THE VINE APRIL 16, 2008
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Lurking in the comments to this post was a discussion of how high and how fast sea levels could rise if the world keeps spewing out carbon unabated. Here's the latest research on the subject, which is still an area of some contention:
Melting glaciers, disappearing ice sheets and warming water could lift sea levels by as much as 1.5 meters (4.9 feet) by the end of this century, displacing tens of millions of people, new research showed on Tuesday.
Presented at a European Geosciences Union conference, the research forecasts a rise in sea levels three times higher than that predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) last year. ...
"The IPCC numbers are underestimates," said Simon Holgate, also of the Proudman Laboratory. The researchers said the IPCC had not accounted for ice dynamics -- the more rapid movement of ice sheets due to melt water which could markedly speed up their disappearance and boost sea levels. But this effect is set to generate around one-third of the future rise in sea levels, according to Steve Nerem from the University of Colorado in the United States.
"If (the sea level) rises by one meter, 72 million Chinese people will be displaced, and 10 percent of the Vietnamese population," said Jevrejeva.
For a more thorough look at the IPCC's sea-rise predictions, and why they're likely underestimates, this RealClimate post is a good place to start. (It's readable, even for non-experts.)
And to see how this little ocean surge could affect the United States, check out this interactive map put out by Architecture2030, which lets you see the impact of various sea-level rises on different U.S. coastal cities. A 1.5-meter rise could, potentially, take out New Orleans, Atlantic City, NJ; San Mateo, CA; Galveston, TX; East Boston; and a long list of towns in Florida that would find themselves partially or wholly submerged. Of course, some of these cities could try building elaborate flood defenses. A country like, say, Bangladesh—most of which sits only one meter above sea level—might find it a bit harder to cope.
--Bradford Plumer
8 comments
Er, doesn't higher temperatures mean more evaporation of water into the atmosphere? Just asking.
- nbarry
April 16, 2008 at 12:47pm
Are the real estate values in the vulnerable coastal areas being affected by these predictions?
- The Ignorant Populist
April 16, 2008 at 12:48pm
nbarry -- I don't know how that would affect sea level rise, although there are questions about whether increased evaporation could help spur even more warming (by putting more water vapor in the atmosphere).
www.boston.com/.../saltier_atlantic_may_help_decipher_global_warming
- Brad Plumer
April 16, 2008 at 12:58pm
Ig. Pop--Yeah, insurance companies are definitely starting to take note:
www.boston.com/.../homeowners_may_feel_heat_of_global_warming
- Brad Plumer
April 16, 2008 at 12:58pm
Interesting link. I notice they are only looking at risk assesments for hurricanes, not rising sea levels.
Regardless, there's your answer Brad. The visceral understanding of higher insurance premiums than the equivalent house further inland will educate far more than any volume of Gore docs.
Can the coastal house prices of our elites fall faster than world carbon levels rise?
(I'm only half joking)
- The Ignorant Populist
April 16, 2008 at 2:56pm
More evaporation? Maybe, but unless the atmosphere is able to hold more water vapor, it will just come out as rain somewhere and run back into the ocean. I don't know whether a slightly warmer atmosphere would end up being more humid overall. My guess is no, because the average temp rise is still smaller than the daily temperature variations, but that's just a guess.
- JEFF FREY
April 16, 2008 at 3:12pm
Evaporation won't make much difference in the see level. You just phyiscally can't get that much more water into the atmosphere. The calculation is a bit arcane for this forum, but roughly speaking, if the atmosphere were to absorb 10 times it current average load (which it cannot do), it' would be equal to an inch of water on the entire earth's surface, so perhaps 1.3 or so inches if restricted to the ocean.
As other have pointed out, the big question about evaporation is how the additional evaporation changes the global heat cycle. Wwater vapor is a potent greenhouse gas -letting the sun in but not letting infrared out, like methan and carbon diaoxide). Condensed atmospheric water (clouds) are net reflectors of sunlight into space, and tend to cool.
Getting the water cycle (liquid surface, to atmospheric vapor to clouds, to precipitation) right in global climate models is an enormous challenge. Right now, water is a source of significant uncertainty in global models.
- sdemuth
April 16, 2008 at 6:24pm
Iggy - check out the short interest in the carbon-condo forward swap market (MICEX traded) and you have your answer.
- teplukhin2you
April 17, 2008 at 3:08am