But..... those potential waves set us up to deliberately turn deserts green....... which can radically alter the economic and political climate of the Middle East.
According to the tide gauge at St. John since 1939 the long term sea level rise at the current rate will be, by 2100 approx 0.138. Meter or 5.4 inch rise. How will a 5 inch rise affect tides? Probably not much.
Unless...... large scale cracking and sliding of ice on the West Antarctic Ice Sheet or the land based Greenland Ice Pack were to occur.... which would mean that that estimate for the year 2100 was pretty much a joke. Dr. James Hansen has stated that the last time that global temperatures rose by three degrees...... ocean levels rose by about 25 meters over four centuries.......... that would be no joke at all. And even if it was..... it would be one way to unite people around a response to the Soros / Buffet plan.... that I just don't like at all....... http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ge-soros-vs-mark-taylor-and-crazytate.515832/ Warren Buffet and George Soros vs Mark Taylor and CrazyTate?
Meh, the oceans have been rising since the beginning of this inter-glacial and will continue to rise until the next glaciation. Oceans were 5-7 meters higher than today during the last inter-glacial sans SUVs and coal.
True... but now that humanity has Graphene Screens that make large scale desalination of ocean water very cost effective.... we should be discussing alternatives that could be far better than some sort of silly carbon tax or cap and trade system.
Or..... this physics problem..... inspires humanity to a higher level of cooperative win - win - win - win behaviour....... where problems being faced in one nation are addressed by another nation...... thousands of miles away from them?!
I do hope that you are correct about this taking centuries....... because this is also relevant to many residents of Anchorage, Alaska.
This is not all that unusual. It's known as a "Tidal Bore", and generally is an example of a long and narrow river that connects with the ocean, in a direction that has the wind also affecting the tidal flow. Another one that I have visited myself is the Turnagain Arm, outside of Anchorage, Alaska. There they get very similar effects, typically tides of 40 feet or more. This video is awesome, and at around the 10 second mark you can see the incoming tidal bore sweeping from West to East. It is strong enough that in places surfers will surf the incoming bore wave.
Tide levels in Fundy would be completely dependent on local land mass not sea level, just as they would be everywhere else. Your understanding or fluid dynamics is being corrupted by the unique geology and being ignored.
My understanding of fluid dynamics is actually most corrupted by the potential of inducing a lot of fear ..... and perhaps anger.....in the minds of property owners who own homes and land along the parts of the Bay of Fundy where high tide levels are thirteen to fifteen times greater than where I live. You are correct....... "local land mass" that produces a funnelling effect is the most relevant factor along the Bay of Fundy....... and near Anchorage, Alaska where the second highest tides in North America occur, but your phrase, "not sea level" is illogical. Obviously an increase in ocean levels..... that get to be funnelled by that land mass... .is what really matters here. I am looking for a simple and highly quotable reply to this topic that will be worded in a way beyond what I can do.... due to my NOT being an engineer or Physics professor. I need that well worded explanation in order to put a better platform in front of M. P. Bill Casey who represents the residents living in that area of Nova Scotia. http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ump-has-a-4-3-trillion-dollar-problem.525406/ M. P. Bill Casey... President Trump has a 4.3 trillion dollar problem.... ... that you and the people of Cumberland - Colchester are in a perfect position to assist him with.
Wow! Thank you Tecoyah! That is EXACTLY the type of document that I wanted to put in front of Nova Scotia, Canada, Member of Parliament Bill Casey! https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07055900.2012.668670 Climate Change, Mean Sea Level and High Tides in the Bay of Fundy David A. Greenberg ,Wade Blanchard,Bruce Smith &Elaine Barrow ..... ..... Now here is an interesting statistic: ..... ......
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07055900.2012.668670 So if these projections turn out to be relatively accurate then: +0.21 x 15 = 3.15 meter rise at high tide level for Truro for 2055 if the multiplier effect of fifteen follows through. +0.28 x 15 = 5.2 meter rise at high tide level for Truro for 2085 if the multiplier effect of fifteen follows through. +0.41 x 15 = 6.15 meter rise at high tide level for Truro for 2100 if the multiplier effect of fifteen follows through.
