JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Apocalypse of sea levels coming. Global Worriers on beach should sell up to deniers

Coastal Risk, Sea levels, 2016, climate change.

 

A group called NGIS Australia are helping climate skeptics find cheaper beach-houses. They’ve put up a website called Coastalrisk.com.au and an App to scarify homeowners. There’s a spike coming, it’s accelerating, and we’re talking billions of dollars.

Do I hear tipping point? It’s a tipping point:

At the moment, there are only a few homes impacted by coastal flooding, high tides and storms but Mr Mallon said we needed to brace for a big spike.

“Tens of thousands of homes in Australia — meaning hundreds of millions of dollars in property — are under increasing threat,” he said.

You could say they’ve gone full mental with the fear factor — especially when global sea levels are rising at about 1mm a year (according to a thousand tide gauges). In Sydney, sea levels are streaking up even slower, at 0.6mm a year.

Changes in sea levels in Australia don’t fit the carbon meme too well. Sell up anyway.

Sea levels, Australia, Sydney, Perth, Newcastle, Auckland, NZ.

Australian-NZ seas were changing as fast or even faster before World War II.

 

How many Australians? Seriously…

About 80 per cent of Australians who live near the coast could be the target of rising sea levels, which were predicted in a Climate Council report in 2014.

This is a continent of beach suburbs –  85% of Australians live within an hours drive of the beach.

More than $200 billion of our infrastructure could be at risk, with parts of the country suffering from more frequent, and severe, floods.

All light blue areas on the map show the parts of Australia most at risk of flooding.

Homeowners and investors will also be hugely impacted by rising sea levels.

Look out for psychic market forces:

Climate Valuation Project head Karl Mallon said unknown to most buyers and owners, there were suburbs in every state where houses were devalued due to climate change.

That’ll be all the buyers that devalue something for a factor they don’t know about.

“Extreme weather risk is rapidly driving up insurance premiums and insurers are already refusing to cover large parts of Australia,” he said.

Last time I looked, no one lived in large parts of Australia. But insurers would be wise to steer clear of flood plains below dams that use Tim Flannery Forecasting.

If insurance premiums are up it hasn’t got much to do with cyclones.

Tropical Storms, Cyclones, Australia, Trend

Severe and non-severe cyclones in the Australian region from 1970 – 2011.

Source: Bureau of Meteorology, Tropical Cyclone Trends.

NGIS Australia set up the coastalrisks site — I see half their clients are government and they have a website designed for that market — lots of glossy pictures and otherwise not-functioning. Click a map: “This website is experiencing unusually high volume. We’ll let you know when we can fit you in”.

This site can’t cope with the traffic at 2:30am here in Perth, and 4:30am in Eastern Australia.

h/t

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/1301.0Feature%20Article32004

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.5/10 (54 votes cast)
Apocalypse of sea levels coming. Global Worriers on beach should sell up to deniers, 8.5 out of 10 based on 54 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/jlk69d5

299 comments to Apocalypse of sea levels coming. Global Worriers on beach should sell up to deniers

  • #

    If the science is settled and we adopt all these carbon abatement strategies to contain rises in global temperature, then surely one doesn’t have to worry about sea level rises as well, otherwise what is the point of it all?

    195

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      I belatedly looked up the Coastalrisk link. LOOKS TO ME LIKE PHISHING. Could it be?

      73

      • #
        Dariusz

        All non-geological sea level curves are showing relative sea level change that incorpates to 4 main variables, the absolute sea level change, the tectonics, subsidence and sediment input(related to climate). Fremantle for example, is located on a steadily subsiding coastal plain. When sediment is deposited it usually contains up to 40% of water that is expelled with increasing weight of the overlying sediments. This gives an illusion of sea level rise where in fact we are subsiding in relation to the sea level. This fact is well recognised in geology.
        So how do you know if sea level increases or not? The short answer we don,t usually know. The trick is to look at the rate of change which Jo has included above. Even satellites are incapable of measuring the absolute values. The evaluation of absolute sea level is based on looking at sediment record in tectonically stable areas with no significant rivers. Best to look at the basement rocks like coastal granite outcrops. All other measurements located on soft rock areas are tainted and can be only used with a huge degree of scientific caution.

        170

  • #

    The Climate Council needs to go back to kindergarten. There teacher will hand out the rulers to show teach them about centimeters and millimeters. If they are extra good, they can help do some measurements with water. They can hold the ruler in a bowl whilst teacher pours in 10mm of water. Then teacher will carefully explain that if they are 8 now this is how much sea levels will have risen by the time they are adults.

    265

    • #
      Yonniestone

      “If they are 8 now”, being a bit generous on their mental age there Kevin. :)

      175

    • #
      climateskeptic

      this is how much sea levels will have risen by the time they are adult

      The latest projections are closer to 150cm by 2100 with Antarctica contributing 1m by itself. So the heading could well be correct.

      Apocalypse of sea levels coming.

      351

      • #
        Ken Stewart

        You forgot the /sarc tag, right? You have checked how much Antarctica is “warming”? (Not just the Antarctic peninsula.) You do know the temperature that ice melts?

        234

        • #
          climateskeptic

          Its the volcanoes underneath not from the top down. You need to read more of this blog to get the latest.

          516

          • #
            AndyG55

            So are you now going to blame the volcanoes on “global warming™” ?

            164

            • #
              climateskeptic

              That’s makes no sense Noddy, you sound confused.

              320

            • #
              Boris

              There are currently 41 volcanoes currently erupting on the planet. 34 of these are on the Pacific ring of fire. There are several under the west coast of antartica underwater/ under ice. There is more than 1000% increase in ice/snow volume on the rest on antartica than there was 2 yrs ago. You won’t have to worry about your piddling 10mm or 1m rise, the water will come in at a rush at over 100m height. Better start taking note of all the earthquakes happening at the moment around the Pacific. There are more to come.

              00

          • #
            AndyG55

            WOW, a NON-skeptic AGW cultist finally admits the WAIS issue is LOCAL volcanic activity, and absolutely NOTHING to do with the non-existent GLOBAL warming.

            195

            • #
              AndyG55

              Your mentor from SkS will NOT be pleased with you.

              They may even take back your “P” grade in “climate propaganda 101″.

              124

              • #

                KinkyKeith April 16, 2016 at 2:30 pm

                “Keep on with the jokes, they help to ease the sadness surrounding modern politics and public delusion created in the name of science.”

                What sadness Keith? I have none with all the beer! Sure could use a set of bumper car protectors to help prevent skins and bruises from stumbling about! Seldom need I resort to Glenfiddich!

                30

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Will,

                There are many varieties of Brandy which are as good,if not better than Glenfield at one third the cost.
                :-)

                KK

                10

              • #
                Raven

                AndyG55,
                You think John Cook might have “inoculated” him?

                Come to think of it, does that mean John Cook is practicing medicine without a licence?

                21

            • #
              climateskeptic

              Make up your mind Noddy, either sea levels aren’t rising and the increased geothermal heat flux under Greenland and the Antarctic are BS or the heat flux is real and sea levels are rising. They cant both be right. Thats the problem when you just nod at anything without thinking.

              316

              • #
                AndyG55

                Poor child… The average SLR world wide is around 1-1.8mm/year.. with NO acceleration

                Get used to the facts, little SkS apostle.

                113

              • #
                climateskeptic

                Facts are not the same as Noddy thought bubbles sorry, where do you get this nonsense

                218

              • #
                Robk

                Climateskeptic,
                Nobody is saying the sea level isn’t rising. No body is say some ice isn’t melting. Nobody is saying climate isn’t changing.
                The trendline of the graph is less than 2mm of sea level rise per year.
                It is you who is inferring some exponential change in conditions that is not evident from the graph. To make such a claim you need evidence, as you yourself say. There is no prima facie case to suggest the trend of the graph will change much.

                153

              • #
                climateskeptic

                Here you are Noddy
                http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/sod/lsa/SeaLevelRise/
                and dont tell me its been manipulated. You quoted NOAA before.

                216

              • #
                Robk

                Climateskeptic,
                The graph presents measured facts and is evidence.
                For you to “project” some extrapolation that is way off the charted facts you need a solid argument and some evidence, until I see that I will remain sceptical. You clearly aren’t.

