Global Sea Level Rise Map • Hacker News Board

Re: Global Sea Level Rise Map

#31

Post by danielvf » Wed, Jan 13, 2016, 12:06 AM UTC

Gravityloss wrote: post #29

danielvf wrote: post #24

This map's default setting of a +7 meter rise would be reached in the year 4348 if sea levels continue to rise at the current rate. (You can get current and historical sea height satellite data from http://sealevel.colorado.edu/ )

There are reasons to assume that a linear fit is not smart. If you assume the rate of melting is roughly proportional to the temperature, then we are in for an increase in rates. But there are other things. Nonlinear ice effects - that are not very well included in IPCC projections, could cause a lot more sea level rise sooner. They are hard to predict. http://phys.org/news/2015-09-eyes-oceansjames-hansen-sea.htm...

Because we are talking about such tiny numbers when we are talking about the current sea level rises, anything spectacular in the future has to be non linear in nature or it just would not matter.

It amazed me just how linear historical sea levels have been. Take a look at measured New York sea levels, which have been kept since before the Civil War.

http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.s...

Re: Global Sea Level Rise Map

#32

Post by Gravityloss » Wed, Jan 13, 2016, 1:34 AM UTC

danielvf wrote: post #31

Gravityloss wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are reasons to assume that a linear fit is not smart. If you assume the rate of melting is roughly proportional to the temperature, then we are in for an increase in rates. But there are other things. Nonlinear ice effects - that are not very well included in IPCC projections, could cause a lot more sea level rise sooner. They are hard to predict. http://phys.org/news/2015-09-eyes-oceansjames-hansen-sea.htm...

Because we are talking about such tiny numbers when we are talking about the current sea level rises, anything spectacular in the future has to be non linear in nature or it just would not matter. It amazed me just how linear historical sea levels have been. Take a look at measured New York sea levels, which have been kept since before the Civil War. http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.s...

Basically there are a few dangerous ways glaciers can react nonlinearly, raising sea level (from watching a few videos).

Perhaps best is to watch this long presentation by Eric Rignot from NASA JPL a few times, it's very fascinating and also terrifying.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3p9uRxX95f4

Imagine two kilometers of glacier sitting on bedrock that's 500 meters below sea level. The glacier doesn't touch sea water because there's higher ground between it and the sea, though still below sea level, and also that's blocked by ice. If that blocking ice melts, the warm and salty water can then touch the big glacier that then starts melting and calving icebergs. Or if the glacier is on higher ground, it can start directly sliding towards the sea.

There are multiple glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica that each could contribute one meter to sea level rise, that the scientists are watching. Eric Rignot named the parts between the glacier and the sea Flood Gates.

We haven't observed ice sheet collapses, so it's hard to know how it will play out, how long it will take, one or more centuries. We also can't afford to wait and observe them and only then do something about it.

Re: Global Sea Level Rise Map

#33

Post by vedaprodarte » Wed, Jan 13, 2016, 7:43 AM UTC

People who doubt the doubt the accuracy of this map should check their brain. It is only a simulation based on some assumptions, not facts! If you do not satisfy with it, go and find 60M+ of water and pour it in your country.