Below: North Carolina’s Albemarle Sound.
Note marker at 36N -76W.
First the Press Release from the University of Pennsylvania:
North Carolina Sea Levels Rising Three Times Faster Than in Previous 500 Years, Penn Study Says
October 28, 2009
PHILADELPHIA –- An international team of environmental scientists led by the University of Pennsylvania has shown that sea-level rise, at least in North Carolina, is accelerating. Researchers found 20th-century sea-level rise to be three times higher than the rate of sea-level rise during the last 500 years. In addition, this jump appears to occur between 1879 and 1915, a time of industrial change that may provide a direct link to human-induced climate change.
The results appear in the current issue of the journal Geology.
The rate of relative sea-level rise, or RSLR, during the 20th century was 3 to 3.3 millimeters per year, higher than the usual rate of one per year. Furthermore, the acceleration appears consistent with other studies from the Atlantic coast, though the magnitude of the acceleration in North Carolina is larger than at sites farther north along the U.S. and Canadian Atlantic coast and may be indicative of a latitudinal trend related to the melting of the Greenland ice sheet.
Understanding the timing and magnitude of this possible acceleration in the rate of RSLR is critical for testing models of global climate change and for providing a context for 21st-century predictions.
“Tide gauge records are largely inadequate for accurately recognizing the onset of any acceleration of relative sea-level rise occurring before the 18th century, mainly because too few records exist as a comparison,” Andrew Kemp, the paper’s lead author, said. “Accurate estimates of sea-level rise in the pre-satellite era are needed to provide an appropriate context for 21st-century projections and to validate geophysical and climate models.”
The research team studied two North Carolina salt marshes that form continuous accumulations of organic sediment, a natural archive that provides scientists with an accurate way to reconstruct relative sea levels using radiometric isotopes and stratigraphic age markers. The research provided a record of relative sea-level change since the year 1500 at the Sand Point and Tump Point salt marshes in the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system of North Carolina. The two marshes provided an ideal setting for producing high-resolution records because thick sequences of high marsh sediment are present and the estuarine system is microtidal, which reduces the vertical uncertainty of
paleosea-level estimates. The study provides for the first time replicated sea-level reconstructions from two nearby sites.
In addition, comparison with 20th-century tide-gauge records validates the use of this approach and suggests that salt-marsh records with decadal and decimeter resolution can supplement tide-gauge records by extending record length and compensating for the strong spatial bias in the global distribution of longer instrumental records.
The study was funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Ocean Program, North Carolina Coastal Geology Cooperative Program, U.S. Geological Survey and National Science Foundation.
The study was conducted by Kemp and Benjamin P. Horton of the Sea-Level Research Laboratory at Penn, Stephen J. Culver and D. Reide Corbett of the Department of Geological Sciences at East Carolina University, Orson van de Plassche of Vrije Universiteit, W. Roland Gehrels of the University of Plymouth, Bruce C. Douglas of Florida International University and Andrew C. Parnell of University College Dublin.
I was curious, because this seemed a bit “off” to me based on other data that I’ve seen. So I went to the University of Colorado Sea Level data server and entered the coordinates for Albemarle Sound (36N -76W or in their usage 36N 284W).
The graph they serve up looks like this:
It’s low resolution, but does look rather flat. Fortunately they provide the data with the plot. You can read all about the Topex/Poseidon data preparation here.
I took that raw data and plotted it here in an expanded size and did a trend line, shown below:
The result was surprising. A slight negative trend.
I chose a different location to get closer to Pamlico Sound, also cited in the study. Unfortunately the interactive tool at UC is coarse on lat/lon and the closest I could get was 35N -76W, just off the outer banks.
The data from that point is plotted below. The source data for 35N -76W is available here.
Apologies for the slight cosmetic differences in line size between the two graphs. I had a computer reset between sessions and lost some settings.
So, if there is 3mm rise per year recently, since 1992, we certainly can’t see it. I can’t say anything for the other years in the study.
But in the press release they say:
The rate of relative sea-level rise, or RSLR, during the 20th century was 3 to 3.3 millimeters per year, higher than the usual rate of one per year.
If that is true, then the rate appears to have slowed significantly in the late 20th century to present. For 35N, -76W, the 1.12mm/yr rate certainly looks like the “…usual rate of one per year”.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Smokey (05:13:19) :
isn’t it reasonable to assume that the Earth’s crust moves in three dimensions?
