Canaries and Coal Mines
The following article was written by blindboy:
September 16 2012 is unlikely to be remembered far into the future, not because the record set that day was unimportant but because it will be broken again so rapidly. It was the day when the extent of the Arctic sea ice reached its lowest ever level. To add a bit of context to that, the six lowest ever levels have been recorded in the last six years.
If it seems a stretch to get from ice in the Arctic to surfing in Australia it helps to consider that sea levels are rising at about 3mm a year according to CSIRO data. This has been occurring for decades and will continue, and in all probability accelerate, into the future. Those of you who remember your year seven science will no doubt be quick to point out that melting sea ice has no impact on sea level. Try it with an ice cube in a glass if you like. The level doesn't change as the ice melts.
The importance of the sea ice is not that it contributes directly to sea level rise but that it is increasingly seen as the canary in the coal mine of climate change. This is our big warning that things are changing. The canary is not dead yet, there is still some sea ice left, but it is in palliative care. The chances are that the Arctic will be ice free in summer within a decade or so. We are already observing the thinning and destabilisation of the ice cover in Greenland and Antarctica, and melt water from that does add, significantly, to sea level rise.
In the unlikely event that all the Antarctic ice melted, sea levels would rise 71 metres. More realistically the sea level rise over this century is likely to be in the order of 1 metre. If you are sceptical about that, the Australian government apparently is not as several years ago they commissioned detailed maps to be made of the effects of a 1 metre rise.
Of all the impacts of climate change and sea level rise their impact on surfing must rate as one of the more trivial but, as surfers, we should consider what they will be. Many surfers of my generation would claim that we have already seen some of the impact of rising sea levels in the steady deterioration of the banks at a large number of east coast beaches.
In this case it is hard to distinguish between the effects of sea level rise and the effects of other factors such as loss of dunes and the impact of man made structures. My fearless prediction is that within a decade or so it will become much easier to make that distinction. Increased erosion will lead to slower recovery from the winter storm season so the steep beach profiles that drive the banks deep will last longer. Add to that the risk of increased storm intensity and the future of our beach breaks and sand points does not look bright.
If anything the future looks even worse for the reefs we love to surf in Indonesia and the Pacific as they are threatened from so many directions. Fertiliser run off stimulates plagues of coral eating starfish. Sea level rise lessens the light reaching the photosynthetic algae in the coral polyps limiting growth. Small water temperature changes, in either direction, can cause catastrophic coral death. Increased dissolved carbon dioxide levels lower the pH of the ocean making it more acidic reducing the ability of corals to build reefs.
There will always be waves but unfortunately we cannot be sure that there will always be the variety and quality of structures necessary for us to ride them. We can't really do much about climate change. Reducing your carbon footprint is all very well but at a time when China is planning something like 400 new (Australian) coal burning power plants, it is not really the issue. The scientific community, despairing of having their warnings generally ignored over the last 40 years, is increasingly focusing on methods to reduce the impacts of climate change rather than to prevent the changes themselves. We should probably be doing the same.//blindboy
Comments
I'm going to cop some flack for this, I can hear the comments already, insensitive, thoughtless..........
Don't go all negative, think of all the new breaks. Secret spots emerging everywhere, breaks improving. The whole QLD coast will available to swell with all that extra water over the swell blocking GBR. The GBR could potentially become the new Fiji with the extra bit of water over the top of the reef. The possibilities are endless.
The climate is always changing. Life adapts. Ho hum.
If you are worried about your carbon footprint (and I'm not) then stop flying in aeroplanes.
Oh, and by the way, has anyone checked the Antarctic ice levels lately? They are bigger than ever.
"The climate is always changing. Life adapts. Ho hum. "
Well that seems a cavalier and frivolous statement. Ever stopped to think about the rate of change?
@ oh really
Regarding the increasing size of the Antarctic ice sheet. That's actually completely expected under climate change. It has been forecast by scientists some time ago. You can read about it in the technical report on water systems written by the IPCC back in 2008. You can find it here:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/technical-papers/ccw/chapter2.pdf
But to save you the trouble, I've pasted a key sentence on that point below:
"GCMs indicate that, overall, the Antarctic ice sheet will receive increased snowfall without experiencing substantial surface melting, thus gaining mass and contributing negatively to sea level."
So you see, the increasing Antarctic ice sheets are completely consistent with the expectations of climate scientists and the projections for climate change and global warming.
If nothing else, we should be able to sell ice to the eskimos soon
dydave that's classic!
Pakis with big bombs worrys me more
I just went on google earth and it shows even less ice than in picture one.
@stunet - not cavalier, just tired of being brow-beaten by shoddy science and doomsday predictions. Sorry if I sounded dismissive of blindboy's concerns.
@binski - IPCC? Really? They have been thoroughly discredited. If you are interested in investigating, here's a place to start. http://joannenova.com.au/2011/03/new-here-the-ten-second-guide-to-the-wo...
Cheer up guys - the sky isn't falling.
Everybody should be concerned with climate change and not dismiss it.
Yes the world climate has warmed and cooled many times over millions and billions of years.
The point is unless from a sudden catastrophic event climate change takes thousands of years if not millions of years to change from one constant to another.If a human being can witness change in his or her lifetime then you know something is seriously wrong as normally it would change so slow we can't possibly notice in the short years that we live.
The fact that this can be proved with data is even more scary.
For us who love riding waves things will change for ever.Breaks will just be gone and new ones appear.At the current rate by the end of the century Shark Island will be surfed at low tide and will be totally fat at high.Food for thought.
@oh really,
I saw a cartoon once that pictured a 'climate summit' with a speaker on stage listing all the benefits of life without fossil fuels:
- Sustainability
- Less pollution
- Healthier children
- Functional cities
And a climate sceptic in the audience stands up and says, "What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"
That cartoon echoes my thoughts on why we should transition away from carbon-based resources. I'm not completely convinced of the science either - truth is I'm a bit confused by it - but then what have we got to lose?
I believe the climate is changing but so am i. Every day i get fatter and balder. I didn't put solar pannels on my roof and tanks on my storm water to save the world, i put'em in to save me money, because as we get better at using less resources the companies who control those resources will only increase the cost to the end user to keep their bottom line.
sigh...another person who just discovered Jo Nova. I shouldn't have bit on this one.
Where to begin. When someone cites Jo Nova as an authority...gees why did I bother.
Tell you what mate, if you really want to dig deeply into this issue, like really get into it properly, then read the primary literature. Read the published papers that inform the IPCC reports (I'm sorry but that haven't been discredited). Don't read blogs that are second and third hand regurgitations of "facts".
Here's a nice one for you to start with...
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0442%281999%29012%3C216...
It's about the contributions of the antarctic and greenland ice sheets to sea level rise and was published in the Journal of Climate. It's nice and simple but contains the predictions that the antartic ice sheet would grow. It was published 13 years ago. Amazing hey!?
If you find that stuff a bit too complicated, perhaps ponder why the people who do understand papers like that think that people like Jo Nova are wrong. And before you jump on the weak argument that it's all about the money and they're just in it for the cash or something, think how much money people as smart as that could make playing the stock market or some other way.
Anyway mate, I'm not really interested in debating with you on here if you're gonna throw lame comments that the IPCC have been discredited when you consider yourself "informed" having read a few bloggers. Read the work of actual scientists and then I might be interested in chatting with you.
Oh and if you're tempted to believe that there's some conspiracy preventing scientists from publishing work that would actually disprove or dramatically change the current understanding of climate, then realise that the first person who can do that will be hailed a hero and probably win the Nobel prize for physics.
See ya.
Well put Benski, it's hard not to bite with some of these guys.
In regards to polar sheets melting away at this point in time and over the past few years, I wonder if that has anything to do with snow levels in Australia this year if at all. I.e Extra moisture evaporating into the air and having to fall elsewhere as rain or snow over nearby landmasses. Our cool weather seems to push as southerlies from the arctic... and falls on Aus when it meets warmer air and Low systems are created. And we had a huge season this year with a 2m base of snow at Perisher at one point. Highest in 12 years apparently.
Are the sheets shifting a few thousand K's North perhaps for a temporary 4-5 month holiday spanning late June to early October? (remember we are lucky some years to get 3 months of good snow). This year the season opened early and closed late because of good falls.
Hey Benski interesting read.
Everyone has a viewpoint and I believe your close and well educated.
I have a theory I would like you to take some thought in regard to the Antarctic ice shelf increasing and negating the sea level rise and would be interested in your viewpoint.
The temps are warming and are having a great effect on the Arctic but the Antarctic shows signs of increasing.If the South pole region was increasing due to the the oceans freezing up more and more each winter I would believe that there cannot be a sea level rise as mentioned.But the Antarctic is increasing through snowfall while the north is melting away.It's not becoming bigger by using the resources of the southern oceans by freezing water to ice its getting bigger from atmospheric snowfalls.So my theory goes the bigger the rock you put in the middle of the bath tub the higher the water will go.
I believe one day the north pole will be gone and the south much larger than it is now.There will be more water from the north spread out and the south pole rock that's sitting in the bath tub of water will be bigger displacing water by the shear size of it and hence sea level rise.
Apologies for the simplistic bath tub analogy but I'd prefer to chat in layman's terms.Cheers
My understanding is that Antartica is a continent with a large land mass under alot of ice/snow surrounded by sheet ice, where as the artic is sheet ice without the landmass/continent. Greenland etc is on the outskirts.
Excuse my ignorance, but I don't quite understand how with global warming/climate change(call it what you will) the artic is melting but the antartic is increasing. Is it shifting weather patterns eg warmer patterns in the norhtern hemisphere, cooler in the southern????
@ Benski
Wow! You made quite a few assumptions about me there. I'm hurt!
I read your article. It was referring to a computer model. That's not Science!
When you can find some real data that suggests catastrophe, then I'll, I'll, I'll ..... move south.
Cheers
fitzroy, I'm outta time today to respond properly so I'll go brief.
Basically from my understanding climate change occurs differently in different places. This is a poor analogy but just as you can have a day that is hotter in Melbourne than it is in Townsville despite Melbourne being further south, climate and how it changes varies across the world too. So the forecast and what is occurring is that the warming will be greatest at the poles (but possibly just the arctic, I can't remember) than elsewhere. I think there are some places where the average temp isn't forecast to change much at all. That's why it's not called global warming by scientists. They call it climate change. It's true that the average temperature over the entire globe is going up but it's going up differently in different places.
Anyway, to the ice thing. The arctic is solely sea ice so it won't affect sea levels too much. It will a bit from thermal expansion (water is at its greatest volume at 4 degrees c) but as someone said above, melt the ice in a cup and the level doesn't change much. The greenland ice sheet is the big one because it's on land and so the addition of all that water as the ice melts will raise sea levels.
Antartica is growing cos its mountains catch precip as storms wrap around the higher latitudes. Precipitation is expected to increase down there so Antarctica will catch it a lot of it, thereby increasing its ice coverage. I don't actually know how the sea ice vs land ice is expected to shake out though. But suffice to say it's not expected to compensate for the loss of the greenland ice sheet by catching all the extra precip on land, otherwise we wouldn't have an issue with sea level rise. It'd just be changes of weather patterns.
redsands
I'm not a climate scientist myself so I'm going off my own understanding which is far from perfect. But I am a scientist in a different field so I don't mind digging through papers to try and get my head around something.
Not sure I understand your theory properly but I don't think that is how it will play out. From my understanding sea level rise will occur because of land based ice (greenland mainly) entering as water. I guess it will be mediated a bit by additional ice in Antarctica but only ice that falls on land as rain or snow. Any additional freezing of water around the continent (ie sea ice) wouldn't affect it I don't think...same reason as the ice in the cup. Refreeze that ice in the cup and it won't change the level too much, it will a bit but not appreciably. While the surface area of mass of land and ice will be bigger the sea ice will still be water floating on the surface.
Also just to clarify, since Antarctica isn't floating on the surface, any additional ice on the land mass won't increase sea levels either because it's not adding volume to a floating object.
Anyway, that's a quick not particularly well thought out reply (long tho sorry!) but I gotta bail to get some work done. Hopefully it's not totally unclear.
oh-really..."I read your article. It was referring to a computer model. That's not Science!"
OK mate. Whatever you say.
Is that map of Aus. right?Is it really 70m. or 7m. either way it looks great, a long held dream of mine would be to get rid of flinders island. Easterly swells in bass strait, now that will be something.can't wait, just turned all the light in me house on.
hotter temperature = higher humidity = sealevel has moved, ummm, not much.
How does the tin foil hat brigade explain ocean acidification? Thats pretty much what sealed the deal for me that burning shite loads of coal and other fossil fuels if not the best idea.
Back to the comment about the snow melt on Greenland, it has been postulated that if that happens the amount of cold water it dumps into the ocean could upset the gulf stream. If this stopped circulating in its current way all hell would break loose converting northern europe into Canada. Nice thought another ice age.
No offence Blindboy .
But posting a map of Aust, with 70M AHMD rise is putting this into the Alarmist category .
Antartic Ice isn't Going anywhere . The entire Ice sheet would have to melt to obtain a 70M rise ........ ( unless of course this was an Editorial inclusion Stu ??? )
Apart from the Science being settled , I'm all for the elimination of Ineffieciencies . But just like Short Period Temperature rises , Short Period Energy generation shifts will end in Headaches ...
Considering it usually takes 20 odd years to build less technical Infrastructure , why would someone want to rush Through a Transition that is not fully prepared and Proven .
Again Australia has the Luxury of being last behind much of Europe , the America's and Asia(Japan) In the Technology stakes . But we try to jump ahead with a Solution , when the above mentioned are all wavering on the Brink of Destruction from Doing just what we intend .
The mistakes and lessons learnt elsewhere are not being avoided as people Rush to " fix " the problems that more advanced countries have failed .
Cause = Alarmism .
Let's not even go near the Fact that all Four IPCC reports have well over shot the Mark . And the continued stall of Global Temps , has interupted " their runaway Temperature ' . Forecast's .
Exponential my Arse .
1970's The science said Global Cooling .
1990's Global Warming
2000's Climate Change
2010's Climate Disruption .
What next .
Note I'm not a Climate Scientist . But please do define one ......
Nothing coming about from any of the findings from IPCC has been Smart/Accurate . It's just been Fast .... Strangely as pointed out thats what computers are good for . But when all the Info isn't fed into them they just fall short of correct every time .
If they can't get the ENSO forecast right out to 6-9 mths what chance the Global Temps' in decades to come .There are just too many variables.
Please save this already sensationalist site from more heated debates.
Deja ve.
There are numerous examples here in Australia and all over the world that an individual's acceptance or otherwise of the science on man made climate change has little to do with the science itself but more to do with the way that person views the world and their place in it.
Personally, I find all this very odd because every single one of us accepts science in our daily lives in food, medicine, computers, transport etc etc so why deny the science in this area?
So thanks for the article, it was good to be updated on these things. The worry for me about such developments are the negative impacts on wildlife ... polar bears and whales to name two. Like children in war they are the pure and faultless but the they will suffer the most.
I have watched past forum topics on Swellnet swirl back and forth over 50 plus entries over a few weeks and the frustration levels boil over at times. With respect to all I no longer have time to engage people with positions contrary to the known and validated science; I just get on with things I do to help the environment. Its the way I keep happy and sometimes sane.
Peace.
Good post Rattle, sensible words.
@Southey,
The map of Australia was an editorial inclusion but I strongly deny there is anything alarmist about it. The article includes a line, "In the unlikely event that all the Antarctic ice melted, sea levels would rise 71 metres" so therefore a graphic matching the text is fitting. Blindboy used the word 'unlikely' so do you expect me to also include that in the caption of the map? Would that make it less alarmist?
Love that map. gotta love the lost city of torquool. haha
Thanks for the comments. It wasn't my iintention to start a climate change debate though I suppose it was inevitable. That said there are a few points I would like to make. The first is that no-one seems to have mentioned the thermal expansion of the oceans or feedback effects. If you are interested in the topic you should research those issues. The second, in relation to southey's comment is that this was first predicted early in the 19th century by a scientist called Arrenhius. It was included in a Geology course I did in the early seventies so it is not a new idea. Finally, yes I was dumb to include the Antarctica comment, I should have referred to the Greenland data which is relevant. As long as we have ozone depletion and circumpolar winds Antarctica should be OK.
The debate I wanted to start was "What can we as surfers do now to mitigate the effects of sea level rise so that people might still have a reasonable variety of breaks in 50 or 100 years time?" this is our problem, we did it. In HST's words we will be seen as a generation of swine having enjoyed 100 years of cheap energy and caused 1000 years of climate instability in the process. Any ideas? I will be keeping a watch on comments for the next couple of hours.
Oh and thanks to benski for the great work in presenting the science.
What makes us surfers any different from the rest of humanity? If the predictions are realized it won't just be a minor shake up along the coastal fringe it'll be widespread chaos effecting every interconnected ecosystem. I don't think surfers shouldnt see themselves as anything different, special or that they somehow have more to lose.
I agree derra83. There is nothing special about us and the impacts on surfing are trivial compared to the bigger picture but, at the same time, I think we have some responsibility to try and preserve the surfing experience for future generations.
My apologies Blindboy, I understand what you were saying in your post and I know this is on a surfing website but i get frustrated by the whole issue. FWIW i dont think much can be done. The best you can do is use less resources and take a stand. Don't expect you'll make a difference but if the situation becomes dire you can tell your grandkids with an honest conscience that you knew it was wrong and you did something.
I live in an old 50's beach shack that is basically at sea level with a small dune about 1 metre high between me and the ocean. It's on a coastal reserve and has a lifetime lease with a clause that if my house is flooded by the sea it can never be rebuilt.
About 25 years ago there was a scare and some shacks were lost but nothing like that has happened since. Every winter I wonder if it this could be the year but can't say I've noticed any significant ocean level rise. I'm not a sceptic but wonder when the water is gonna come over the dune. In the meantime im just taking it one day at a time and loving my beachfront lifestyle while it lasts!
No apology necessary derra83. I am over frustration myself. It is our greatest stuff up of all time but humans will survive. You can take as much personal responsibility as you like in terms of your lifestyle but in the end it is a collective problem and the solutions have to be collective so no, you won't find me cycling to work or refusing to fly. My basic point is that, regardless of anything else, surfing has an intrinsic value and it is worth planning to preserve it.
i suppose the +1M AHD map of Australia wouldn't have go the attention you were seeking ay Stu ....
The thing is i was always taught to question what someone was desperately " trying to SELL " to me .
Sciences' meaning itself is to question everything . And science is never settled , it evolves ....
Albert Einstein once said ,
" No amount of Experimentation can prove me Right , a Single Experimentation can prove me wrong . "
Not that much of what is " consensus " is experimentation/ practise , but mere Theory .
Owing to this Einstein Quote :
"In Theory , Theory & Practise are the same . In Practise they are not . "
Reality will belittle us all , as today Ethics become Tomorrows Eightees Fashion . Not something to enjoyably reflect back on !
And lastly being an Optimist , we will change , the Earth will change . " Its Evolution Baby " ........
A.E .
" Learn from Yesterday , Live for Today , Hope for Tomorrow . The important thing is to never Stop questioning . " !!!!
Thanks , Pete .
southey skepticism is the ultimate scientific value so by all means stay that way on climate change but just make sure you are not being taken for a ride by the vested interests. Remember smoking and lung cancer and how the tobacco companies funded anyone prepared to cast doubt on the relationship between smoking and il health? Well that was nothing compared to the funding the fossil fuel industry has spent trying to discredit climate change. There are too many heavily funded "climate institutes" to mention before you even consider the professional mouthpieces of talk back radio and our friend Rupert's tabloid hacks.
If you want to be skeptical more power to you but look carefully at your sources, don't be deceived by the professional deceivers.
Point of my last comment is I could well be the canary!
Sorry yorkessurfer, I missed your comment before. Sounds like you're down the coal mine without a respirator there but enjoy it while you can. If you are under 30 though I would be definitely looking for a property with better long term prospects. Find a climate change skeptic (southey might be interested) sell at a profit and reinvest a couple of meters (at least) higher up.
Blindboy .
I'm probably at about the same Sea level as Yorkessurfer .....
I work in the Alternative Energy industry ( a bit of conflict of Interest [ Inversed !? ] ) .
Look up and Measure how high above Sea Level the CSIRO Marine & Atmospheric Sciences Property is at Aspendale ( Victoria ) . The day they shut up shop is the Day I'll consider Relocating .
PS. I don't live Near there , but they are my Canary !!!!
Alarmism , Breeds Irrational Mistakes .
See " Insulation Scheme " , " Solar Rebates " , etc etc .
We need considered approaches not Knee jerk Reactions of well minded but miss directed efforts .
No argument there Southey. My point is that the sea is rising, beaches will lose sand and reefs will be damaged. We still have a window of opportunity to plan for how we, as surfers, should respond to this. I will probably post on what I think we should be doing sometime next week.
Well if I had the money, I would be buying up land in low lying coastal areas and building islands with perfect reefs so waves can peel each side.
There is something for all the surfing architects to think of, in future when you design a house, if it is a waterfront mansion design it so when it get covered by the ocean it creates a nice sucky wave.
Can't wait for the tide to come in, use more coal, it's there for us to burn.
That will open up a legal can of worms too, as I would own the land under the water surrounding the island.
Cheers for the interesting read blindboy. As a punter I'm pretty uninformed on the issue aside from what can be gleaned from the mainstream media so the unbiased writing is always appreciated.
A lot of strong opinions on this topic and both sides of the argument are well presented. At the end of the day with any environmental issue some people seem to see the bigger picture and some don't; but mostly there's a bunch of us in the middle who have flashes of motivation but for any number of reasons we never really convert it into action. I think regardless of what you believe about climate change ( and my mind is not set either way) there's no denying that there are some fundamental problems with the way we treat our environment and the way we treat each other. Finding the motivation to change is the biggest hurdle
Well if the sea rises it will go back to how it was 100 years ago . If you look around any cliff face you can see the tidal marks in the landscape . Norther'n Beaches for example Narrabeen was mostly under water 100 years ago and now the Narrabeen Lakes is so low that if the lake was open to the sea full time it would drain empty like curl curl , same with Queenie lagoon and Dee Why Long Reef is drained out so low that it would nee many Meters of rising sea to get it back to healthy again .
What we are suffering from now is ocean tidal fall not a rising sea . All my information is from what i have observed and from being educated at Narrabeen high and those excellent excursions around Narrrabeen Lakes that we would go on very often looking for fossils in the shale rock .
lukesripping, you're right in terms of the sea level once being higher in the Sydney region but you are wrong about the time scale. I will try to find the data but I have a vague memory that the last significant change was a drop of about one metre around 10,000 years ago.
.....make that 5-6000 years ago with good data for minimal change from 2000 years ago until the end of the 19th century.
yorksurfer ..... ah the joy of taking one day at a time. All power to you.
This is a good explanation of the trends in ice at the poles.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22349-why-sea-ice-records-are-pole...
.......and I found the link to the maps the government has prepared. Check out your local area!
http://www.ozcoasts.gov.au/climate/sd_visual.jsp
Interesting link regarding what's happening to the poles blindboy, thanks. Pity the link regarding sea level rises only covered Adelaide and not regional South Oz where I live.
Of more importance- floyd I've been trying to train my dog to do the front paw stand as shown in your profile pic! Any tips?
Yorksurfer, you already walk the middle path, the illumination you seek is within you.
yorkesurfer what are you doing having a dog living in a coastal reserve.
sorry for being off topic folks.
A coastal reserve is not a national park so their is no restriction on pet ownership. Same as cactus, it's a coastal reserve too and if you have been there it's a doggy paradise!
Biggest issue is snakes. My neighbour has a cat(shock, horror!) and the little fucker got bit by a snake 2 weeks ago. It pulled through but it cost $1000 in vets bills!
This might be a naive (or very stupid uneducated) question, but does the runoff from major rivers throughout the world have anything to do with the ocean rising? Maybe theres no way to stop oceans rising.
@ Yorkes $1000 bucks on a cat!!!!! That's crazy talk, I thought the best way to get rid of snakes was throw a bag full of kittens into the bush and those little natural born killers will play havoc on the reptile population in a region. The added bonus is when the snakes have been thinned out you get the sport of thinning the cats out afterwards.
Deanafroth, Google "water cycle"
Basically the sun causes water in the oceans and rivers to evaporate, then as it rises it forms clouds and these clouds rain over land (and ocean) filling in the rivers and streams which then return back to the ocean.
So it's all contained in one cycle, the problem with the ice melt in the Arctic and longstanding glaciers is that the balance is being thrown out of whack. Also a warmer Earth and oceans as a whole leads to higher sea levels because the higher the average water temp, the more volume it takes up.
Hey deanafroth dont listen to craig, you may have stumbled onto something, appropriate action might be to start building an ark ASAP, ( but don't take cats on board, we can do without them I reckon)
Deanfroth is onto it, We can build dams on all major rivers in the world and on these water catchments wave machines can be built into them with with various reefs built so there is more than just one wave from the swell produced. It will fix this environment thingy with the sea rising so we can use the brown coal to power the wave machines. The greenies wont be able too argue with that as the dams will have fixed that and if they fell that badly about it they can colonize Mars and start from scratch and they can stuff planet up.
Yeah, send em to Mars.
I asked you to go outside when you broke wind Shaun.
All this breaking of wind isn't helping this environment thingy situation either Shaun, contrary to Morris's advice it might be best to contain it indoors , btw are we still on topic?
Yes, it's just a little side note Neil. If you really are THE real Neil!!!
Yeaaahh
Blindboy said:
"What can we as surfers do now to mitigate the effects of sea level rise so that people might still have a reasonable variety of breaks in 50 or 100 years time?" this is our problem, we did it. In HST's words we will be seen as a generation of swine having enjoyed 100 years of cheap energy and caused 1000 years of climate instability in the process. Any ideas?"
This one is tough. Areas that have formed and are used now might be quite underwater so hardly breaking in the scenarios being presented for the future. The geology that will be then exposed to the ocean will not immediately form things like defined new ledges, sandbanks and reefs. Think of Jan Juc, with the water lapping at the cliff base. Not much surfing there. But then imagine the Maroochy Rivermouth and estuary completely inundated, but new waves breaking on a new shoreline.
What can we do? OK, as you suggested, reduce our carbon footprint. If that is the cause, reduce it. Keep looking out for the canaries - as surfers we are usually more in tune with the environment than most people around us. Then go proactive, establish synthetic trees that take carbon out of the air proactively. In this role we might be forced into being 'Environmental Manager' as Tim Flannery suggested. Be careful not to do too much CO2 sequestration, or we will be snowboarding in the Otways.
Revegetate/Replenish with water, the land. The dreaded carbon exchange will put a value on storing carbon and money will flow into those things that do this, including mature forest. Right as 9 billion live on the planet and need arable land for food production - perhaps combine the two in permaculture. Have a look at Peter Andrews' "Back from the Brink" for an Aussie perspective on this. Revegetate urban areas to reduce heat bloom. Using technology, if predictions of increasing level begin to come true, deliberately engineer features that will create good surf. Pioneer work is being done on artifical reefs, it would be easier to make one on land if you know that land will be underwater in the future.
That's my 2c. I'm not sure if GW is man-made or not personally, after having read hours and hours worth of information on both sides.
Shaun How dare you question my neilness
The water lapping the cliffs at Jan Juc... torquay under water, can't see anything wrong with that, let's just do a better job of looking after the new coast of the future.
Looks like the ABC just caught up with Swellnet...
http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2012/11/19/3634514.htm
Thanks for the link benski. I think the statement that "Australia's wave budget won't change that much." needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt. If you consider the whole coast then Australia has a lot of beaches in a natural condition complete with dune systems to allow for an orderly retreat. Unfortunately the vast majority of surfers live in locations with severely degraded beach systems with minimal capacity for retreat. How will Manly, for example, fare?
In terms of reefs I think the conclusion is even more optimistic. I don't know of too many spots that are at their best under current maximum high tides, but I know plenty that need low or mid-tide conditions. Experts, by definition, have a narrow area of knowledge. In this case it may well be possible to know a lot about beaches but very little about surfing. Until they come up with something more solid than guesswork I will remain scetical of their Goldilocks forecast.
Try this:
http://www.climatechangeinaustralia.gov.au/documents/resources/TR_Web_Ch...
p.24 Australian sea level rise 1.2mm/year 1920-2000.
I'd suggest that even if this rate doubles, more damage will occur from either a) increase in frequency of severe storms - which is not supported by this research summary anywhere apart from possibly NW WA or b) increase in size of storms/surges which is undetermined, and c)any feedback loops that may occur which dramatically increase the rate of sea level rise. For a 70m rise, that's a lot of 1.2mm years. Or 3mm years.
As before, as surfers we are the canaries, so keep an eye on your local coal mine...
velocityjohnno, it was never our intention to claim that a 70m rise was probable. The illustration was chosen because it was the only one that showed a significant change at that resolution. If you read the text the claims are much more modest and in keeping with the document to which you have provided the link.
Here's an alarming article regarding the thawing out of permafrost (frozen soil) in the Arctic.
Perma meaning permanently, we are now apparently seeing this permafrost melting, exposing ancient organic matter which is in turn releasing massive amounts of carbon and methane (green house cases) into the atmosphere.
It will take a while to read but it's more than worth it: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/where-even-the-earth-is...
The feedback effects are where the models get scary. As well as the permafrost, there are similar issues with methane hydrates on the sea floor. Essentially, we just do not know enough about these issues to build them into the existing models with any degree of reliability. This is the UN report the article was based on.
http://www.unep.org/pdf/permafrost.pdf
NASA released an article yesterday showing that 2012 was the 9th warmest on record since 1880 and that average global temperatures were 0.6 degC higher than the mid-20th century baseline and has risen 0.8 degC since 1880.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012-temps.html
A quick question for Craig or ThermalBen: are water temps in coastal Vic typical of this time of year at present (March 2013)? The CSIRO chart looks hot and it's somewhere between 20.5 to 22 degrees in the water.
I'm mindful of the WA 2010 warm water event right down the West Coast and onto the South Coast.
The Point Nepean buoy is 19.8 degrees right now. I don't have any access to climatological datasets but off the top of my head this seems to about right for this time of year.
water temp is above normal at the moment by a few degrees...we have just had the hottest 10 days in Vico's history...all over 32 degrees and the surf on the weekend was great and we were all in shorts and ...i surfed in a shortjohn for hours...which i have never done at this time of year.....
Water here has definately got warmer in the summer period from the ol days ...we could never surf in shorts in summer.....
So your telling me Brute that all those old stories of woolen Footy jumpers and shorts were just that . " Stories " . Although most of those were told by guys that far outdated you .
Perhaps there was a previous ocean SST period say perhaps from the 1930's till 50/60's that similar anomalously high temps were seen , and there just wasn't the Data for it ???
VJ , i reckon we may see another strong Leeuwin event in the following months . And the Far west VIC could see the tail end of this come early winter . Here's hoping ....
southey,my forst years surfing in Warnambool,wer is footy shorts and a S/S jumper....summer and winter.....I remember the first time I borrowed a S/S Spring/Dive suit and surfed all day in the middle of winter,thinking how could you ever get warmer than this.
I was speaking to Nick C last year about the water temps down here,and off the top of my soggy ol' memory...30 years ago water Temps here on the surf Coast were about 5 degress colder in summer and 4 degrees in winter....these were all from records that Nick had dug up.....
we have had the water temp rise here over the last 20-30 years.....I still think about surfing 8 degree water in winter in the Bool.....middle of winter...would come out of the water blue.....but......that what surfing was!!!!
I also spent the first few years in a s/s jumper, footy shorts and a garbage bag under the jumper, the bag may have made it less warm. I don't know it was to cold to tell, but at least there was always a fire on the beach. The next generation missed out on the joys of hypothermia, not a care in the world.