From NOAA News: NOAA Report Explains Sea Level Anomaly this Summer along the U.S. Atlantic Coast
August 31, 2009
Persistent winds and a weakened current in the Mid-Atlantic contributed to higher than normal sea levels along the Eastern Seaboard in June and July, according to a new NOAA technical report.
After observing water levels six inches to two feet higher than originally predicted, NOAA scientists began analyzing data from select tide stations and buoys from Maine to Florida and found that a weakening of the Florida Current Transport—an oceanic current that feeds into the Gulf Stream—in addition to steady and persistent Northeast winds, contributed to this anomaly.
“The ocean is dynamic and it’s not uncommon to have anomalies,” said Mike Szabados, director of NOAA’s Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services. “What made this event unique was its breadth, intensity and duration.”
The highest atypical sea levels occurred closer to where the anomaly formed in the Mid-Atlantic, where cities like Baltimore, Md., at times experienced extreme high tides as much as two feet higher than normal. Data from NOAA’s National Water Level Observation Network tide stations, Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory, and National Data Buoy Center, are published in the report.
Impacts of the event were amplified by the occurrence of a perigean-spring tide, the natural timing of the season and month when the moon is closest to the Earth and its gravitational pull heightens the elevation of the water. The combined effects of this tide with the sea level anomaly produced minor flooding on the coast.
“The report is a good first assessment,” said NOAA Oceanographer William Sweet, Ph.D. “However, NOAA, with our academic partners, should continue to investigate the broader causes behind the event. Further analysis is needed to fully understand what is driving the patterns we observed.”
The full report, Elevated East Coast Sea Level Anomaly: June-July 2009, is available online.
NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.
“NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun”
You know, I’m leaning towards thinking this was just a typo — and that it should have read:
“NOBODY understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun”
—
Re: FatBigot (20:45:17)
You make an interesting argument.
[snip – waayy off topic. Self immolation for a climate cause has little to do with sea level]
So here is an odball way that man probably is raising the sea level (we are talking a whopping 3mm afterall). I had a “eurika” moment when I saw the first picture of the post, and almost thought that was where we were going with the post, but alas no.
Every ship, boat and sub displaces a certain amount of water, now an individual boat might well not make much of a difference, but there are alot of boats, I have to imagine smeared out over the surface of the ocean that the displacement has to account for at least a small portion of the 3mm rise, just a thought.
MattB: Another thought. We now have 6 billion+ people wandering around, all pushing down on the planet. So something has to go up in response.
I suspect, without doing any math, all of it amounts to a speck of dust on the truck scale. Well below the noise threshold. My question: sea level rise relative to what? If they really saw a two foot change, that should show up on shore. Have to wonder just how they measure some of these things.
NOAA scientists began analyzing data from select tide stations and buoys from Maine to Florida and found that a weakening of the Florida Current Transport—an oceanic current that feeds into the Gulf Stream
Interesting. A weakened Gulf Stream is accepted by many as the cause or at least a contributing factor of the Little Ice Age, in Europe.
Note that despite popular belief, the reason Western Europe is temperate for its latitude (from memory England is on the same latitude as Labrador), is the Rocky Mountains which causes low pressure systems to track further northwest than they would otherwise. The Gulf Stream is secondary although still a factor.
“After observing water levels six inches to two feet higher than originally predicted, NOAA scientists began analyzing data from select tide stations and buoys”
“NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.”
How interesting and how in conflict. Better said that NOAA predicts changes in the Earth’s environment which are WRONG on occasion!
“After observing water levels six inches to two feet higher than originally predicted, NOAA scientists began analyzing data from select tide stations and buoys”
“NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun,
Where was the fall in water levels, must be a fall somewhere.
Retired Engineer (07:48:08) :
MattB: Another thought. We now have 6 billion+ people wandering around, all pushing down on the planet. So something has to go up in response.
I suspect, without doing any math, all of it amounts to a speck of dust on the truck scale. Well below the noise threshold. My question: sea level rise relative to what? If they really saw a two foot change, that should show up on shore. Have to wonder just how they measure some of these things.