                123

              • #
                Robk

                Your link to NOAA says the trend is 2.9mm +/-0.4. How do you come up with 1500mm in 85 years?

                132

              • #
                AndyG55

                He skipped primary school maths.. did all the “feely” subjects instead.

                103

              • #
                AndyG55

                Gotta love NOAA’s maps

                http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/sod/lsa/SeaLevelRise/slr/map_txj1j2_wysiwyg.pdf

                Shows Sydney area around 4mm-6mm per year. (Sydney tide gauge measures 0.65mm/year)

                OOPS !!!! looks like the satellites are STUFFED and totally irrelevant for purpose..

                Quite funny… keep the JOKES coming, monkey !!

                123

              • #

                Note from article:
                “A group called NGIS Australia”,the only product of this group called NGIS Australia is charts for governmental distribution. Jew wan chart? Hokay, jew tell me wat jew wan chart to imply. We make really good chart for lowest price! No need to trouble jew for data.

                92

              • #
                AndyG55

                Come to think of it, having the trend out by only a FACTOR of 6 to 10…..

                …. that’s pretty good for NOAA. !!!

                103

              • #
                climateskeptic

                OOPS !!!! looks like the satellites are STUFFED and totally irrelevant

                So UHA data is crap then, its the only thing you base your meme on, don’t throw it out so hastily.

                How do you come up with 1500mm in 85 years?

                Easy, I read the science. IPCC say 0.5m and that does not include ice-sheet melt. Antarctic another 0.75m, and that doesn’t include the Greenland melt from all those volcanoes Noddy is so keen on, lets say 0.25m. Do you want me to help you with the maths

                220

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                KlimateSeptic,

                You quote “science” coming from the IPCCCC.

                This body is a political organisation and has no scientific credibility.

                Having you “help with the maths” is areal screamer, love it.

                Keep on with the jokes, they help to ease the sadness surrounding modern politics and public delusion created in the name of science.

                KK

                133

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                KlimateSeptic,

                You quote “science” coming from the IPCCCC.

                This body is a political organisation and has no scientific credibility.

                Having you “help with the maths” is areal screamer, love it.

                Keep on with the jokes, they help to ease the sadness surrounding modern politics and public delusion created in the name of science.

                KK

                54

              • #
                AndyG55

                “So UHA data is crap then, its the only thing you base your meme on”

                Oh dear.. you have just taken the bait and shown that you have zero understanding about the difference between satellite temperature measurements, validated (do you even know what that means) against pristine surface data, and satellite altimetry readings that are subject to quite significant errors, as clearly shown by the Sydney comparison above.

                The Global Positioning System (GPS) inferred vertical tide gauge velocity suffers of significant inaccuracies.
                Larger inaccuracies are provided by the satellite altimetry Global Mean Sea Level (GMSL)”

                83

              • #

                AndyG55 April 16, 2016 at 12:06 pm

                “Gotta love NOAA’s maps Shows Sydney area around 4mm-6mm per year. (Sydney tide gauge measures 0.65mm/year)”

                You know with measuring wave action and all! Perhaps that is the TREND over the entire 24 years of measurement of something, from 100 miles away! Sure is SCARY! GPS itself is ±2 meters in altitude at best. How much is being spent on remote BS?

                103

      • #
        Pauly

        “The latest projections are closer to 150cm by 2100 with Antarctica contributing 1m by itself.”

        The problem is with your assumptions and your belief that averages mean something in terms of climate. Global climate change is apparently not so global, as Ken’s regional charts indicate.
        https://kenskingdom.wordpress.com/

        The satellite temperature record for Antarctica shows a cooling trend that persists across the entire satellite record. Not sure how that will add to sea levels, if you extrapolate it out to 2100.

        203

      • #
        AndyG55

        “The latest projections are closer to 150cm by 2100 with Antarctica “

        Projections by whom?. Not much weight put in ANY projection from the climate glitterati.

        They have done so, so well with temperature, … NOT.!

        123

        • #
          climateskeptic

          Projections by whom?

          I know you try and avoid science to stop it interfering with your political dogma but here goes anyway.

          http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v531/n7596/full/nature17145.html

          218

          • #
            AndyG55

            “Nature”, the climate cult magazine. roflmao.

            Tell me how all the other “projections” are going.

            They are NONSENSE, and even they know it.

            Pity you haven’t thrown off enough of your SkS brain-washing to realise it.

            Look at the data, there is NO acceleration of the current 1-1.8mm/year sea level rise… END OF STORY.

            133

            • #
              climateskeptic

              Noddy the climate skeptic, uses UHA temperature cause they suit his mindset even though you have to go up Mt Everest to verify them and ignores everything else cause its been manipulate and doesn’t follow his meme. You poor nodding dill.

              220

              • #
                AndyG55

                Poor brain-wash dolt.. they really had the hose up full bore, didn’t they.

                Zero brain matter left it seems.

                93

              • #
                Bob in Castlemaine

                So where do you “go” to verify the terrestrial data sets climateskeptic?

                82

              • #
                AndyG55

                UAH and RSS are verified against the only untampered, un-UHI-affected, equally spaced surface data in the world… USCRN

                The trends over the USA are an almost exact match.

                This sample area verifies the data algorithms used in UAH and RSS..

                123

              • #
                climateskeptic

                UAH and RSS are verified against the only untampered, un-UHI-affected, equally spaced surface data

                They dont measure the same thing so how can one verify the other. Such ignorance, what a laugh and you just dont get it. Why dont you use the Mars surface temperature as well.

                222

              • #
                toorightmate

                Be very careful atop Mt Everest.
                It is moving North at about 1.2mm per annum more than sea level is rising!!!!

                92

              • #
                AndyG55

                You seriously DO have the understanding of a monkey.

                Are you saying that CO2 changes the lapse rate, or something dumb like that ???

                Please go back to primary school and start again.. because you sadly missed out the first time.

                83

              • #
                climateskeptic

                Well there you have it, blog proof of warming. Its getting closer to the nth pole but the glaciers are in decline Q.E.D.

                220

              • #
                climateskeptic

                Hahaha, lapse rate… has nothing to do with lapse rate Noddy. Its no wonder there is a world-wide decline in the herring fishery, you have caught them all especially the red ones. Your lack of basic science comprehension is showing again.

                Here is a starter for you
                “The general warming and the increase of moisture content of air, which results from a CO2 increase, contributes to the large reduction of the meridional temperature gradient in the lower model troposphere because of 1) poleward retreat of highly reflective snow cover and 2) large increase in the poleward transport of latent heat. The reduction of the meridional temperature gradient appears to reduce not only the eddy kinetic energy, but also the variance of temperature in the lower model troposphere. The penetration of moisture into higher latitudes in the CO2-rich warm climate is responsible for the large increase of the rates of precipitation and runoff in high latitudes of the model.”

                http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0469%281980%29037%3C0099:OTDOCC%3E2.0.CO;2

                119

              • #
                AndyG55

                CS does a cut/paste.. without a clue what it is talking about. Well done. :-)

                SkS would be proud of you.

                “numerical experiments reveal that the response of the model climate ”

                ie its all based on the same continued erroneous supposition. GI-GO!

                123

              • #
                AndyG55

                “The general warming and the increase of moisture content of air, which results from a CO2 increase”

                HILARIOUS from the very first line.. :-)

                113

              • #
                AndyG55

                OOPS says CS .. goofed yet again.!!

                103

              • #
              • #
                AndyG55

                That pesky thing called REAL measurements, ;-)

                83

              • #
                Robk

                Climateskeptic,
                Your Ametsoc link is a commentary on the modeling of climate not actual climate. Your quote from the abstract talks about how the models (“especially simple ones”) behave.
                For you to use that as evidence is very much a circular argument…..the evidence is the model. Fail.

                113

              • #
                climateskeptic

                “That pesky thing called” unsourced graphs pasted from blogs. Very unimpressive Noddy

                213

              • #
                AndyG55

                Poor CS, has so little knowledge of climate science he doesn’t recognise graphs of basic data, available to anyone, when he sees them.

                Have you really spent that little time actually investigating this stuff !!

