Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
No serious scientist is talking about 15 metres. The most doomeristic are talking 2 metres in 100 years. Big deal...

And that's only if

  1. The climate models are actually correct.
  2. BP, IEA and everyone but the IPCC has strongly underestimated the amount of recoverable fossil fuels on our planet.


Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Tue Sep 8th, 2009 at 11:06:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh yes?
If Antarctica goes, it's actually around 30 meters. Before taking dilatation into account.

Some rather major bodies of ice lying on the sea floor are already considered doomed in the next few years in Antarctica.

As for 2 metres, no it needs absolutely no underestimate of the recoverable fossil fuels. On the contrary, the already discovered reserves are about twice as big as needed to get +2-3°C on the current models, and so far they have always proved to underestimate the ice melting.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Tue Sep 8th, 2009 at 03:02:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The rate of sea-level rise has increased in the period from 1993 to the
present (Figure 1), largely due to the growing contribution of ice loss from
Greenland (Box 1) and Antarctica. However, models of the behaviour of
these polar ice sheets are still in their infancy, so projections of sea-level
rise to 2100 based on such "process models" are highly uncertain. An
alternative approach is to base projections on the observed relationship
between global average temperature rise and sea-level rise over the
past 120 years, assuming that this observed relationship will continue
into the future. New estimates based on this approach suggest a sealevel
rise of around a metre or more by 2100

http://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/press-releases/files/synthesis-report-web.pdf

The above recently doubling of the estimate to around 1 meter by 2100 is based on a linear extrapolation from previous data. Hansen argued a couple of years ago that the linearity assumption should be questioned, and that if rapid collapse of the arctic and antarctic glaciers were to occur, quick rises of sea level beyond the 1 meter range could result.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19526141.600-huge-sea-level-rises-are-coming--unless-we-act-no w.html?page=1

Many civic projects related to flood control are financed and designed with 100 year time frames, so large uncertainty in this area is difficult from both the technical and the political viewpoints...

by asdf on Tue Sep 8th, 2009 at 07:52:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series