Uneven rates of sea level rise tied to climate change

From Eurekalert

Public Release: 3-Dec-2018

Findings could help improve regional sea level forecasts

National Center for Atmospheric Research/University Corporation for Atmospheric Research

The pattern of uneven sea level rise over the last quarter century has been driven in part by human-caused climate change, not just natural variability, according to a new study.

The findings suggest that regions of the world where seas have risen at higher than average rates — including the Eastern Seaboard of the United States and the Gulf of Mexico — can expect the trend to continue as the climate warms.

The study, published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, was authored by scientists John Fasullo at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and Steve Nerem at the University of Colorado Boulder.

“By knowing that climate change is playing a role in creating these regional patterns, we can be more confident that these same patterns may linger or even intensify in the future if climate change continues unabated,” Fasullo said. “With sea levels projected to rise a couple of feet or more this century on average, information about expected regional differences could be critical for coastal communities as they prepare.”

The research was funded by the National Science Foundation, which is NCAR’s sponsor, the NASA Sea Level Change Team, and the U.S. Department of Energy.

Finding the signal of climate change

For the study, Fasullo and Nerem, both members of the NASA Sea Level Change Team, analyzed the satellite altimetry sea level record, which includes measurements of sea surface heights stretching back to 1993. They mapped global average sea level rise as well as how particular regions deviated from the average.

For example, the oceans surrounding Antarctica and the U.S. West Coast have had lower-than-average sea level rise, while the U.S. East Coast and Southeast Asia, including the Philippines and Indonesia, have experienced the opposite. In some parts of the world, the rate of local sea level rise has been as much as twice the average.

Regional differences in sea level rise are influenced by where heat is stored in the ocean (since warm water expands to fill more space than cold water) and how that heat is transported around the globe by currents and wind. Uneven sea level rise is also influenced by ice sheets, which lose mass as they melt and shift the gravitational forces affecting regional sea surface height.

Natural shifts in ocean cycles — including the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a pattern of sea surface temperatures similar to El Niño but longer lasting — are therefore known to affect sea levels. So scientists were not surprised to find that as the ocean rises, it rises unevenly. But it’s been difficult to say whether these natural cycles were the dominant influence on regional differences.

To investigate the role of climate change, the scientists turned to two sets of climate model runs, known as “large ensembles”: one created using the NCAR-based Community Earth System Model and one created using the Earth System Model at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. These large ensembles — many model simulations by the same model, describing the same time period — allow researchers to disentangle natural variability from the impacts of climate change. With enough runs, these impacts can be isolated even when they are relatively small compared to the impacts from natural variability.

The climate models suggest that in regions that have seen more or less sea level rise than average, as much as half of that variation may be attributed to climate change. The scientists also found that the impacts from climate change on regional sea level rise sometimes mimic the impacts from natural cycles.

“It turns out the sea level rise response to climate change in the Pacific resembles what happens during a particular phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation,” Fasullo said. “This explains why it’s been so difficult to determine how much of the pattern was natural or not, until now.”

Improving forecasts

The research findings have implications for local officials, who are interested in improved forecasts of sea level rise for the areas they oversee. In the past, forecasters have had to rely on the global rate of change — about 3 millimeters a year and accelerating — and knowledge of the uneven regional impacts associated with continued melting of the ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica.

The findings add the possibility that the regional patterns of sea level rise tied to climate change can also be included, because the models predict that the regional patterns observed in the satellite measurements will continue into the future.

“We now have a new tool — long-term satellite altimeter measurements — that we can use to help stakeholders who need information for specific locations,” said Nerem, a fellow of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences at the University of Colorado Boulder and a professor of aerospace engineering.

###

About the article

Title: Altimeter-Era Emergence of the Patterns of Forced Sea Level Rise in Climate Models and Implications for the Future

Authors: John T. Fasullo and R. Steven Nerem

Journal: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1813233115

The University Corporation for Atmospheric Research manages the National Center for Atmospheric Research under sponsorship by the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

149 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
chaamjamal
December 5, 2018 3:35 am

Can the uneven sea level rise rates be interpreted in terms of the proposition that the rate of sea level rise can be moderated by reducing fossil fuel emissions?

https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/12/05/attenuate-slr/

tty
December 5, 2018 3:46 am

“…regions of the world where seas have risen at higher than average rates — including the Eastern Seaboard of the United States and the Gulf of Mexico — can expect the trend to continue as the climate warms.”

Of course, because the reason relative sea level is rising faster on the Eastern Seaboard is that the land is sinking, which will continue whether climate gets warmer, colder or remains the same.

And you only have to look at a map to see that this has been going on for millenia. The Eastern Seaboard is a classic case of a sinking coastline with rias (drowned river valleys) and barrier islands.

toorightmate
December 5, 2018 3:49 am

Thanks be to god that the continental plates and the sea bed (ie Earth’s crust) are not moving!#$%^&*
We are so fortunate to have such firm reference points!#$%^&*

LdB
Reply to  toorightmate
December 5, 2018 6:27 am

It’s like everything in Climate Science you just assume a value you like and call it a baseline, it doesn’t matter it is moving 🙂

cerescokid
December 5, 2018 4:05 am

When I started to read this piece, I thought I would bookmark it for insights into regional differences in SLR. At the end I discovered there was no there, there. Just like Oakland.

