From the NASA Jet Propulsion Lab

NASA Satellites Detect Pothole on Road to Higher Seas
An Update from NASA’s Sea Level Sentinels:
Like mercury in a thermometer, ocean waters expand as they warm. This, along with melting glaciers and ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica, drives sea levels higher over the long term. For the past 18 years, the U.S./French Jason-1, Jason-2 and Topex/Poseidon spacecraft have been monitoring the gradual rise of the world’s ocean in response to global warming.
While the rise of the global ocean has been remarkably steady for most of this time, every once in a while, sea level rise hits a speed bump. This past year, it’s been more like a pothole: between last summer and this one, global sea level actually fell by about a quarter of an inch, or half a centimeter.
So what’s up with the down seas, and what does it mean? Climate scientist Josh Willis of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., says you can blame it on the cycle of El Niño and La Niña in the Pacific.
Willis said that while 2010 began with a sizable El Niño, by year’s end, it was replaced by one of the strongest La Niñas in recent memory. This sudden shift in the Pacific changed rainfall patterns all across the globe, bringing massive floods to places like Australia and the Amazon basin, and drought to the southern United States.
Data from the NASA/German Aerospace Center’s twin Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (Grace) spacecraft provide a clear picture of how this extra rain piled onto the continents in the early parts of 2011. “By detecting where water is on the continents, Grace shows us how water moves around the planet,” says Steve Nerem, a sea level scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder.
So where does all that extra water in Brazil and Australia come from? You guessed it–the ocean. Each year, huge amounts of water are evaporated from the ocean. While most of it falls right back into the ocean as rain, some of it falls over land. “This year, the continents got an extra dose of rain, so much so that global sea levels actually fell over most of the last year,” says Carmen Boening, a JPL oceanographer and climate scientist. Boening and colleagues presented these results recently at the annual Grace Science Team Meeting in Austin, Texas.
But for those who might argue that these data show us entering a long-term period of decline in global sea level, Willis cautions that sea level drops such as this one cannot last, and over the long-run, the trend remains solidly up. Water flows downhill, and the extra rain will eventually find its way back to the sea. When it does, global sea level will rise again.
“We’re heating up the planet, and in the end that means more sea level rise,” says Willis. “But El Niño and La Niña always take us on a rainfall rollercoaster, and in years like this they give us sea-level whiplash.”
For more information on NASA’s sea level monitoring satellites, visit: http://sealevel.jpl.nasa.gov/ , http://sealevel.colorado.edu , http://www.csr.utexas.edu/grace/ and http://grace.jpl.nasa.gov/ .
h/t to WUWT reader “Pete”
==========================================
[UPDATE by willis]
I trust that Anthony won’t mind if I expand a bit on this question. NASA adduces the following map (Figure 2) showing where they claim the water went.
Figure 2. GRACE satellite changes in land water. Note that for all of the screaming about Greenland melting … it gained ice over the period of the year. In any case, red and blue areas are somewhere near equal, as would be more apparent if they didn’t use a Mercator projection that exaggerates the blue area in the Northern hemisphere.
The sea level was going up at about 3 mm per year. In the last year it fell about 6 mm. So that’s a change of about a centimetre of water that NASA says has fallen on land and been absorbed rather than returned to the ocean. But of course, the land is much smaller than the ocean … so for the ocean to change by a centimetre, the land has to change about 2.3 cm.
To do that, the above map would have to average a medium blue well up the scale … and it’s obvious from the map that there’s no way that’s happening. So I hate to say this, but their explanation doesn’t … hold water …
I suspected I’d find this when I looked, because in the original press release the authors just said:
“This year, the continents got an extra dose of rain, so much so that global sea levels actually fell over most of the last year,” says Carmen Boening.
When people make claims like that, with no numbers attached, my Urban Legend Detector™ goes off like crazy … and in this case, it was right.
Best to all, thanks to Anthony.
w.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Ocean mixing can also cause sea levels to fall. Thermal expansion (dV/dT) is not constant, it near 0 at 0C and increases with temp. If you mix 9 parts 0C with 1 part 30C you get a smaller volume of 3C. If wonder if climate scientist are aware of this?
It’s pretty clear what’s happening: global warming is evaporating the oceans.
Extrapolating this trend in models, I find that by 2100 there will be a sea level of zero. That’s right, no more oceans.
Maybe you denialists don’t need oceans, but there’s no reason the rest of humanity has to be dragged down with you.