                51

            • #
              AndyG55

              Even the Abstract is HILARIOUS to say the least

              “we use a model coupling ice sheet and climate dynamics” wow… Climate models work so well.. NOT.

              “processes linking atmospheric warming with “ except the Antarctic is COOLING

              “applied to future greenhouse gas emission scenarios” roflmao.. the failed GHG warming assumption in all its glory.

              Do you REALLY take that paper seriously? really ????????

              You have GOT to be joking !!

              113

              • #
                climateskeptic

                except the Antarctic is COOLING

                only in your political party

                219

              • #
                AndyG55

                Yawn !!! and the brain-washed SkS monkey produces yet another empty post.

                The Antarctic is COOLING ..

                DENY the data all you like.. its what SkS monkeys do.

                93

              • #
                el gordo

                Yes the word ‘potentially’ is a dead give away.

                The big problem for the warmists is the increasing extent of Antarctic sea ice, for which they have no answer.

                Isn’t that right CS?

                93

              • #
                climateskeptic

                DENY the data

                What data the sky data 10km above the surface that you rely on or the real data?
                https://web.archive.org/web/20080920041805/http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=17838

                You are living in fantasy land nodding at nonsense.

                212

              • #
                climateskeptic

                “The big problem for the warmists is the increasing extent of Antarctic sea ice” not really, most of the models predict it, its just strawman nonsense to say otherwise

                218

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘…most of the models predict it, its just strawman nonsense to say otherwise.’

                I would be interested in a link to verify.

                In the meantime, El Nino is a major mover and shaker when it comes to sea ice.

                https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/global-sea-ice.jpg

                Also, are you aware that the Subtropical Ridge is stuck in the Bight?

                92

              • #
                climateskeptic

                You guys are a laugh a minute.
                Hate to break it to you but AW doesn’t even have a degree, not even in engineering. You might as well ask Miranda Devine or Piers Akerman for your science advice. Why dont we thaw out Walt Disney and ask him for advice on internet use?

                215

              • #
                AndyG55

                Particularly that big February warm spot over northern Russia which hammered the Barents Sea.

                If the Barents Sea had not been effected, Arctic sea ice would have been quite high this year.

                Next year there will not be an El Nino.

                The Northern Atlantic is cooling rapidly.

                The AMO is starting to roll off its peak.

                The end of 2016 could be a really shocking time for the Arctic sea ice worriers.

                113

              • #
                climateskeptic

                Here is the sad reality, it been the lowest in many years and actually below long term average for most of this year.
                https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/graph/Sea_Ice_Extent_S_v2.png

                213

              • #
                AndyG55

                Long term average … what a load of garbage you come out with. You mean the upward leg of the AMO cycle…. cherry picked from 1979.

                Be HONEST if you know what the word means.

                The current Arctic sea ice is almost exactly where it should be for the phase of the AMO.. IGNORE that fact as long as you want.

                You still haven’t learnt a single thing about the AMO, nor the fact that for the first 3/4 of the Holocene there was often ZERO summer sea ice.

                The Arctic sea ice level is actually still VERY high compared to the whole of the current Interglacial. That’s because it still hasn’t properly recovered from the huge extents of the COLDEST period in the last 10,000 years ie the LIA.

                But do keep making your childish, know-nothing statements picked from the inept SkS and other alarmist sites. It displays your immense ignorance every time.

                103

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘…its been the lowest in many years and actually below long term average for most of this year.’

                So you are saying El Nino had nothing to do with sea ice last year?

                With the STR stuck in summer mode the sea ice extent should return to record breaking stuff.

                63

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘Hate to break it to you but AW doesn’t even have a degree, not even in engineering.’

                So what, the story was a guest post.

                http://www.vencoreweather.com/blog/2016/4/11/215-pm-global-sea-ice-makes-a-strong-comeback

                63

              • #
                climateskeptic

                cherry picked from 1979.

                The ignorant nonsense continues. Where do you suggest they get the pre 1979 data from?

                So what, the story was a guest post.

                well…. at least he finished his degree but got no further. Is that the best caliber of posters that Anthony can find and actually his quoted graph shows no significant increase, nor does he say there is.
                http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png

                sea ice extent should return to record breaking stuff.

                OK….. lets wait and see.

                29

              • #
                AndyG55

                Oh look, a company that gets paid for being correct…….

                NOAA can make the horrendously wrong forecasts, but the government money keeps flowing in.
                ZERO accountability except to those in government pushing the climate change farce.

                If Cruz or Trump get in…… let’s watch the NOAA/GISS story change very quickly.

                113

              • #
                AndyG55

                “Where do you suggest they get the pre 1979 data from?”

                roflmao.. yet again you show your ignorance… the satellite data does go back further, bozo.. they just avoid using that part.

                63

              • #
                climateskeptic

                If Cruz or Trump get in

                Neither has a hope in hell

                19

              • #
                climateskeptic

                the satellite data does go back further

                They will be pleased to hear that, give me a link and I promise to pass it on.

                You make all these amazing claims but come up with diddle-squat evidence.

                213

              • #
                AndyG55

                Oh dear, so you admit you don’t know the satellite data goes back further… So funny.

                Seems there is very little you actually do know about anything to do with climate.

                133

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘OK….. lets wait and see.’

                The mechanisms involved are complex, but it strikes me as perfectly rational that the Subtropical Ridge is creating more sea ice.

                Its inability to travel north in winter is a complete mystery.

                92

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘Neither has a hope in hell.’

                Trump won’t get enough support so delegates will desert him for Cruz.

                Hilary should beat her Democratic rival to run for the Whitehouse, but she lacks the debating skills of Cruz. On climate change he is the man.

                91

          • #
            Robk

            Your link to “Nature” is a paper which “projects” a projection which is not tracking reality (measured facts) so it is unreliable.

            102

            • #
              climateskeptic

              Derrr, anything about the future is not yet ” (measured facts)”. You cant be that simple can you?

              215

              • #
                Robk

                Forgive me for not explaining.
                The IPCC’s selected models diverge signicantly from the measured temperature track. As time passes the gap between actual and what was predicted for that time is diverging. The temperature appears to be rising but a lot slower than predicted. The models are wrong. To use those projections to then extrapolate a future sea level is unreliable for that reason.

                143

              • #
                climateskeptic

                The IPCC’s selected models diverge signicantly from the measured temperature track.

                Not so, only in the blogoshere.
                Another dose of reality for you and it doesnt even include the last 12 months. If it did it would be well above the trend line. You really need to research more before you post.
                https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2015/8/11/1439267088234/77baf174-5f5f-4a0f-8a63-d116550434c3-620×515.png?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=715985aa182682008460087c14a35d26
                http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/aug/10/2015-global-temperatures-right-in-line-with-climate-model-predictions

                215

              • #
                AndyG55

                You know CS has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING when he is reduced to using Guardian links !!

                133

              • #
                AndyG55

                And Gavin Schmidt.. one of the main instigators of the temperature data manipulation and fabrication, defending his own ineptitude and maleficence.

                ….. you are getting more and more HILARIOUS with each post.

                Did Jo hire you to make a MOCKERY of AGW alarmists or something?

                Because you are doing an absolutely marvellous job at it. ?

                144

              • #
                climateskeptic

                So these graphs are fabricated too. How so, show us what they should look like Noddy???You never post any science to support your memes, good time to start.

                213

              • #
                climateskeptic

                At least Gavin Schmidt is a climate scientist unlike Anthony Watts the Uni dropout.

                219

              • #
                AndyG55

                Gavin Schmidt is a paid AGW propagandist. Nothing more.

                144

              • #
                AndyG55

                The fox put in charge of the hen house, so to speak.

                Except he really isn’t that cunning except in ducking debates with anyone that actually knows something about climate.

                113

              • #
                climateskeptic

                Gavin Schmidt.. one of the main instigators of the temperature data manipulation and fabrication

                Oh dear, reduced to conspiracy theories again. Why doesn’t someone just write a paper to demonstrate the manipulation or better still, just give me a link to that paper. What are conspiracy theories do you subscibe to. Is the “moon made of cheese?” “Is polio vaccine contaminated with mercury?” Are the worlds energy companies suppressing free energy machines?” There’s a whole loony world out there you will feel quite at home in

                213

              • #
                Robk

                Now we’ve gone from csiro and NOAA to a year old guardian repost which is uncredited.
                I’m sorry, I’ve never seen that graph before, it’s not in IPCC stuff as far as I’m aware.
                I’m calling that B/S unless shown otherwise.

