Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
Well, I see that the climate hypemeisters are at it again. Here’s Google News on the subject.
Figure 1. The usual, from the usual suspects.
So I thought I’d take a look at some of the claims. To start with, here’s an overview of the sea level rise around the US coasts.
Figure 2. US relative sea level trends. Red is fastest rising, then orange, yellow, green, and finally blue for areas where relative sea level is falling. SOURCE: NOAA
A few notes of interest. First, look at the east coast / west coast differences in relative sea level rise. This is generally not because sea levels are rising at different rates on the east and west coasts. It’s because the land is generally sinking on the east coast and rising on the west coast. Nothing to do with the ocean.
Next, check out the local differences. At Grand Isle, Louisiana, the big red arrow in the Gulf of Mexico, the relative sea level is rising at 9.2 mm per year … while only a short distance away, the green arrow to the right of Grand Isle shows that Pensacola, Florida has a relative sea level rise less than a third of that, 2.7 mm per year.
Why different sea level rise rates? Again, it has nothing to do with the ocean. It’s because Grand Isle is a silty barrier island in the Mississippi Delta, and like all such islands, it’s slowly sinking into the briny blue.
So … guess which areas of the US the serial sea level doomcasters are focused on?
Well, here’s the Washington Post’s poster child for the “catastrophe” … Dauphin Island, Louisiana.
Figure 3. Dauphin Island, Alabama
And guess what? It’s another slowly sinking barrier island. Here’s what they claim is happening there.
Figure 4. The WaPo’s graph of the horrible, terrible sea level rise at Dauphin Island. Note that it is cut off at about 2022 … SOURCE: Washington Post
However, here’s what NOAA says about the sea level rise there.
Figure 5. NOAA relative sea level trend, Dauphin Island, Alabama. SOURCE: NOAA
Note that the Washington Post has cut off the last part of the data, which shows that Dauphin Island sea level rates are back to historical norms … bad journalists, no cookies …
And in the other Washington Post article, they go on about how terrible things are because of the recent rate of sea level rise in Charleston, South Carolina. Here’s the NOAA data for that tidal station.
Figure 6. NOAA relative sea level trend, Charleston, South Carolina. SOURCE: NOAA
Yes, there has been a recent increase in sea level rates in Charleston. But is it historically unusual? Well … in a word, no. I downloaded the data to take an accurate look at the rates of rise.
Figure 7. Comparison of recent and historical sea level rise rates, using the NOAA Charleston data linked above.
[CODA] And after writing the above, as Michael Corleone said, “Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!” …
I closed the page on this post and resumed wandering the web, and then I have the misfortune to see the Boston Globe is up in arms about sea levels. They say (emphasis mine):
Last year, sea levels along the Boston coastline were, on average, higher than at any other point in recorded history: about 14 inches above levels in 1921, when records began.
“This hasn’t stopped or slowed down yet,” said Rob DeConto, a climate scientist who studies ice sheets in a warming climate and a professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.
The record-breaking sea level is yet another data point showcasing a decades-long trend that is accelerating at a startling pace. As climate change worsens, the shoreline along much of the city will need new flood protections, such as berms, sea walls, and restored marshlands, as early as 2030, the latest available data provided by Boston plainly show.
As 2030 approaches, climate resilience experts told the Globe, the rapidly accelerating pace of sea level rise necessitates action.
Hmmm, sez I … so I got the Boston data from NOAA.
Figure 8. Boston sea level trend
Hmmm, sez I … not seeing the dreaded “rapidly accelerating pace of sea level rise” there. So I downloaded the data and analyzed it for acceleration. Here’s the result. Each point shows the acceleration over the thirty years previous to that date.
Figure 9. Trailing 30-year sea level rise acceleration rates, Boston Massachusetts.
As you can see, the acceleration of Boston sea level rise over the last 30 years has been … well … not to put too fine a point on it … basically zero. Zip. Nada. Nothing.
You can also see the alternating acceleration and deceleration of sea level rise over time, which is visible in all the sea level records around the world. And so we can be sure that at some time in the future, sea levels in Boston will actually begin to accelerate again.
And when that happens, be prepared for the climatastrophist hype to hit new highs.
Forewarned is forearmed …
TL;DR Version: The sea level rates are doing what they’ve always done. There’s been no unusual “acceleration” in the tide gauge measurements. The east coast land is still sinking, the west coast land is still rising, acceleration is still alternating with deceleration, and just like always, silty barrier islands in river deltas are slowly returning to the ocean …
… and when Bill Gates, Obama, and the rest of the pluted bloatocrats stop buying million-dollar beachfront estates, you might start thinking about sea levels.
Until then?
Chill.
And here in Northern California, where we were supposed to be in a permanent drought … it’s raining again. The view from here …
While that’s great for the forest, and the grass loves it, that also means I’m gonna have to mow our two-acre clearing again … my gorgeous ex-fiancee sez I should hire someone to do it, but I figure, why should illegal immigrants have all the fun?
Best to all, stay well,
w.
PS: When you comment, please quote the exact words you are discussing, to avoid misunderstandings. And if you want to show that Willis is wrong, here’s how to do it.
