Sea level rise at least 10 feet in next 50 years.

[L. Coyote]

Earth’s Most Famous Climate Scientist Issues Bombshell Sea Level Warning
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/07/20/sea_level_study_james_hansen_issues_dire_climate_warning.html
By Eric Holthaus

Monday's new study greatly increases the potential for catastrophic near-term sea level rise. Here, Miami Beach, among the most vulnerable cities to sea level rise in the world.

In what may prove to be a turning point for political action on climate change, a breathtaking new study casts extreme doubt about the near-term stability of global sea levels.

The study—written by James Hansen, NASA’s former lead climate scientist, and 16 co-authors, many of whom are considered among the top in their fields—concludes that glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica will melt 10 times faster than previous consensus estimates, resulting in sea level rise of at least 10 feet in as little as 50 years. The study, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, brings new importance to a feedback loop in the ocean near Antarctica that results in cooler freshwater from melting glaciers forcing warmer, saltier water underneath the ice sheets, speeding up the melting rate. Hansen, who is known for being alarmist and also right, acknowledges that his study implies change far beyond previous consensus estimates. In a conference call with reporters, he said he hoped the new findings would be “substantially more persuasive than anything previously published.” I certainly find them to be.

To come to their findings, the authors used a mixture of paleoclimate records, computer models, and observations of current rates of sea level rise, but “the real world is moving somewhat faster than the model,” Hansen says.

Hansen’s study does not attempt to predict the precise timing of the feedback loop, only that it is “likely” to occur this century. The implications are mindboggling: In the study’s likely scenario, New York City—and every other coastal city on the planet—may only have a few more decades of habitability left.

.................

[sharedvalues]

1. Only one major party IN THE ENTIRE WORLD supports climate denial

The GOP denies climate change because

- Fox news and Limbaugh have a huge propaganda hold on half the country
and
- Our politics has so much money in it that oil and gas companies have purchased GOP politicians

Hell, if it's good for exxon mobile who cares about people who live near rising seas?

[riversedge]

10. Actually it is only 52 members of congress. The majority of the people are

believers in climate change and its horrible effects. Only 52 members of the Party. They do have the power.

[sharedvalues]

21. And the Koches. And Exxon. And BP. The wealthy and corporate owners of the GOP

The only reason the GOP believes in climate denial is because of how much the oil and gas industry pays them to believe it.

The biggest problem is money in politics - corporations and the super-wealthy can buy politicians.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

38. No. Exxon and BP believe in AG Climate Change. The Kochs surely do too.

The problem is two-fold.

1) They want to make a fast fat profit while they can and then get out before the bottom falls out.

2) They are rich enough that they can protect themselves from any effects of global warming, whether those effects are primary (sea level rise & drought for examples) or secondary (destabilization, refugees, etc.).

[sharedvalues]

39. Ok, I agree. They believe in it. They still pay politicians and scientists to deny it.

I think we agree

[yardwork]

34. Oddly enough, the energy companies are fully aware of climate change.

Exxon has some of the best climate change data in the world. They're using it to control risk, purchase water rights, and generally position themselves to come out ahead of the game.

The politicians they own are probably stupid enough to actually believe climate change denier propaganda, but the huge corporations know the truth.

[sharedvalues]

40. Ugh. That makes 40% of Americans stupid.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

37. Assad's party in Syria supports climate denial and is out of the Paris Accord. . . . . nt

[sharedvalues]

41. "One major non-dictatorial party." Better? :)

Non-dictatorial. For now.

Also in the UK the DUP denies climate change, but they're a small fringe party, so I exclude them from "major"

[Bernardo de La Paz]

42. ;)

[KingCharlemagne]

49. Plus, anthropocentric climate change, just like radiocarbon dating, are plots by Satan to

deceive us.

[applegrove]

2. I watch people buying beachfront property on HGTV all the time and cringe.

Last edited Sat Jun 24, 2017, 09:11 PM - Edit history (1)

I no longer watch the shows where people are buying on the beach.

[WheelWalker]

3. Bummer.

[Doodley]

4. If that prediction is accurate, I think the human species has a very short time.

World war will be inevitable as we face mass migration, mass destruction of cities, infrastructure, food shortages, famine, disease and global civil unrest.

[Brother Buzz]

6. That, or we learn a bit from the Dutch

Levee construction could become THE growth industry

[dalton99a]

14. Trump Levee Builders, a Trump Organization company

There is big money in misery

[cagefreesoylentgreen]

20. I wonder if that's not actually the endgame

Lately I've been thinking that the redirection of wealth towards the top is an attempt by the rich to pull up the ladder, and let the proles drown, starve, and die. Thin the herds. That they believe their wealth will shield them from ecological catastrophe.

Well, I'm not seeing any "Elysium" -style space habits being built, and while their riches might shield them for the very short term, the uber-wealthy are just as fcked as the rest of us.

