that most of the carbon put into the atmosphere by Vikings while producing bog iron is still with us.

It's not like a stream of water where we can dam the stream and the stream bed dries out immediately, more like a pond where if we stop the main stream from filling it, there's enough input from other seeps (permafrost, clathrates, etc.) to keep it topped off.

Atmospheric carbon lasts a long time.

Terry

[Jonger]

Jong

The problem as I see it is that most of the carbon put into the atmosphere by Vikings while producing bog iron is still with us.

It's not like a stream of water where we can dam the stream and the stream bed dries out immediately, more like a pond where if we stop the main stream from filling it, there's enough input from other seeps (permafrost, clathrates, etc.) to keep it topped off.

Atmospheric carbon lasts a long time.

Terry

We have materials made that can absorb and extract co2 from the air.... Some that extracts a trees entire years amount in a few days. If the situation becomes that dire, we can start doing this on a larger scale.

Most of these contraptions are water activated to remove the co2.

We also could double our forest cover world wide. Step one is sustainable energy first.

[salbers]

A foot a century sounds like something we can live with - you don't suppose it might accelerate do you?

Terry

We can recall the GRACE data showing acceleration over the past decade in terms of Greenland Ice Melt

[dabize]

http://ucl.academia.edu/KevanEdinborough/Papers/419926/The_Catastrophic_Final_Flooding_of_Doggerland_by_the_Storegga_Slide_Tsunami

The above is a link to a reconstruction of the contribution of the Storegga Slide tsunami to the final flooding of the North Sea, inundating Mesolithic Doggerland around 8-9,000 years ago (~6000-7000 BCE). The interesting aspect of it to me is the relatively small scale of the tsunami, which was estimated to be 3-5 meters at most in this region (although much more than that closer to the site of the slide in Scotland, the Faeroes and Norway)

I thought the paper is interesting in its own right, and relevant to this thread because it mentioned that the rates of sea level rise (due to ice sheet melting after the last ice age) were around 1 meter per century, which is higher than now but likely lower than the rate will be in 50-100 years.

This offers a scale for considering the ultimate fate of places like South Louisiana and Florida over the next few hundred years, during which the earth will be facing similar (and probably rapidly increasing) rates of SLR. The final depopulation will likely occur with a major natural disaster (perhaps an uberKatrina) that makes it ridiculous for the survivors to keep up the pretense of habitability.

[TerryM]

Wasn't Storegga part of God's Plan to isolate England and thus provide a future bastion where Divinely Ordained Monarchs could reign in perpetuity?

It meshes nicely with His implantation of Mega Methane Mushrooms about the shoreline of Beringia, awaiting His signal to erupt and rid us of the Heathens and Hedonists of the Left Coast.

Terry

[dabize]

Wasn't Storegga part of God's Plan to isolate England and thus provide a future bastion where Divinely Ordained Monarchs could reign in perpetuity?

It meshes nicely with His implantation of Mega Methane Mushrooms about the shoreline of Beringia, awaiting His signal to erupt and rid us of the Heathens and Hedonists of the Left Coast.

Terry

I know about the CH4 clathrate release angle with Storegga, but that wasn't my interest here. Similarly, the final separation of Britain was indeed one of the major accompaniments/consequences of the flooding of Doggerland, but I was struck by the insight into the human dimension from this paper. It is one of the few near-historic episodes of SLR impacting on human society, however fragmentary the direct evidence might be, and for me it "put me in the scene".

Now that you mention it, a methane "burp" from Storegga might well have been more causally linked to the final flooding of Doggerland than the tsunami - the SLR from that would have been permanent, whereas the tsunami would have been a transient push. Hard to see how one could show that, though.

[Nikolai]

It seems as though much of Louisiana in particular will be swallowed quite soon... the efforts towards rebuilding the marshes etc are good but inadequate & ridiculous in the face of macro-scale phenomena... aka global sea level rise. Re-building marshes does nothing if A) they're all at sea-level anyways and the sea-level is rising.

Katrina wasn't even the worst-case scenario... if/when it does happen, I would expect coastal Louisiana to become depopulated.

I don't think the same would happen to Miami... it isn't actually in the GOM like LA is, and there's so much more there that's actually worth saving. People also like to use NYC as an example, but by the time any great threat of flooding arises there will certainly be flood gates built at the entrances to NY Harbor, I think.

[dabize]

It seems as though much of Louisiana in particular will be swallowed quite soon... the efforts towards rebuilding the marshes etc are good but inadequate & ridiculous in the face of macro-scale phenomena... aka global sea level rise. Re-building marshes does nothing if A) they're all at sea-level anyways and the sea-level is rising.

