They say that the state of the Arctic sea ice cover is the canary in the mine of terms of climate change. Hence it is worth keeping an eye on.
Now the graph plotting the extent of the Arctic sea ice has now crossed the line of the previous lowest year, 2007:
The image above comes from the National Snow and Ice Center site which tells us in their May 4 update that
During April, Arctic sea ice extent declined at a steady pace, remaining just below the 1979 to 2000 average. Ice extent for April 2010 was the largest for that month in the past decade. At the same time, changing wind patterns have caused older, thicker ice to move south along Greenland’s east coast, where it will likely melt during the summer. Temperatures in the Arctic remained above average.
And also that in the southernmost Bering Sea, Barents Sea, and Sea of Okhotsk it “remained cool, with northeasterly and northwesterly winds”.
Cool is a relative term and overall the area was quite warm in relation to the 1951-1980 mean according to this image from NASA GISS:
The image is from this site.
From this site April was an equal all time record:
Possibly we shouldn’t get too excited though as the April ice extent was “well within one standard deviation of the mean for the month”. May does seem to be heading for decisively different territory, however, as the first graph from the Greenleap Arctic Watch site shows.
Greenleap get that graph from this site. I would have copied the image to freeze it in the post at May 22, apart from a clear injunction not to do so without prior permission.
This graph shows that 2010 is still within the parameters of what happened in the last eight years, as of May 22. Also the big dive in 2007 really came during June. So there is work to be done if a new summer minimum is to be set. The ice is thinning and volume continues to hit new lows. What happens from here this summer will depend on a number of factors, including wind direction and the Beaufort Gyre, cloud cover (or the lack of it) as well as warmth. According to a volume-based projection the Arctic could be ice-free in summer within 10 years.
Climate Progress has a number of posts on the topic of Arctic ice, including here and here.
On a broader view Greenland is ice taking a dive and Antarctica is looking distinctly ugly. Given current levels of CO2, however, it’s really a matter of time.
Update: As requested by John D @ 7, here is the image showing sea level rise in Australia with 70 to 80 metres sea level rise:
I got it from a David Spratt powerpoint presentation which he gave at a conference in January 2009. You can download it from here.
Hansen says we will get a world free of permanent ice at 450 ppm plus or minus 100. It may be a little more than that but the present Government policies imply CO2 levels of at least 550ppm (midpoint) but probably 650 or more.
The saddest thing about this post to me is that my first thought was “oh what will Andrew Bolt make of it?”. Get out of my head, creep!
The saddest thing about this post to me is that my first thought was “oh what will Andrew Bolt make of it?”. Get out of my head, creep!
wilful, I try not to read him and his ilk, but inevitably they impinge. They were saying quite a bit back in March, but I haven’t heard from them lately.
Recently the New Scientist ran an article about warmer conditions in Greenland counterintuitively resulting in an extension of ice shelves on the perimeter. Ice pools on the land ice sheet from surface melting are carried by the plumbing to the bottom of the sheet through moulins where it flows into the sea under the ice shelves. The ice shelves miss the fracturing which comes from water from above penetrating the cracks and the intact shelves push further out to the sea.
Of course eventually the warmer water chewing away at the bottom of the ice shelves does the job. Meanwhile the denialists might have some statistics they can cherry pick for a time.
wilful, I try not to read him and his ilk, but inevitably they impinge. They were saying quite a bit back in March, but I haven’t heard from them lately.
Recently the New Scientist ran an article about warmer conditions in Greenland counterintuitively resulting in an extension of ice shelves on the perimeter. Ice pools on the land ice sheet from surface melting are carried by the plumbing to the bottom of the sheet through moulins where it flows into the sea under the ice shelves. The ice shelves miss the fracturing which comes from water from above penetrating the cracks and the intact shelves push further out to the sea.
Of course eventually the warmer water chewing away at the bottom of the ice shelves does the job. Meanwhile the denialists might have some statistics they can cherry pick for a time.
Thanks for the continuing informative posts, Brian.
More confirmation of the dire extent of the problems we face at The Polar Science Center , which is modelling (and verifying) volumetric sea ice data anomalies and trends since 1979.
Thanks for the continuing informative posts, Brian.