Exactly! As one living high in the Rocky Mountain uplift, it’s hard to lose sight of that fact. It’s interesting to know that the original Rocky Mountains were completely washed and scraped away eons ago, and another range built up and eaten half away into the sea. Just drove by the Grand Canyon and up to the continental divide. Throw in some underwater volcanoes, megatons of desert dust blown in, and vast quantities of silt carried out to sea from rivers. And subsidence never stops.
And some politician actually promised to lower the seal levels!
In addition, this jump appears to occur between 1879 and 1915, a time of industrial change that may provide a direct link to human-induced climate change.
Besides this statement being about the most elementary, nonsensical, and ridiculous that should ever come out of a technical journal, OF COURSE they make no mention that this time period is LIA recovery time period as well.
And yes, coming from Penn State, you might expect it to have a little fraudulent tone to it as its staff features one of the charlatan professor/wizards…the beloved Michael Mann.
I am starting to feel sorry for these researchers…as they are caught between the charlatan/wizards on the one hand, and their sources of funding (who are also charlatans, that grab them by the balls and threaten “You will reach Conclusion X or your funding will dry up.”
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
My guess: the North Carolina data specified: “relative sea-level rise, or RSLR”
Satellite data: usually absolute level of sea level rise.
eg, you are probably comparing apples and oranges here.
Wouldn’t the Coast Guard Station at Elizabeth City have accurate information concerning sea levels in the Albemarel Sound? I spent a lot of time there in the late 80’s and 90’s.
How much of this is due to isostatic rebound? When glaciers covered much of north america several thousand years ago, the land under the ice was forced down, resulting in the southern states (even as far as the Caribbean) being lifted. Once the ice retreated, the land in the north began to rise, and south began to fall. This process continues today.
Billingsgate, an inhabited island in Wellfleet Harbor in Cape Cod, Massachusetts, did indeed sink and was abandoned during the late 19th and early 20th century and is now only visible at low tide. To attribute this to CO2 would be something of a stretch.
I have regularly visited Wellfleet Harbor for the last 33 years, and I cannot say that there has been any appreciable rise in the water level, leaving aside the 13.5 ft twice daily tidal swings.
On the other hand, on the Atlantic side, nature can be quite aggressive. A bad Nor’easter can take off 50 ft of beach overnight, which it did this summer.
Anthony/Moderators
The link below the picture incorrectly reads, “First the Press Release from Penn State:”
The press release is from the University of Pennsylvania (UPenn);
http://www.upenn.edu/
a completely different entity from Penn State:
http://www.psu.edu/
The link should read, “First the Press Release from UPenn:”
REPLY: Yes thanks, my mistake, and fixed now thank you – A
It’s -15 Celsius outside in South Colorado! This would me more or less normal in winter but in October… Yeah, I know, it’s just weather.
I wanted to say something for a long time here, and I think I’m going to say it now.
Debunking the UN “casino science” from a purely scientific point of view is important. However, no scientific argument or data are going to bring down the Green Power Machine — I hope it’s obvious. Self-important bickering and juggling the numbers a la Leif Svalgaard will go unnoticed in power circles.
What can bring it down is laughter. I remember, what brought down the Soviet Union. Revealing the inconvenient truth about its bloody lies and crimes was important but no serious books or speeches were able to punch a hole in Soviet mental defenses. Beatles and jeans did it. And laughter: disdainful laughter.
wws – I seldom LOL, but your monkeys had me doing it
PSU-EMS-Alum (03:58:38) :
Too bad about the loss to Iowa. I had hoped better for Joe-pa this year!
When one publishs one’s results in the journal Geology, does one actually have to show these results to someone? I’m not being snarky – I just find it wild that a journal would let one just publish a claim that seems to be contradicted by available evidence without providing some evidence of one’s own that people could actually evaluate.
Bull (04:34:35) :
3 millimeters is equal to 0.1181102 inches….ain’t a whole heckuvalot.
But enough to speculate the the sky ‘may’ be falling.
Cassandra King (01:51:21)
All of southern England is sinking, Scotland is rising as is Scandinavia, that’s all because of the last iceage, but such old knowledge is probably too obvious for BBC.
So the study shows fingerprints of the Manniac school of data abuse.
