The average sea level rise rate for all 157 NOAA tide gauges active this century, is just below 0.7 mm/year.
tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/MSL_global_trendtable.html
The average for all 194 stations (including ones which are now defunct) is higher – at 0.8 mm/year. This indicates that sea level rise rates are slowing this century, and are much lower than the wildly bogus claims of 3.1 mm from the University of Colorado and elsewhere.
The blink comparator below shows CU claims, and the actual rates.
Eighty-eight percent of the NOAA tide gauges show sea level rise rates lower than 3.1 mm/year. This applies for both currently active tide gauges and defunct ones. Almost all of the tide gauges which show 3.1 mm/year are in subduction zones.
The widely used number of 3.1 mm/year is a complete joke.
The Dukes of Hazzards — An inexact exact science……”Predicting sea level rise in North Carolina for the next century is now and will be for an extended period, an inexact exact science.” – NC Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report, NC Coastal Resources Commission’s Science Panel on Coastal Hazzards
The alarmists seem to believe ocean basins are tapered at the top, wine bottle shaped instead of a saucer. No wonder they are so confused about sea level…
Sea rise at Port Arthur, Tasmania is averaging 0.8-mm per year.
http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/HunterTasmania2003GRL.pdf
No one is panicking in Tasmania.
You’re right, it averages out to abour 0.8 mm/yr If you take the median you get about 1.1 mm/yr. If you take all the tide gauge data from the PSMSL arrange them on a gridded map and average it all out since 1993 you will bump it up to about 2.3 mm/yr. If you read what Colorado U says about their data you will find that, In essence, they would like their GMSL time series to be a proxy for ocean water volume changes (not sea level), and if you take their GIA adjustment out it’s only 2.8 mm/yr. So their chart isn’t what it says it is, and it’s likely a whole millimeter too high.
As far as acceleration of sea level goes, Steve Nerem who did the chart above produced this presentation:
“Why has an acceleration of sea level rise not been observed during the altimeter era?”
Here’s the link:
http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com/fileadmin/documents/OSTST/2011/oral/02_Thursday/Splinter%203%20SCI/04%20Nerem%20ostst_2011_nerem.pdf
Go all the way to the last page on that and you will find that Sea level is decelerating to the tune of minus 0.06 mm/yr²
Here’s a screen shot:
http://oi39.tinypic.com/nr14bq.jpg
Bottom line? Sea level is not a problem.
Reblogged this on Globalcooler's Weblog and commented:
In light of the current emphasis on Sea Level Rise in Connecticut and the recent legislation passed in Hartford, this is most appropriate. With the legislated 2.4 inches per decade minimum rise, this makes that laughable. Add to that the 4ft of SLR legislated through a redefinition of the meaning of high tide mark from the “mean high tide” to the highest natural tide of the year. In Guilford, apparently, that means 4.1 ft.increase in the high tide mark thereby stealing many thousands of acres from shoreline land owners. And as you can probably guess the insurance companies, The Nature Conservancy and environmental engineering firms are at the forefront of the legislation. Each of these groups will be the benefactors of these changes.
I’ll panic as soon as they can tell me how high this planet’s sea level should be. And not because we built stuff in places that have been underwater more than above throughout this planet’s history.