Global warming is coming to my suburb

Article in one of the local rags today about sea rises due to global warming affecting my suburb.
I live in south fremantle a stones throw from where this article talks about but its scary anyway.

www.watoday.com.au...

Fremantle's historic West End is becoming the "Venice of the south" with water seeping into basements of buildings because of rising sea waters, according to a University of WA ocean expert.

Professor Pattiaratchi warned in 2011 climate change scientists were predicting a sea-level rise of one metre by 2100 along Australia's coastline. Advertisement He claimed such a rise would have profound impacts on the tidal range along the West Australian coast.

A federal government report at the time found sea levels around Australia's west and far north have risen the most, with an eight-millimetre rise recorded since the early 1990s.

If the sea level keeps rising at that rate, it won't just be the basement of buildings in the West End that will be under water but a large chunk of the port city by 2100, with most of the coastline expected to move 100 metres inland.

its frightening, Im on a hill but i lopve my suburb and hope this fdoesnt come to be. pretty sure global warming is happeneing and its all a bit scary

a reply to: lortl

www.watoday.com.au...

was built on reclaimed land from the 1830s and with parts of the area only built 90 centimetres above sea level, the ocean is trying to reclaim the land.

A bit silly building building so close to the sea and only 90 cms above sea level

Australia's west and far north have risen the most, with an eight-millimetre rise recorded since the early 1990s.

Wow 8mm rise in 25 years...

large chunk of the port city by 2100, with most of the coastline expected to move 100 metres inland.

So another 84 years to go..I think you worry too much

The seas have been rising long before we were able to control the global climate all by ourselves. it's very difficult to find that information, since there is so much hyperbole about AGW when you look for that subject, but facts will remain facts, even if they are buried under mounds of horse #.

Global mean sea level (MSL) has been rising since the end of the last ice age almost 18,000 years ago. Measures of sea level refer to the level of the ocean's surface halfway between high and low tide (to find out more about how sea level is measured, see our links below). Often, they are used to standardize measurements of land elevations and sea depths. Sea level, however, is not the same across the world. Mean sea level is the average, or mean, height of the sea.

www.wunderground.com...

Enjoy! We haven't been able to use the pool since the middle of August. Barely reaching 80 (F). When I was a kid it was regularly 90 degrees all the way through August and into September. I actually wore a light jacket last week. In August. It's nuts.

A federal government report at the time found sea levels around Australia's west and far north have risen the most, with an eight-millimetre rise recorded since the early 1990s.

Your source

It is not physically possible to raise sea level in one area more than another without changing the gravitational constant. We do not have the technology to do that. The only known way the gravitational constant can change is by addition or subtraction of external masses (the moon creates high and low tides), and this effect is temporary.

That statement is fact no matter who reports otherwise.

What is orders of magnitude more likely is that the land has settled, lowering by the reported 8mm. Land does not have the viscosity of water and can raise or lower over time. Reclaimed land, especially if part of that reclamation included raising the surface via back filling, is especially susceptible to settling. Oceanfront land is also susceptible to settling as ocean currents tend to remove sediment, causing the land around to slowly settle.

I also find it strange that this problem has worsened to such a degree over about 1/4" of relative water/land level change. If that is so, the whole area has been on the verge of destruction since the 1990s. We can't even grade to that precision.

I hope the residents manage to correct their problems, but I consider those reporting this story to be nothing more than activists for political bull-shavings. It's just more doom-porn propaganda.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck

A federal government report at the time found sea levels around Australia's west and far north have risen the most, with an eight-millimetre rise recorded since the early 1990s.

Your source

It is not physically possible to raise sea level in one area more than another without changing the gravitational constant. We do not have the technology to do that. The only known way the gravitational constant can change is by addition or subtraction of external masses (the moon creates high and low tides), and this effect is temporary.

That statement is fact no matter who reports otherwise.