                163

              • #
                AndyG55

                And he is NOT a climate scientist, he is a mathematician.

                He knows very little about climate…

                but quite a bit about manipulating numbers.

                123

              • #
                climateskeptic

                guardian repost which is uncredited

                You need to read more than just the headline. You must be Noddy#3

                212

              • #
                AndyG55

                The evidence that the raw temperature data has been change beyond recognition is indisputable.

                Of course you would think that was quite ok.. all part of being involved in climate science.. change the data to suit the story.

                113

              • #
                AndyG55

                ‘Impact of TRF Error on Global Mean Sea Level (GMSL) Record from Spaceborne Altimetry:

                Impact of TRF on GMSL Record from Tide Gauges: competing approaches for TRF realization yield estimates for sea-level rise ranging from 1.2 to 1.6 mm/yr.

                Refer to post #32

                83

              • #
                climateskeptic

                The evidence that the raw temperature data has been change beyond recognition is indisputable.

                So why dont you write a paper to correct the manipulating then. Until someone does, I’m disputing it, so show me.

                215

              • #
                AndyG55

                I don’t give a stuff if you dispute it or not…… irrelevant.

                There is a massive amount of instances showing “adjustments” to temperature, nearly all of it creating a warming trend.

                That warming trend in some places comes purely from the data adjustment.

                Why don’t you go and do some serious investigating, on your own, about just how much the data has been changed..

                … unless you don’t WANT to enlighten yourself, of course. ;-)

                Stuck in your brain-less mush, unable to think or do anything without SkS direction. Sad.

                103

              • #
                climateskeptic

                There is a massive amount of instances showing “adjustments” to temperature

                Thats right it has all been adjusted, but you show me where the methodology is wrong.

                216

              • #
                AndyG55

                And those “adjustments” just happen to account for most of the warming… how bizarre is that chance. !!

                133

              • #
                AndyG55

                Did you know that in the US, the “adjustments” when put against the change in atmospheric CO2 level have an R² = 0.998

                Just coincidence…………. of course.

                123

              • #

                First direct response to:
                climateskeptic April 16, 2016 at 3:02 pm

                (“Gavin Schmidt.. one of the main instigators of the temperature data manipulation and fabrication”)

                “Oh dear, reduced to conspiracy theories again. Why doesn’t someone just write a paper to demonstrate the manipulation or better still, just give me a link to that paper. What are conspiracy theories do you subscibe to. Is the “moon made of cheese?””

                Please demonstrate any need for conspiracy theory? NASA Goddard, NOAA, and most all of Meteorology has
                “NO” science whatsoever! All of CAGW is but arrogant incompetence in these organizations and that academic discipline.
                If there were a wee bit of science, these folk could easily state the amount of Earth’s atmosphere in kilograms, the calculation thereof and method used to physically verify the assumptions used in such calculation.
                In addition, several theories as to why remains that amount of atmosphere, along with a large list of determining parameters, including temperature and gas mixture species that would have been available way way prior to the establishment of such US governmental propaganda agencies.
                Where is any reliable reference to the composition and amount of Earth’s atmosphere, let alone any science/conjecture of how and why this atmosphere may affect near surface temperatures.
                All the best! -will-

                [I'm not sure what trapped this in moderation but I'm approving it because it's a reply quoting climateskeptic. I almost snipped some of it but decided it doesn't go below the level of prior comments compared to Jo's standards. But accusatory language generally will put a comment into moderation and adds little or nothing useful to the discussion. A word to the wise...] AZ

                10

              • #

                AndyG55 April 16, 2016 at 4:13 pm

                “Did you know that in the US, the “adjustments” when put against the change in atmospheric CO2 level have an R² = 0.998″ Just coincidence…………. of course.”

                This implies that governmental adjustments of historical temperature measurements at any and every location are a linear function of atmospheric CO2! Most likely, and most obscene! I believe I will have another beer!

                123

              • #
                bobl

                Er no, but Polio Vaccine WAS contaminated with SV40 a KNOWN ONCOVIRUS and is possibly implicated in the cancer epidemic we are suffering now.

                History not your strong suit either ?

                10

          • #
            ROM

            Climateskeptic’s reference @ # 2.2.3.1 to the “Nature” paper, Contribution of Antarctica to past and future sea-level rise has this to say in the abstract;

            [ Bolding is mine and no doubt most here will pick up why I have bolded certain words ]

            Here we use a— model —coupling ice sheet and climate dynamics—including previously underappreciated processes linking atmospheric warming with hydrofracturing of buttressing ice shelves and structural collapse of marine-terminating ice cliffs—that is calibrated against Pliocene and Last Interglacial sea-level estimates and applied to future greenhouse gas emission scenarios. Antarctica has the potential to contribute more than a metre of sea-level rise by 2100 and more than 15 metres by 2500, if emissions continue unabated.

            That paper is nothing more than a whole bag full of surmisations heaped on a bucketload of approximate estimates all of which were fed into an unvalidated and unverified “model” as posted in the abstract, which in turn uses the output what has becoming quite clear, are almost universally failed climate models, to provide a proposed scenario for a future climate.
            A future climate for which no evidence exists or can possibly be produced as to its true and still in the future characteristics unless one is a shaman and soothsayer who can predict the future with uncanny accuracy.
            None of this is Science!
            It is mere BS dressed up as some sort of sciencie sounding paper that is designed to ensure the future funding of the author’s of the paper with lots of serious sounding verbage and lots of guestimates, the basis for which NO supporting evidence exists at all when those ice melting / sea level rises
            are projected into the future a century ahead.
            .
            .

            Now to a paper that is based on the actual observed data from the GRACE gravity satellite experiment which has provided the data for the Nature paper below on the global ice melt and the way in which that Ice Melt affect sea levels;

            Original Source ; NoTricksZone blog;

            Climatologists Stunned, Baffled: New Scientific Studies Show Glacier, Ice Sheet Melt Rates “Rapidly Decelerating”!

            And one of a number of similar “Nature” published paper’s abstract that this NTZ blog post refers to;

            [ Bolding is mine ]

            Recent contributions of glaciers and ice caps to sea level rise

            Abstract;
            Glaciers and ice caps (GICs) are important contributors to present-day global mean sea level rise.
            Most previous global mass balance estimates for GICs rely on extrapolation of sparse mass balance measurements representing only a small fraction of the GIC area, leaving their overall contribution to sea level rise unclear.

            Here we show that GICs, excluding the Greenland and Antarctic peripheral GICs, lost mass at a rate of 148 ± 30 Gt yr from January 2003 to December 2010, contributing 0.41 ± 0.08 mm yr− to sea level rise.

            Our results are based on a global, simultaneous inversion of monthly GRACE-derived satellite gravity fields, from which we calculate the mass change over all ice-covered regions greater in area than 100 km.

            The GIC rate for 2003–2010 is about 30 per cent smaller than the previous mass balance estimate± that most closely matches our study period.

            The high mountains of Asia, in particular, show a mass loss of only 4 ± 20 Gt yr for 2003–2010, compared with 47–55 Gt yr in previously published estimates.

            For completeness, we also estimate that the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, including their peripheral GICs, contributed 1.06 ± 0.19 mm yr to sea level rise over the same time period.

            The total contribution to sea level rise from all ice-covered regions is thus 1.48 ± 0.26 mm, [ yr] which agrees well with independent estimates of sea level rise originating from land ice loss and other terrestrial sources.

            1.48 mm / yr sea level rise or 148 mms over a Century and the Global ice melt from the Arctic to the Antarctic to the high Himalayan glaciers [ research papers ] and the rapid slowdown in the Greenland glacier melt and even in some cases, Greenland glaciers now advancing once again, all of which are implying an even lower rate of sea level rise in the near future.

            Better buy those cheap beach front properties from those “deeply concerned citizens” before this whole dangerous sea level rise / global warming catastrophe thing becomes a complete bore and those beach front properties regain even more of their value.