Do note, I said small :), just like the majority of man’s influences on climate (environment is a whole nother issue) Just like those same 6 billion people all contribute in a small way, to a rising temperature due to the fact that they are warm bloded, but also take away a portion of whatever water level rise there is because at any given time they are sequestering a fair amount of water. Lots of little things to look at if you want to try to model the whole shebang, no wonder the models cant get even close (though they may have a better chance if they stated including solar variability into the equation, but that might result in realizing just how little effect we do have on climate though)
Sea level rise in New Zealand
I hope this is the right place to post:
I have been quietly accumulating information on sea level rise over the past year, from relevant blog posts and web sources, downloading information whenever possible and trying to make some sense of it all. I have quite a collection, but there are many things I still don’t fully understand. Today, I discovered the IODE site, and noticed a recent international conference (May 2009). I took a look at some of the reports and noticed that reports for two of the major cities in New Zealand, Wellington (capital city) and Auckland (where I live), still could only show results for up to 2000 (Auckland) and 2005 (Wellington).
I am puzzled. Why is the data reported on nearly 10 years old for Auckland, and four years old for Wellington.
I have learnt (I hope) not to jump to conclusions, and I intend to dig a little deeper. On the Auckland data it seems that
“Efforts are being made to obtain permission from the port company to make this data available to the international community.”
Fair enough. I guess that good data reporting does take time. The Auckland results up until 2000 show a steady rise of 1.29mm +/- 0.20mm pa and Wellington shows a steady rise of 2.41mm +/- 0.35mm pa
But then I found another source of information, which graphs the available satellite data right through almost to today it appears. Most curious – I input the coordinates for Auckland, and the resulting graph shows that MSL has been essentially flat from 2000 until 2009. How about Wellington ?? Hmmm . . . this also shows a pretty flat-looking graph from 2000 until 2009.
Do I smell a rat ?? No, I am sure there is a reasonable explanation somewhere, and I do trust our local NZ scientists and administrators – they would never deliberately stall on providing the best most up to date information. I will just have to ask them, and I will.
But before I do, can anyone else shed some light on this ?? Maybe I am missing something important ?? Sorry – I don’t know how to post links or graphs
Here are my references:
(1) http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_station.shtml?stnid=690-002 for Auckland, and
http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_station.shtml?stnid=690-011 for Wellington
(2) http://www.iode.org/index.php option=com_oe&task=viewDocumentRecord&docID=3654
and download the pdf file at
http://www.iode.org/index.php%20option=com_oe&task=viewDocumentRecord&docID=3654
(3) using the University of Colorado interactive wizard
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/wizard.php
input coordinates are 74\’45\” and -35\’55\” for Auckland, NZ
and for Wellington NZ the coordinates are 174\’47\” and -41\’17\”
or just go straight there:
Auckland:
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/wizard.php?dlon=174%2745%22&dlat=-35%2755%22&map=v&fit=n&smooth=n&days=60
Wellington:
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/wizard.php?dlon=174%5C%5C%5C%2747%5C%5C%5C%22&dlat=-41%5C%5C%5C%2717%5C%5C%5C%22&map=v&fit=n&smooth=n&days=60
thanks in advance
Norm Beazer
re: Norm Beazer (22:12:42) :
Sea level rise in New Zealand
the references again . . .
(1) for Auckland, and http://tinyurl.com/yz7ra27
for Wellington http://tinyurl.com/yguv5d8
(2) IODE http://tinyurl.com/ygd4vep
and download the pdf file at
http://tinyurl.com/yzdmk4q
(3) using the University of Colorado interactive wizard
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/wizard.php
input coordinates are 74\’45\” and -35\’55\” for Auckland, NZ
and for Wellington NZ the coordinates are 174\’47\” and -41\’17\”
or just go straight there:
Auckland: http://tinyurl.com/yghkmxs
Wellington: http://tinyurl.com/yg77r68
thanks again
Norm Beazer