Actual headline from press release:
Sea-level rise too big to be pumped away
From the POTSDAM INSTITUTE FOR CLIMATE IMPACT RESEARCH (PIK)
Future sea-level rise is a problem probably too big to be solved even by unprecedented geo-engineering such as pumping water masses onto the Antarctic continent. The idea has been investigated by scientists at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact. While the pumped water would certainly freeze to solid ice, the weight of it would speed up the ice-flow into the ocean at the Antarctic coast. To store the water for a millennium, it would have to be pumped at least 700 kilometer inland, the team found. Overall that would require more than one tenth of the present annual global energy supply to balance the current rate of sea-level rise.
“We explored a way to at least delay the rise of sea level we can no longer avoid by even the strictest climate-change mitigation strategies. This is estimated to reach about 40 cm by the end of the century,” says lead-author Katja Frieler. “Our approach is definitely extreme, but so is the challenge of sea-level rise.” Burning fossil fuels leads to greenhouse-gas emissions that drive up global temperatures. Consequently, the thermal expansion of ocean water and the melting of glaciers and ice-sheets slowly raise sea levels, which will continue for millennia. Under unabated warming, sea level rise may exceed 130 centimeters by 2100.
Sacrificing Antarctica for saving Bangladesh?
“This is huge. Local adaptation, for instance building dikes, will not be physically possible or economically feasible everywhere,” Frieler says. “Protection may depend on your economic situation – so New York might be saved, but sadly not Bangladesh, and this clearly raises an equity issue,” she adds. “Hence the interest in a universal protection measure. We wanted to check whether sacrificing the uninhabited Antarctic region might theoretically enable us to save populated shores around the world.” Rising oceans are already increasing storm surge risks, threatening millions of people worldwide, and in the long run can redraw the planet’s coastlines.
The scientists addressed the problem from an ice-dynamics perspective, using state-of-the-art computer simulations of Antarctica. Since the ice is continually moving, ocean water put on its surface can only delay sea-level rise – and if it is placed too close to the coast, ice-sheet mass loss and thus sea-level rise after some time could even increase, they found. As a consequence the water has to be pumped a long way inland onto the ice sheet.
“Even if this was feasible, it would only buy time”
The Antarctic ice sheet is up to 4000 meters high, and that would mean an inconceivable engineering effort. Pumping so much water that high up onto the ice sheet requires enormous amounts of energy. Antarctica is very windy, so the power for the pumping could in principle be generated by wind turbines – yet this would require building roughly 850.000 wind-energy plants onto the ice continent. The costs are expected to be much higher than those associated with local adaptation in other studies, though these measures by definition are limited in scope and scale, the scientists state.
“The magnitude of sea-level rise is so enormous, it turns out it is unlikely that any engineering approach imaginable can mitigate it,” concludes co-author Anders Levermann, head of Global Adaptation Strategies at PIK and scientist at Columbia University’s Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory. “Even if this was feasible, it would only buy time – when we stop the pumping one day, additional discharge from Antarctica will increase the rate of sea-level rise even beyond the warming-induced rate. This would mean putting another sea-level debt onto future generations.” Also, the most sensitive coastal ecosystems of Antarctica would of course be seriously affected by this measure.
Greenhouse-gas reductions, local coastal protection, and abandonment
If possible at all, delaying the rise by storing water on Antarctica would only show significant effects in a scenario of ambitious climate policy, strictly limiting global warming. “If we’d continue to do business as usual and churn out emissions,” says Levermann, “not even such an immense macro-adaptation project as storing water on Antarctica would suffice to limit long-term sea-level rise – more than 50 meters in the very long term without climate change mitigation. So either way, rapid greenhouse-gas emission reductions are indispensable if sea-level rise is to be kept manageable. In any way substantial investment into long-term local coastal protection will be required if we want to avoid a stepwise abandonment of coastal areas.”
###
Article: Frieler, K., Mengel, M., Levermann, A. (2016): Delaying future sea-level rise by storing water in Antarctica. Earth System Dynamics
Weblink to the article once it is published: http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I cannot understand that alarmism regarding the sea level rise.
When looking at the plots of the SONEL sea level monitoring project, there is no acceleration of the rise. For example the tide gauge archives of Brest (France) show a modest 200mm rise in 170 years. http://www.sonel.org/spip.php?page=maregraphe&idStation=1736.php
The BOM (Australia) plots though shorter (1992-2014) than the SONEL ones are showing an almost flat trend in the South Pacific islands: http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO70058/IDO70058SLI.shtml
Except for the Kiribati islands where tectonic forces are at work towards a submersion: http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO70060/IDO70060SLI.shtml
So far as I know, the New Zealand autorities have denied the climatic refugee status to the Kiribati inhabitants for that reason.
