If worry is storm surge on crowded coasts, focus on groundwater & gas withdrawal. Sinking rate 22 CM/yr in some spots to 2 MM/yr rise from warming. Relevant ‘13 paper in Remote Sensing of Environment:
Estelle Chaussard, Falk Amelung, Hasanudin Abidin, Sang-Hoon Hong
We use interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) time-series analysis of ALOS L-band SAR data to resolve land subsidence in western Indonesia with high spatial and temporal resolution. The data reveal significant subsidence in nine areas, including six major cities, at rates up to 22 cm/year. Land subsidence is detected near Lhokseumawe, in Medan, Jakarta, Bandung, Blanakan, Pekalongan, Bungbulang, Semarang, and in the Sidoarjo regency. The fastest subsidence occurs in highly populated coastal areas particularly vulnerable to flooding.We correlate the observed subsidence with surface geology and land use.
Despite the fact that subsidence is taking place in compressible deposits there is no clear correlation between subsidence and surface geology. In urban areas we find a correlation between rapid, patchy subsidence and industrial land use and elsewhere with agricultural land use. This suggests that the subsidence is primarily caused by ground water extraction for industrial and agricultural use, respectively. We also observe subsidence associated with exploitation of gas fields near Lhokseumawe and in the Sidoarjo regency. A continuation of these high rates of subsidence is likely to put much of the densely populated coastal areas below relative sea level within a few decades.
“Stadium wave signal predicts that.current pause in global warming could extend into.2030s..” It’ll be interesting to see if IPCC or this Wyatt/Curry thesis matches coming years best. Details from Georgia Tech:
‘Stadium Waves’ Could Explain Lull In Global Warming
One of the most controversial issues emerging from the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) is the failure of global climate models to predict a hiatus in warming of global surface temperatures since 1998. Several ideas have been put forward to explain this hiatus, including what the IPCC refers to as ‘unpredictable climate variability’ that is associated with large-scale circulation regimes in the atmosphere and ocean. The most familiar of these regimes is El Niño/La Niña, which are parts of an oscillation in the ocean-atmosphere system. On longer multi-decadal time scales, there is a network of atmospheric and oceanic circulation regimes, including the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.
A new paper published in a recent online edition of the journal Climate Dynamics suggests that this ‘unpredictable climate variability’ behaves in a more predictable way than previously assumed. The paper’s authors, Marcia Wyatt and Judith Curry, point to the so-called ‘stadium-wave’ signal that propagates like the cheer at sporting events whereby sections of sports fans seated in a stadium stand and sit as a ‘wave’ propagates through the audience. In like manner, the ‘stadium wave’ climate signal propagates across the Northern Hemisphere through a network of ocean, ice, and atmospheric circulation regimes that self-organize into a collective tempo.
The stadium wave hypothesis provides a plausible explanation for the hiatus in warming and helps explain why climate models did not predict this hiatus. Further, the new hypothesis suggests how long the hiatus might last.
Building upon Wyatt’s Ph.D. thesis at the University of Colorado, Wyatt and Curry identified two key ingredients to the propagation and maintenance of this stadium wave signal: the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) and sea ice extent in the Eurasian Arctic shelf seas. The AMO sets the signal’s tempo, while the sea ice bridges communication between ocean and atmosphere. The oscillatory nature of the signal can be thought of in terms of ‘braking,’ in which positive and negative feedbacks interact to support reversals of the circulation regimes. As a result, climate regimes — multiple-decade intervals of warming or cooling — evolve in a spatially and temporally ordered manner. While not strictly periodic in occurrence, their repetition is regular — the order of quasi-oscillatory events remains consistent. Wyatt’s thesis found that the stadium wave signal has existed for at least 300 years.
The new study analyzed indices derived from atmospheric, oceanic and sea ice data since 1900. The linear trend was removed from all indices to focus only the multi-decadal component of natural variability. A multivariate statistical technique called Multi-channel Singular Spectrum Analysis (MSSA) was used to identify patterns of variability shared by all indices analyzed, which characterizes the ‘stadium wave.’ The removal of the long-term trend from the data effectively removes the response from long term climate forcing such as anthropogenic greenhouse gases.
The stadium wave periodically enhances or dampens the trend of long-term rising temperatures, which may explain the recent hiatus in rising global surface temperatures.
“The stadium wave signal predicts that the current pause in global warming could extend into the 2030s,” said Wyatt, an independent scientist after having earned her Ph.D. from the University of Colorado in 2012. READ THE REST.
.@Reuters jumps PNAS embargo & utterly botches story on new @PIK_climate study of sea level rise per degree warming.
Story headline: “Models point to rapid sea-level rise from climate change”
Paper title (italics added): “The multi-millennial sea-level commitment of global warming”
Paper: “[W]e are committed to a sea-level rise of about 2.3 meters [per 1ºC] within the next 2000 years.”
At least Reuters got in a solid quote from lead author Anders Levermann that makes the right point on the right time scale:
"Continuous sea-level rise is something we cannot avoid unless global temperatures go down again," Levermann said. "Our results indicate that major adaptation at our coastlines will be necessary. It’s likely that some currently populated regions can’t be protected in the long run."
Excellent post on clashing #fracking worldviews on new @PsychToday blog, #Anthropocene Mind. Excerpt:
The debate about fracking’s merits reveals the power of our core ideological beliefs. When Yale researchers polled a sample of Americans, they found that opinions lined up according to political orientation. Conservatives tended to support the practice and its economic boost while liberals tended to oppose it, fearing environmental harm. Feygina, I. Jost, J.T., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2010) see the glimmer of System Justification Theory (SJT), in such divergent political perspectives.
According to SJT, we need the world to be stable and predictable, to have companions, friends and lovers, and to feel physically and emotionally safe. Why change economic, political, and social systems that are working in our favor? Viva the status quo, especially when we feel threatened by something new. System justification gets us through the day. We go to school, the office, market, fields, or factory despite the paralyzing pain, fear, and violence of the daily news. It blinds us too, making us skirt inequality and danger.
Revisiting ‘11 post on whiplash effect as science & society intersect: [S]cience is a stutter-step, hopscotch style journey full of zigs and zags on all kinds of timescales. When you put that kind of process in the distorting environment of a policy fight, the temptation to overstate (in both directions) is essentially akin to a “positive feedback,” to adopt the parlance of climate research.