Posted on 03/10/2009 11:12:02 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
The global sea level looks set to rise far higher than forecast because of changes in the polar ice-sheets, a team of researchers has suggested.
Scientists at a climate change summit in Copenhagen said earlier UN estimates were too low and that sea levels could rise by a metre or more by 2100.
The projections did not include the potential impact of polar melting and ice breaking off, they added.
The implications for millions of people would be "severe", they warned.
Ten per cent of the world's population - about 600 million people - live in low-lying areas.
The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in its 2007 Fourth Assessment Report, had said that the maximum rise in sea level would be in the region of 59cm.
Professor Konrad Steffen from the University of Colorado, speaking at a press conference on Tuesday, highlighted new studies into ice loss in Greenland, showing it has accelerated over the last decade.
Professor Steffen, who has studied the Arctic ice for the past 35 years, told me: "I would predict sea level rise by 2100 in the order of one metre; it could be 1.2m or 0.9m.
"But it is one metre or more seeing the current change, which is up to three times more than the average predicted by the IPCC."
"It is a major change and it actually calls for action."
Dr John Church of the Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research added: "The most recent research showed that sea level is rising by 3mm a year since 1993, a rate well above the 20th century average."
Ice flow
Professor Eric Rignot, a senior research scientist at Nasa's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said that results gathered since the IPCC showed that melting and ice loss could not be overlooked.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
I don’t, I never really became well versed in metrics. However, that scientist should know metrics since he used them in his calculations. LOL!!!!
More PC gobbledegook.
If they really believed this stuff, wouldn’t residents of the Northeast and the West Coast be leaving? No, instead they would like those living in the Mid-West Heartland and the South to fork over enormous taxes and ruin their economies so these enviro-nazis can continue to squat on the coasts.
"But it is one metre or more seeing the current change, which is up to three times more than the average predicted by the IPCC."
"It is a major change and it actually calls for action."
Dr John Church of the Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research added: "The most recent research showed that sea level is rising by 3mm a year since 1993, a rate well above the 20th century average."
So Dr John Church says the sea is rising 3mm a year hmm! 3 x 100 yrs = 300mm.
But Prof Steffen says the sea will rise 900 to 1200 mm by 2100.
Is there something I missed here?
Quote of the day!
That comment can be applied to anything that makes no sense that comes from Washington, science, anti-Americans, etc. It's all a bunch of Obama! We should keep saying that when anything makes as much sense as he does! Good one!
In 2007 the IPCC said it would rise 59cm by 2100; divide 59/93 years for a rise of 6.44mm a year; now it is 3mm/year and that is faster???
To get a rise of 1 meter by 2100 the level would have to average 10.1mm/year.
Needs more study, or sleep or booze...
“Exactly. Simple classroom experiment will demonstrate stupidity of the Polar ice Cap is melting and we’re going to drown chicken littles. Float some ice cubes in a glass of water. Mark the level of the water. Let ice cubes melt. Mark the level of the water. What happened boys and girls?”
Your idea explains why there is no reason to fear a large melting of ice in the arctic, which is floating ice. I think the global warming alarmists are talking about the ice melting that is supported by land, like Greenland and Antarctica. In thoses cases, a massive ice melt really would cause a significant rise in sea level. Too bad for the alarmists that the evidence does not indicate significant melting, in fact, the opposite is arguably taking place.
he is just saying this so that he can qualify for, and hopefully get a large research grant. I would bet money on it.
Ah, but put some ice cubes on a ramp that will drain into the glass and do your experiment again. Don’t forget, there is not only water-based ice, but ice that is on land, as well. Some of that land-based ice will run directly into the oceans.
Here’s an interesting analysis by a physicist that demonstrates we have nothing to worry about for at least the next 3000 years:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/will_the_ice_caps_melt.html
Must be connected with this:
Climate Scientists Meet In Denmark
More than 2,000 climate scientists gathered in Copenhagen on Tuesday to focus on global warming's rapid acceleration, the American Free Press reported.
New research suggests the impact of global warming could be even worse than predicted by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007, with natural disasters like floods, drought, disease and extreme weather, arriving sooner rather than later.
Scientists fear the possibility that human activity -- mainly the burning of oil, gas and coal -- could trigger natural drivers of global warming that could be nearly impossible to reverse.
Presenters at the conference are likely to unveil a new scientific consensus that sea levels are set to rise at least a meter by 2100, more than double the IPCC estimate, which failed to account for melt-off from the Greenland Ice Sheet.
Britain's top climate negotiator, John Ashton, said the meeting must look at what is a 'reasonable worst case' in the lifetime of people alive today, since even rich nations had yet to take such scenarios seriously.
Ashton said that a sea level rise of one or two meters would not just be damaging for China, it would be an absolute catastrophe.
“And what is catastrophic for China is catastrophic for the world," he added.
Researchers from 80 countries responded to the open invitation to present their findings, which were then vetted by a panel of climate experts.
Katherine Richardson, head of the Danish government's Commission on Climate Change Policy and a co-organizer of the meeting, said the huge response from scientists comes from a sense of urgency, but also a sense of frustration.
"Most of us have been trained as scientists to not get our hands dirty by talking to politicians. But we now realize that what we are dealing with is so complicated and urgent that we have to help to make sure the results are understood," she told AFP.
Many other experts, like Connie Hedegaard, Denmark's minister for climate and energy, agree that political decisions should be driven by science.
"As policymakers, we can't ignore what the scientists are telling us, nor can we close our eyes to reality," she said.
---
On the Net:
When land ice melts it runs into the sea and dilutes the salt content making it easier for the water to evaporate. Plus the weight of the glaciers is reduced on the surface land which then tends to rise. It’s an incredibly complicated system and in some ways self (or God if you prefer)regulating.
I wondered why it was still too damned cold here in Los angeles...can you drive your SUV some more....I could use some warming!
From the article at post #70....
Presenters at the conference are likely to unveil a new scientific consensus that sea levels are set to rise at least a meter by 2100,
At the rate that technology has advanced in the last 90 years and increasing exponentially, I suspect there will even be floating cities by then.
The rallying cry of 2100 will be "Surfs up!"
Notice the words "could rise".........If I find the fountain of youth, I "could" still be alive by then.
I’m not sure you are replying to the correct post, My question was in mm. How can a 3mm per year rise equal 900 to 1200mm in 91 years.
3mm x 91 years = 273mm
Until it doesn't.
Likewise the hurricanes were going to be more numerous and stronger, doing untold damage... until they didn't.
Duh...not sure who I was replying to...but the scientists clearly didn’t have the same figure in their statements...pointed out at post #65 also...
The numbers in the post were the same; it is just that they don’t agree with the broad conclusion.
If the level rose by 3mm+1/year each decade, the total increase by 2100 would be 633mm, against the IPCC prediction of 590mm.
Say it raised by 3+2/year each decade; what would that bring?
In the meantime, they get grants to continue their study of climate change for the rest of their lives.You're too kind. I would have said:
They get grants to continue their study of climate change for the rest of their stinking, lying, anti-science, socialist lives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.