Forecast for big sea level rise

BBC News ^ | 15 April 2008 | Richard Black

[Aristotelian]

Sea levels could rise by up to one-and-a-half metres by the end of this century, according to a new scientific analysis.

This is substantially more than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) forecast in last year's landmark assessment of climate science.

Sea level rise of this magnitude would have major impacts on low-lying countries such as Bangladesh.

The findings were presented at a major science conference in Vienna.

(snip)

"The rapid rise in the coming years is associated with the rapid melting of ice sheets."

(snip)

The latest satellite data indicates that the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets are losing mass, though the much bigger East Antarctic sheet may be gaining mass.

[BOBTHENAILER]

I absolutely loved that part of the movie. My great grandchilron will call their Nevada seaside resort.......

NAILERVILLE

[eggman]

So what is the probability of this outcome vs. the probability of the sea level remaining virtually unchanged?

Does this "scientific analysis" have predictions for the near term (5-10 year time frame)?

The problem with these predictions is they are just sensationalism to generate media buzz. It's not about the science, it's about the media recognition so they can get more grant money to generate more dire predictions.

[Rudder]

All 100 million Bangladeshis would be delighted to move to California, given the opportunity.

Oh, those poor, misguided souls.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

You obviously have no idea of living conditions in Bagladesh.

[secretagent]

Both ice sheets are gaining in mass.

Greenland and West Antartica are losing mass, while East Antartica is gaining mass, according to the article.

Which two ice sheets do you think are gaining mass? Source?

[aruanan]

Which two ice sheets do you think are gaining mass? Source?

Greenland is losing ice around the edge, but that's always going on, inevitably. However, in the interior, Greenland is gaining ice at a rate faster than the loss around the edges, so much so, it has been calculated that the sea level has actually been decreased recently by something a millimeter. Anyway, as a whole, Antarctica is also gaining ice mass regardless of West Antarctica. I'll look for the source and post it.

[Let's Roll]

Not gonna happen - global cooling will turn so much sea water into ice that the increased weight at the polar ice cap will cause the globe to flip over.

Sorry, goron, you picked the wrong weather cycle.

[aruanan]

Which two ice sheets do you think are gaining mass? Source?

Greenland is losing ice around the edge, but that's always going on, inevitably. However, in the interior, Greenland is gaining ice at a rate faster than the loss around the edges, so much so, it has been calculated that the sea level has actually been decreased recently by something a millimeter. Anyway, as a whole, Antarctica is also gaining ice mass regardless of West Antarctica. I'll look for the source and post it.

Sorry, that was about 1/10mm/year.

In Greenland, the ice loss at lower altitudes is "-2.0 ± 0.9 cm/year, in qualitative agreement with reported thinning in the ice-sheet margins," but that "an increase of 6.4 ± 0.2 cm/year is found in the vast interior areas above 1500 meters." Spatially averaged over the bulk of the ice sheet, the net result is a mean increase of 5.4 ± 0.2 cm/year, "or ~60 cm over 11 years, or ~54 cm when corrected for isostatic uplift.""

[SunkenCiv]

I wonder how much the bodies of all the global warming demagogues would cause the sealevel to rise? ;’)

[stylin19a]

yikes...that could mean the Sahara Forest

[steelyourfaith]

Thanx!

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[Old Professer]

You just took the first step of the rest of [y]our life’s journey - why else would such outrageous predictions be made based on a point where verification is rendered humanly impossible?

[willyd]

No, that’s why you see all those houses out in the ocean that were built a hundred years ago.

[BIGLOOK]

I live just above sea level on the Big Island and over the past three years we have seen minus three + low tides regularly.

Of course this isn't a scientific study....just another fishing tale.

[Old Professer]

You are far too analytical and logical to be still here; us old-timers must recognize when it is time to go.

But, before we leave, today's sunspot image gives rise and hope to the AGW crowd as we see a new spot (at least the number) in the anticipated latitudinal location; perhaps Cycle 24 has started after all and doom awaits:

[this image automatically updates each day]

[dixiechick2000]

[Old Professer]

This is not a designated fishing area...

Facts, pictures or citations, please.

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

Glad I’m at 6800 ft.

For now... In 92 more years, you’ll be at only 6795 feet, and THEN you’ll be in trouble, mister!

---

I don’t care who you are, that’s funny right there.

[unkus]

LOL-Good reply.

[driftless2]

"land rises"

That is called isostatic rebound. It is the reason why most of the lower U.S. has few lakes and Canada has a gazillion of them. When the huge two mile high ice mass retreated (melted actually) ten thousand years ago or so, it left some huge lakes in its wake. Like glacial Lake Agassiz which covered much of northern Minnesota and Wisconsin. Now there are no huge lakes inside Minnesota and Wisconsin boundaries. We have the Great Lakes, and Canada has quite a few . But in another ten thousand years or so if the the rebound continues many of these huge lakes will drain as the land rises.