            40

            • #
              ROM

              I have a Sea Level post sitting in moderation at the moment for some unknown reasons but to add another string to the bow on decreasing sea level rates of rise, currently according to the GRACE gravity experiment data, of around 1.48 mms / yr, I have another satellite based piece of information as below;

              This information is from a 2011 workshop on increasing the accuracy of the satellite sea level measurement data.
              And it is from what could be classed as dis-interested observers whose main interest in life is satellite sensing technology.

              Geodetic Reference Antenna in Space;
              (GRASP):

              And the relevant part to sea level rises;

              Impact of TRF Error on Global Mean Sea Level (GMSL) Record from Spaceborne Altimetry:

              Impact of TRF on GMSL Record from Tide Gauges: competing approaches for TRF realization yield estimates for sea-level rise ranging from 1.2 to 1.6 mm/yr.

              Desired accuracy for measuring global mean sea level (GMSL) rise is 0.1 mm/yr.

              [ TRF - Terrestrial Reference Frame ]

              61

              • #
                TdeF

                As noted before, the current sea level rise may be well below the historic rate because of the very cold conditions in Antarctica and the relatively rapid and massive increase in ice there. We may even see the sea level dropping, a prelude to an ice age.

                The rate of 1.2mm-1.6mm/year, 120mm-160mm per century is a long way from the ABC’s Robin Williams dire prediction of 100 metre sea rise in Sydney by 2100, drowning the city and of course billions of people around the world in highly populated low lying coastal and delta and island areas. Now two decades later with no visible effects on any of the world’s cities from Melbourne to London, you have to suspect they may be wrong but being wrong has never stopped alarmists. Was there a web site for the Rapture?

                30

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              Climateskeptic’s reference @ # 2.2.3.1 to the “Nature” paper, Contribution of Antarctica to past and future sea-level rise has this to say in the abstract;

              ROM,

              What you summarize from that paper looks very familiar. It’s a lot like the kind of presentation that was produced from a “Buzzword Computer” my boss back in the late 1960s had. You could turn two little wheels and words appeared in windows that you could stick together in a written or verbal presentation to impress your audience. It was a joke of course. But the use of word after word to make something look authoritative and bamboozle the audience sure is alive and well.

              For instance, what does this mean?

              Our results are based on a global, simultaneous inversion of monthly GRACE-derived satellite gravity fields, from which we calculate the mass change over all ice-covered regions greater in area than 100 km.

              Help! My head is spinning.

              20

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                I’m sure they think it makes sense but it’s a process of piling one estimation on top of another until it’s impossible for it to be worth anything — the error piles up faster than the process.

                20

          • #
            KinkyKeith

            Hi Klimate, is that pronounced Naychah”?

            A good magazine, frequently found in the waiting room at the dentist.

            Must admit I haven’t seen one for a while and suspect the dentists have removed them to avoid being associated with the rubbish.

            103

          • #
            RB

            Climate BS Artist – The “collapse” of basins in West Antarctica has been talked about when Hansen was in nappies. No doubt that there was more melting during the last interglacial, when we had fewer SUVs than in modern times. The trouble is that the maximum temperatures of the present interglacial have long gone.

            The actual basins measured (poorly) to be flowing faster into the sea have 0.6m of sea-level rise equivalent in ice and are expected to collapse in 200-900 years time. “Antarctica has the potential to contribute more than a metre of sea-level rise by 2100 and more than 15 metres by 2500, if emissions continue unabated.” is extrapolated to ice in areas that are not changing or are growing. Its beyond stupid.

            The bit that is melting is over volcanic activity. The troposphere over the Southern Ocean, SST and record sea-ice extent (and record number of climate scientists being caught in ice) shows that there is no actual data to back up the claims made from poor modelling as if they were experimental data.

            112

            • #
              AndyG55

              Poor CS, you have to wonder what he thinks he is accomplishing here.

              So far all he has managed is to show himself as the standard brain-washed climate troglodyte.

              He has wasted a whole heap of his obviously pointless existence on pointless empty posts without landing even a powder-puff.

              No wonder he is starting to sound more and more manic. :-)

              I hope he backs away, for the sake of what little sanity he has left.

              142

              • #
                Glen Michel

                They come here and fail.They are usually tiresome- using the same old appeal to authority complete with utter belief in fairy tales of impending climate doom.They cannot debate with reason on their side.With the gate keepers and political masters controlling the issue it is difficult for the truth to emerge.

                92

              • #
                el gordo

                Good trolls are scarcer than hen’s teeth, so we’ll have to content ourselves with small mercies.

                CS is ok, doesn’t lack a backbone and has a rudimentary understanding of the debate. Its not for us to sway him but make sure we have all the answers in preparedness for when the balloon goes up.

                I see him as someone to spar with and sharpen my knowledge.

                72

              • #
                Another Ian

                Andy

                But remember

                Brandolini’s Law: “The amount of energy needed to refute [nonsense] is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.”

                From comments at

                “What Would We Do Without Peer Review?”

                http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2016/04/what-would-we-d-64.html#comments

                [Editorial discretion applied.] AZ

                30

          • #
            Wayne Job

            CS the non sceptic, I also like to rely on historical information, the British Admiralty the odd couple of hundred years ago charted the world. One of the things they did was to engrave rocks at low tide they called dry rocks. Oddly regardless of what you believe those rocks are still dry at low tide, there are two options here, maybe three, one the rocks have grown, two the moon has changed orbit and the tides are bigger, three the level of the ocean has changed very little in two hundred years. Your choice, many of these rocks are up along the East coast, so you can check.

            Further back in history was a different story, coming out of an ice age, with much of the northern hemisphere covered in up to five miles of ice deep, when it melted it had to go somewhere.

            51

          • #
            mark

            I knew a guy about seven or right years ago that simply HAD to sell his pristine Monaro asap because the value was going to drop as we were about to run out of oil…??

            41

      • #
        Manfred

        could

        Quantify that.

        51

      • #
        climateseptic

        … but then we all know that projections are like climte models – everyone’s got one, and the NOAA data all syas that there is less than 3.0mm sea level rise annually since – well – since they started measuring so at the best we are looking at 28cm by 2100 and the Arctic is accumuling ice so – meh…

        Sorry brother.

        911

        • #
          climateskeptic

          Very amusing Noddy, including the bit about Arctic ice accumulation. Taking over my avatar that’s a laugh as well as an admission of defeat. Can’t counter with evidence cause all you have is conspiracy and manipulation

          216

          • #
            AndyG55

            Poor child.. you have YET AGAIN proven your ignorance and DECEIT !!

            Are you playing with yourself , yet again ?????

            84

          • #
            climateseptic

            Thanks NoddyPrime aka good old climateskeptic,

            Oh goodness I feel a rant coming on…

            I hope no one brings up Pevensey Castle in relation to sea level rise cos we’re still 10 metres below natural sea levels that existed during the Medieval Warm Period – you know the one just before the Little Ice Age when sea levels fell and then never ever recovered – thank goodness we are in a natural warming period since then… hope none of the government dupes wakes up to it and cuts off our lucrative little grants and subsidies earners though.

            75

      • #
        sophocles

        And it could well be wrong.

        The Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level is an aggregator of tide gauge data from around the world. About two years ago, I played with their data tool and looked at average annual sea level rise around the coastline from 1905 to 2013. It was 1.7 mm per annum. That agreed with other research.

        I then looked at average sea level rise from 1955 to 2013. It was about 0.75 to 0.9 mm per annum (interpolated from the tool’s scale).

        There was a hump around 1940 to 1950, which was large enough to raise the average. Must have been all that tonnage going to the bottom.

        30

      • #
        climateskeptic

        Oh dear the meme is imploding. The lowest winter maximum Arctic sea ice cover ever recorded
        http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries_thumb.png

        and one of the largest Greenland summer melts. How long can the charade continue????
        http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/images/greenland_melt_area_plot_tmb.png
        https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

        Question is, is it adjusted? or manipulated? or just real?

        36

        • #
          climateskeptic

          2016 Arctic Sea Ice Wintertime Extent Hits Another Record Low
          The 13 smallest maximum extents on the satellite record have happened in the last 13 years.