What is orders of magnitude more likely is that the land has settled, lowering by the reported 8mm. Land does not have the viscosity of water and can raise or lower over time. Reclaimed land, especially if part of that reclamation included raising the surface via back filling, is especially susceptible to settling. Oceanfront land is also susceptible to settling as ocean currents tend to remove sediment, causing the land around to slowly settle.

I also find it strange that this problem has worsened to such a degree over about 1/4" of relative water/land level change. If that is so, the whole area has been on the verge of destruction since the 1990s. We can't even grade to that precision.

I hope the residents manage to correct their problems, but I consider those reporting this story to be nothing more than activists for political bull-shavings. It's just more doom-porn propaganda.

TheRedneck

While true that land subsidence may cause sea level rise along coasts, there are several other reasons as well. Here is a good article from Yale.

The Secret of Sea Level Rise

a reply to: Rezlooper

It's an article from Yale. I'll grant that.

The explanations in the article are not realistic. To be honest, after reading through this report, I'm thankful my degree is not from Yale. I also am praying no Yale engineer ever designs anything I need to work.

Massive ice sheets are big enough to create appreciable differences in the gravitational field of the entire planet? Really?

TheRedneck

From the reports I have been reading, there is no appreciable evidence of global warming in Antarctica, although the west ice sheet is loosing ice, the east ice sheet is gaining, and as for mean average global temperatures, NASA weather satellite data shows no change, and this years highest ever recorded temperature is up by 0.01 degree C, really? really? records show it was hotter in the USA in the 1930's!!! (all available online, I get those reports direct into my inbox, each day.)
As I live just below the 52 parallel, the 'weather' is something I like to keep my eye on.

a reply to: pikestaff

Global warming is very obvious. To deny is ignorant.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Enjoy! We haven't been able to use the pool since the middle of August. Barely reaching 80 (F). When I was a kid it was regularly 90 degrees all the way through August and into September. I actually wore a light jacket last week. In August. It's nuts.

Wait, what? It is around 80F so you can't use the pool? I think you may benefit from an extended break here in Blighty - we get the shorts and sun cream out as soon as it gets over 60F! You will be loving that 80F by the time you get home.....

a reply to: Rezlooper

To deny is ignorant.

Sea ice surrounding Antarctica reached a new record high extent this year,

Source: www.nasa.gov...

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

First half of 2016 BLOWS AWAY global temp records!

a reply to: TheRedneck

And July got even better

July 2016 was Earth's warmest month on record

Sure we only been keeping records for 120 years, but hey, we're smashing all records in those 120 years and it's been consistent for the past several years that each month just keeps getting hotter.

The hottest year ever! NASA says we're burning through heat records

originally posted by: pikestaff
From the reports I have been reading, there is no appreciable evidence of global warming in Antarctica, although the west ice sheet is loosing ice, the east ice sheet is gaining, and as for mean average global temperatures,

Oh really? No evidence you say? How are these lakes forming?

The lakes, unsurprisingly, are caused by climate change, and they can help to accelerate the process of ice melt and glacier collapse. The water from the lakes filters down through the glacier to lubricate its foundations, destroying the galcier's integrity. That can lead to collapse and major ice loss. A trillion tons of ice melted off Greenland's ice sheet between 2011 and 2014.

Worryingly, these lakes are now being found in Antarctica in increasing numbers. A long term study in Geophysical Research Letters found that 8,000 lakes appeared on the Langhovde Glacier in East Antarctica between 2000 and 2013. Study co-author Stewart Jamieson told the Washington Post that the lakes have appeared in "the part of the continent where people have for quite a long time assumed that it's relatively stable, there's not a huge amount of change, it's very, very cold."

Sure the earth goes through heating a cooling cycles but to deny that we're outside the normal ranges is pure ignorance....

a reply to: Rezlooper

I was referring to your response concerning the increase of ice mass in Antarctica.

But, if you want to play whack-a-link, we can.