The fact that there is no acceleration over the last 100y rather argues against the hypothesis that there is a detectable AGW component to the changes.
It does not mean it will continue to rise, though 3mm/a is slow enough not to be the biggest problem we face. Neither will it stop Bangladesh sinking. That has very little to do with seas rising.
Crazy guys. I once met a young scientist from the PIK on a local train in Berlin. We talked about his bike. He told me he was going by bike from Berlin to Vienna for a climate conference. He also mentioned that he would never want to have children with his girlfriend because of climate change.
Apologies for the blockquote error – Mods could you assist please?
So this guy was biking on a train. I think he has fooled himself. He is not biking from Berlin to Vienna, he is taking a train from Berlin to Vienna with his bike.
Jeff
A few months before I met him on the train he took the trip to Vienna – only by bike. Took him about a week for roughly 1.000 Km, as far as I remember. It’s a little bit crazy, but on the other hand: he puts his money where his mouth is. Unlike Leo DiC, Al G and many other warmists.
Yes, these idealist european lefty eco-loons are in the process of choosing to wipe themselves out by not breeding sustainably. Since they are not sustaining their number – I consider that a correct use of the term.
They are now also actively replacing themselves with the displaced people of Syria, a country which until recently had the seventh highest rate of population growth in the world.
The Syrians, Afghanis and N. Africans who fill the vacuum left by the eco-leftist nitwits, will not share the skewed obsessions regarding the environment and family planning.
So, the world will trundle on as it has ever done. With the spoils inherited by those who replicate in greatest number.
Potentially an IQ raising outcome for the rest of humanity
And then there’s the small problem of – desalination, (or are they not bothered about creating a great salt lake).
And then there’s the small problem of – pumping water that freezes at 0°C through 700km of pipes at -40°C, (they could use a 50/50 water/antifreeze).
And then there’s the small problem of – removing antifreeze, otherwise it wont turn to ice, (or are they not bothered about creating a great liquid lake that will melt the existing ice there).
And then there’s the major problem of – finding sufficient beds in a secure institution for these dorks.
Sea water freezes at about -2°C. So your first problem isn’t too important. Your second one is a little more serious. They would likely need to use heated pipes.
No problem, they’d just add heaters to the pipes and keep the water liquid.
I see a business opportunity.
Death Valley in the US is about 80 or so metres below sea level.
Get some desal plants built.
Build a pipeline.
Once the water starts syphoning , you can use turbines along the path to generate some of the power for the desal plants.
The US gets a very big new lake of clean water for agriculture / recreation and the problem of sea level rise is solved.
If you need more storage, the Salton Sea comes to mind.
As soon as I saw this article, I thought of the proposed Qattara Depression and Dead Sea Projects:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea%E2%80%93Dead_Sea_Canal
I have no idea what effect these would have on world sea level, but it does suggest a new funding source for project enthusiasts to pursue.
Who knows, maybe some poor inland Egyptians will someday own beachfront property! 🙂
Siphon from gulf of California to Death Valley… Put power generation on it and ride the tidal flow. Dig out the basin another 100 meters, and ship it to Bangladesh for fill, or to New Orleans, if you like. Stock the lake with saltwater fish, sell real estate, boats, and have higher humidity to the east. Evaporate out water at the edge.. Like Ghandi … Make salt. Death Valley National Inland Sea.
That’s a brilliant idea. But the energy for the desalination would be considerable.
Why are you concerned about whether it is a freshwater lake or an inland saltwater sea?
And can I suggest that I may know of a yard in which several hundred miles of unused XL size pipeline are currently stored up.
As new, but with slight cosmetic surface rust. Buyer collects.
Fresh water is better for drinking / agriculture.
Don’t want to risk salt water getting into the aquifers.
The salt is also a useful byproduct that can partly offset the costs.
Both the Dead Sea and Qattara depressions already contain very large quantities of salt so You don’t need to worry about groundwater contamination. All endorheic basins do.
And there are several more salt lakes/playas near coasts and well below sea level: the Danakil Depression, Chott el Djerid, Salton Sea and Lago Enriquillo for example.
Put another one to the Dead Sea… 300 M below sea level.
Yeah, it’s actually a shame that we missed out on the opportunity to flood the Mediterranean Basin.
Let’s not let that happen again.
Why wait for nature to flood depressions when we can do it first?
Holy crap – the entire delusion relies upon GIA.
Sea level rise acceleration can only be manufactured using GIA.
Antarctic ice sheet melting can only be manufactured using GIA.
But what is GIA based upon?
Upon a big heap of complete unknowns and guesses about how bouncy the mantle is and what it may or may not be doing over millennia. All unproven speculation.
And when tested in reality by GPS – then always shown to be way off from the real-world measurable rates.
But, of course, the alarmists will then say – “but, are you proposing that there is a conspir@cy amongst thousands of climate scientists?”