More confirmation of the dire extent of the problems we face at The Polar Science Center , which is modelling (and verifying) volumetric sea ice data anomalies and trends since 1979.
Wilful,
My first thought as well. For what its worth, Andy will probably say, “The warmenists say we shouldn’t rely on short term patterns, but here they are spreading their fear mongering on the basis of one months worth of data”. The irony would no doubt be lost on most of his commenters.
Wilful,
My first thought as well. For what its worth, Andy will probably say, “The warmenists say we shouldn’t rely on short term patterns, but here they are spreading their fear mongering on the basis of one months worth of data”. The irony would no doubt be lost on most of his commenters.
Thanks, Pterosaur for the link. Climate Progress posted this graph but without the link. It comes from this section of the site you linked to. Last night I was too tired to chase it down.
The graph has fallen out of the trend channel, which itself was down. Not a good look.
Thanks, Pterosaur for the link. Climate Progress posted this graph but without the link. It comes from this section of the site you linked to. Last night I was too tired to chase it down.
The graph has fallen out of the trend channel, which itself was down. Not a good look.
it still remains the greatest moral challenge of our time…that is until it becomes the greatest environmental disaster of all time
it still remains the greatest moral challenge of our time…that is until it becomes the greatest environmental disaster of all time
Good one Brian. It is hard data like this and the drama of shrinking ice cover that will wear down the skeptics and push pollies into being “seen to act”
Perhaps it is time to produce that map of yours which shows the Southern Ocean going almost all the way to the gulf of Carpenteria.
Good one Brian. It is hard data like this and the drama of shrinking ice cover that will wear down the skeptics and push pollies into being “seen to act”
Perhaps it is time to produce that map of yours which shows the Southern Ocean going almost all the way to the gulf of Carpenteria.
John, I’ve added it at the end of the post. Kinda rips the guts out of the place.
John, I’ve added it at the end of the post. Kinda rips the guts out of the place.
It most certainly does that Brian @8. Thanks. Have learnt so much and feel so much better informed from all your wonderful climate posts. Thanks
It most certainly does that Brian @8. Thanks. Have learnt so much and feel so much better informed from all your wonderful climate posts. Thanks
William Connolley is always a good value read on sea ice.
William Connolley is always a good value read on sea ice.
Go ‘free’ markets and the metrosexual crack smoking community that blather on about how good everything Versace-inspired is….. SAY IT LOUD AND PROUD [YOU KNOW YOU WANT TOO, lol ....]
Go ‘free’ markets and the metrosexual crack smoking community that blather on about how good everything Versace-inspired is….. SAY IT LOUD AND PROUD [YOU KNOW YOU WANT TOO, lol ....]
A couple of weeks ago I read that the oil companies knew 20 years ago that global warming was real and that the Arctic sea was likely to grow smaller and disappear. This was exactly what the oil companies wanted so they could get to the oil underneath, so they embarked on a global campaign to cast doubt on the science of global warming in the hope that the governments of the world would do nothing. Now they are getting their wish. The ice is gradually retreating, and the oil drilling rigs are moving in.
A couple of weeks ago I read that the oil companies knew 20 years ago that global warming was real and that the Arctic sea was likely to grow smaller and disappear. This was exactly what the oil companies wanted so they could get to the oil underneath, so they embarked on a global campaign to cast doubt on the science of global warming in the hope that the governments of the world would do nothing. Now they are getting their wish. The ice is gradually retreating, and the oil drilling rigs are moving in.
We should write the Bolter’s column for him. Can’t be that hard by now.
We should write the Bolter’s column for him. Can’t be that hard by now.
Well, L think that I will be holding on to my Blue Mountains property on behalf of my children, and maybe expanding the holding to consolidate our “family seat”. I am going to have to rebuild everything to be grapefruit sized hail proof, fire proof, gail proof, and heat tolerant. That should make my family’s future property look something like the buildings on Santorini. Not a bad look!
Well, L think that I will be holding on to my Blue Mountains property on behalf of my children, and maybe expanding the holding to consolidate our “family seat”. I am going to have to rebuild everything to be grapefruit sized hail proof, fire proof, gail proof, and heat tolerant. That should make my family’s future property look something like the buildings on Santorini. Not a bad look!