          Must be an “Inconvenient Truth” for the Noddys to swallow without gagging
          http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/2016-arctic-sea-ice-wintertime-extent-hits-another-record-low

          36

        • #
          climateseptic

          Dear NoddyPrime,

          Meanwhile the Antarctic ice hits all time historical high.

          I feel another rant coming where I don’t need to supply evidence for my statements other than spurious links to Gruniad articles.

          Oh dear.

          At the real rate of sea level rise the Barrier Reef will be exposed to carbonated air by the year 2100 and Professor Flannery’s well invested waterside properties will be inland of the Blue Mountains.

          52

          • #
            Craig Thomas

            So you think Antarctica warming up from an average of -40 to an average of -37 should *not* increase precipitation?

            Or did you think ice melts at -37 degrees?

            11

      • #
        Dan in Oz

        Mr Climate Septic

        If you feel obliged to comment on the basis of a pending catastrophe at least check out the BOM tide gauge data found here.
        http://www.bom.gov.au/oceanography/projects/ntc/monthly/

        I dumped out the 101 year monthly data for Sydney Harbour, imported into excel and divided the data into 3 equal parts of ~34 years. The first thing noticeable is the large ENSO driven yearly variation. This variation is greater than the entire SLR from 1914. The maximum high tide mark was recorded in 1974 during a large El Nino and the minimum low tide reading was more recent, in 1982.

        Using the high tide data, and dividing into 3 equal recording periods of ~34 years, the first 34 years had zero trend, the following 34 years from 1947-1981 had a 3cm rise and the final 34 years until 2014 also had a 3cm rise. Certainly, in the case of Sydney, there has been no change in the rate of increase in the high tide mark since 1947.

        21

        • #
          Craig Thomas

          Gosh, maybe the scientists should try,
          – looking at thousands of tide gauges
          – adjust the data on the basis of isostatic changes
          in order to get a more accurate picture of sea level change?

          Why haven’t they thought of that?

          Uh, hang on….
          http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/

          01

          • #
            AndyG55

            Thousands of tide gauges show an average sea level rise of around 1.5mm/year with absolutely no acceleration.

            00

            • #
              Craig Thomas

              That’s weird, NASA says the opposite.
              I wonder whom I should trust? The rocket scientists, or the looney on the internet?

              00

    • #
      Robk

      To me, the graph’s vertical axis has a confusing label.
      I would have called it “change in sea level (mm/year)”, meaning ds/dt (speed), or “rate of change in sea level”meaning dv/dt (acceleration). Perhaps it’s just me.
      Either way, much of the main part of Antarctica is gaining ice at the moment. Who knows what the height of sea level will be in 80 odd years time bit if you had to guess, around 100mm higher.

      92

    • #
      Craig Thomas

      It’s not entirely clear why any teacher would tell them that, when 10mm is about 3 years’-worth of sea level rise at the current rate:

      http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/

      01

  • #
    pattoh

    How many of our celeb doomsters have purchased waterside homes since they started banging the CO2 drum?

    Combet
    Rudd
    Flannery
    Blanchette………………..

    They ain’t heading for the hills or taking their money with them!

    (I’ll wager they all have floating corkscrews though)

    192

    • #
      climateskeptic

      Flanney’s block has a steep slope and his house sits meters above the water. A wise purchase with the aid of scientific savy. His water view will just improve with time. Rudd’s block is on a headland.

      213

      • #
        Robk

        He enjoy watching the decay and misery all around him then…nice.

        81

      • #
        Another Ian

        No doubt the projected sea level rise stops just below his block then?

        92

      • #
        climateseptic

        Ok AndyG55,

        You got us – the real rate of sea level rise is pretty much nothing – in fact NOAA don’t even supply data for Fort Denison after 2010 because the sea level isn’t rising.

        So all this ‘sea level rise scare campaign’ is for smart money to buy up big time into beach properties on the down low.

        Hey nothing wrong with a bit of ‘climatebagging’ when the leftards are so gullible they will believe anything – geez – I mean – ‘the rain that falls wont fill dams’, ‘British children wont know snow’, ‘catastrophic global warming causes polar vortexes’, and wait, this is the best ‘warm oceans absorb CO2 and become acid’ – what a bunch of maroons. And they believe this stuff.

        Crap – did I write that out loud – hell – where’s delete…

        94

        • #
          climateseptic

          oops.

          Please disregard all of the above – we really believe that humans have caused global warming and climate change.

          We also believe that we must stop the planet from warming and the climate changing by preventing man from progressing.

          We also believe that to survive humans must stop evolving.

          No one can possibly adapt to the type of catastrophic temperature changes forecast.

          It would be like getting on board an airplane in the middle of winter in Moscow and fly to the Aleutian Islands for a holiday – like there is at least 2°C difference – ARE YOU MAD?

          85

        • #
          AndyG55

          “the real rate of sea level rise is pretty much nothing”

          Well done :-)

          See, HONESTY is not that difficult, even for you.

          82

        • #
          AndyG55

          “the leftards are so gullible they will believe anything”

          Wow.. someone broke CS’s firewall !! TRUTH has snuck in.

          73

        • #
          AndyG55

          “for smart money to buy up big time into beach properties on the down low”

          Thing is, NOBODY believes that crap anyway…..

          Waterfront properties prices, even half a metre above the water, still continue to climb rabidly.

          The farce has failed.

          73

        • #
          AndyG55

          Green thumbs for your acceptance of reality..

          Well done.. but small steps, small steps.

          53

        • #
          AndyG55

          OK, you fooled me.. you really ARE a skeptic.

          Why else would you be making such [snip] comments and posting such obviously farcical links.

          Well play-acted , sir. !!!!

          [We really do want a little higher level of debate than name calling and insults. Your violation of the standard Jo wants is what puts you in moderation. And moderators do not have to clean up comments and approve them, we can just leave them alone to time out and die.] AZ

          41

        • #
          toorightmate

          Climate Skeptic is bang on the money.
          Fort Dennison was originally built in a paddock.
          I saw them build it.
          And now, look how far the water has risen!!

          11

      • #
        Glen Michel

        Rudd is a block head.

        21

      • #
        climateseptic

        Yes, NoddyPrime,

        A very wise purchase… at the expense of the previous owner who was duped into believing the house would fall into the Hawkesbury due to sea level rise, or become bleached by carbonated hysteria, or maybe foundation fracturing of the ‘flux-capicitor’ down at the disused desal’ plant.

        54

    • #

      I now live approx 300m above sea level, I moved here because of predictions by Robin Williams of impending 100m rises. I was hoping to get magnificent water views over Wilsons Promontory (submerged) and surrounding locales. I shall be very disappointed if this does not eventuate!

      153

      • #
        climateskeptic

        There’s your problem, listening to Bolt and Williams for scientific advice.

        215

        • #
          AndyG55

          Willians for sure.. Bolt was trying to get him back to some sort of reality.

          But you go with the Williams number if you like .

          143

        • #
          climateseptic

          Agreed NoddyPrime,

          “There’s your problem, listening to Bolt and Williams for scientific advice.”

          But while we’re on a roll we may as well add ‘The end is’ Nye, Al Gore, Davo’ Suzuki, Professors Turkey and Flanno’ – emeritus, your good self, SKS and the Obama Choir singing ‘Consensus’ from the Book of Gillard and Rudd.

          63

  • #
    Ted O'Brien.

    Show the noaa’s tidesandcurrents chart for Fort Denison in Sydney, which shows a remarkably steady rise of just 0.65 mm/year since 1886. That’s two and a half inches a century. Then ask why it terminates at about 2010. Fort Denison has not moved.

    http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_station.shtml?stnid=680-140

    213

    • #
      climateskeptic

      0.65 mm/year since 1886. That’s two and a half inches a century.

      …and? What will it do in the future? What a wasted post

      316

      • #
        AndyG55

        Yes, all your posts are wasted, little Sks monkey.

        Tell you what, why don’t you run away, and come back when some sort of major acceleration of sea level rise starts happening in the tide data.

        Until then, you are just another normal empty, irrational, “believer” with absolutely nothing to offer to sane scientific discussion.

        123

      • #
        climateskeptic

        http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/images/CSIRO_GMSL_figure.png
        Notice the blue line, hint, its the longer one

        214

        • #
          AndyG55

          REAL data, I said… not fudged and manipulated satellite data from CSIRO’s climate worriers.

