ADVERTISEMENT

Thirsty continents are slowing down expected sea level rise, scientists say

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
79,435
62,542
113
Despite the accelerated melting of glaciers and ice sheets, sea levels aren’t rising quite as quickly as scientists anticipated. The reason: Continents are absorbing more of the water before it flows into the seas, according to a new study.

Scientists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory figured this out by measuring changes in Earth’s gravity with twin satellites orbiting the Earth in tandem. Over the past decade, thirsty continents have slowed the rate of sea level rise by about 20%, or about 1 millimeter per year, according to the study published in Science.

The force of gravity depends on mass: The more there is, the stronger the gravitational attraction. And on Earth, the only thing heavy enough and mobile enough to affect the planet’s gravity is water, said John T. Reager, a JPL hydrologist and the study’s lead author.

MORE: Get our best stories in your Facebook feed >>

“That movement of water has one of the biggest effects on the earth’s gravity field,” Reager said.

Each year, Earth’s continents cycle through 6 trillion tons of snow, surface water, soil moisture and groundwater. These stores of water are then gradually released into the ocean, allowing the process to begin again. But the strength of that cycle can vary from year to year and decade to decade, due to natural variability in the weather and climate.

See the most-read stories in Science this hour >>
Over the last century, however, the rate of sea level rise has accelerated as melting glaciers and ice sheets have poured more water into the ocean, and warming temperatures have caused the sea’s volume to expand.

Between April 2002 and November 2014, the years that Reager and his colleagues studied, the sea level rose at an average rate of 2.9 millimeters per year – nearly double the average rate seen during the 20th century, according to estimates from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

That’s fast, to be sure, but still not quite as fast as the scientists would have expected.

To solve this puzzle, the scientists considered a fourth factor: the water stored on land.

Using satellite data from NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission, they were able to measure the water cycle’s influence on sea level for the first time.

GRACE uses a pair of satellites to track changes in Earth’s gravity field. That allowed them to see where the water was and where it wasn’t.

The twin satellites, called Tom and Jerry, constantly chase each other around the globe in an orbital game of cat-and-mouse. When Jerry flies near a massive object like a mountain, the tug of gravity will pull him toward it and the distance between him and Tom will grow.

As Jerry passes the mountain, the effect happens in reverse: The tug of the mountain’s gravity pulls him back, allowing Tom to catch up.

Meanwhile, scientists on the ground measure the change in distance between the two satellites. Those changes in distance reveal how the strength of gravity has changed at different points on Earth's surface.

“In Southern California we can see the pull of gravity decreasing because of the drought,” said Alex Gardner, a JPL glaciologist who worked on the study. “When there’s a big flood event, we can see the pull of gravity increasing.”

750x422

The map shows trends in liquid water storage over continents, measured by NASA's GRACE satellites. Red shows a decrease in storage and blue shows an increase.

(J.T. Reager, NASA /JPL)
Between 2002 and 2014, natural climate and weather cycles brought more rain and snow over land, where it collected in the soils and caused water tables to rise, Reager said.

During this time, the continents soaked up an extra 3.2 trillion tons of water, slowing the rate of sea level rise by about 0.71 millimeters per year.

But the pattern won’t continue indefinitely. Eventually, Gardner said, he expects the continents to start to lose water mass again.

“The land can only hold so much water,” Gardner said. “The expectation is this additional soaking up of water is not going to last forever.”

The only way to abate the rising seas is to reduce the amount of energy Earth absorbs, and the only way to do that is to stop emitting CO2 and other greenhouse gases, Gardner said.

“We can’t compete with the Earth’s system. It’s just so huge,” he said. “Some years are wet, some years are dry. You wait long enough and the climate wins. Climate always wins.”

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-water-land-gravity-sea-level-20160215-story.html
 
Cool, God built in a life raft for us. GW will fill our depleted aquifers and save the day. Praise Jesus!

Yeah....no. Not US anyway. The southern half of the US from the mid-Atlantic to California is losing groundwater. That includes the huge midwest aquifers that supply water for farming.
 
Sea levels not rising?

The Earth is spongy.

The Science is settled.

LOLWUT?

Sea level ARE rising AND that rate is accelerating.

It's just not accelerating as fast as some calculations predict, based upon GRACE satellite measurements showing extreme ice loss.

And, in case all you can read is 'headlines', the same scientists have acknowledged that this trend cannot continue indefinitely; ultimately, the land will saturate and SLR trends will be consistent with land ice losses and warming oceans.

The other caveat, which I don't think is mentioned in the article, is that if the land is soaking up more water and saturating, then it will be more prone to extreme flooding events when it cannot absorb water from seasonal rains.
 
Yeah....no. Not US anyway. The southern half of the US from the mid-Atlantic to California is losing groundwater. That includes the huge midwest aquifers that supply water for farming.