Nope – because almost none of the hoards of climate “scientists” actually understand what went into the GIA models. And certainly none of them, if sealed in a room, could derive a similar bunch of predicted rates from scratch.
And basically almost every work on the fundamental principles of GIA seems to have one name – Peltier – attached to it.
So, one man is now responsible for the entire fiction of sea level rise acceleration and antarctic melting.
Wake up alarmist idiots. If the GIA rates prove to be flawed – then your entire delusional belief system could melt away overnight. And without sea level rise or uplift or crustal deformation.
Defamation perhaps. Of character.
Antarctica is fine. Antarctica ain’t going anywhere. You are – you’re going away!!!
Greenpeace opposes the plan, because of the danger that the world would topple.!!??
If Greenpeace opposes, surely that means it is a working idea?!
I, personally, support this plan. I believe that spraying billions of gallons of sea water into the middle of the Antarctic will have no negative impact in the forseeable future.
I wrote that just to write it.
Seriously, people who come up with this shit need to have their degrees revoked then spend six months in public humiliation. Spraying sea water into the arctic is ******** moronic. Children know to desalinate it.
It would cost less to desalinate and store the excess see water in freshwater reservoirs for use in agriculture that would then reduce the CO2 resulting in a lack of sea level rise (omg .76 meters wah wah)
It’s quite clear that these people are suffering from the serious illness called ‘The Potsdamien Drift’, which is brought on when pseudo scientists, are worried about their massive finance stream tailing off. It affects their brain and there is no cure for the disease at the moment. It is caused by having to do the awful job of sitting at their desks four days a week, trying to justify the massive salaries that they have been used to over many years. Its an illness that gets worse over the years, and it is very rare that they will ever be cured. So please let us show a bit of sympathy to these people. Incidentally,global warming sceptics rarely experience this terrible affliction.
prjindigo….why not just build dams in temperate regions of the world? Rivers are already fresh water…. no need for desalination. result would allow us to generate electricity and if we built enough dams to hold back enough water to accommodate a full meter of sea level rise we’d have enough water to recharge aquifers and support agriculture world wide. Presumably less water entering the oceans through the river systems of the world will translate into less sea level rise on the principle that water finds its own level. One would think that there would be a huge gain in reliable electricity production. No need to work and solve the problems attendant to pumping any kind of water in a -40C environment So simple really.
Just thinking aloud here innit but, something similar.
In the (same) way that then Aral Sea modified the weather/climate around it, why not take ourselves off to, say for example, the Sahara.
We dig ourselves some big shallow holes, easy digging coz its just sand innit, and fill them with sea water. and keep them full.
So, the lakes we create then evaporate, that makes clouds (incidentally cooling the place) The clouds make rain (cools the place even more) and, after the addition of a bit of Rock Dust available from grinding up the nearest mountain, plants will grow and it will be lovely. Again. Like it was 6,000 years ago.
Then, following the wisdom of ancient people around the world who say ‘plants bring rain’, the whole thing looks after itself and we can use the rain to wash away the salt lakes we originally created.
What’s not to like? A bit like Alan Savory and his desert management/improvment technique
(Improving, via some fresh and pulverised rock, the highly weathered (Laterite) soils must maybe be done first though)
This is literally as the idea from the lets cover the arctic with soot to melt it and prevent an ice age department
Won’t all that mass cause Antarctica to tip over and capsize? 🙂
Don’t be silly! You need 8,000 Marines to cause that to happen! 🙂
I’m all for a bit of blue sky thinking, but I don’t think people should actually publish every dimwit idea they come up with before it is rejected. Submitting techno-fantasies like this to the world as some kind of peer-reviewed science merely embarrasses science and raises questions about the “peers”.
Well, as Dr S has said, keep an open mind but no so open your brains fall out.
There was recently a discussion here in the comments about this exact idea. The conclusion was much the same – the energy to pump the water would beway too high. Can’t find it now.
…” this would require building roughly 850.000 wind-energy plants onto the ice continent.”….
..So they admit, windmills for energy are useless !
THis can’t be a serious article. The ice generated would be soot tinged from all the diesel used to run the pumps, melting the ice. The heat generated would also melt the ice.
April Fools is still a few weeks away.
“…from all the diesel used to run the pumps…”
Nope, they thought of that already; “this would require building roughly 850,000 wind-energy plants”.
That’s 2,550,000 million blades whirling. On the bright side, there are no birds, bats or raptors to mince.
Wot? Sea level rise is a problem? sssheeeesh!
Crisis? Wanna know what to do about it? … can’t figure it out yet dear worriers?
Have you seen the south china sea lately?
I can see Bruce Willis leading the engineering team to make this possible. Coming SOON, to a theatre near you.
Lemme see…that was the Potheads Institute for Youmustbesmokincrack?
