Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Mon 14 Jan 2019, 02:25:55

If the sea level is rising why is a WW1 wrecked submarine now sticking up out of the water?
Just asking.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/12/europe/g ... index.html
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9809
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby MD » Mon 14 Jan 2019, 03:39:15

pfff. the seas do their thing. shifting sands
Stop filling dumpsters, as much as you possibly can, and everything will get better.

Just think it through.
It's not hard to do.
User avatar
MD
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4951
Joined: Mon 02 May 2005, 02:00:00
Location: On the ball

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby jedrider » Mon 14 Jan 2019, 20:37:10

Post-Glacial Rebound?
User avatar
jedrider
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1512
Joined: Thu 28 May 2009, 09:10:44

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 15 Jan 2019, 07:40:03

vtsnowedin wrote:If the sea level is rising why is a WW1 wrecked submarine now sticking up out of the water?
Just asking.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/12/europe/g ... index.html


Vincent Schmitt, a tour guide in the area, told AFP that "it is visible at low tide generally...because of the erosion we are experiencing."
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13201
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 15 Jan 2019, 14:21:07

jedrider wrote:Post-Glacial Rebound?
Would account for about 1.0 meter over the 100 years after the sub sank.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9809
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby dohboi » Fri 22 Feb 2019, 10:09:49

Plans Approved to Build Massive Seawall in NYC for "Once in 300 Year" Storm

https://www.inverse.com/article/53485-b ... -every-ten

Despite Hurricane Sandy’s immense impact, the city has been slow to adopt protective measures that would safeguard residents from future storm-related disasters. A 2018 report that evaluated storm preparation ranked New York 12th out of 16 Eastern coastal states, behind both New Jersey and Connecticut. But on Tuesday, New York finally secured funding to begin addressing that though the Staten Island Levee Project, a $615 million seawall that will be built to withstand a “300 year storm.”

The new project is set to run 5.3 miles along Staten Island’s Eastern shore. It’s actually not technically a “wall,” and it will eventually be composed of a system of interconnected levees, berms, and seawalls, designed to combat both storm surges and rising sea levels.

But as climate change proceeds at an increasingly destructive pace, the more traditional ways of measuring storm severity — once every 100 years, every 300 years, every 500, etc. — and the ways in which those designations inform our seawall design could quickly become outdated. Hurricane Sandy, after all, was a once in a century storm. The Staten Island seawall is built for a once-in-300 year storm. But a report released last year by the Regional Plan Association found that those “every 500 years” floods New York has been slow to protect themselves against? They could start happening once every five.


https://www.6sqft.com/study-new-york-ci ... every-500/
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18456
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Fri 22 Feb 2019, 12:25:32

Just as I predicted - before Trump leaves office, all his expensive NYC real estate will be protected from SLR at taxpayer's expense.

Now you know one of the main reasons he is POTUS, and will seek a second term. Of course, many of us would stand by and watch NYC sink into the ooze, and say "Good Riddance!". But that's just not gonna happen, now. Queue up and pay your taxes, to keep Trump Tower's basement dry.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 22 Feb 2019, 14:13:28

Uh, STATEN ISLAND, not Manhattan. Or does Trump have lots of property in Staten Island?

Here’s the plan for Manhattan. Much more ambitious, 10 miles long, no price tag attached.

That just Leaves Brooklyn and Queens.

$615 for Staten Island
$2,000 ish for Manhattan
Another few billion for Brooklyn and Queens

About $6 billion.

Not including cost over runs and maintenance.

Franklybto my ear that is an astonishingly low ball estimate considering the AMTRAK tunnel into NYC is about $30 billion alone. (When I worked on this project many years ago the admitted cost was almost $13 billion, but it was well known within the project that was an unrealistic political low ball figure.)

https://www.citylab.com/transportation/ ... al/556106/
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13201
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Fri 22 Feb 2019, 14:51:48

Most of Trump's high dollar real estate is in downtown or uptown Manhatton. Uptown is a lot safer than the entire financial district, which is at risk in tunnels and basements that when flooded render the high rise buildings uninhabitable. The Dutch solved similar problems in Amsterdam using hard seawalls, compartmentalization, big pumps, and gates. New Amsterdam's problems could be solved that way as well, at a huge cost and after decades of effort and considerable demolition of existing structures which must be sacrificed to save the others. So far, the politics won't allow such a plan.

What is already happening is the city is hardening tunnels and basement spaces and adding watertight bulkhead doors. Problem is, that's not nearly enough to cope with storm surge in a major storm.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 22 Feb 2019, 17:22:24

But we are spending untold billions to improve access to this very area.

Stuuipid.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13201
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby dohboi » Sat 23 Feb 2019, 07:50:04

"...before Trump leaves office, all his expensive NYC real estate will be protected from SLR at taxpayer's expense."

Interesting...I hadn't thought of that. Of course, he shortly have to give all that property up. And there are obviously a lot of other interested parties that want to see NYC preserved no matter what.

But yeah, storm surges are likely to get higher and higher going forward.

On the other hand, it's possible that slr will not be quite as fast as some recent estimates have predicted: https://www.skepticalscience.com/new-li ... n-slr.html

Studies shed new light on Antarctica’s future contribution to sea level rise

The papers together suggest a likely contribution of around 15cm from melting Antarctic ice by the end of this century, with a 5% likelihood that it will exceed 39cm under a high-emissions scenario.


I think it's still early days in understanding Marine Ice Cliff Instability (MICI), and further research will likely further alter these conclusions.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18456
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Tanada » Sat 23 Feb 2019, 09:51:38

Sure, all they have to do to disprove marine ice cliff instability if find one, just 1, marine terminating ice sheet anywhere on earth that exceeds 100 meters altitude by a substantial percentage.

