. . . so is the entire actual Jersey shore. A Princeton study has found that global warming is causing a rise in sea levels that is far greater and more accelerated than previously thought. The report predicts that the Jersey shore could be underwater in a matter of decades and low-lying areas thrashed by increasing storm surges.
The study of Princeton-based research group Climate Central forecasts an increase of three to four feet in water levels and that the danger of massive killer storms will double by 2030. On their site, you can pick an area to look at the potential damage.
Even if half of this rise in sea levels is realized, it would produce widespread damage within our lifetime. It will be interesting to watch those people denying this environmental trend swim out of that problem.
As for that more painful reality, my greatest concern is that Jersey Shore will then combine with Waterworld in a terrifying mutation that will lead millions to throw themselves into the sea to make it stop.
Source: CBS
Bdaman 1, March 16, 2012 at 4:15 pm
Well, I’ve been waiting on comments on sea level rise and out of the 25 or so comments posted so far 3 are about sea level rise. And you guys bitch about me staying on topic.
==========================================================
You seem to be “on topic challenged” because JT posted, inter alia, this:
If you don’t think that has topic linkage to “sea level rise” then I think we have isolated one of your manic problems posing as enlightenment.
Bdaman:
Keep it simple.
you are going out on a limb talking about the hydrologic cycle.
Gene probably thinks that is when you read HWB Joseph in the bathtub.
idealist707 1, March 16, 2012 at 4:09 pm
Thank you both. It was methane hydrate I read about.
…
Very interesting that it effects drilling in Gulf of Mexico. How about other deep water drilling worldwide?
========================================================
We know more about Mars and Luna (the moon) than we do about the deep oceans, yet the psychopaths want to blunder into that area psychotically screaming “drill baby drill”.
That is, into an area “where angels fear to tread.”
My research of late was limited to the Gulf of Mexico primarily, because it is the area of convergence for the K-T extinction crater (Chicxulub Crater), the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe, and the psychoanalysis of 9/11 denialism.
The K-T is an imprint from the 65 million year old dinosaur mass-extinction event, which scientists on about this date two years ago, said was asteroid / meteorite induced.
Anyway, I sum it all up in one post about a subject called SCAD (State Crimes Against Democracy).
Global warming induced climate change denial propaganda is a state crime against democracy, in the sense that the House of Representatives is infested with such deniers, who want to officially label the science “the greatest hoax ever fostered on America.”
Blouise, Bda lines up with anti-Obama and anti-Pelosi group.
SwM,
Testing, testing … Pelosi Rules! …
Dinner time … later
bda,
Hey man, you give as good as you get.
Sometimes this place is like West Side Story except everybody belongs to both the Jets and the Sharks … all depending on the topic, sides change.
Sooner or later Officer Krupke shows up
Blouise, You noticed.lol Some of us segue into how awful the republicans because of the war on women. Others segue into how EVIL Obama is no matter what the topic is.
Bdaman is citing a Kilimanjaro guide.
According to Kaser [a leading expert on low-latitude glaciers], there’s no evidence to support [the guide]’s observation. Such a reversal would require an increase in precipitation over the past two to three years, which didn’t occur, he said.
Thank you MS, Blouise I’m trying not to be an asshole but when you are constantly called every name in the book, it’s hard not too. I posted a comment on Raffs EPA thread from Gingerbaker and Slartibartfast. Raff thought it was pretty ruff. When you combine it with the fact that I was factually correct, it just amazes me that they still want to call me an idiot.
bda,
I don’t bitch about you staying on topic.
It is my observation that almost every poster has a favorite “topic” and segues to it every chance they get.
So we know precipitation plays a role in sea level. Obviously frozen participation included. Lets take a look and an icon Mt Kilimanjaro.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Snows of Kilimanjaro defy global warming predictions
AMHERST – If there is a poster child for global warming, it may be the vanishing snows of Kilimanjaro, which were predicted to disappear as early as 2015 in a widely-publicized report a decade ago.
However, the famed snowcap is stubbornly persisting on the African peak and may not fully vanish for another 50 years, according to a University of Massachusetts scientist who had a hand in the prediction.
The 2001 forecast was indirectly part of key evidence for global warming offered during the 2006 documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” which warned of the threats of rising global temperatures. In it, former vice president Al Gore stated, “Within a decade, there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro” due to warming temperatures.
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/03/snows_of_kilimanjaro_defy_global_warming_predictions.html
Here’s the kicker
QUOTE
“Unfortunately, we made the prediction. I wish we hadn’t,” says Douglas R. Hardy, a UMass geoscientist who was among 11 co-authors of the paper in the journal Science that sparked the pessimistic Kilimanjaro forecast. “None of us had much history working on that mountain, and we didn’t understand a lot of the complicated processes on the peak like we do now.”
“The glaciers are still shrinking, and in the next decades they will almost certainly disappear, but it will probably be on the order of three or four decades, maybe five,” Hardy said recently. “But we don’t know for sure. It might be in only two.”
UNQUOTE
WAIT! It gets better. Notice above that Doug Hardy wished they hadn’t made the prediction? That’s because the prediction was wrong. As a result, Hardy simply said that it would take longer; 3, 4, maybe 5 decades before the decreasing snowcap disappears. –Guess what? It’s not shrinking!
Are the snows of Kilimanjaro returning? Guide says yes
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/18/2595738/are-the-snows-of-kilimanjaro-returning.html#storylink=cpy
Despite what you have just read how EXPERTS can be wrong or SEA LEVEL IS NOT RISING AT AN ALARMING RATE or Kilimanjaro not shrinking you guys will still be deniers.
Well, I’ve been waiting on comments on sea level rise and out of the 25 or so comments posted so far 3 are about sea level rise. And you guys bitch about me staying on topic.
Let me break it down for you seeing how you all have a problem looking at facts. According to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory the average rate of sea level rise since the early 90’s is 3.2mm per year. But in the 2010 to 2011 year sea level DROPPED 6mm.
From the JPL
Quote:
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
Unquote:
When you go to the linked sea level site in the article above it makes no mention of La Nina having an effect on whether or not it has an effect on the rise but pushes the mantra that it’s worse than we thought and it’s all because of burning fossil fuels.
The Math- From the JPL quote we see that sea level has been rising at a rate of a little more than an inch per decade. This means at the current rate of acceleration, assuming that the sea level recovers and begins to rise again, in 100 years time, sea level will rise around 12 inches.
Again from the JPL
Quote
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.
Unquote
Notice it says GRADUAL RISE. Not to be confused with the article RISING AT ALARMING RATE.
Back to the JPL
Quote
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.
Unquote
HAS BEEN REMARKABLY STEADY, again no rise at an alarming rate.
Back to JPL
Quote
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.
Unquote
This means, that along with the OCEAN COOLING due to La Nina, the evaporation of water into the atmosphere from the oceans and the earth has fallen back down to earth over land. Australia suffered an extreme drought the last couple of years. So did the Amazon and the Southern U.S. mainly Texas and Arizona. MOST ALL THE CLIMATE EXPERTS said these were permanent droughts due to global warming. Guess what, THEY WERE WRONG. Australia’s drought over, Texas drought almost over, Amazon drought over. Lake Powell which was proclaimed dead by expert climate scientist Gavin Schmidt has risen 70 feet as of January 2012. The record snows Europe has received the last 3 years also factored in to the FALL OF sea level.
Back to the JPL
Quote
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.
Unquote
and just so you can’t say I’m cherry picking
Quote
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.”
Unquote
Water does flow down hill but not all water makes it back to the ocean as evidence of Lake Powell. The ground absorbs water, trees and plants take it in. ON AN ON AND ON.
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2011-262
Thank you both. It was methane hydrate I read about.
The ocean pressures will not lessen soon.
You gentlemen are better qualified that I to judge, at this point on the ocean temp rise diagram, when the temp at current pressure will lead to “out-gasing”.
This has to be calculated including the rise of heat retention due to atmospheric changes as to gas changes, etc. The contentious issue of the shielding effect of microparticle solids in atmoshere pollution may or may not be ignored.
Very interesting that it effects drilling in Gulf of Mexico. How about other deep water drilling worldwide?
idealist707 1, March 16, 2012 at 12:08 pm
lLOTTA
There is another factor which can explain the temp surge … Perhaps you could help me with the compounds name. Then googling would be easier……about 5 years ago it was briefly in the headlines.
lottakatz 1, March 16, 2012 at 2:10 pm
idealist707
1, March 16, 2012 at 11:57 am
Lotta,
…
I think the word you are maybe looking for is “hydrates” or “calthrates”, as in methane hydrate that exists in the deep ocean?
==========================================
Yep, in the deep ocean methane is stored in a crystal lattice caused by great pressures, and stores an incredible amount of energy.
That is what took out several drilling rigs in the Gulf of Mexico, for example.
In the boggy tundra areas of the far north, e.g. Alaska and Canada, it is not in the methane hydrates (crystal lattice) form, so it can release much easier.
In fact, that has disturbed some scientists who study it.
Methane, even when it is not in methane hydrates form, is 30 times more powerful of a green house gas than CO2 is.
