Rising sea levels to hit California hard by 2100

[Eugene]

Source: Reuters

Rising sea levels to hit California hard by 2100

By Deborah Zabarenko
WASHINGTON | Fri Jun 22, 2012 6:56pm EDT

(Reuters) - Seas could rise higher along the California coastline this century than in other places in the world, increasing the risk of flooding and storm damage, dune erosion and wetland destruction, the U.S. National Research Council reported Friday.

Rising sea levels have long been seen as a consequence of climate change, because as the world warms, glaciers melt and contribute water to the Earth's oceans. At the same time, ocean waters tend to expand as they heat, pushing sea levels higher.

The report looked at how much seas could rise by 2100 along the U.S. West Coast, and found that the water off California's coast from the Mexican border to Cape Mendocino could rise between 16.5 inches and 66 inches by century's end, compared to what they were in 2000.

The high end of the range is higher than the projection for the global rise in sea levels, which runs from about 20 inches to 55 inches, scientists said in the report.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/22/us-climate-sealevel-california-idUSBRE85L1H920120622

[kestrel91316]

1. We have steep coastlines. It will hit FL a lot harder.

[XemaSab]

2. Steep coastlines except for, you know

LA, the Bay Area, San Diego, Humboldt Bay, Stockton, Santa Barbara, and half of the other cities and towns in the state.

[kestrel91316]

3. I live in LA and most the county has quite steep coastlines. The south bay has significant bluffs.

Long Beach is more at risk. Santa Barbara slopes upward significantly and has high bluffs. The Oxnard Plain is more potentially problematic.

[hunter]

5. In terms of area, yes.

But collapsing bluffs have always been a problem in California. Rising sea levels with accelerate that process.



http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/docs/MMDL/FLD/Feature.cfm?ID=32

[petronius]

7. And we'll lose a lot of our wetlands. Even if they can adjust quickly enough

to rising SL, development upstream and inshore of most wetlands would limit where they could expand to...

[tinrobot]

8. See for yourself

Here's a nice app that shows the sea level rise.

http://flood.firetree.net/

The article says it would be a maximum of about 66 inches, which is less than 2 meters.

If you plug 2m in, you'll see that most of the coastline stays reasonable intact. In SoCal, the naval base in Oxnard, parts of San Diego, and Santa Barbara get affected. In Northern California, San Francisco Bay, Stockton, and Watsonville all get affected. Further north, Eureka is affected.

But generally, the state survives fairly well. The East Coast of the US gets affected a lot more.

[CreekDog]

11. your "eyeballing" and crude, irresponsible conclusion is ridiculous

not to mention, completely unreliable and unscientific.

[FloridaJudy]

13. La, la, la, la

In a few decades, I'll have some nice, beach-front nearby here in central Florida.

Of course, my place will be pretty much uninhabitable, what with the lack of fresh water and the astronomical AC bills and all...

I probably won't live that long, but I pity anyone who does.

[CreekDog]

10. Oh? Not really.

(yes, Muscle Beach, the Baywatch Beach)

(Pacifica, California)

(Mission Beach San Diego)

(San Francisco Bay Estuary)
(yes, for some reason, the comment I'm responding to suggests sea level rise is most catastrophic at ocean/land interfaces, neglecting the substantial lands that occur in estuaries, which are, guess what? at sea level)

(also, if sea level rise inundates a wetland and destroys it, then the role of wetlands in the ecosystem, to cleanse the water and provide habitat will be lost --a disaster to our habitat, as humans, that is unimaginable)

never ever discount the power of environmental change.

[SoutherDem]

4. Yet, since none of the living Republicans will still be alive

They do not care.

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. Here's an interactive flood map to see what that would look like.

http://flood.firetree.net/

[bananas]

9. "an earthquake of magnitude 8 or more could cause waters to rise by an additional 39 inches"

Such an earthquake is extremely likely.

According to a different article:

The likelihood of a more powerful quake of 7.5 magnitude in the next 30 years is 46 percent.

http://digitaljournal.com/article/294234

So by 2100 we should assume an additional meter rise from a large quake.

[CreekDog]

12. appreciating the newsworthiness of your post and hating the ignorance that minimizes it

and expecting better from DUers, but surprised to not see it in some cases, though thankfully, rare among our community.

denial of the impact of climate change which is based on ignorance or uninformed denial is irresponsible.

[OnlinePoker]

14. This report has a pretty big margin of error with, in some cases, sea level falling, not rising.

"For the California coast south of Cape Mendocino, the committee projected that sea level will rise 4 to 30 centimeters by 2030, 12 to 61 centimeters by 2050, and 42 to 167 centimeters by 2100. For the Washington, Oregon, and California coast north of Cape Mendocino, sea level is projected to change between falling 4 centimeters to rising 23 centimeters by 2030, falling 3 centimeters to rising 48 centimeters by 2050, and rising between 10 to 143 centimeters by 2100. The committee noted that as the projection period lengthens, uncertainties, and thus ranges, increase."

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=13389