When that manage to pull that rabbit out of their hat I will give them more credence.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15523
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby jawagord » Fri 08 Mar 2019, 17:15:33

NOAA has created maps on sea level trends, most of the world currently has a rate of rise of 0-1 ft per hundred years.

https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltre ... rends.html
Don't deny the peak!
jawagord
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon 29 May 2017, 09:49:17

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby dohboi » Mon 20 May 2019, 22:03:49

Sea Level Rise Could Be Much Larger Than Expected

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48337629

Scientists believe that global sea levels could rise far more than predicted, due to accelerating melting in Greenland and Antarctica...

The long-held view has been that the world's seas would rise by a maximum of just under a metre by 2100.

This new study, based on expert opinions, projects that the real level may be around double that figure.


In the researchers' view, if emissions continue on the current trajectory then the world's seas would be very likely to rise by between 62-238cm by 2100. This would be in a world that had warmed by around 5C - one of the worst case scenarios for global warming.

"For 2100, the ice sheet contribution is very likely in the range range of 7-178cm but once you add in glaciers and ice caps outside the ice sheets and thermal expansion of the seas, you tip well over two metres," said lead author Prof Jonathan Bamber from the University of Bristol.

... According to the authors, this scenario would have huge implications for the planet.

They calculate that the world would lose an area of land equal to 1.79 million square kilometres - equivalent to the size of Libya.

Much of the land losses would be in important food growing areas such as the delta of the Nile. Large swathes of Bangladesh would be very difficult for people to continue to live in. Major global cities, including London, New York and Shanghai would be under threat.

"To put this into perspective, the Syrian refugee crisis resulted in about a million refugees coming into Europe," said Prof Bamber.

"That is about 200 times smaller than the number of people who would be displaced in a 2m sea-level rise
."


----

Ice sheet contributions to future sea-level rise from structured expert judgment

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2019 ... 1817205116
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18456
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 21 May 2019, 11:02:33

SLR in the face of a 5°C temp rise is nothing. Africa and the ME and large parts of India, and Pakistan would be severely hurt. The number of refugees would be hard to imagine.

Perhaps that is what is behind Brexit, the deep unconscious knowledge that they have an island which must be protected.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13201
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Ibon » Tue 21 May 2019, 16:14:14

Newfie wrote:Perhaps that is what is behind Brexit, the deep unconscious knowledge that they have an island which must be protected.


I agree and islands are not just physical bodies surrounded by water . Continents and cultures and religions and national borders are also "islands"

And I fully agree that there is very close to the surface if not well above the surface an understanding globally that we are approaching the BIG SQUEEZE. This is working just under the surface effective public opinion and public policy.

I think we underestimate how these currents just below the surface act on societies.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7550
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 21 May 2019, 17:09:43

As many recent elections show.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13201
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Ibon » Tue 21 May 2019, 17:29:00

Newfie wrote:As many recent elections show.


I foresee this huge tension emerging between protecting your island and attempting to protect the biggest island of all, our planet. One requires borders and looking out for ones own and the other requires sacrifice toward a global set of regulations that each nation and thus each individual will comply to.

Is this even remotely feasible?
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7550
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby dissident » Wed 22 May 2019, 00:22:34

The IPCC 4th round predicted under 50 cm including 75% from thermal expansion. We are supposed to swallow that all of the land ice melt will be at most 13 cm? This is the sort of crap you get when you assume that land ice is one big ice cube that melts via surface ablation. This number has zero physical meaning since ice sheets are like ice cubes only at the scale of a few feet. On the scale of the ice sheet they are viscous, flowing aggregates that allow water to migrate from the surface to the base via capillary action through compacted crack surfaces. Just by increasing the rate of surface melt during the summer, the whole ice sheet can be accelerated in its flow. None of the GCMs even account for ice sheet flow. They just estimate surface ablation which is counter-acted by snow deposition in winter.

So in these GCMs, ice sheets can see zero net annual mass change and hence contribute nothing to sea level rise. This is patent nonsense that is not observed. In fact, observations indicate an accelerating mass loss by the Greenland ice sheet and a significant part of the Antarctic ice sheet. The 13 cm must have been coming from some sea-edge ice loss due to warming ocean waters. But in the real world this ice loss contributes to enhanced flow of ice towards the sea-edge and is thus a time accumulated ice loss instead of some reshaping of the "giant ice cube". It is safe to say that 130+ cm is vastly more likely than 13 cm. Giving a total of at least 167 cm by 2100.

But the above ignores the self-organized criticality of ice sheets and surges of ice loss are inevitable. An estimate of 2 meters is a conservative one. The IPCC did not bother to qualify its absurd forecasts. Unlike the other parameterizations in GCMs, the ice sheet schemes were a total joke and an after-thought. This is not too bad for global climate estimates since the surface area of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets is limited and they do not exert a significant impact on global sea surface temperatures. So the warming estimate is not impacted noticeably by the rate of ice sheet melt. This applies on the 100 year time scale. If all the land ice disappears then the geometry of land and oceans will change and there will be more impact due to the typically lower water albedo compared to land. On the 100 year time scale sea level rise is more important for impact on humans.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5602
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 22 May 2019, 06:36:16

Ibon wrote:
Newfie wrote:As many recent elections show.


I foresee this huge tension emerging between protecting your island and attempting to protect the biggest island of all, our planet. One requires borders and looking out for ones own and the other requires sacrifice toward a global set of regulations that each nation and thus each individual will comply to.

Is this even remotely feasible?


I see no reason, no evidence, to suggest it is. That’s not a value statement, just reflection upon history.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13201
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cynthiacript and 6 guests