[misanthrope]

45. Maybe not the species as we can be surprisingly adaptive.

We have a generalized diet, novel cleverness, mobility and a fluid culture that is our chief tool of adaptation.

But Western Civilization? Oh yeah, that would break down quickly.

[NutmegYankee]

47. I'm sure our species will make it.

We've survived ice ages and colonized vastly diverse habitats across nearly the entire planets surface. The species will make it. Our civilization, like many before it, may not make it.

[Doodley]

48. We survived ice ages by taking to caves, wearing animal skins and learning to control fire.

Cities under water, mass migration, massive crop failure, mass food shortage and famine, destruction of infrastructure, worldwide economic depression, human suffering on a scale never seen before - this is the backdrop to a world war that could turn nuclear. A very different scenario.

[NutmegYankee]

52. None of which would kill every last human being.

I'm talking about the species, not civilization.

[Doodley]

56. As long as there is it doesn't turn nuclear. Okay humans would still exist, but the

longer-term survival of the species is called into question, because whatever devastation happens in fifty years gets multiplied many, many times as climate change and all those terrible consequences become more magnified as time goes on. A ten foot rise in fifty years would only be a prelude of what is to come.

[suffragette]

5. I remember back when the Bush Admin tried to silence Hansen.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x386633


Thank goodness he persevered then and is still doing his best to sound the alarm and speak the truth.

[BigmanPigman]

7. No one mentions how population growth is a major contributor of climate change.

In 1960 the US population was 178 million. Now it is 325 million. Someone else can do the real math for me but my rough estimate is an increse of about 75% during my lifetime. That is the main reason for climate change and I doubt many countries want to or can tackle that problem.

[angstlessk]

8. The GOP is tackling that problem...kill the poor and elderly!

Let the rich swim around the Miami high rises!

[BigmanPigman]

9. I was thinking the same thing.

[Kentonio]

11. The only country that has tried in modern times is China

And they were called authoritarian monsters for it.

[L. Coyote]

19. One woman, one child, one century, one billion.

Approximately as we move past the point where the math is accurate. More like add a generation at this point. Nonetheless, an inevitable necessity in a shrinking world.

[Duppers]

32. Most do not want to face this fact.

So, thank you.

Have seen posters say we have enough, we just need to better use assets such as green energy and distribute wealth. Nope.

[BigmanPigman]

35. Funny you mentioned this now since I was just discussing this with a friend.

She is smart and realistic yet believes that we just need to be aware and work together to achieve results through science, individual responsibility and world powers working together. I don't dare mention birth control, etc since so many pro- lifers and religious people jump all over me. It is similar to another reply that mentioned China and how their mandate was "monstrous".

[Duppers]

36. "Monstrous" Ha! There we go.

We could discuss this here but we'd probably upset folks.

I've tried to broach the big picture with folks, to only repeatedly be brushed off. We're a hopeless species.

I've a hub's story about NASA that I'll tell you about when I'm feeling better. (Can't believe I trust myself to post with 102° temp.)

[misanthrope]

46. Not just climate change but the entire Anthropocene extinction.

We have gobbled up habitat at alarming rates and combined with our pollution, overfishing, changes to the oceanic temperatures, salinity and pH levels reduction to water tables, altering the flow of rivers, et cetera then it is easy to see what we have wrought with our escalating numbers.

[guss]

12. Melt

This is what the US Map Looks like if the Ice caps Melt.

[d_r]

18. Think about

How polluted the oceans would be if Florida went under water

[KingCharlemagne]

53. all those dead Republicans :) - nt

[BigmanPigman]

23. Where did you find this info?

[guss]

24. National Geo

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-melt-new-shoreline-maps/

[Not Ruth]

13. It took 50,000 years for the last sea level rise of 10 feet

So this is a problem.

[dalton99a]

15. +1

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. That was the draft from 2 years ago; the peer-reviewed version appeared last year

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/03/22/james_hansen_sea_level_rise_climate_warning_passes_peer_review.html