Chad, I reckon I could write a computer program that could write Bolt’s columns for him. It’d be a bit like the post-modernist essay genrator, but far simpler.
Chad, I reckon I could write a computer program that could write Bolt’s columns for him. It’d be a bit like the post-modernist essay genrator, but far simpler.
I think that you should do that DI, and submit the output 1 day earlier than Bolt’s.
I think that you should do that DI, and submit the output 1 day earlier than Bolt’s.
Brian @8, looks like we will have an inland sea after all…
Brian @8, looks like we will have an inland sea after all…
DI(nr),
Ha! I’d pay money to see that. I’m with BilB. We could see how close the software gets and then, once it’s at about 75% accuracy, sell it to Rupert, undercutting the Bolter.
Win!
We’ll make this blogging thing pay yet.
DI(nr),
Ha! I’d pay money to see that. I’m with BilB. We could see how close the software gets and then, once it’s at about 75% accuracy, sell it to Rupert, undercutting the Bolter.
Win!
We’ll make this blogging thing pay yet.
Thanks for the map Brian. At least we wouldn’t have to put up with whinging Murray Darling irrigators and the fishing might be good if the water is not too hot. As a bonus Barnaby’s home would be under water. We may even find that the whole of Australia becomes moister and able to support more agriculture.
Is there a world wide version?
Thanks for the map Brian. At least we wouldn’t have to put up with whinging Murray Darling irrigators and the fishing might be good if the water is not too hot. As a bonus Barnaby’s home would be under water. We may even find that the whole of Australia becomes moister and able to support more agriculture.
Is there a world wide version?
JohnD @19: “Is there a world wide version?”
Here it is:
http://flood.firetree.net/
You can toggle around the world and choose whichever rise in mean sea level up to 17m (equivalent to totally melting Greenland and West Antarctic Shelf, from memory), to suit what you think is most likely in the coming decades.
You can also zoom in to check it out in fine detail, down to street level.
Brisbane and Sydney airports are interesting (maybe Qantas is planning on ordering sea planes), as is most of the Gold Coast and a lot of seaside and riverside suburbs in our capital cities. Some major arterial roads are in trouble too, such as the Kwinana Freeway in Perth.
The Netherlands and Bangladesh could be a bigger worry than our inland sea? Thinking in terms of mass migration of climate refugees…
JohnD @19: “Is there a world wide version?”
Here it is:
http://flood.firetree.net/
You can toggle around the world and choose whichever rise in mean sea level up to 17m (equivalent to totally melting Greenland and West Antarctic Shelf, from memory), to suit what you think is most likely in the coming decades.
You can also zoom in to check it out in fine detail, down to street level.
Brisbane and Sydney airports are interesting (maybe Qantas is planning on ordering sea planes), as is most of the Gold Coast and a lot of seaside and riverside suburbs in our capital cities. Some major arterial roads are in trouble too, such as the Kwinana Freeway in Perth.
The Netherlands and Bangladesh could be a bigger worry than our inland sea? Thinking in terms of mass migration of climate refugees…
My NSW coastal surf report today said that I can still enjoy 20 degree plus seawater temperatures. This seemed a bit too pleasureable to me and I wondered how this compares with May/June periods in recent times, the peculiarities of the East Australian Current notwithstanding.
My NSW coastal surf report today said that I can still enjoy 20 degree plus seawater temperatures. This seemed a bit too pleasureable to me and I wondered how this compares with May/June periods in recent times, the peculiarities of the East Australian Current notwithstanding.
John D @ 19 and Elise @ 20, I found this one and this one. The second I know is from NASA. I used it in this post in June 2008 where you’ll get a better look at it.
75 meters is probably nearer the mark. I understand Greenland to be worth about 6-7 metres, West Antarctica 5 metres and East Antarctica 59 metres. The remaining ice caps and glaciers about a metre or so, then there is thermal expansion. As I understand it you’d have to wait a long time before you got more than a few metres from that source.
Then there are to use untechnical language wobbles in the earth’s crust and ocean currents, which affect sea levels at particular sites. Roger Jones made a recent comment which would be helpful if it could be located.
John D @ 19 and Elise @ 20, I found this one and this one. The second I know is from NASA. I used it in this post in June 2008 where you’ll get a better look at it.