Not suprising at all.
REPLY: No, I accidentally put in Penn State instead of University of Pennsylvania at one point in the story. My mistake. No connection – Anthony
OT I am keeping an eye on the science museum http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/proveit.aspx poll and it seems that the warmers are wary of giving their true name and e-mail to the museum
The nay sayers are merilly adding a count a minute or so, and the yeas are about 1/8 of that rate. Or have we reached a tipping point? Educated people becoming aware that the wind has changed?
tokyoboy (01:10:13) :
rbateman (02:06:50) :
Jimmy Haigh (02:32:42) :
Dave Wendt (02:46:59) :
Caleb (03:04:54) :
John A (03:35:20) :
Expat in France (04:11:00) :
Smokey (05:13:19) :
Roger Sowell (05:19:33) :
Leon Brozyna (05:56:46) :
Don S. (05:57:50) :
Mike Monce (06:09:50) :
Lennart Bilén (06:18:21)
Wade (06:24:41) :
savethesharks (06:34:30) :
WakeUpMaggy (06:40:43
Curious (07:07:19)
The list, so far, of those who think the land and not the water has more to do with the sea level there than manmade co2.
Oh ya, my name too.
————–
If studies from many locations of the Atlantic Coast from the northern tip of Canada to the southern tip of Florida had been done then this study of a minuscule location of the Atlantic Coast could be put in better perspective.
So many questions. Such great precision. But still, things are bad, getting worse, and there is an “a direct link to human-induced climate change” because of that great “time of industrial change” – 1879-1915.
Thoughts:
While the sea level rise is measured in mm (repeat: mm) the mid-Atlantic Ridge has a spreading rate measured in cm (that’s cm). Does the ridge grow in volume even as the basin widens? If not, does the seawater have a larger basin to fill and, thus, the level should drop? Meanwhile, the sand, silt, and clay continues to wash into the basin – – and the water level should rise.
For Ref:
“spreading rate in the range of 2.6 to 3.2 centimeters per year near the axis of the ridge”; and “Additional data for a basalt collected 62 kilometers west of the axis gives a spreading rate of 0.8 centimeter per year,”
from:
Potassium-Argon Ages and Spreading Rates on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge at 45° North (Science 27 September 1968)
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/161/3848/1338
This representation of sea level over the last 20,000 years is of interest: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png
It would appear that the sea has been rising for the last 8000 years anyway, at much the same rate as the last 500 years. However, that statement is a little perverse if that rise is compared to what the sea was doing between 20K and 8K years ago, in which case sea level rise has been negligible.
I am no expert so I will pose a question. Are not the layers of organic deposits subject to oxidation? Would this oxidation vary dependent on the levels of oxygen in the water at any given time?
Wade said “The dynamics of the North Carolina beach depends on the Gulf Stream, north-easterlies, and hurricanes, of which there are many of the last two. The sand is always rising and falling based on what nature deposits.”
In addition, rock jettys were constructed along the Carolina shores, perhaps in 1870-1915 time period, to protect major harbor entrances. These jettys cut off natural sand flows. Beach erosion occurs near these jettys downstream of the prevailing coastal currents. This is why Folly Beach, south of the Charleston Harbor is eroding.
This is such a completely bogus study because if winds in the more recent period were more often from the NE or were generally stronger when they blew from the NE, then the tide gauges would read higher values even though the sea didn’t really rise. Long term weather changes such as changes in the average strength or location of the Bermuda High would be enough to provide the impact observed in this study.
Smokey (05:13:19) :
…isn’t it reasonable to assume that the Earth’s crust moves in three dimensions?
Very good, as an example, I give you the Himalayas.
Well that’s it then…. I guess I’ll just have to leave my seaside home and head for the hills!
Set the flamingos FREEEEE!
Ah it looks like they have resurrected an early error of Oceanographers. Last century oceanographers assumed that land levels never changed so used the land to measure ocean level changes and geologists assumed that sea level never changed so used sea level as a guide to measure land elevation changes.
It appears these enterprising scientists have have made the great assumptions that land level never changes and so can be used to reliably gauge sea level changes. Thus resurrecting an major error of science a century ago that was fixed when oceanographers finally compared assumptions with geologists.
Sorry, typo – jettys = jetties. Also, The Charleston Harbor jetties were completed in 1898.