News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Sea levels 'to rise a metre this century' 

Sea levels 'to rise a metre this century'

27 Oct, 2008 03:25 PM
Sea levels will rise by one metre this century, according to German scientists who warn that global warming is happening faster than previously predicted.

Citing UN date on climate change, two senior German scientists say that previous predictions were far too cautious and optimistic.

Earlier estimates predicted a rise of 18cm to 59cm in sea levels this century. But that estimate is woefully understated, according to Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, who heads the Potsdam Institute for Research on Global Warming Effects, and Jochem Marotzke, a leading meteorologist.

"We now have to expect that the sea level will rise by a metre this century," said Schellnhuber in Berlin.

He said it is "just barely possible" that world governments will be able to limit the rise in average global temperatures to just 2 degrees Celsius by the end of the century, if they all strictly adhered to severe limits in carbon dioxide emissions.

Those restrictions call for halving greenhouse emissions by 2050 and eliminating CO2 emissions entirely by the end of the century. But the German researchers said the resulting limited increase in temperature is predicated on strict adherence to those restrictions without exception, and even then there are many variables which could thwart the goals.

Schnellnhuber, who is official adviser to German Chancellor Angela Merkel on climate-change issues, said the new findings employed data unavailable to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for its most recent global warming report.

The two experts said the IPCC report had been based on data up to 2005 only, but since then ice loss in the Arctic had doubled or tripled. Schnellhuber charged that 20 per cent of the loss of the ice sheet on Greenland could be directly linked to the added carbon dioxide emissions from new Chinese coal-fired power stations.

The new sea level predictions, according to Schellnhuber, are based on studies of melting Himalaya glaciers and the shrinking Greenland ice cap.

He blamed the rapidly diminishing size of the Greenland ice cap on soot particles from Chinese coal-fired power plants.

"That is truly a global effect," he said. Soot settles on the ice, preventing the ice from reflecting as much sunlight back into space.

The result is that the ice absorbs sunlight rays, raising the temperature of the ice and causing it to melt.

"Air pollution plays a massive role in the accelerating pace of climate change, he said.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Be careful the, UN data has proved to be notoriously iincorrect. Prviouse data from the UN has been shown to have incorrectly places the decimal point two places to the left of where it should have been. How can this institutions data be relied upon.
Posted by Maxwell, 27/10/2008 4:21:06 PM
Amazing stuff when you consider that in the 1960's the top ranking scientists and United States generals truly believed that Russia was making atomic weapons on the dark side of the moon (due to miss-reading gamma rays or something) but when scientists warn us about rising sea levels global warming they shrug them off claiming one lame excuse after another. Time is running out like the water from the Murray so now is not the time for saying the UN have got it wrong.
Posted by Dave, 27/10/2008 6:56:59 PM
At 39, I've endured decades of feeling like I'm watching a horror movie unfold whilst helplessly strapped into my seat. Reoccurring scenes are updating with subtle, or worse,(like this article) aggressive upswings in the certain demise of our precious victim. Tragically, she is held hostage by greedy individuals that want to exploit her for their gain alone. She has lots to give too, without them having to really give back either. Let's face it - she's cheap. And with things like coal, oil and gas to give up - she's damn easy too.
Posted by PeterPaul, 27/10/2008 7:57:31 PM
Not to mention the climate models they rely on suggest temperatures should be rising due to rising CO2. But despite the CO2 rise, where's the warming?
Posted by Nutzy, 27/10/2008 8:36:03 PM
Although I think 1 meter rise is still a conservative estimate (historically it is 3-7 meters given the temperature rise expected): A one-meter sea level rise would wreak particular havoc on the Gulf Coast and eastern seaboard of the United States. Every U.S. East Coast city from Boston to Miami would be swamped.
Posted by dobermanmacleod, 27/10/2008 9:29:14 PM
Arctic ice is reaching normal quickly see cryosphere today or here http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Ext ent.png Antarctica ABOVE anomaly see "cryosphere today", temps have been FALLING since 2002 see here http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/MSUvsRSS-m.html
Posted by jason, 28/10/2008 11:15:54 AM
This is poor science. Sea levels have been rising for the past 20,000 years, and slower for the past 600 years. Current rate is about 0.8mm/year, though it's slowed down in the last few years. There's no evidence that the rate if rise will increase - only wild theory not backed up by observation or data.
Posted by R James, 28/10/2008 2:14:12 PM
Surely this can be viewed as nothing more than speculative science? Obviously they could not have possibly predicted the current rate of coal-fired power plants growing throughout Asia, back in the '80's? (Or, maybe they couldn't conceive that we'd be still burning Coal for our Energy in 2008!?) This is an evolving science, another example: A current Antarctic Expedition is promising more insight again that will definitely change figures - up or down - but it will mean the same. There are two important facts we all know: 1; We know fossil fuels are extremely detrimental to the environment. 2; We know it requires massive change throughout the world, at great cost. When we look at it simply like that, no wonder we get discrepancies of information bantered about when things like ancient methane capture is thrown into the Frey. How can we possibly get correct, unbiased information fed to us, when digging for coal and drilling for oil are so lucrative and convenient? How long must the people watch this happen, when the only real COST, is to the Earth? Unfortunately, it's not quite as easy as money, when we can just go and print another one when it runs out.....
Posted by PeterPaul, 28/10/2008 8:16:50 PM
I really love the ignorant lemmings bleating that climate change isn't happening and it is all speculative. My personal experiences (shrinking glaciers in Europe since 1967) and professional knowledge (I'm a scientist involved in modelling dynamical systems) indicates that we should indeed be concerned. The artificial financial debacle is but insignificant compared to the coming problems if we don't work on living sustainably on the only planet that supports us, Earth.
Posted by Concerned Canberran, 29/10/2008 4:59:25 PM
Concerned Canberran - involved in modelling - isn't that where we enter the data that proves our theory?
Posted by Bear, 30/10/2008 11:26:37 PM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.

Most popular articles

Australian Running Festival

Feb Best Buys


The Canberra Times







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...