75 meters is probably nearer the mark. I understand Greenland to be worth about 6-7 metres, West Antarctica 5 metres and East Antarctica 59 metres. The remaining ice caps and glaciers about a metre or so, then there is thermal expansion. As I understand it you’d have to wait a long time before you got more than a few metres from that source.
Then there are to use untechnical language wobbles in the earth’s crust and ocean currents, which affect sea levels at particular sites. Roger Jones made a recent comment which would be helpful if it could be located.
Elise, that’s hilarious! Many years ago before google earth and the internet I wanted to create a map of a flooded UK, something along the lines of the novels “The White Bird of Kinship.” I did it by blowing up maps from an atlas and colouring them in along relief lines on a light table. Now I can do it in 3 seconds on my computer and print the bugger wirelessly.
Oh, how times have changed!
Elise, that’s hilarious! Many years ago before google earth and the internet I wanted to create a map of a flooded UK, something along the lines of the novels “The White Bird of Kinship.” I did it by blowing up maps from an atlas and colouring them in along relief lines on a light table. Now I can do it in 3 seconds on my computer and print the bugger wirelessly.
Oh, how times have changed!
sg, have you seen this one?
Pablo, you would not expect the sea temperature to change much in terms of human perception.
BilB, where I sit here in Ashgrove it’s 80 metres above sea level according to my son’s bicycle computer. Of course for the sea to rise that far would take millenia in all probability and assumes the human race won’t have partial success in intervening.
Debbieanne @ 9, thanks. I give it my best shot and every time I press “publish” I hope I haven’t made a big clanger this time, which is always possible. Many commenters have read widely these days. That was rare a few years ago, so I get a lot back, which makes it worthwhile.
sg, have you seen this one?
Pablo, you would not expect the sea temperature to change much in terms of human perception.
BilB, where I sit here in Ashgrove it’s 80 metres above sea level according to my son’s bicycle computer. Of course for the sea to rise that far would take millenia in all probability and assumes the human race won’t have partial success in intervening.
Debbieanne @ 9, thanks. I give it my best shot and every time I press “publish” I hope I haven’t made a big clanger this time, which is always possible. Many commenters have read widely these days. That was rare a few years ago, so I get a lot back, which makes it worthwhile.
that one goes too fast, Brian. I was able to check from that firetree site, and in my little town of Steamy Beppu, if there’s a 5m sea level rise I’ll be sitting on water front property!
that one goes too fast, Brian. I was able to check from that firetree site, and in my little town of Steamy Beppu, if there’s a 5m sea level rise I’ll be sitting on water front property!
sg, yes it is too fast. Actually it is about post-glacial or isostatic rebound. This is what you have to worry about:
In other words, Britain is like a giant see-saw. Currently Scotland is going up and Southern England is going down. That’s without any sea level rise caused by AGW.
sg, yes it is too fast. Actually it is about post-glacial or isostatic rebound. This is what you have to worry about:
In other words, Britain is like a giant see-saw. Currently Scotland is going up and Southern England is going down. That’s without any sea level rise caused by AGW.
Sorry, the term is now “glacial isostatic adjustment”.
Sorry, the term is now “glacial isostatic adjustment”.
oh well, that should solve the problem of the BNP, anyway!
oh well, that should solve the problem of the BNP, anyway!
Brian,
On sea level rise my 250 metre elevation is elevation safety overkill, but the other threats brought on by extreme weather are relative certainties which I believe will be an impossibly painful realisation 30 years from now. Weather goes everywhere, sea level laps at the edges.
Brian,
On sea level rise my 250 metre elevation is elevation safety overkill, but the other threats brought on by extreme weather are relative certainties which I believe will be an impossibly painful realisation 30 years from now. Weather goes everywhere, sea level laps at the edges.
Mention of the future vulnerability of the Thames Barrier with sea level rise makes you wonder if when next you stand on Sydney Harbour’s North or South Head you visualise a ‘wall’ perhaps with a break (lock) in the middle for shipping. Solves a lot of property problems. Botany Bay would be even easier. Plenty of good clean fill from Hunter open cut coal operations.