Abstract. We use numerical climate simulations, paleoclimate data, and modern observations to study the effect of growing ice melt from Antarctica and Greenland. Meltwater tends to stabilize the ocean column, inducing amplifying feedbacks that increase subsurface ocean warming and ice shelf melting. Cold meltwater and induced dynamical effects cause ocean surface cooling in the Southern Ocean and North Atlantic, thus increasing Earth's energy imbalance and heat flux into most of the global ocean's surface. Southern Ocean surface cooling, while lower latitudes are warming, increases precipitation on the Southern Ocean, increasing ocean stratification, slowing deepwater formation, and increasing ice sheet mass loss. These feedbacks make ice sheets in contact with the ocean vulnerable to accelerating disintegration. We hypothesize that ice mass loss from the most vulnerable ice, sufficient to raise sea level several meters, is better approximated as exponential than by a more linear response. Doubling times of 10, 20 or 40 years yield multi-meter sea level rise in about 50, 100 or 200 years. Recent ice melt doubling times are near the lower end of the 10–40-year range, but the record is too short to confirm the nature of the response. The feedbacks, including subsurface ocean warming, help explain paleoclimate data and point to a dominant Southern Ocean role in controlling atmospheric CO2, which in turn exercised tight control on global temperature and sea level. The millennial (500–2000-year) timescale of deep-ocean ventilation affects the timescale for natural CO2 change and thus the timescale for paleo-global climate, ice sheet, and sea level changes, but this paleo-millennial timescale should not be misinterpreted as the timescale for ice sheet response to a rapid, large, human-made climate forcing. These climate feedbacks aid interpretation of events late in the prior interglacial, when sea level rose to +6–9 m with evidence of extreme storms while Earth was less than 1 °C warmer than today. Ice melt cooling of the North Atlantic and Southern oceans increases atmospheric temperature gradients, eddy kinetic energy and baroclinicity, thus driving more powerful storms. The modeling, paleoclimate evidence, and ongoing observations together imply that 2 °C global warming above the preindustrial level could be dangerous. Continued high fossil fuel emissions this century are predicted to yield (1) cooling of the Southern Ocean, especially in the Western Hemisphere; (2) slowing of the Southern Ocean overturning circulation, warming of the ice shelves, and growing ice sheet mass loss; (3) slowdown and eventual shutdown of the Atlantic overturning circulation with cooling of the North Atlantic region; (4) increasingly powerful storms; and (5) nonlinearly growing sea level rise, reaching several meters over a timescale of 50–150 years. These predictions, especially the cooling in the Southern Ocean and North Atlantic with markedly reduced warming or even cooling in Europe, differ fundamentally from existing climate change assessments. We discuss observations and modeling studies needed to refute or clarify these assertions.

http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/16/3761/2016/

[BigmanPigman]

22. Very interesting, thanks!

[Achilleaze]

17. Massively declining value forecast for Mar a Lago

Soon to be known as "The Swamp formerly owned by the republican Draft Dodger in Chief, Comrade Casino."

[jpak]

25. Don't Cry for Me Mar-a-lago

[greymattermom]

28. It's new name will be

Mar-y-lago

[enid602]

31. waterfrofnt

Time to buy waterfront property in Pine Bluff, Arkansas!

[democratisphere]

26. Wall Street will be underwater in more ways than one.

[hatrack]

27. And call me crazy, but it could well be way faster than that . . .

You know, kind of "faster than expected."

[trof]

29. I'm 9' above mean sea level (MSL)

But I'm 76 and I'm pretty sure I won't be here to see it.
I should sell now.

[L. Coyote]

44. My grandfather's farm in Holland is below sea level. Has been for a long time now.

But how high can dikes be built? When all the ice is gone, the water will be 70 feet higher.

[Bleacher Creature]

30. And yet Florida keeps voting for Repuplicans

[Duppers]

33. Great thread.

Thanks for putting it in GD where more will see it.

[AuntPatsy]

43. Rec.

[Doodley]

50. Say goodbye to the following US cities:

http://www.climatecentral.org/wgts/10ft/CitiesList-10ft-SLR.html

[Blue_Adept]

51. Woo! Not on the list! Maybe I'll have some better access to the ocean by then.

[L. Coyote]

54. what Earth will look like if we melt all the ice

https://www.treehugger.com/climate-change/what-earth-will-look-if-climate-change-melts-all-ice.html

National Geographic has a good, but disturbing, interactive map showing what 216 feet of sea level rise will do to coastlines around the world.



All the water:

[Yavin4]

55. The coastal elites will have to move into the red states. n/t

[Sancho]

57. I'm 2 miles from the Gulf. Not sure if I'll live to see this, but it's crazy to ignore it.

http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/study-sea-level-rise-may-severely-impact-tampa-by-2040/379718201

http://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/water/this-is-how-rising-sea-levels-will-reshape-the-face-of-the-tampa-bay-area/2249781

https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=8726520
This link shows the measured rise in St. Petersburg, FL. Trump is insane.

[golfguru]

58. Does that mean I will own ocean front property?

I am 7 miles from the ocean and about 10 feet above sea level. Too bad I won't be alive in 50 years to finally be able to own ocean front property.

[Binkie The Clown]

59. Every new study says "quicker, sooner, worse." And still...

...the techno-utopians keep telling us "they" will invent some new magic next Tuesday that will save us all. Ain't gonna happen. Half the people alive today will live long enough to die of catastrophic ecosystem failure, probably in the form of starvation or pandemic.

(You know how us clowns are; trying to spread happiness wherever we go!)