Oh my........ http://bathurstsustainabledevelopment.com/userfiles/Sea Level Rise-Coastal Sections-Daigle-2012.pdf Sea-Level Rise and Flooding Estimates for New Brunswick Coastal Sections
It will also be very important to evaluate the effects of expanding volume as oceans warm and the albedo effects of Dark water vs. White ice. https://www.skepticalscience.com/earth-albedo-effect.htm
Yes.... and even the darkened ice and snow of the land based Greenland Ice Pack is scaring scientists due to how much more solar energy it tends to absorb?! Warming of the Greenland ice is a scary prospect indeed!
Particularly concerning the Atlantic conveyor slowing or stopping. https://news.mongabay.com/2016/05/s...atlantic-conveyor-warn-abrupt-climate-change/
Once again, yet another hysterical posting based entirely upon FUD. Now here is some reality. Sea level change has been relatively unchanged in over 7,000 years. The amount of rise has remained pretty consistent, with a few minor changes every few hundred years. Here is what it looks like, on a long term scale: Notice, this scale is in thousands of years. With the level change pretty much falling to nothing in the last 7 millennium. Now here is another one, with a time coverage of around 120 years. And like the last chart, it does not track the rate of rise, but the increase above a baseline. And even though it goes up sharply (because of the scale of the chart), it shows a consistent rise, with no radical increase in the amount of rise. BTW, a great many question the results from 1993 until today, because at that time the method of measurement drastically changed. Instead of doing actual land measurement upon fixed locations it changed to primarily satellite measurements which do not measure differences in land elevation. Of the 230 or so tide monitoring stations used for the post-1993 results, only 70 of them long record fixed locations. The rest "approximate" their data and "extrapolate" their results. To give an example, the town of Juneau actually has lowering tides. And no, the water is not going down there. Because of Plate Tectonics, the land is actually rising. And if anybody wants to see what a real Tidal Bore was like, they should hop into a time machine and go back about 15-20,000 years ago. At that time the San Francisco Bay was first being transition from a river to the feature we know today. And the narrower Golden Gate Passage was much more narrow. It is believed that the tidal bores back then were killer, as the off-shore wind would push huge amounts of water into the bay, similar to what is seen in the Turnagain Arm today. And as an FYI, one of my main interests for over 40 years has been geology. I have even done some prospecting at "Sharktooth Hill", just East of Bakersfield. The resting place of a lot of marine life, laid down around 15 MYA when the central valley was entirely underwater. And as little as 3 MYA, most of Southern California was also under a large stretch of what is now the Gulf of California. As well as the Los Angeles Basin, San Fernando Valley, and most other areas West of the Santa Monica Mountains. So if people think sea levels are high now, they have no idea how high they have gotten in the past, geologically speaking. When the last major Ice Age ended (Karoo, 260 MYA), the Interglacial lasted for so long (until 23 MYA) that dinosaurs and a thriving ecosystem existed. That was an era of no Polar Ice Caps at all. Global mean temperatures were over 10 degrees F higher than they are now, and were so for millions of years. They know that the dinosaurs evolved there, as they have larger eyes than their more Northern relatives (to see better in the long dark winters), that are also more deeply sunken (to not be blinded in the long lit summers). A rather unique evolutionary trait found nowhere else. Many paleontologists would love to be able to do some actual digging down there. Many are now speculating that the distance from the KT event and adaptation to the colder temperatures may have allowed them to survive longer than any of the other dinosaurs on the planet. But since the Antarctic Ice Cap formed around 23 MYA, it is pretty much impossible to really do any looking for them. The closest we can come is the digs in Dinosaur Cove. Today part of SE Australia, around 80 MYA it was only a few hundred miles from the South Pole. And the fossils recovered show it had a lush tropical climate. If I have to bet on global climate based on prehistoric models, I would bet on eventual loss of the ice caps and water levels much higher than they are today. Because in the history of our planet, that is the norm. Having permanent ice caps is not the norm, geologically speaking.
Thank you for this fascinating post.... .and I do indeed agree with your summary of what is probable for the future.
Well... There is less ice... Ice is frozen water. Less ice = more water Ice is shiny Reflects heat from the sun back out into space. Less ice = the planet's absorbing more of the sun's heat.
Exactly........ and the fact that the ice on Greenland is getting darker and dirtier means that it is absorbing more energy from the sun. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/04/180404114735.htm Algae, impurities darken Greenland ice sheet and intensify melting