          There is NO ACCELERATION in any tide data, none anywhere. (except where the land is very obviously sinking or the data is being deliberately manipulated to match fudged satellite data)… and certainly not in Australia.

          114

          • #
            climateskeptic

            Noddy, its all conspiracy, what a joke you are. The world is against you, anything that doesn’t conform to the meme is conspiracy. The commies are under the bed watch out.

            219

            • #
              AndyG55

              Yawn.. yet another EMPTY post from the SkS monkey.

              go back to your masters.. and get a clue, even if it will be wrong.

              113

              • #
                climateskeptic

                You are running out of insults again, why don’t you go back to the party room, do the one armed salute and get a script update.

                214

              • #
                AndyG55

                Oh look, yet another empty post from the SkS drone.

                113

              • #
                climateseptic

                Beg to differ, AndyG,

                NoddyPrime can’t be a monkey.

                A monkey would have eventually got something correct.

                Can’t be a ‘bot either.

                A scientific consensus has never invented anything other than a ponzy scheme.

                –OK Point made. No more sock puppets. Thanks. – Jo

                54

            • #
              RB

              There are obvious problems with the data. They are link here to how the actual satellites don’t measure sea level rise, that comes from corrections.

              Here is my comment from yesterday about the GTA that should have you concerned about how much to trust the numbers coming from people trying to sell thermageddon.

              73

          • #
            Lewis P Buckingham

            The fact that there is no accelerated sea rise in Sydney is a problem for the Greens.
            Driving down to Bondi there used to be signs telling us that Bondi would be flooded because of AGW, put up by the greens for election purposes.
            In the last election these signs did not reappear.
            Its a bit like those signs that used be in real estate offices showing a very old bearded man.
            The caption read ‘This was the young man who waited for real estate prices to fall’;
            When the next bust occurred in real estate, all these signs disappeared.
            You can fool some people for a time.
            We are always stuck with the scammers.

            71

        • #
        • #
          Robk

          The CSIRO chart you linked to suggests a trend slope of around 5-7mm per year. The NOAA link you posted had a trend line of 2.9mm+/-0.4mm. You are saying 1500mm/85years but have no evidence.
          From the CSIRO and NOAA evidence it is clear that mean global sea level is a tricky thing.
          To explain: If the earth were as smooth as a billiard ball water would cover the earth in a uniform depth. The earth is not completely smooth and it’s shape changes continously, so the bucket is changing size and the amount of water in the bucket varies as land ice and water change(spillage if you like) and then there is expansion of the volume. Never mind the sloshing about from storms and tides. You have to put up some convincing evidence to implicate CO2.

          82

          • #
            climateskeptic

            The CSIRO chart you linked to suggests a trend slope of around 5-7mm per year.

            You are deluded it goes up 75mm in the last 25 years.

            is a tricky thing

            Its clear that simple maths is a tricky thing for you.

            112

            • #
              Robk

              75mm/25 years=3mm per year

              1500mm/85 years= 17.6mm….your unsubstantiated projection

              102

            • #
              climateseptic

              Sorry, I can’t help myself – I am absolutely leading you all astray with my witty vocabulary.

              NOAA shows at most 3.0mm per year sea level rise in some locations and in others it is 5.0mm fall – for instance Cairns is 1.5mm rise and New Guinea is 3.0mm fall, USA is sinking by 6.0mm and Canada is rising by 6.0mm.

              Average of all this is ZERO.

              CSIRO? Why do you think they are getting sacked – homogenisation.

              95

              • #
                AndyG55

                “my witty vocabulary”

                Only in your very stunted mind. !

                44

              • #
                AndyG55

                darn.. its you… got me. :-)

                too subtle… normally you change the avatar MORE than a bit.

                Have at the twerp, CSe. I hand him over to you. :-)

                52

          • #
            AndyG55

            “‘Impact of TRF Error on Global Mean Sea Level (GMSL) Record from Spaceborne Altimetry:

            Impact of TRF on GMSL Record from Tide Gauges: competing approaches for TRF realization yield estimates for sea-level rise ranging from 1.2 to 1.6 mm/yr.

            refer to ROM’s post at #32.

            62

      • #
        Ted O'Brien.

        Touché! What for the future? People who can read a chart can see in that chart that until further notice the sea level at Fort Denison will continue to rise at 0.65 mm/year, 28 years on from the establishment of the IPCC and its alarmism.

        It is remarkable that noaa seems to have chosen to hide Sydney’s “further notice” since about 2010. It has continued to publish less complete sites.

        122

      • #
        James Murphy

        Climateskeptic, here’s a NOAA prediction. based on linear extrapolation.

        In your opinion, why is linear extrapolation better, or worse than the methods employed in the Nature paper you quoted above?

        62

        • #
          climateskeptic

          The point being what, to illustrate you can only draw straight lines?

          19

          • #
            James Murphy

            I made no claims regarding the drawing of anything, I am merely linking to information published by NOAA.

            I asked “…In your opinion, why is linear extrapolation better, or worse than the methods employed in the Nature paper you quoted above?…”

            I do not see the need for your snarky and immature replies to a reasonable question.

            82

          • #
            climateseptic

            James Murphy,

            If only I could draw lines as straight as that – sadly I can’t even lie straight in bed.

            66

            • #
              James Murphy

              so… still no actual answer then?
              In your opinion, why is linear extrapolation better, or worse than the methods employed in the Nature paper you quoted above?

              62

            • #
              James Murphy

              subtle name change, typo, or someone altogether different, I wonder…?

              61

            • #
              Gee Aye

              There is always a place for unfunny innuendo

              01

              • #
                AndyG55

                Your place.

                51

              • #
              • #
                Mike

                “No, the thousands of tide gauges which indicate rise as only about 1mm per year are far more reliable.”

                Like a ‘black sheep’ is more reliable, or even a ‘bleak swan’…….

                00

              • #
                Mike

                Thanks…… Mike

                00

              • #
                Mike

                It would be good if the climateers could foresee extinction from ordinary causes like deforestation…. pushing it a bit i admit..in the not so foreseeing alley..bugger about that…hmmmmm

                Thank goodness for Bob Bown who had to bailed out from prison for simply trying to save a forest from extinction. I f he had been trying to save the climate by lying in front of a bulldozer to prevent climate charge he would have been alright,.

                00

              • #
                AndyG55

                “‘bleak swan’”

                Sound like a pretty sad bird. :-(

                Lost its mate to a wind turbine, no doubt.

                42

              • #
                Mike

                Like the Orange Bellied Parrot of lore….

                01

  • #
    Peter Miller

    So called climate science has always been about confusing employment inducing fantasy with employment reducing facts.

    Bureaucracies, like cancer tumours and fungi, live only to increase in size at the expense of their hosts. The climate bureaucracies are particularly virulent in this regard, so unfounded scare stories, such as runaway sea level rises, help feed the frenzy of employing even more new pointless government employees – or even worse, their far more costly and equally useless NGO colleagues.

    Cancer tumours and climate bureaucracies cannot help themselves from growing ever larger, even though if unchecked they will eventually kill their hosts.

    Good luck to all those able to take the opportunity of buying some cheap, prime, real estate on the Australian coast.

    162

  • #

    In West Wales, the impact of the sea level rise extremism is being felt by the people of the small village of Fairbourne. A climate change report of Wales found the village would soon be lost to the sea and recommended abandonment. That is:-

    Fairbourne is expected to enter into “managed retreat” in 2025 when the council will stop maintaining defences due to rising sea levels.

    and

    More than 400 homes are expected to be abandoned in the village by 2055 as part of the council’s shoreline management plan (SMP) policy.

    The sea level rise figures were from the very top of the IPCCs projections. Even by these estimates, it will be no longer worth maintaining flood defenses if the sea levels rise by another 3-4cm, and the homes will have to be abandoned before the sea levels rise by 36cm.
    The consequence is that homes once worth up to A$400,000, are unsaleable. Residents are now trying to sue the council.