Well, you can’t fake it forever I guess….
….when Envisat was launched, showed falling sea levels and they adjusted it back up to what the computer climate models said sea level rise should be……..
they can’t keep adjusting it back up forever…………….
Stay tuned next year for news of an “unprecedented rise” in sea levels (back to the trend line).
The press release is devoid of scientific content and seems aimed at what they believe are flat-earth sceptical snaggle toothed bloggers. Yeh, that be me.
NASA = HOGWASH. We need to stop funding this corrupt, bureaucratic propaganda machine.
Precipitation my a**!! I don’t believe it for a moment. More like the cooling oceans reducing the sea level.
The decline in sea level is more like 10 mms over the past 18 months.
The atmospheric water vapour level declined by about 1 mm, ie. fell as rain. So the amount that was evaporated from the oceans previously and then dropped on land over the past year (to stay there for a period of time) would just be a small fraction of that number.
That’s a huge assumption that ignores the possibility of an ensuing longer term negative ENSO phase which will tend to sustain the greater amount of rainfall.
Of course they could add yet another correction factor to their calculation to hide the decline, an ‘abnormally large rainfall correction’ to along with their isostatic land rise adjustment. (Like a Monty Python sketch, you’ll be asleep on the beach getting a nice tan and someone will wake you to declare that you are in fact drowning but just don’t know it yet. )
Somebody wake me up when they ultimately stoop to claiming sea level is dropping because snow isn’t melting fast enough which is because of ….’climate change’!
Let’s see, sea level rise is proof of Global Warming and sea level drop is move proof of global warming just wait …
Now I don’t know if I should laugh or cry…
“…sea-level whiplash.”
In your mind.
Obama said, “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow”.
It’s just as predicted. Amazing. /sarc
At least the water runoff excuse will allow time for recharge of biased press releases.
For comparison:
6mm drop is about 480 cubic miles of water while all the worlds rivers are about 509 cubic miles of water.
Although, it would constitute just less than a 2% increase in surface water (lakes, rivers, swamps).
[Sniff test] [?]
http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/earthwherewater.html
http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/oceans.htm
It’s just like the Global temperatures.
They’re going down now but in the near future the inevitable thermogeddon will kill us all.
In other words, we’re always right even if we’re wrong.
>>So where does all that extra water in Brazil and Australia come from?
>>You guessed it–the ocean.
And where does all that heat go, too?
How many gw or tw does that represent – turning warm oceans into cold rain or even colder snow, and radiating the difference into the atmosphere and beyond? And if we are having a double-dip la Nina, the world will soon be quite a bit colder. Yes, or no?
.
Of course the models predicted this drop./
Oh, so now they can’t find the missing water.
Absent minded folk, these climate scientists, no? Never give them your car keys.
As Steven Goddard shows:
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/06/19/hiding-the-decline-in-sea-level/#more-32692
envisat is not showing any sea level rise. Maybe would be interesting to see envisat sea level plotted with sea water average temperature:
http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/ihadsst2gl_2001:2011a.png
looks like pretty good fit to me.
“So, like how long does it take rain to make it back to the ocean? When it rains here in New Hampshire, the river level respond quickly, then drop over a few days. In the summer, trees suck the ground dry pretty quickly.”
Out here in the west we capture the rain and it never makes it back to the sea. http://lakepowell.water-data.com/
I wondered why the data was not being updated for about 5 months. The datasets seem to always stop wben something inconvenient is happening while they cook a reason or add on a factor. Look for the pothole to be filled in. (WHat would a psychologist make of this term)
It seems sea level is falling and it is because of missing volume in the oceans. I think they should look for the missing ocean volume in the same neighborhood as Trenberth’s missing heat.
The oceans are missing some volume and it is a travesty that we cannot account for it.
Meanwhile in the real world…
http://calderup.wordpress.com/2011/08/24/cern-experiment-confirms-cosmic-ray-action/
“Ion-induced nucleation [cosmic ray action] will manifest itself as a steady production of new particles [molecular clusters] that is difficult to isolate in atmospheric observations because of other sources of variability but is nevertheless taking place and could be quite large when averaged globally over the troposphere [the lower atmosphere].”
@Dale Rainwater. Jay Cadbury, phd. says:
I suggest Lucia’s site would be a better place to post this.
And btw: The arctic ice pack is affected by the winds. Even NASA admits this.
You guys are obviously looking at the raw data. The adjusted data shows sea levels rising.