NASA notes sea level is falling in press release – but calls it a "Pothole on Road to Higher Seas"

From the NASA Jet Propulsion Lab

The red line in this image shows the long-term increase in global sea level since satellite altimeters began measuring it in the early 1990s. Since then, sea level has risen by a little more than an inch each decade, or about 3 millimeters per year. While most years have recorded a rise in global sea level, the recent drop of nearly a quarter of an inch, or half a centimeter, is attributable to the switch from El Niño to La Niña conditions in the Pacific. The insets show sea level changes in the Pacific Ocean caused by the recent El Niño and La Niña (see http://sealevel.jpl.nasa.gov/science/elninopdo for more information on these images). Image credit: S. Nerem, University of Colorado

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.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

126 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mike M
August 24, 2011 10:31 am

paulhan says: August 24, 2011 at 9:56 am
Oh, so now they can’t find the missing water.
Absent minded folk, these climate scientists, no? Never give them your car keys.

Thanks – I just sprayed my monitor.

August 24, 2011 10:33 am

Quite a few funny remarks here (I laughed, especially JohnT and TallDave)
anyways
Stephen Wilde says
As regards the speculation about the missing volume having gone into more rainfall over land isn’t that effect an order of magnitude or more LESS than that required to alter total ocean volume by the amount implied from the observations ?
Henry@SW
I think that is true. You cannot have that much contraction unless there is much more cooling going on. Winter was especially cold here (South Africa), june-july, more than before, and august looks set to beat (cold) records as well.
http://www.letterdash.com/HenryP/winters-are-getting-colder-in-pretoria-bring-back-the-global-warming-please
I think the days of warming will be over…..

sHx
August 24, 2011 10:38 am

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.

Sometimes I have this nagging suspicion that someone is insulting my intelligence.

chris y
August 24, 2011 10:39 am

Lars P-
“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.”
Thanks for posting this link to Steve Goddard’s recent discussion on sea level rise. I was going to do the same, but I ran out of time this morning.
Envisat seems to be the crazy uncle that no-one among the CACC circle-singers wants to acknowledge…

Jason Bair
August 24, 2011 10:46 am

Has there been any studies or series looks into the potential sea level rise from pumping ground water up for irrigation?
I’d imagine that could account for quite a lot of sea level rise over time.

Dr. Dave
August 24, 2011 10:47 am

Jeepers! It looks like we have about an inch of sea level rise per decade. OK…I’m 54 and if I’m fortunate I might live another 3 decades. On top of that I live in the southern Rockies at 7,000 ft above sea level. Excuse me if I choose to ignore this “threat”.

Matt Rogers
August 24, 2011 10:49 am

We are heading deeper into the negative Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) where La Nina events will outnumber El Nino events. So this downward trend could very well continue. Notice their line chart goes back to the 1990s when the PDO was positive/warm and we had much more/stronger El Nino episodes.
This “pothole” will become a sinkhole if this is indeed merely reflecting the PDO cycle.

Gary Krause
August 24, 2011 10:49 am

Willis say “we’re” heating up the planet? S[inc]e when? 1900? 4000 B.C.? 12,000 B.C.???
Does converting oil, coal, and methane to CO2 and H2O raise the oceans? What gravitational affect do other planets, moon, and sun have on satellite positioning and accuracy? 5 cm in 20 years; how can we possibly adapt??? Another 4 inches of asphalt!

Resourceguy
August 24, 2011 10:58 am

Pothole sounds a lot like green shoots and soft patch in recently failed economic forecasts.

August 24, 2011 11:03 am

Just to be clear… is this the “adjusted” (plate techtonics aware) sea level we’re talking about or the real sea level as can be evidenced at the coasts?

August 24, 2011 11:13 am

The sea-level rise is observed at 46 mm vs modelled for 55.0 In a rise prior to the Super El Nino 1998, the level rose 10 mm in 6 months (20 mm/yr), while in a non-super El Nino phase of 2000.5 to 2002.5 it rose from 17.5 to 32.5 mm, or 7.5 mm/yr for 2.0 years. These are the two short-term rate rises to consider if a large rise to “fill the pothole” back to modelled expectations.
On the non-super-El-Nino consideration, a rise in sea-level has to begin immediately and continue for two years. The CO2 model says the oceans will rise at least 3.2 mm/yr, so that we would be at not 55 but 61.4 mm mid-2013.5. That would be 15.4 mm above this stated pothole value, and be achievable at 7.5 mm/yr. If, however, we are entering a new phase of climate cooling and sea-level drop or stability, to maintain the CAGW scare the sea-level must rise at 10 mm/yr or more beginning in 2012.
Without a super-El Nino happening in 2013, the IPCC CO2-Temperature-sea-level rise is in trouble. Any hope for a 1.0m or greater rise by 2100 will require an average of 9.0 mm/yr after 2012. In the short term sea-level rises must triple the historical average since 1979 to about 2015, and then begin a > 4 mm/yr march steadily up to >6mm/yr by 2025 (approx.). We will be, if this happens, truly in unique, extraordinary times if this happens.
It all comes down to the numbers, and not of the next decade, but almost the next week.
It is clear why the Gore-rhetoric is getting so shrill. The debate will become moot within just a few more years – one more presidential term. Either catastrophe will be looming, or those dark, hurricane-worrisome shapes on the horizon will just be clouds (weather, not climate). Gore cannot risk any delay in the world acting on his demands, as the need to do so may become as irrelevant as his alleged need for a therapeutic massage.
I’m voting for a horizon with clouds. The non-rainy type.