I have always believed that pulling good water out of the ground for irrigation purposes was a bad deal. If you live in an arid area that is consistently dependent on pulling water out of the ground to produce a good crop then you probably shouldn't be farming in that area or should be farming a crop that matches the weather patterns of the area.
 
Last edited:
Sea levels not rising?

The Earth is spongy.

The Science is settled.

"Between April 2002 and November 2014, the years that Reager and his colleagues studied, the sea level rose at an average rate of 2.9 millimeters per year – nearly double the average rate seen during the 20th century, according to estimates from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.That’s fast, to be sure, but still not quite as fast as the scientists would have expected."

reading_is_fundamental.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
LOLWUT?

Sea level ARE rising AND that rate is accelerating.

It's just not accelerating as fast as some calculations predict, based upon GRACE satellite measurements showing extreme ice loss.

And, in case all you can read is 'headlines', the same scientists have acknowledged that this trend cannot continue indefinitely; ultimately, the land will saturate and SLR trends will be consistent with land ice losses and warming oceans.

The other caveat, which I don't think is mentioned in the article, is that if the land is soaking up more water and saturating, then it will be more prone to extreme flooding events when it cannot absorb water from seasonal rains.
Sea levels have risen 200 millimeters since 1870 (according to NASA's coastal gauge) that's less than 8 inches since the Indian Wars. What is the tipping point, or sinking point?
 
Sea levels have risen 200 millimeters since 1870 (according to NASA's coastal gauge) that's less than 8 inches since the Indian Wars. What is the tipping point, or sinking point?

A) It's actually about 9 inches. You are looking at graphs thru only 2005 or so. Since 2005, levels have rise another ~4cm, or 1.5 inches.

B) Sea levels rose only about 3 inches from 1870 to 1940. If the subtraction problem 9 - 3 = 6 is not beyond your level of STEM capability, that means it's gone up 6 inches from 1940 to now.

That means 1) the rate has about doubled pre/post 1940 and 2) it is still accelerating.

What do you mean 'what is the tipping point'? Sea level rise IS NOT GOING TO STOP anytime soon, so long as the oceans continue to heat up due to thermal expansion and land ice from Greenland and Antarctica continues to melt and run into the ocean.

Do Republicans not believe in the physical chemistry concept of thermal expansion?
 
Huh, that would contradict this news release.......From NASA.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...s-show-how-the-world-is-running-out-of-water/

I just keep feeling like the global warming thing is going to turn out like the Spotted Owl BS.

Not really.
Aquifers are deeper water repositories; the water tables they are referring to in the recent study are very close to the surface.

As the scientists noted, this is a short-term effect, whereas aquifer depletion/replenishment for deeper water sources is something which occurs over hundreds to thousands of years.
 
A) It's actually about 9 inches. You are looking at graphs thru only 2005 or so. Since 2005, levels have rise another ~4cm, or 1.5 inches.

B) Sea levels rose only about 3 inches from 1870 to 1940. If the subtraction problem 9 - 3 = 6 is not beyond your level of STEM capability, that means it's gone up 6 inches from 1940 to now.

That means 1) the rate has about doubled pre/post 1940 and 2) it is still accelerating.

What do you mean 'what is the tipping point'? Sea level rise IS NOT GOING TO STOP anytime soon, so long as the oceans continue to heat up due to thermal expansion and land ice from Greenland and Antarctica continues to melt and run into the ocean.

Do Republicans not believe in the physical chemistry concept of thermal expansion?


So...

You're saying sea levels are falling?
 
Despite the accelerated melting of glaciers and ice sheets, sea levels aren’t rising quite as quickly as scientists anticipated. The reason: Continents are absorbing more of the water before it flows into the seas, according to a new study.

Scientists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory figured this out by measuring changes in Earth’s gravity with twin satellites orbiting the Earth in tandem. Over the past decade, thirsty continents have slowed the rate of sea level rise by about 20%, or about 1 millimeter per year, according to the study published in Science.

The force of gravity depends on mass: The more there is, the stronger the gravitational attraction. And on Earth, the only thing heavy enough and mobile enough to affect the planet’s gravity is water, said John T. Reager, a JPL hydrologist and the study’s lead author.

MORE: Get our best stories in your Facebook feed >>

“That movement of water has one of the biggest effects on the earth’s gravity field,” Reager said.

Each year, Earth’s continents cycle through 6 trillion tons of snow, surface water, soil moisture and groundwater. These stores of water are then gradually released into the ocean, allowing the process to begin again. But the strength of that cycle can vary from year to year and decade to decade, due to natural variability in the weather and climate.

See the most-read stories in Science this hour >>
Over the last century, however, the rate of sea level rise has accelerated as melting glaciers and ice sheets have poured more water into the ocean, and warming temperatures have caused the sea’s volume to expand.

Between April 2002 and November 2014, the years that Reager and his colleagues studied, the sea level rose at an average rate of 2.9 millimeters per year – nearly double the average rate seen during the 20th century, according to estimates from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

That’s fast, to be sure, but still not quite as fast as the scientists would have expected.