Mention of the future vulnerability of the Thames Barrier with sea level rise makes you wonder if when next you stand on Sydney Harbour’s North or South Head you visualise a ‘wall’ perhaps with a break (lock) in the middle for shipping. Solves a lot of property problems. Botany Bay would be even easier. Plenty of good clean fill from Hunter open cut coal operations.
BilB, quite so.
pablo, things will definitely be uglier. I’ve only read it once, but I understand that sometime this century we (the world) will lose our lovely beaches under BAU. They’ll only come back with a future period of stability lasting some time.
BilB, quite so.
pablo, things will definitely be uglier. I’ve only read it once, but I understand that sometime this century we (the world) will lose our lovely beaches under BAU. They’ll only come back with a future period of stability lasting some time.
Brian @26, further to your example of glacial isotactic adjustment, the Swedish Vikings used to take their longships up to Uppsala, which was a port in those times.
http://www.beowulf-country.org/Gamla-Uppsala-burial-mounds-walk.html
If you check Uppsala on Google maps (north of Stockholm, Sweden) it is a loong way inland today. The boats and burial mounds are high and dry.
After the glacial period ended, apparently Sweden “rebounded” when the load of ice and snow was removed. So, apparently, it now rides higher above the waterline, even allowing for corrections for sea level changes since Viking times.
Amazing thing, this glacial isotactic adjustment.
Brian @26, further to your example of glacial isotactic adjustment, the Swedish Vikings used to take their longships up to Uppsala, which was a port in those times.
http://www.beowulf-country.org/Gamla-Uppsala-burial-mounds-walk.html
If you check Uppsala on Google maps (north of Stockholm, Sweden) it is a loong way inland today. The boats and burial mounds are high and dry.
After the glacial period ended, apparently Sweden “rebounded” when the load of ice and snow was removed. So, apparently, it now rides higher above the waterline, even allowing for corrections for sea level changes since Viking times.
Amazing thing, this glacial isotactic adjustment.
Elise I’ve heard Karl Kruszelnicki say that the earth’s crust is like a coat of paint on a basketball. I think that’s what he said. I haven’t done the maths but the bottom line is that it is a very thin skin.
Elise I’ve heard Karl Kruszelnicki say that the earth’s crust is like a coat of paint on a basketball. I think that’s what he said. I haven’t done the maths but the bottom line is that it is a very thin skin.
I guess that being a global coolist means being beyond denial,so this presentation means nothing to me and the map of underwater Australia remains premature and without merit,unless a historical geological analysis of flooded map areas are showing examples of that geochemical process.Thus maybe carbon dioxide, the gas, isn’t the criminal!?
I guess that being a global coolist means being beyond denial,so this presentation means nothing to me and the map of underwater Australia remains premature and without merit,unless a historical geological analysis of flooded map areas are showing examples of that geochemical process.Thus maybe carbon dioxide, the gas, isn’t the criminal!?
p.a.t. I’m sure we needed to know that!
p.a.t. I’m sure we needed to know that!
Brian, you’ve cherry-picked.
There are several Arctic ice measurement indices, as I’m sure you know. For some reason you have chosen to feature only NSIDC, which as you say shows the line below 2007 at the same date. NORSEX however shows the opposite – Arctic ice extent above 2007 (and 2008).
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/observation_images/ssmi1_ice_ext.png
Also a cherry-pick as regards to time – a post at exactly the time that even on NORSDIC the 2010 line goes below that of 2007, having been above all year to date.
In any case, as is obvious from any of the indices, this is still early in the melt season. The big fall starts in about a month’s time, and that is also when the various yearly plots really diverge (which is to say that it is sea conditions over a relatively short period of time at greatest melt that determine the annual minimum). It is a bit too soon for triumphalism.
None of which is to say that all is necessarily well in the Arctic. It is to say that if you want credible objectivity for any audience other than the chosen faithful, you need to be quite a bit less selective in your data.
Brian, you’ve cherry-picked.
There are several Arctic ice measurement indices, as I’m sure you know. For some reason you have chosen to feature only NSIDC, which as you say shows the line below 2007 at the same date. NORSEX however shows the opposite – Arctic ice extent above 2007 (and 2008).
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/observation_images/ssmi1_ice_ext.png
Also a cherry-pick as regards to time – a post at exactly the time that even on NORSDIC the 2010 line goes below that of 2007, having been above all year to date.
