Not so fast again. Do read the second item also. Whatever they are
all claiming, it is clear that the sea level did rise slowly in
response to the global increase in temperature that peaked in 1998.
As could be reasonably expected that impact is now slowly dropping as
the driver is flat to now declining.
We can presume that this possibly reflects additional fresh water
been released from Greenland and other Glaciers. It may also reflect
warmer waters. How much of either is likely open.
The more interesting question is just how much of this rise is a
result of a rebound from the Little Ice Age? I have no doubt that a
period of cold will again expand all glaciers and take it all back.
What makes this all so problematic anyway is that the global sea
surface area is 361 million square kilometers. That means that a
rise of one meter requires 361 000 cubic kilometers of ice. That is
an awful lot of ice to melt. The glaciers reacting with the sea just
do not cut it. In fact we are talking about one cubic kilometer of
ice per square kilometer of area in Greenland and we have had nothing
of the kind anytime during the past centuries.
So the only reasonable explanation for the modest rise we have seen
is the modest general global temperature increase driven by the
rebound from the Little Ice Age causing an expansion of the surface
water.
Seas rising 60
percent faster than UN forecast: study
by Staff Writers
Paris (AFP) Nov 28, 2012
Sea levels are rising
60-percent faster than the UN's climate panel forecast in its most
recent assessment, scientists reported on Wednesday.
At present, sea levels
are increasing at an average 3.2 millimetres (0.125 inches) per year,
a trio of specialists reported in the journal Environmental Research
Letters.
This compares with a
"best estimate" by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007, which projected that by today, the
rise would be 2 mm (0.078 inches) per year.
The new figure
converges with a widely-shared opinion that the world is heading for
sea-level rise of around a metre (3.25 feet) by century's end,
co-author Grant Foster of US firm Tempo Analytics told AFP.
"I would say that
a metre of sea level rise by the end of the century is probably close
to what you would find if you polled the people who know best,"
Foster said.
"In low-lying
areas where you have massive numbers of people living within a metre
of sea level, like Bangladesh, it means that the land that sustains
their lives disappears, and you have hundreds of millions of climate
refugees, and that can lead to resource wars and all kinds of
conflicts," he added.
"For major
coastal cities like New York, probably the principal effect would be
what we saw in Hurricane Sandy.
"Every time you
get a major storm, you get a storm surge, and that causes a major
risk of flooding. For New York and New Jersey, three more feet of
water would be even more devastating, as you can imagine."
The investigation, led
by Stefan Rahmstorf of Germany's Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact
Research (PIK), gauged the accuracy of computer simulations that the
IPCC used in its landmark Fourth Assessment Report in 2007.
That report jolted
governments into nailing climate change to the top of their agenda,
culminating in the ill-fated Copenhagen Summit of 2009, and helped
earn the Nobel Prize for the IPCC.
The new study gave
high marks for the document's forecast on global temperature, saying
there was a "very good agreement" with what was being
observed today, an overall warming trend of 0.16 degrees Celsius
(0.28 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade.
But it said the IPCC's
projection for sea levels was much lower than what has turned out.
The panel's prediction
for the future -- of a rise of up to 59 cms by 2100 -- "may also
be biased low," it warned, a caution shared by other studies
published in recent years.
Foster said the
bigger-than-projected rise could be attributed to meltwater runoff
from land ice, something that was a big unknown when the IPCC
reported in 2007 and remains unclear today.
Other factors were
technical uncertainty, he said.
The IPCC's projection
had been based on information from 1993 to 2003, and there has been
more data since then, helping to prove the accuracy of satellite
radars that measure ocean levels by bouncing radar waves off the sea
surface.
The IPCC's Fifth
Assessment Report will be published in three volumes, in September
2013, March 2014 and April 2014.
Stefan Rahmstorf’s
Sea Level Amnesia – Using His Own Numbers, Sea Level Rise Actually
Slowed Down 3%!
By P
Gosselin on 29. November 2012
Ulli Kulke, veteran
journalist at the German flagship daily DIE WELT, posts a
comment at his blog on über-alarmist Stefan Rahmstorf’s claim
that “sea levels are rising 60% faster” than previously thought
in 2007.
Sea levels
have decelerated over the last years. Chart
source:http://sealevel.colorado.edu/
Being a devout
alarmist, Rahmstorf is obsessed with finding ways to produce
spectacular headlines. In Germany scary climate headlines have become
a tradition every November, just before every major climate
conference. Doha this year is no different.
In his latest claim,
Rahmstorf claims that just a few years ago, sea levels were thought
to be rising 2 mm/year. Suddenly the sea level, the satellites say,
is actually now rising at 3.2 mm/ year – that’s 60% faster then
they thought!
But as Kulke points
out in his piece titled False climate alarm surrounds an old
hat,Rahmstorf is suffering from (selective) amnesia, and forgot what
he said in the UN-IPCC report of (2007): Rahmstorf back then:
Satellite measurements show a rise of 3.1 mm/year for the period
1993-2003 – and if you consider the measurements through 2006, it’s
even 3.3 mm/year.”
Kulke writes, with a
bit of sarcasm:
It was, after all,
quite some time ago, and there was so much data in that thick report.
Also with sea levels – some numbers were lower and some were
higher. But Rahmstorf, the ocean scientist, had been lead author in
every climate report. For this reason the data shouldn’t be
anything new for him. Back then the report projected an increase of
18 – 59 cm for the coming century.
Alarm, Alarm. Let’s
increase the growth of data. Or, to speak like Honecker (leader of
former communist regime East Germany): Always higher, never lower!
And if it’s not possible to increase the current data, then let’s
just reduce the data of the past. Just like some climate
scientists also want to reduce the temperature of the hottest year
since instrumental measurements began, namely 1998, just so that this
decade can once again appear to be on the rise. Or just like
Michael Mann tried with his infamous hockey stick – but failed.”
If we take Rahmstorf’s
1993 – 2006 period value of 3.3 mm/year, then we see that sea
level rise has actually slowed down by 3%, and not risen 60%.
The tricks being used by alarmist climate scientists are becoming
ever more obvious and desperate.
You don’t need to be
an investigative journalist to uncover that.
No comments:
Post a Comment