To solve this puzzle, the scientists considered a fourth factor: the water stored on land.

Using satellite data from NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission, they were able to measure the water cycle’s influence on sea level for the first time.

GRACE uses a pair of satellites to track changes in Earth’s gravity field. That allowed them to see where the water was and where it wasn’t.

The twin satellites, called Tom and Jerry, constantly chase each other around the globe in an orbital game of cat-and-mouse. When Jerry flies near a massive object like a mountain, the tug of gravity will pull him toward it and the distance between him and Tom will grow.

As Jerry passes the mountain, the effect happens in reverse: The tug of the mountain’s gravity pulls him back, allowing Tom to catch up.

Meanwhile, scientists on the ground measure the change in distance between the two satellites. Those changes in distance reveal how the strength of gravity has changed at different points on Earth's surface.

“In Southern California we can see the pull of gravity decreasing because of the drought,” said Alex Gardner, a JPL glaciologist who worked on the study. “When there’s a big flood event, we can see the pull of gravity increasing.”

750x422

The map shows trends in liquid water storage over continents, measured by NASA's GRACE satellites. Red shows a decrease in storage and blue shows an increase.

(J.T. Reager, NASA /JPL)
Between 2002 and 2014, natural climate and weather cycles brought more rain and snow over land, where it collected in the soils and caused water tables to rise, Reager said.

During this time, the continents soaked up an extra 3.2 trillion tons of water, slowing the rate of sea level rise by about 0.71 millimeters per year.

But the pattern won’t continue indefinitely. Eventually, Gardner said, he expects the continents to start to lose water mass again.

“The land can only hold so much water,” Gardner said. “The expectation is this additional soaking up of water is not going to last forever.”

The only way to abate the rising seas is to reduce the amount of energy Earth absorbs, and the only way to do that is to stop emitting CO2 and other greenhouse gases, Gardner said.

“We can’t compete with the Earth’s system. It’s just so huge,” he said. “Some years are wet, some years are dry. You wait long enough and the climate wins. Climate always wins.”

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-water-land-gravity-sea-level-20160215-story.html
Crap, I was hoping my house would be much closer to the ocean sometime soon, it should increase my property value significantly.
 
Crap, I was hoping my house would be much closer to the ocean sometime soon, it should increase my property value significantly.

Probably not. The pristine beach areas are going to be underwater and a hundred yards to maybe a mile offshore; property plots that will become 'beachfront' will have loads of flotsam and garbage from the stuff that went underwater constantly washing onshore....
 
Probably not. The pristine beach areas are going to be underwater and a hundred yards to maybe a mile offshore; property plots that will become 'beachfront' will have loads of flotsam and garbage from the stuff that went underwater constantly washing onshore....

You really think that sea rise will be so fast that buildings will be left to decay under water?

LOL, you guys are something else. Wake me when NASA evacuates Cape Canaveral.
 
Probably not. The pristine beach areas are going to be underwater and a hundred yards to maybe a mile offshore; property plots that will become 'beachfront' will have loads of flotsam and garbage from the stuff that went underwater constantly washing onshore....
It'll just take time to clean things up, and I'll need a lot more than a few hundred yards to a mile. I was thinking 100 miles would be good. That should get me right where I want to be until I'm ready to sell.
 
It'll just take time to clean things up, and I'll need a lot more than a few hundred yards to a mile. I was thinking 100 miles would be good. That should get me right where I want to be until I'm ready to sell.

Right. Because 'cleaning things up' is free. And restoring beach-like areas to spots that used to be strip malls is easy and free, too.....
 
Right. Because 'cleaning things up' is free. And restoring beach-like areas to spots that used to be strip malls is easy and free, too.....
Fish habitat man, sea life will flourish in new, yet unexplored ocean. Leave it to some enterprising investors to take care of cleanup and commercialization of the newly created shoreline. With much less available beachfront, people will pay through the nose, willingly, for a piece of it. It's a different way of letting the 1%ers stimlulate the economy willingly instead of just taking their money and leaving it to the government to spend wisely.

Oh yes, this has great potential, well beyond my initial hope of living a little closer to the ocean.
 
Are you suggesting they will pick this up....

2631759-Hilton-Garden-Inn-Outer-BanksKitty-Hawk-Hotel-Exterior-1-DEF.jpg


...and move it?

No, I'm suggesting that persistent flood events will eventually result in the building being torn down, and protective dunes installed in its place. This is going to be a gradual process that plays out over many decades/centuries.

You realize it's not going to happen like on "The Day After Tomorrow" movie, right?

tumblr_lvm3powJA01qkyqtro1_500.gif
 
Right. Because 'cleaning things up' is free. And restoring beach-like areas to spots that used to be strip malls is easy and free, too.....

They're tearing down old hotels and building new ones in their place on Daytona Beach right now.

You really think strip malls wouldn't be torn down if we didn't have global warming?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT