Study: IPCC sea level rise projections too low

[Cheeznado]

The results show that global temperature continues to increase in good agreement with the best estimates of the IPCC, especially if we account for the effects of short-term variability due to the El Niño/Southern Oscillation, volcanic activity and solar variability. The rate of sea-level rise of the past few decades, on the other hand, is greater than projected by the IPCC models. This suggests that IPCC sea-level projections for the future may also be biased low.

http://iopscience.io.../044035/article

[TerryM]

http://iopscience.io.../044035/article

Their figure of 9 mm/yr under moderate warming scenarios should give those charged with protecting coastal cities cause for alarm. I don't think many see 2.4C as reasonable by 2100 so the 9 mm figure could be taken as a minimum.

The Eastern Seaboard as I understand it saw a SLR of 3 mm/yr during the period when global SLR was only 1.5 mm - if this were to hold true going forward NYC might be expected to face a 1.8 meter rise by 2100 if temperatures only rise to 2.4C above pre-industrial levels.

This can probably be dealt with, but preparations will have to start very soon.

Terry

[csnavywx]

Water withheld by dams is equivalent to around 10k cubic km of water or approx 25mm SLR (~1in.), a factor I'm not sure has been calculated into historical trends (considering the rate of SLR so far).

On the flipside, BAU 2100 projections include unrealistically high emissions based on a fossil fuel reserve number that is inflated and takes into account very little/no thermodynamic considerations related to its extraction (entropy will undercut our production of such FFs to the extent that they should collectively peak around 2025-2035 regardless of any CO2 policy enforcement). There's a real reason we're baking sand to collect degraded, heavy crude with reckless abandon.