2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report
description
Transcript of 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report
![Page 1: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report
A Brief Critique
By Dave BurtonMember, North Carolina Sea Level Rise Risk Management
Study Advisory Committee (NC SLRRMS)
Raleigh, NC Nov. 15, 2011
Slides will be here: tinyurl.com/ncleg2burton
![Page 2: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
How Much Sea Level Rise Should We Expect by 2100?
![Page 3: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Claim:
(p.3): “This report synthesizes the best available science on SLR...”
No, it doesn’t!
But the Report’s problems are far from unique.
![Page 4: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Climate misinformation is rampant
http://www.nsf.gov/about/history/nsf0050/arctic/seaice.htm
On the National Science Foundation web site…
For example…
![Page 5: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Climate misinformation is rampant
http://www.nsf.gov/about/history/nsf0050/arctic/seaice.htm
…and any competent high school science teacher could tell you that it is nonsense. (Archimedes!)
On the National Science Foundation web site… for 6.5 years!
![Page 6: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Climate misinformation is rampant
http://www.nsf.gov/about/history/nsf0050/arctic/seaice.htm
Finally fixed … after 6.5 years!
![Page 7: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
NOAA’s list of159 GLOSS-LTT tide gauges
• Sea level rises or falls at different rates in different places: -8 mm/year to +6 mm/year
• Median: +1.1 mm/year (4” / century)
• Geographically-weighted average: +1.1 mm/year *
![Page 8: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Why it varies: Subsidence & uplift
• Crust of the earth floats on a ball of molten magma, and it’s sloshing!
• Post-glacial rebound (GIA) – mostly uplift
• Water, oil & natural gas wells – subsidence
• Northeastern NC has less bedrock than SE NC
![Page 9: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Why Duck?
Problem # 1Science Panel Report
• Wilmington: 75 years• Southport: 75† years• Beaufort: 58† years• Duck: 24* years!
† With gaps
* 32 years available for Duck, but only 24 used
“A drawback to [NC] tide gauges… is that most of them don’t extend back in time more than 50 years, making it difficult to resolve changes in the rate of rise”[2010 NC SLR AR, p.6]
![Page 10: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Why Duck?
Problem # 1Science Panel Report
![Page 11: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
and around 3 mm per year (0.12 inches/yr) over the last fifteen years.
Problem # 2Science Panel Report
Claim (p.6): “Currently, MSL is rising at a rate of approximately 2 mm per year (0.08 inches/yr) if averaged over the last hundred years,
Mythical acceleration
The rate of MSL rise has increased in response to global warming.”
![Page 12: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
• “2 mm/year” comes from averaging and adjusting coastal tide station trends
• “3 mm/year” is measurement of a different quantity (satellite-measured mid-ocean sea level).
Problem # 2Science Panel Report
Mythical acceleration
![Page 13: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
2010 NC SLR AR predicts huge acceleration in SLR
Problem # 2Science Panel Report
Mythical acceleration
![Page 14: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
• No actual increase in rate of SLR in last ~80 years!
Problem # 2Science Panel Report
![Page 15: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
CO2 is up…
but…+1 ppm/yr +2 ppm/yr
![Page 16: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Tide gauges show no acceleration
(Graphs downloaded from NOAA.gov)
![Page 17: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Tide gauges show no acceleration
At 25% of the GLOSS-LTT tide stations, LMSL is falling
![Page 18: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Tide gauges show no acceleration
(Not since 1930, anyhow)
![Page 19: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Tide gauges show no acceleration
![Page 20: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Tide gauges show no acceleration
Wilmington is the only GLOSS-LTT tide station in NC
![Page 21: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Tide gauges show no acceleration
Last 20 years:
Full record(76 years):
![Page 22: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
But what about satellite data?
we have about 18 years of it, now
(But see “Great Sea Level Humbug.pdf ” link at nc-20.com)
![Page 23: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Satellites show no acceleration
![Page 24: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
IPCC’s ThirdAssessment Report (2001)
“observational finding of no acceleration in sea level rise during the 20th century.”
![Page 25: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Satellites show no acceleration in SLR,tide stations show no acceleration in SLR,
SO, where does CRC Science Panel get their projected acceleration?
• Church & White (2006)
• Confusion: tide gauge vs. satellite data
• Confirmation Bias
• Rahmstorf (2007)
![Page 26: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Church and White (2006)Their claim: “A 20th century acceleration in global sea-level rise.”
• But “no 20th century acceleration has previously been detected” by other researchers.
![Page 27: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
I told Drs. Church & White about it. Dr. Church replied:
Church and White (2009)In 2009, they posted updated data to their web site.
I applied their regression analysis method to the new data…
Result for 20th century: deceleration!
“…thank you … For the 1901 to 2007 period, again we agree with your result and get a non-significant and small deceleration.” (June 18, 2010 email attachment)
![Page 28: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Sources for the error:
Acceleration myth
• Church & White (2006)
• Confusion: tide gauge vs. satellite data
• Confirmation Bias
• Rahmstorf (2007)
![Page 29: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Sources for the error:
Acceleration myth
• Church & White (2006)
• Confusion: tide gauge vs. satellite data
• Confirmation Bias
• Rahmstorf (2007)
![Page 30: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Bias
NASA JPL Climate Symposium, Oct 24, 2009 (Lee=Leung Fu)
![Page 31: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Bias
![Page 32: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Sources for the error:
Acceleration myth
• Church & White (2006)
• Confusion: tide gauge vs. satellite data
• Confirmation Bias
• Rahmstorf (2007)
![Page 33: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
“the Science Panel believes that the Rahmstorf method is robust and 1.4 meters a reasonable upper limit for projected rise.” [2010 NC SLR AR, p.11]
Problem # 4Science Panel Report
“In hindsight, the averaging period of 11 years that we used in the 2007 Science paper was too short to determine a robust climate trend…[Stefan Rahmstorf's 2009 mea culpa, on the RealClimate blog ]
“It turns out that Rahmstorf has pulled an elaborate practical joke on the Community…” [Steve McIntyre]
More on Rahmstorf’s Method here: tinyurl.com/rahmstuff
![Page 34: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
• Rahmstorf “projected sea-level rise in 2100 of 0.5 to 1.4 meters above the 1990 level.” (110 years)
• 2010 NC SLR Assessment Report projects for a 90 year period
Problem # 5Science Panel Report
![Page 35: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
All of the IPCC scandals have been about their exaggeration of global warming and its effects:
IPCC “Conservative?”
• Climategate• “Hockey stick”• Melting Himalayan glaciers goof• Extreme weather events error [1]
• African crop yield error• WWF sourcing scandal
“IPCC estimates are conservative…” [2010 NC SLR AR, p.7]
![Page 36: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
•Last ¾ century of anthropogenic CO2 (>30% increase) caused no acceleration in SLR.• Irrational and unscientific to presume that the next ¾ century will be different.
We’ve done the experiment!
![Page 37: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Errors:• Cherry-picked a single, outlier tide station (Duck, NC)• Conflated coastal tide gauges with mid-ocean satellite
data, creating the illusion of accelerated SLR• Used discredited “Rahmstorf 2007” method, and
exaggerated even his predictions
Realistic projection for Wilmington and Southport is only about 7” by 2100 (10” for Morehead City, 16” for Duck)
![Page 38: 2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814a94550346895db7a1a6/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
2010 North Carolina Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report
A Brief Critique
By Dave BurtonMember, North Carolina Sea Level Rise Risk Management
Study Advisory Committee (NC SLRRMS)
Raleigh, NC Nov. 15, 2011
Slides will be here: tinyurl.com/ncleg2burton