In any case, as is obvious from any of the indices, this is still early in the melt season. The big fall starts in about a month’s time, and that is also when the various yearly plots really diverge (which is to say that it is sea conditions over a relatively short period of time at greatest melt that determine the annual minimum). It is a bit too soon for triumphalism.
None of which is to say that all is necessarily well in the Arctic. It is to say that if you want credible objectivity for any audience other than the chosen faithful, you need to be quite a bit less selective in your data.
Wozza, I’ve picked rather than cherry-picked. I suppose you think the NSIDC is part of the grand conspiracy.
I’m aware that there are difficulties in measurement and a certain arbitrariness in what is considered “ice cover”. Ultimately volume trumps area, I think, but that appears even harder to measure. I’ve tried not to over-egg what’s happening. But thank you for your contribution.
Wozza, I’ve picked rather than cherry-picked. I suppose you think the NSIDC is part of the grand conspiracy.
I’m aware that there are difficulties in measurement and a certain arbitrariness in what is considered “ice cover”. Ultimately volume trumps area, I think, but that appears even harder to measure. I’ve tried not to over-egg what’s happening. But thank you for your contribution.
While I agree we see changes in the Arctic, the question is how significant is this when 90% of Ice Caps are located in the Antarctic; where my reading is that the experts are undecided about Ice Volumes here(irrespective of the links above).
What I am pleased about however is only one of my properties will go under at the the sea level increases above (of course, if they can be believed). I’ll be on the big island where SA was. ( I could be quite old by then)
Last month I was on the main Netherlands dike, they started building in 1597, I guess they’ll add a few metres (another 30 metres should do it) and carry on. It going to be about adaption to climate change. The changes made by the humman race and natural forces are not controllable by looking at the single entity carbon dioxide.
While I agree we see changes in the Arctic, the question is how significant is this when 90% of Ice Caps are located in the Antarctic; where my reading is that the experts are undecided about Ice Volumes here(irrespective of the links above).
What I am pleased about however is only one of my properties will go under at the the sea level increases above (of course, if they can be believed). I’ll be on the big island where SA was. ( I could be quite old by then)
Last month I was on the main Netherlands dike, they started building in 1597, I guess they’ll add a few metres (another 30 metres should do it) and carry on. It going to be about adaption to climate change. The changes made by the humman race and natural forces are not controllable by looking at the single entity carbon dioxide.
John, we had a look last year at what happened in West Antarctica in the last few million years and at a reassessment on what’s happening with sea level rise. As Paul Norton said, the situation is still alarming.
On The Netherlands, we were there in 2008 but I didn’t see the main dyke. My brothers visited some farmland and were impressed with a whopping great windmill that sucked, from memory, three swimming pools of saltwater out of water table every minute. As the sea level rises the pressure will obviously increase and the pumps will have to work harder. I’m sure that’s not the only problem they’ll have to deal with.
For starters they might expect quite horrendous spring floods down the Rhine from the spring melt of the Alps. But I’m speculating.
John, we had a look last year at what happened in West Antarctica in the last few million years and at a reassessment on what’s happening with sea level rise. As Paul Norton said, the situation is still alarming.
On The Netherlands, we were there in 2008 but I didn’t see the main dyke. My brothers visited some farmland and were impressed with a whopping great windmill that sucked, from memory, three swimming pools of saltwater out of water table every minute. As the sea level rises the pressure will obviously increase and the pumps will have to work harder. I’m sure that’s not the only problem they’ll have to deal with.
For starters they might expect quite horrendous spring floods down the Rhine from the spring melt of the Alps. But I’m speculating.
‘Triumphalism’ is not a word I think Brian would want to use regarding the presentation of this data. maybe ‘sobering’ or chilling’ or ‘worrying’. And I’m quite sure Brian has it in him to do a post in September or October illustrating what has happened over the forthcoming northern summer.
Brian, there’s a very comprehensive dutch plan for increased flooding etc. Found it a year or so ago, couldn’t find it last time I looked, but I recall that Rhine flooding was a big issue, and as part of the response they were returning 80 000 hectares of settled farmland to wilderness sanctuary floodplain over the next few short years.
‘Triumphalism’ is not a word I think Brian would want to use regarding the presentation of this data. maybe ‘sobering’ or chilling’ or ‘worrying’. And I’m quite sure Brian has it in him to do a post in September or October illustrating what has happened over the forthcoming northern summer.
Brian, there’s a very comprehensive dutch plan for increased flooding etc. Found it a year or so ago, couldn’t find it last time I looked, but I recall that Rhine flooding was a big issue, and as part of the response they were returning 80 000 hectares of settled farmland to wilderness sanctuary floodplain over the next few short years.
wilful, that’s pretty right. I’d been monitoring the progress daily and almost didn’t bother with a post. I guess what changed my mind was the triumphalism from denialists that accompanied the relative extensive ice coverage in March and the fact that others like Climate Progress were posting. I have it in mind to return to monitor what happens in September.
wilful, that’s pretty right. I’d been monitoring the progress daily and almost didn’t bother with a post. I guess what changed my mind was the triumphalism from denialists that accompanied the relative extensive ice coverage in March and the fact that others like Climate Progress were posting. I have it in mind to return to monitor what happens in September.
John @38: “Last month I was on the main Netherlands dike, they started building in 1597, I guess they’ll add a few metres (another 30 metres should do it) and carry on.”
Brian @39: “As the sea level rises the pressure will obviously increase and the pumps will have to work harder.”
Exactly right Brian! The Dutch have of course studied this (they are big on hydrology, as one might expect), and concluded that they could withstand 1m rise…just.
It is not only the water table problem and the burden of pumping costs on their economy, but the seawater pressure on the dykes, which would reach prohibitively costly widths in the effort to be secure against massive water pressures.
Furthermore, at high dyke levels, a single breach due to structural weakness would devastate the countryside and be very hard to contain. As the water rushes through, it will exert enormous pressure on the sidewalls of the breach, which will also give way, thus widening the breach and causing even greater flowrate of seawater, exerting greater erosional pressure, etc, etc. An exponential catastrophe.
The Dutch already have direct physical experience of this type of problem, back in the winter of 1953. I saw film footage of it while living in Holland. The disaster looked pretty desperate and miserable for the inhabitants who were sitting on the rooftops of flooded houses, or desperately trying to plug the widening breach with sand bags in bitterly cold winter conditions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_flood_of_1953
It is hard to imagine the devastation if the sea level were significantly higher.
I doubt very much that it will be a case of an extra few meters of dirt on the dykes and BAU.
John @38: “Last month I was on the main Netherlands dike, they started building in 1597, I guess they’ll add a few metres (another 30 metres should do it) and carry on.”
Brian @39: “As the sea level rises the pressure will obviously increase and the pumps will have to work harder.”
Exactly right Brian! The Dutch have of course studied this (they are big on hydrology, as one might expect), and concluded that they could withstand 1m rise…just.
It is not only the water table problem and the burden of pumping costs on their economy, but the seawater pressure on the dykes, which would reach prohibitively costly widths in the effort to be secure against massive water pressures.
Furthermore, at high dyke levels, a single breach due to structural weakness would devastate the countryside and be very hard to contain. As the water rushes through, it will exert enormous pressure on the sidewalls of the breach, which will also give way, thus widening the breach and causing even greater flowrate of seawater, exerting greater erosional pressure, etc, etc. An exponential catastrophe.
The Dutch already have direct physical experience of this type of problem, back in the winter of 1953. I saw film footage of it while living in Holland. The disaster looked pretty desperate and miserable for the inhabitants who were sitting on the rooftops of flooded houses, or desperately trying to plug the widening breach with sand bags in bitterly cold winter conditions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_flood_of_1953
It is hard to imagine the devastation if the sea level were significantly higher.
I doubt very much that it will be a case of an extra few meters of dirt on the dykes and BAU.
And in a modest piece of good news ….
Financial crisis ‘cut greenhouse gas’
The financial crisis has done what politicians cannot – it has brought down Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.
A report card released on Thursday shows emissions dropped by 2.4 per cent last year, bucking a long-term upward trend.
Financial crisis ‘cut greenhouse gas’ CATHY ALEXANDER
May 27, 2010 – 4:24PM
Ads by Google
Carbon Accounting
Capture, Monitor, Measure & Report Your Carbon Emissions Data
http://www.NGER.com.au
AAP
The financial crisis has done what politicians cannot – it has brought down Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.