So this is what it comes to? Having run out of things to study that are alarming but unproveable and/or unlikely they are starting to write papers about things that won’t work at all? That’ll keep the gravy train rolling for years. There must be loads of things that never happened, aren’t happening and won’t happen in the future that can be written about in learned journals – or even in ‘Nature’ and it’s many spawn.
Jamal Munshi March 9, 2016 at 10:06 pm said:
“According to climate science, the total land area of Bangladesh is shrinking due to rising seas. According to the data, it is growing at a rate of 30 sq km per year.”
I am reminded to that great American philosopher, Professor Y. Berra, who said “In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.”
Some have mentioned filling the Death Valley, the Dead Sea and the Qattara Depression. You don’t really have to go that far, no need to fill the depressions. Oases are fertile because the water table is close to the surface. The sandy desert is not fertile because the water table is way down. It is way down because of the extremely high rate of evaporation through sand dunes. During the war, steel plates were laid on level sand in the Sahara to provide a runway for fighter planes. Inevitably there were oil leaks. The combination of steel plates and oil leaks produced a ‘soil’ which was far less permeable to water vapour, with the result that with the occasional rain the water table rose and the desert started blooming.
Now pump desalinated water from the coast to the sand dunes and pour it on, with a goodly coating of waste oil on the surface. Quickly it will saturate the sand and the desert will bloom. The Sahara Desert could probably absorb a foot of water every year for centuries. And there is always the Kalahari, the Sind, and the Namib, plus Saudi Arabia.
How to get the desalinated water? Use solar power. Build large trays, covered with glass, about 15 ft up, and connect to the sea. Then pump air out of the trays – when the pressure drops sufficiently sea water will rise up and flood the trays. As the trays will be heated through the glass by the sun’s rays, the water will rapidly evaporate, leaving a concentrated brine which can be pumped out and back to the sea. The water vapour can be pumped inland to the desired area where in the cool of night it can be liquefied and used to irrigate the “fields”. Why pump water vapour? True, the same mass will be involved, but as the viscosity of water vapour is far less than liquid water (please check, is it?) the energy needed will be greatly reduced.
Note: cooling water from ships’ diesel engines was used to heat sea water for low pressure evaporation to produce ships’ drinking water before reverse osmosis distillers became practical. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_evaporation for much earlier and current applications.
Nice Dudley, like it.
Options are a matter of choice, as is the wallowing in false ‘problems’.
Very imaginative. However, pumping water vapour sounds impractical – either the pipelines have to be heated to boiling point, or the interior has to be kept below atmospheric pressure.
Also note that greening the desert will reduce albedo, which will increase warming … maybe we should rather just cover the deserts with aluminium foil to radiate more heat back out to space.
Mandate aluminum hats…
850,000 windmills….hmmm….
Does the power to manufacture them come from other windmills? At what price per kWh? To make that many requires the effort of a lot of windmills, right? And will those first windmills be made using coal-fired electricity?
If the plan is to use ‘renewables’ to power the manufacture the vast numbers of ‘renewables’ hardware, they had better up up expected cost by a couple of orders of magnitude.
Well, the undercut on these Mediterranean cliffs are about 500 years old (judging by the stalactites hanging on the cliffs). And the sea level is still precisely on the same level as the undercut and the shelf below it. And the Mediterranean has no tides, so this is the only sea level.
And there are loads of these undercuts all around the Med. I saw similar ones in Greece and Spain, so land movements are not the explanation. And a land movement that keeps exactly the same pace as a rising sea level is highly unlikely. Ergo, one might say, the sea has not risen for 500 years or more.
http://s14.postimg.org/jci3z4z5t/undercut_med_cl.jpg
Here is the curtain stalactite, clinging to the cliff above the undercut. A good 500 years? So the cliff face has been there for a number of centuries – these are not cliffs that are retreating year by year.
http://s29.postimg.org/n59kinlav/undercut_stalactite.jpg
Those blue, shiny, cylindrical stalactites are very rare! You’re lucky to have captured one in the wild like that! 🙂
It would be a lot easier to just dig the oceans deeper if they want to lower the sea levels.
Well, you could do this – or you could just develop working fusion reactors. Neither of which will have any effect whatsoever on sea level, but at least the fusion reactor would increase the supply of cheap energy which is necessary to fuel further human progress. Onward to the Dyson sphere!
Would that much weight added to the southern hemisphere cause a wobble in the earth’s rotation leading to the release of more CO2 from the ocean floor and volcanic action, leading to additional Greenland ice sheet melt, leading to higher ocean levels, leading to more pumping … ??? (preposterous istn’t it?)
Damit! I mean dam it. Haven’t they closed something like 400 reservoirs in California because of environmentalists? Fill ’em up. Build more dams all over the world and fill them up. Oh yeah, you could also get power from them that is carbon free.