I did a study (Danger Lurks In The Deep Water) of the research on methane hydrates in the Gulf of Mexico and the researchers indicated it is very dangerous to drilling, because it has a short fuse and amalgamates near oil and gas deposits there.
When released into the atmosphere in too much quantity it becomes dangerous in the global warming context.
idealist707
1, March 16, 2012 at 11:57 am
Lotta,
you are insane, can I join you?
—————
OMG! Have I come apart again?
—
I think the word you are maybe looking for is “hydrates” or “calthrates”, as in methane hydrate that exists in the deep ocean?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate
“Methane clathrate, also called methane hydrate, hydromethane, methane ice,”Fire ice natural gas hydrate or just gas hydrate, is a solid clathrate compound (more specifically, a clathrate hydrate) in which a large amount of methane is trapped within a crystal structure of water, forming a solid similar to ice.[1] Originally thought to occur only in the outer regions of the Solar System where temperatures are low and water ice is common, significant deposits of methane clathrate have been found under sediments on the ocean floors of Earth.[2] The worldwide amounts of carbon bound in gas hydrates is conservatively estimated to total twice the amount of carbon to be found in all known fossil fuels on Earth.[3]”
‘insane’
It’s all a problem shared by all life forms.
Environment, energy absortion, waste disposal. And the narrow band of liveble conditions.
Don’t screw up by increasing beyond bounds, destroying your food sources, and sabotaging your environment by shitting everywhere.
Fracking your water ain’t so wise either.
lLOTTA
There is another factor which can explain the temp surge.
It has been mentioned as a potential cause for runaway temp rise due to release of stored carbon compounds in the ocean bottom (name?) in the form of nodules.
When the water temp rises to a certain point, the combination of water pressure and temp will lead to releas, and the compounds turned into gas from a solid state. These gases then rise and enter the atmosphere, causing in term another water temp rise and an eventual species extinction and water evaporation and a Venusing of Earth.
Perhaps you could help me with the compounds name. Then googling would be easier……about 5 years ago it was briefly in the headlines.
Lotta,
you are insane, can I join you?
Frankly: “Dredd – The earth has a fabulous mechanism for self correction. Too much or too little of something it needs and the earth will correct.”
***
To echo Dredd “Tru dat”. One of the methods of sequestering CO2 naturally is in the ocean and from a recent study it looks like that is what is happening with some very bad results. That may explain where the CO2 is going if not into the atmosphere. What happens when the oceans reach their CO2 saturation limit is that the oceans are dead and the CO2 starts accumulating in the atmosphere again in large quantities. (A)GW is a multi-faceted threat the implications of which are not being fully considered.
————
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/03/02/436193/science-ocean-acidifying-so-fast-it-threatens-humanity-ability-to-feed-itself/
“Science: Ocean Acidifying So Fast It Threatens Humanity’s Ability to Feed Itself
By Joe Romm on Mar 2, 2012 at 4:13 pm
The world’s oceans may be turning acidic faster today from human carbon emissions than they did during four major extinctions in the last 300 million years, when natural pulses of carbon sent global temperatures soaring, says a new study in Science.”
….
“Here’s more on the new study:
The oceans act like a sponge to draw down excess carbon dioxide from the air; the gas reacts with seawater to form carbonic acid, which over time is neutralized by fossil carbonate shells on the seafloor. But if CO2 goes into the oceans too quickly, it can deplete the carbonate ions that corals, mollusks and some plankton need for reef and shell-building.
That is what is happening now. In a review of hundreds of paleoceanographic studies, a team of researchers from five countries found evidence for only one period in the last 300 million years when the oceans changed even remotely as fast as today: the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, or PETM, some 56 million years ago. In the early 1990s, scientists extracting sediments from the seafloor off Antarctica found a layer of mud from this period wedged between thick deposits of white plankton fossils. In a span of about 5,000 years, they estimated, a mysterious surge of carbon doubled atmospheric concentrations, pushed average global temperatures up by about 6 degrees C, and dramatically changed the ecological landscape.
The result: carbonate plankton shells littering the seafloor dissolved, leaving the brown layer of mud. As many as half of all species of benthic foraminifers, a group of single-celled organisms that live at the ocean bottom, went extinct, suggesting that organisms higher in the food chain may have also disappeared, said study co-author Ellen Thomas, a paleoceanographer at Yale University who was on that pivotal Antarctic cruise. “It’s really unusual that you lose more than 5 to 10 percent of species over less than 20,000 years,” she said. “It’s usually on the order of a few percent over a million years.” During this time, scientists estimate, ocean pH—a measure of acidity–may have fallen as much as 0.45 units. (As pH falls, acidity rises.)”
****
Link to the study:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/335/6072/1058.abstract