Katrina wasn't even the worst-case scenario... if/when it does happen, I would expect coastal Louisiana to become depopulated.

I don't think the same would happen to Miami... it isn't actually in the GOM like LA is, and there's so much more there that's actually worth saving. People also like to use NYC as an example, but by the time any great threat of flooding arises there will certainly be flood gates built at the entrances to NY Harbor, I think.

Miami/Broward/FtL up to WPB might hang on a bit as an island for the reasons that you give, but not the rest of it. Agreed re NYC.....it will get the Netherlands treatment. Wall off the Narrows and make Long Island Sound the new Zuider Zee.

Assuming the society at large remains intact enough to foot the bill.........

[ben4vols]

Interesting article from WUWT the other day regarding the rate of sea level rise. LINK

Seems as though during this time of unprecedented melt in Greenland sea level rise isn't accelerating as fast as it used to.

Of course this isn't a huge surprise to those who know what tortures sea level data is put through by its' AGW handlers before it is presented to the public. Envisat unadjusted data shows a scary 3 cm rise per century. Once again another metric that has to be "adjusted" before it shows an AGW signal, as Jo Nova points out. LINK

What astonished me was the sea levels first recorded by the Topex Poseidon satellite array showed virtually no rise at all from 1993-2001. Surely not, I thought. I asked sea-level expert Nils Axel-Morner, and he confirmed: “Yes, it is as bad as that.“ Now, given that Envisat (the European satellite) showed no rise from 2003-2011 (until it was adjusted) that means we have almost 20 years of raw satellite data showing very little rise.

The adjusted version of Envisat shows a tiny slope of around 6-7 cm per century… (the unadjusted showed 3 cm per century.)

[Vergent]

Interesting article from WUWT the other day regarding the rate of sea level rise. LINK

Seems as though during this time of unprecedented melt in Greenland sea level rise isn't accelerating as fast as it used to.

Of course this isn't a huge surprise to those who know what tortures sea level data is put through by its' AGW handlers before it is presented to the public. Envisat unadjusted data shows a scary 3 cm rise per century. Once again another metric that has to be "adjusted" before it shows an AGW signal, as Jo Nova points out. LINK

The adjusted version of Envisat shows a tiny slope of around 6-7 cm per century… (the unadjusted showed 3 cm per century.)

Envisat had a bug. They fixed it in August.

https://earth.esa.in...ut?p_l_id=65733

[ben4vols]

Envisat had a bug. They fixed it in August.

https://earth.esa.in...ut?p_l_id=65733

Hah. Yeah it had a bug alright. The bug was it didn't show what they wanted it to.

[PhillipS]

Hah. Yeah it had a bug alright. The bug was it didn't show what they wanted it to.

The Conspiracy Theorist has spoken - those eveil warmistas are smart enough to 'adjust' the data without getting caught, but dumb enough to leave inconsistencies. And his evidence - the lack of evidence is PROOF of the conspiracy, of course.

[ben4vols]

The Conspiracy Theorist has spoken - those eveil warmistas are smart enough to 'adjust' the data without getting caught, but dumb enough to leave inconsistencies. And his evidence - the lack of evidence is PROOF of the conspiracy, of course.

Back to page one in the alarmists playbook I see. No one is saying conspiracy, except you.

[PhillipS]

Back to page one in the alarmists playbook I see. No one is saying conspiracy, except you.

You're the only one saying that temperature records and, now, sea-level records are being adjusted for sinister purposes. In your post above you wrote "The bug was it didn't show what they wanted it to."

That's an assertion by you of conspiracy on the part of the scientists involved. It's an ad hominem attack and you should either provide evidence to support it or retract it. If you don't feel that there was a conspiracy then retract your claim.

The same goes for the temperature record - if you don't feel that there is a conspiracy in the adjustments being made to temperature records then retract the claims you've made and stop making new ones.

Otherwise, you're declaring yourself to be one of the tin-foil hat fringe.

[ben4vols]

You're the only one saying that temperature records and, now, sea-level records are being adjusted for sinister purposes. In your post above you wrote "The bug was it didn't show what they wanted it to."

That's an assertion by you of conspiracy on the part of the scientists involved. It's an ad hominem attack and you should either provide evidence to support it or retract it. If you don't feel that there was a conspiracy then retract your claim.

The same goes for the temperature record - if you don't feel that there is a conspiracy in the adjustments being made to temperature records then retract the claims you've made and stop making new ones.

Otherwise, you're declaring yourself to be one of the tin-foil hat fringe.

They could just be making incorrect adjustments with no sinister motives, thus the reason I don't assert it is a conspiracy. I know you would like me to so you could try your childish character assassination game with tin-foil hat comments. I'll let you play that game by yourself.