Nuke
August 24, 2011 11:16 am

HenryP says:
August 24, 2011 at 10:49 am
Nuke
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/24/nasa-notes-sea-level-is-falling-in-press-release-but-calls-it-a-pothole-on-road-to-higher-seas/#comment-727445
Citation?

You can be certain somebody is working on adjusting the data right now.

Gary Hladik
August 24, 2011 11:21 am

“…between last summer and this one, global sea level actually fell by about a quarter of an inch, or half a centimeter.”
*sigh* There goes my beachfront property.
And I only had 180 meters to go…

Mike Abbott
August 24, 2011 11:27 am

AJStrata says:
August 24, 2011 at 8:59 am
My biggest problem with this cm level data here is the overall accuracy of 3 cms:
http://sealevel.jpl.nasa.gov/technology/
So all this is basically in the noise.

My interpretation of the methodology described in the link you provided is that the 3 cm accuracy applies to individual satellite readings. As is stated in that link, “This accuracy figure [3 cm] pertains to a few-kilometer spot on the ocean surface directly beneath the satellite. By averaging the few-hundred thousand measurements collected by the satellite in the time it takes to cover the global oceans (10 days), global mean sea level can be determined with a precision of several millimeters.”
I’ll let more knowledgeable readers determine if that explanation makes sense or not, but NASA claims a precision of several millimeters in the global sea level measurement, not 3 cm.

DirkH
August 24, 2011 11:31 am

They’ll fix this pothole with some minor post facto adjustments. Let Hansen have his way with it. It’ll be fixed real soon now.

Resourceguy
August 24, 2011 11:42 am

It is about time to do another remake of the Invasion of the Body Snatchers movie. Stay in your homes and remain calm. The conversion to warmist press releases will not hurt you and all the pain and emotion will be gone. Oh and don’t forget you have no choice Miles.

James Sexton
August 24, 2011 12:02 pm

Latitude says:
August 24, 2011 at 9:10 am
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…………….
============================================================
I don’t think the ever envisioned the discussion/rejection of the CAGW hypothesis to last this long.

August 24, 2011 12:07 pm

Henry@nuke
you’re funny too
Jokes aside though:
You do understand that this is what we are expecting:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/orssengo3.png
So some natural cooling is on its way
Anything on top of that curve shown above is due to the increase in vegetation
which has increased greatly because the greenies (wanting trees and gradens) and because the CO2 is acting as fertilizer.
http://www.letterdash.com/HenryP/more-carbon-dioxide-is-ok-ok

Conradg
August 24, 2011 12:11 pm

Obama said, “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow”.
If ever there were proof that the man has magical powers, this is it. We need scientific studies of the guy to find out where he gets them.

August 24, 2011 12:15 pm

Please inform yourself about satellite-derived sea levels:
Any report based on Topex/Poseidon sea level measurements is principally flawed because a most critical part outside 66º N and S is left out. In these areas the sea level sinks dramatically. Around Antarctica down to -2 metres! This massive dip is caused by strong W to E winds driving equally strong currents. Due to strong Coriolis forces near the poles, the water is then pushed equator-ward where it heaps up (Ekman spiral). Topex/Poseidon looks only at the heap and not at the trough, as do moored buoys (and most coastal sea level stations).
Wind strength, which can change by 25% on a decadal scale and 30% in a century, has a most determining effect on sea levels everywhere. Because of the seminal work of Dr Joseph fletcher, we can no longer ignore this.
Dr Fletcher’s lecture http://www.seafriends.org.nz/issues/global/fletcher.htm
What is normal climate change?: http://www.seafriends.org.nz/issues/global/climate7.htm
Are sea levels rising?: http://www.seafriends.org.nz/issues/global/climate4.htm#Are_sea_levels_rising
Sea temperature is simply a small variable, whereas the influence of wind is big.

August 24, 2011 12:16 pm

Obama said on jun 3rd, 2008 in his nomination victory speech “… I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal…”
he was right. in this chart, the Sea Level change from june 2008 to present : almost zero mm.
now, if only the stupid planet will begin healing…
as for jobs, screw that. who the hell needs a stinking job. He has his.
I am so impressed.

August 24, 2011 12:18 pm

DirkH says:
August 24, 2011 at 11:31 am
They’ll fix this pothole with some minor post facto adjustments. Let Hansen have his way with it. It’ll be fixed real soon now.
Yup, splice in a bit of model “data” and voila, sea level starts increasing from NOv 2010, almost at 3.2 mm /year

August 24, 2011 12:32 pm

Hi
timing of the drop is also nicely synchronized with the Japan earthquake timing. So maybe the dramatic level change seen is related to reformation of the sphere, as some metres or even over ten metres shortening in circumference of the earth. Maybe the weather phenomena play some smaller role as seen in the graph trend as well?
br Markku

August 24, 2011 12:47 pm

henry@jothi85
Obama thought the science was settled