Our global records do not go back 120 years. I am still not convinced our present measurements are truly representative of the global mean temperature. Humans live on land, which covers only 1/3 of the surface, and cannot survive in much of that area due to temperature extremes. Our measurements in those areas where we do not live are either satellite-based (which means indirect measurement) or sporadic weighted readings which are, by definition, subject to error. There is also the noise factor, since all the measurements give mean differentials which are orders of magnitude below typical daily fluctuations. Finally, the stability of the sensors themselves has not been verified to my satisfaction, since many of them are located in areas where the local environment has changed drastically due to expansion of civilization (parking lots instead of open fields, for example).

That is not a direct rebuttal of mean global surface temperature rise; it is a concern over the accuracy of the reports that mean global surface temperature is rising.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheAmazingYeti

That is a satellite image from Digital Globe, Inc.

These lakes are melted sections of surface layers of ice, which quickly refreeze, but the presence of these lakes of melted ice means that the formerly ‘safe’ area isn’t that safe anymore.

Source: www.konbini.com...

Quickly refreeze.

For this to happen quickly on a large scale, there must be enough heat influx in that location to overcome the heat of fusion for that much water. For the lakes to refreeze quickly, there again must be enough heat energy lost in that location to overcome the heat of fusion for that much water. This simply cannot possibly be a global consequence, but instead must be a localized phenomenon (geothermal, perhaps?). The latter requirement also indicates extremely cold atmospheric temperatures well below the freezing point of the water.

It's a real purty pitcher, though.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
What is orders of magnitude more likely is that the land has settled, lowering by the reported 8mm. Land does not have the viscosity of water and can raise or lower over time. Reclaimed land, especially if part of that reclamation included raising the surface via back filling, is especially susceptible to settling. Oceanfront land is also susceptible to settling as ocean currents tend to remove sediment, causing the land around to slowly settle.

I think you're nailing it, right there. That's basically how I was going to respond, but worded better. I'll just quote you for repetition's sake and give you the ol' big thumbs up

a reply to: Rezlooper

If the idea of local differences in sea level comes as a surprise, it’s probably because the experts themselves are only now beginning to fully realize what might cause such differences, and how significant they might be.

This is from your Yale article.

The reality is vastly different--nothing is fully understood when it comes to global warming and changes in sea level, and the fact that this article claims that it is should immediately tell you that you can pretty much dismiss much of what is claimed from being absolute fact. I don't care if the paper came from Yale or from my local community college.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

A federal government report at the time found sea levels around Australia's west and far north have risen the most, with an eight-millimetre rise recorded since the early 1990s.

Your source

It is not physically possible to raise sea level in one area more than another without changing the gravitational constant. We do not have the technology to do that. The only known way the gravitational constant can change is by addition or subtraction of external masses (the moon creates high and low tides), and this effect is temporary.

That statement is fact no matter who reports otherwise.

What is orders of magnitude more likely is that the land has settled, lowering by the reported 8mm. Land does not have the viscosity of water and can raise or lower over time. Reclaimed land, especially if part of that reclamation included raising the surface via back filling, is especially susceptible to settling. Oceanfront land is also susceptible to settling as ocean currents tend to remove sediment, causing the land around to slowly settle.

I also find it strange that this problem has worsened to such a degree over about 1/4" of relative water/land level change. If that is so, the whole area has been on the verge of destruction since the 1990s. We can't even grade to that precision.

I hope the residents manage to correct their problems, but I consider those reporting this story to be nothing more than activists for political bull-shavings. It's just more doom-porn propaganda.

Hi. This post is very silly.

1) Sea level is a relative measurement (it's the mean sea level at a particular place - note that this is the mean of high and low tides).
2) Sea level is rising in some places and falling in others (glacial rebound vs land subsidence, for example).
3) There are a lot of gravitational anomalies on Earth anyway (and seen in satellite readings).
4) Currents alter sea levels greatly (if the Gulf Stream ceased flowing, the East Coast could suddenly become inundated with a few feet of water).

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Rezlooper

To deny is ignorant.

Sea ice surrounding Antarctica reached a new record high extent this year,

Source: www.nasa.gov...

Please explain the relevance of sea ice extent in Antarctica, so that your point is more clearly understood.