What a waste of a press release.

Tom
December 5, 2018 4:58 am

I’m curious how a model which did not accurately HINDcast temperatures, can be expected to accurately FOREcast seal level, using those same temperatures.

LdB
Reply to  Tom
December 5, 2018 6:22 am

Even if it hindcasts properly there is still a very large and real probability it can’t predict very far ahead because it doesn’t really cover the underlying behaviour. That is why weather forecasts are only useful for 3-5 days ahead and it doesn’t matter how many models and computer power you throw at it. It is a fairly well known mathematical proof to show no matter what you do classical weather prediction models will fail at 3-5 days.

Ask a Climate Scientist for the predictive limits of their models if you want a bit of humour 🙂

Bruce Cobb
December 5, 2018 5:20 am

Now, if they could just tie uneven weather to “climate change”.
Oh wait.

J.H.
December 5, 2018 5:27 am

Their observations and their conclusions have nothing in common. They observed lumpiness of the Ocean surface….. Which then gave them poetic licence to program their climate activism into a Computer Model… Oops, sorry. “large ensembles”, probably because it sounds sciency, sophisticated an’ just a little bit French,

…. and Voila! Global Warming Ocean Catastrophe version 94.10… and because, “satellites”. It must be true.

I’m sick of these guys and their “Ensembles”. I prefer to call it a scam. It has less letters and is easier to type.

Thomas Homer
December 5, 2018 5:40 am

Are we accurately measuring the high tides in the Bay of Fundy?

Tides in the Bay of Fundy are over 50 feet in elevation. Clearly the land formation compounds the height of the tides there. Does that mean that an eight of an inch sea level rise would get compounded to be over an inch at the top of the Bay of Fundy tides? Is this happening?

Bean
December 5, 2018 7:51 am

I live in the forest in the mountains … I have nothing but questions on how sea level is derived to tenths of millimeters when stating sea level measurements.

Absolute sea level rise in relation to what? An absolute rise referenced to the ITRF that is itself only accurate within a couple of centimeters? Referenced to a geoid that is a model surface [with its own errors] referenced to the ITRF? An average of satellite altitude measurements from satellites whose orbital position is only known at best within centimeters? They are measuring a sea surface that is uneven over time and position. How do they use measuring and reference systems accurate to centimeters to derive absolute sea level within tenths of millimeters? Can averaging many measurements be any more accurate when they are measuring a property which varies with time and location?

Tide gauge sea level. Is it corrected for crustal motion with nearby MORS data or is it relative? NOAA isn’t much help with that at their web site. How much of the sea level rise detected by tide gauges is due to local land subsidence? The East coast and Gulf coast of the US are known to be subsiding. Is the subsidence being removed in order to determine absolute sea level rise? How can they derive tenth of millimeter accuracy with gauges that are not accurate to tenths of millimeters?

Isn’t the measured sea level change they are reporting somehow at least an order of magnitude better than the measuring systems they are using to derive sea level?

Is any of this conflating precision with accuracy? What is the estimated error in the accuracy of the sea level measurements?

back to the forest …

Duane
December 5, 2018 8:34 am

Regional differences in rate of sea level rise? OK, yes, the data show differences, but given the following basics from physics and hydrodynamics and aerodynamics:

1) Universal sea level theoretically is the same the world over – its gravity

2) Universal sea level rate of change theoretically the same the world over – again, it’s gravity

3) Any differences in absolute sea level must be due to other factors, including measurement errors, local subsidence or uplift, and the effects of sea currents, sea bottom profiles and land obstructions on the free flow of water between seas, and prevailing winds that create a geostatic energy difference between two points on the sea surface

4) Any differences in rates of change in sea level between any two points on the sea surface are also due to the same factors listed in point 3) above.

Funny, but the sea level alarmists never talk about any of these very basic scientific factors … indeed they ignore them altogether.

Now tell me again who are the “science deniers”?

AD
Reply to  Duane
December 13, 2018 2:33 am

This is exactly it. There’s a huge amount of variability in global sea level – many metres difference. It amazes me that studies such as these nod to regional differences but, despite the knowledge we have regarding gyres, effects of wind, isostatic/eustatic movement and so on the results *still* refer to a ‘global’ sea level (and ditto ‘global’ temperature change. I have noticed too, there is a propensity to attribute blatant anthropogenic change due to less-than-ideal land use to ‘climate change’. So you have land which is compacting due to housing and water extraction… But it’s still because climate change. This is what concerns me: instead of a thorough assessment, future assessments will basically be: “this issue is occurring because climate change”. The end – totally ignoring important facts that we can truely learn from – and more to the point – mitigate against, rather than throwing money down the black hole of trying to control the climate when we can’t even control relatively simple things like rivers and landslides (rolls eyes).

