Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: Catastrophic Sea Level Rise within Three Generations [View all]xrm67
(21 posts)24. Doubling time of less than 5 years has been established.
Last edited Thu Apr 9, 2015, 10:58 PM - Edit history (2)
What don't you get about this? Can you read the sentence in bold which was published in every news media outlet?
'Incredible' rate of polar ice loss alarms scientists
The planets two largest ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are now being depleted at an astonishing rate of 120 cubic miles each year. That is the discovery made by scientists using data from CryoSat-2, the European probe that has been measuring the thickness of Earths ice sheets and glaciers since it was launched by the European Space Agency in 2010.
Even more alarming, the rate of loss of ice from the two regions has more than doubled since 2009, revealing the dramatic impact that climate change is beginning to have on our world.
The researchers, based at Germanys Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research used 200m data points across Antarctica and 14.3m across Greenland, all collected by CryoSat, to study how the ice sheets there had changed over the past three years. The satellite carries a high-precision altimeter, which sends out short radar pulses that bounce off the ice surface and then back to the satellite. By measuring the time this takes, the height of the ice beneath the spacecraft can be calculated.
It was found from the average drops in elevation that were detected by CryoSat that Greenland alone is losing about 90 cubic miles a year, while in Antarctica the annual volume loss is about 30 cubic miles. These rates of loss described as incredible by one researcher are the highest observed since altimetry satellite records began about 20 years ago, and they mean that the ice sheets annual contribution to sea-level rise has doubled since 2009, say the researchers whose work was published in the journal Cryosphere last week.
The Hansen article I inked to and which you are quoting from is more than 2 years old and was before the recent discoveries mentioned above. The polar ice caps are melting more than twice as fast as what Hansen and others had predicted. What don't you get about that?
And about the 70 feet of SLR already locked in, that was in my article as well which you evidently have trouble comprehending:
Melting polar and glacial ice and thermally expanding ocean water have accelerated SLR to the highest rate in at least 6000 years, and an estimated 69 feet SLR has already been set into motion.
Edit: In my last comment I did say 70 meters and actually meant feet. 69 feet = 21 meters, still beyond catastrophic.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
53 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
...for each meter of sea level rise, the coastline is eroded, over time, by 100 meters.
xrm67
Apr 2015
#2
“The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.
dixiegrrrrl
Apr 2015
#4
That's the first time you've mentioned freshwater, or inland glaciers
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 2015
#13
Freshwater pulses slowing down ocean currents has nothing to do with sea level or ice area
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 2015
#15
I will write a blog post about this and hopefully answer your questions once and for all.
xrm67
Apr 2015
#19
Again, no doubling period has been 'established' for sea level rise
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 2015
#22
2 data points for ice loss does not mean 'exponential sea level rise'
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 2015
#27
Any rational person can now see than an exponential doubling period has been established
xrm67
Apr 2015
#28
If you watch the video of Box I linked to in #22, you see he got the 69 feet from Alley
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 2015
#30
If it's in fits and starts, it's not exponential, by definition (nt)
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 2015
#45
Any process for something to be exponential while having gaps when nothing happens
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 2015
#52
Limits to Growth projections were correct... We're on track for collapse of industrial civilization
xrm67
Apr 2015
#12
Yes, I'm sure they're all wrong. Where's my TV remote? Pass me the buttered popcorn.
xrm67
Apr 2015
#23
What's your opinion of the Earth System sensitivity estimate by Wasdell et al
GliderGuider
Apr 2015
#29