A report card released on Thursday shows emissions dropped by 2.4 per cent last year, bucking a long-term upward trend.
But conservationists are not celebrating because emissions have started to rise again as the economy bounces back.
Advertisement: Story continues belowAccording to the latest annual National Greenhouse Gas Inventory, emissions dipped to 537 million tonnes in 2009.
That’s because the economy slowed – especially the steel sector – so less coal was burned to make electricity.
Last year’s emissions returned to 2005 levels, or five per cent more than 1990 levels.
Presumably this was true for the rest of the world too.
Apparently they are on the way back up however. It seems ironic that the work of a bunch of sleazebag and even criminal traders in commodities and dodgy securities who are universally reviled and doubtless enthusiastic about polluting the planet did more to abate GHGs in one year than all of the conferences and targets and solemn promises put together. What a weird world we live in.
A second irony is that one often hears objections to an ETS based on the idea that in some way, it would hand control of policy to the people who brought us the GFC. Perhaps oin the evidence above, even if true, that would be no bad thing.
Just joking … as sadly, their “solution” isn’t sustainable.
And in a modest piece of good news ….
Financial crisis ‘cut greenhouse gas’
The financial crisis has done what politicians cannot – it has brought down Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.
A report card released on Thursday shows emissions dropped by 2.4 per cent last year, bucking a long-term upward trend.
Financial crisis ‘cut greenhouse gas’ CATHY ALEXANDER
May 27, 2010 – 4:24PM
Ads by Google
Carbon Accounting
Capture, Monitor, Measure & Report Your Carbon Emissions Data
http://www.NGER.com.au
AAP
The financial crisis has done what politicians cannot – it has brought down Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.
A report card released on Thursday shows emissions dropped by 2.4 per cent last year, bucking a long-term upward trend.
But conservationists are not celebrating because emissions have started to rise again as the economy bounces back.
Advertisement: Story continues belowAccording to the latest annual National Greenhouse Gas Inventory, emissions dipped to 537 million tonnes in 2009.
That’s because the economy slowed – especially the steel sector – so less coal was burned to make electricity.
Last year’s emissions returned to 2005 levels, or five per cent more than 1990 levels.
Presumably this was true for the rest of the world too.
Apparently they are on the way back up however. It seems ironic that the work of a bunch of sleazebag and even criminal traders in commodities and dodgy securities who are universally reviled and doubtless enthusiastic about polluting the planet did more to abate GHGs in one year than all of the conferences and targets and solemn promises put together. What a weird world we live in.
A second irony is that one often hears objections to an ETS based on the idea that in some way, it would hand control of policy to the people who brought us the GFC. Perhaps oin the evidence above, even if true, that would be no bad thing.
Just joking … as sadly, their “solution” isn’t sustainable.
Tim Flannery has accused Rudd of a betrayal of trust:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/national/professor-tim-flannery-accuses-rudd-of-climate-betrayal-of-trust/story-e6frea8c-1225872259604
Tim Flannery has accused Rudd of a betrayal of trust:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/national/professor-tim-flannery-accuses-rudd-of-climate-betrayal-of-trust/story-e6frea8c-1225872259604
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/rudd-loses-flannerys-trust/story-e6frgczf-1225872278929
That “joke” is Tony, who, you never tire of telling us, you will be voting for, Jacques@44.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/rudd-loses-flannerys-trust/story-e6frgczf-1225872278929
That “joke” is Tony, who, you never tire of telling us, you will be voting for, Jacques@44.
Climate Progress reports on a study that the Greenland land mass is rising as the ice sheet melts.
Climate Progress reports on a study that the Greenland land mass is rising as the ice sheet melts.
Brian @46, that was very interesting news!
I was on the verge of speculating about Greenland at the end of my post about Sweden, but thought it was a bridge too far. Apparently not.
It tends to confirm other data indicating that the changes in the ice thickness are significant, not trivial as the denialists would have us believe.
Brian @46, that was very interesting news!
I was on the verge of speculating about Greenland at the end of my post about Sweden, but thought it was a bridge too far. Apparently not.
It tends to confirm other data indicating that the changes in the ice thickness are significant, not trivial as the denialists would have us believe.