Clyde Spencer
December 5, 2018 9:01 am

“… the global rate of change — about 3 millimeters a year and accelerating…”

While there may have been a recent increase in the rate of change, the proof of acceleration is not in evidence. They are essentially making a forecast, which shows their bias.

Prjindigo
December 5, 2018 10:02 am

Is anybody going to bother to point out that there are thousands of “scientists” who think the sea level can rise differently in different places?

It is the most idiotic thing I have heard since someone claimed that CO2 caused climate change.

malkom700
December 5, 2018 10:20 am

The effects of climate change are felt by all normal people on their own skin. It is therefore completely astonishing that there is such a discourse where skeptics are in the majority. This is a strong phenomenon that when we are all going to suffocate in the sea water, there will continue to be heated debates about the causes of climate change.

December 5, 2018 1:45 pm

To summarize the conclusions of this study:

“Places where SLR has been slower than average, will continue to show slower than average SLR, and places where SLR has been faster than average, will continue to show faster than average SLR”

Would anyone have expected differently?

NZ Willy
Reply to  Smart Rock
December 5, 2018 4:01 pm

Yes of course, because physical law says equilibrium sea level should follow gravitational isobars. Therefore if you measure deviations from the equilibrium, you should expect subsequent measurements to come back the other way to restore the equilibrium. But these “scientists” appear to be missing these simple rules that Tom Sawyer would understand by instinct, duh.

Gopal Panicker
December 5, 2018 2:53 pm

Sea level is not the same everywhere. Because of the rotation of the Earth, sea levels on the western margins of the oceans is higher than that on the eastern margins, 1 or 2 feet or more. Winds influence ocean currents and sea levels. For example, during the southwest monsoon, the sea levels on the west coast of India rise 1 or 2 feet. Also, as others have said, deposition of silt by rivers will raise sea levels .

Not Chicken Little
December 5, 2018 4:37 pm

On two occasions I have been asked, ‘Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?’ I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. — Charles Babbage

See, they apparently had “climate scientists” who viewed computer models as gospel even waaaay back then…and back then at the dawn of computing machines, Charles Babbage already knew the limitations. You’d think by now this knowledge would be pretty widespread and understood…but you’d be wrong!

December 5, 2018 5:11 pm

December 5, 2018 5:38 pm

Sorry wrong video. This one is much better…

December 5, 2018 7:54 pm

What does this mean? Shift gravitational forces???
Uneven sea level rise is also influenced by ice sheets, which lose mass as they melt and shift the gravitational forces affecting regional sea surface height.

[??? .mod]

Earthling2
Reply to  Tommyboy
December 6, 2018 12:22 am

“Uneven sea level rise is also influenced by ice sheets, which lose mass as they melt and shift the gravitational forces affecting regional sea surface height.”

Good point. That would be the geoid, something not covered by the article and not even much by the comments. Although the physical Earth has excursions of +8,848 m (Mount Everest) and −11,034 m (Marianas Trench), the geoid’s variation ranges from +85 m (Iceland) to −106 m (southern India), less than 200 m total compared to a perfect mathematical ellipsoid. The oceans are not a bath tub with equal levels everywhere. As stated in the article, the oceans are ‘lumpy’. They are up to 200 M (640+ feet) differential elevation as measured to the centre of the Earth. If all the ice in Greenland were to melt, the meltwater would migrate slowly to the equator and finally be mostly offset on the opposite side of the planet from Greenland. Because of of gravitational forces of the mass balance of the ice sheet and the density of the crust, and a lot of other stuff.

The strength of gravity is not the same everywhere, because density (and therefore mass) varies throughout the planet. This is due to continents, magma distributions, mountain ranges, deep sea trenches, ice caps and so on. And everything is changing slowly relative to everything else, so the ocean level is ‘baked’ in to all this gravitational effect. If a perfect sphere were then covered in water, the water would not be the same height everywhere. Instead, the water level would be higher or lower depending on the particular strength of gravity in that location. That is why the ocean sea level is +85 M higher near Iceland relative to the centre of the Earth, (in part because of the Greenland Ice Sheet) and -106 M lower in S. India relative to the centre of the Earth. But you wouldn’t be able to tell with a spirit level. The Panama Canal is a good example, but perhaps more related to winds, tides and deeper and higher ocean temperatures, but some geoid effect and the Pacific Ocean is 2-3 feet higher than on the Atlantic side of the Canal.

Very interesting subject…hope I am beginning to understand it in some detail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoid

Max Mack
December 6, 2018 1:05 am

And just when you thought it was safe to come out of the closet, CBC is reporting that climate change could wake Canada’s volcanoes.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/thenational/climate-change-could-wake-up-canada-s-dormant-volcanoes-1.4934504

Johann Wundersamer
December 6, 2018 9:39 am

“Natural shifts in ocean cycles — including the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a pattern of sea surface temperatures similar to El Niño but longer lasting” —

Pacific Decadal Oscillation CAN’T last longer then ~ 6 years el Niño + 1 year la Niña

because el Niño is the DRIVER of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation despite the name.

Glad to get corrected where I’m wrong.