    100

  • #
    Another Ian

    Different area, similar observations

    To repeat what I have posted on a Discussion thread: with regard to how the wind industry is going to save the world (by destroying it – with the active support of Greenpi$$, Fo€, etc.), here is an interesting comment on an article in The Scotsman (http://www.scotsman.com/news/wind-farm-fund-looks-to-raise-315m-1-4100155):

    A RECORD FOR THE WIND INDUSTRY?
    Despite:
    Over 5,000,000 trees felled to make room,
    Hundreds of miles of bulldozed tracks,
    Our finest landscapes trashed by multinationals,
    Giant pylons scarring our beautiful countryside,
    Drumochter Pass completely vandalised,
    Thousands of tons of concrete dumped on our fragile upland ecosystems,
    Millions of birds and bats needlessly slaughtered,
    Wind farms visible from 60% of Scotland,
    Tourists deterred by industrialised landscapes,
    The highest energy bills in Europe,
    Countless millions extorted from the poorest bill payers,
    Multinationals and landowners trousering millions,

    During our coldest nights so far, when we needed power most,
    despite all this, wind’s contribution to the National Grid,
    to the nearest round figure was -

    ZERO!!! (0.15% precisely)
    Right now as I write – 0.18% !!!

    – GeorgeH_2 (4:47 PM on 14/04/2016)

    The sooner this despicable farrago fails, the better.
    Apr 15, 2016 at 7:59 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent”

    From comments at

    http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2016/4/15/money-to-burn-josh-368.html#comments

    180

  • #
    AndyG55

    As mentioned in the last thread, the SMH link shows Sydney Airport flooded.

    Thing is, the lowest point on the main runway of Sydney Airport is 6m above current sea level, and there is a +6m differential along the runway, giving an average elevation of 9m.

    With the measured, non-accelerating SLR at Fort Denison of 0.65mm/year, that gives something like 9000 years before the water will reach the lowest part of the runway.

    202

    • #
      AndyG55

      They say “sea levels could rise up to 0.74m” (yep and pigs might learn how to fly) which nowhere near enough to cuase the flooding they show.

      Its just another big irrational, mis-information SCARE/SCAM job.

      ps.

      Has anyone got time to check the actual elevation of other areas they show as flooded?

      162

    • #
      Another Ian

      Andy

      Re #3.1.2 and #3.1.2.1

      So when Sydney Airport is under water Flannery will have limited freeboard?

      30

  • #
    John in Oz

    Is this an illegal scam scheme?

    Short and distort[edit]
    Main article: Short and distort
    A variant of the pump and dump scam, the “short and distort” works in the opposite manner. Instead of first buying the stock, and then artificially raising its price before selling, in a “short and distort” the scammer first short-sells the stock, and then artificially lowers the price, using the same techniques as the pump and dump but using criticism or negative predictions regarding the stock. The scammer then covers his short position when he buys back the stock at a lower price.[17]

    80

    • #
      David Maddison

      It is reminiscent of villain Lex Luthor in Superman who planned to get rich by detonating a nuclear bomb in the San Andreas Fault and making California slide into the sea making all the desert land east of the fault which he owned suddenly very valuable as the New West Coast. http://youtu.be/kqD0pqDOAtk

      50

    • #
      Robk

      Governments use that scheme widely with respect to environmental issues.

      30

  • #
    David Maddison

    It’s amazing that these [snip] worry about supposed sea level rise but no one expresses the slightest concern about building in known flood zones such as in Brisbane. I thought it incredible that even after the devestating Queensland floods people actually rebuilt in the same flood prone area.

    [If you avid what I snipped you won't end up in moderation. Thanks.] AZ

    110

    • #
      Greebo

      I thought it incredible that even after the devestating Queensland floods people actually rebuilt in the same flood prone area.

      Can’t see why. They did exactly the same thing after the ’74 floods as well. What was that saying about people who ignore the past??

      90

      • #
        bobl

        It’s not that simple.
        Brisbane is built on the Brisbane river flood plain and unless you plan to move Brisbane somewhere else there really isn’t a choice. What they have done instead is allow buildings to be lifted higher so the floor level can be placed above the water level for when it does flood. This won’t stop flooding but it will make it less damaging when it does.

        Another possibility would be enlarge the river or build a massive tunnel and pump water through that in the event of a flood reducing the volume the river has to carry.

        00

    • #
      Bushkid

      The Wivenhoe dam was built as a flood mitigation measure after the 1974 floods. The dam was built to prevent such flooding, not cause it. That the water level in the dam was mis-managed in 2011 (i.e. far too much water held back as the rain kept falling and the water rose until a catastrophic amount had to be released to avoid an even more catastrophic failure of the dam wall itself) is not the fault of the people living in either Brisbane or other downstream areas. You see, the government had believed all the hype about it never raining again, and besides they could make money selling all that lovely water to consumers.

      After all, if you can’t trust the government to keep you safe when they promise to, well who can you trust??????

      20

  • #
    toorightmate

    When those Melbournites wake up each day to go to work, as well as watching the clock, they will have to consult the tide chart.

    50

  • #
    Ruairi

    The minuscule rise of the sea,
    May cause coast-dwelling warmists to flee,
    To secure higher ground,
    Where they feel safe and sound,
    As if fleeing a great tsunami.

    170

  • #
    David Maddison

    I have tried to go to the website for a while now and keep getting the message that it is overloaded and to try later.

    40

  • #

    The “Coastalrisk” website is currently claiming it is overloaded, but they are “Using the 2100 Sea Level Rise Scenarios provided by the IPCC”.
    If you live in Queensland, what this means is the following:
    1. Projected temperature rise of 3°C by 2100
    2. For each 1°C, 5% increase in precipitation, so 15% increase
    3. Projected rise in storm surge levels.
    4. This is extra over the change from the older 50 and 100 year ARI (average return interval), now termed AEP (annual exceedance probability) of 1% (= 100 years).
    The above is contained within the “Coastal Hazards” section of the (mandatory) Queensland State Planning Policy, so if you are near the shoreline you either already have this, or are about to get it, in the planning scheme for your area. In most cases flood mapping is or will be available at the local council website. The mapping is modelled of course, resolution is 10 x 10 metres, better than it used to be, but hardly adequate. There are numerous errors, eg low points such as road edges and drains are frequently 10+ metres away from the correct location.
    The results for my area, Townsville City, are mind-boggling. Sure, there are low-lying areas that regularly flood, but the 1% AEP mapping now shows flooding of areas that did not flood in the 1998 “night of Noah” which was a 1 in 200 year event, or the 1:200 event that occurred in 2000. An industrial development I was consulted on is at 9 metres AHD, about 8km from the shoreline, but required a further 750mm of fill above its neighbours before it would comply. The project was abandoned.
    I lodged an objection to this unsubstantiated IPCC nonsense when it was a draft policy. To his credit, my local member read all 7 pages, and passed the document on to the then deputy premier Jeff Seeney. Then they got kicked out. The current incumbents won’t do anything to moderate this.

    151

    • #
      bobl

      2. For each 1°C, 5% increase in precipitation, so 15% increase

      Wow really, someone doesn’t know their chemistry.

      To Evaporate water costs @20deg costs 4 x 80 +2266 Kj = 2586 kJ/kg per kg of water. 3.8W (EG energy of a doubling of co2 according to IPCC) x 24 x 365 = 3.8 x 3600 x 24 x 365 = 119,836,800 J or 119000 kJ enough to evaporate 46kg of water representing just a 4.6% increase in rainfall. However this presumes all the CO2 heating goes into water – everyone knows that Hansen says that the unaccounted IMBALANCE energy from CO2 is just 0.6W or just 16% of that meaning a maximum evaporation of just 7.3 kg per annum, per square meter is possible that’s just 0.0073 or (0.73% / 7.3mm) increase in rainfall. If that did happen of course the whole heat of warming would be absorbed in evaporating water and the temperature could not rise. Assuming we allow some to create the rising air temperature to drive the evaporation, evaporation must be much less than this

      So there is NO WAY POSSIBLE that rainfall can increase 15% for 3 deg (an IPCC doubling of CO2) without repealing the law of conservation of energy. Simple physics/chemistry.

      10

  • #
    Robber

    Stop worrying. Greg Hunt is going to burn about half a tonne of fossil fuel to jet his way to New York to sign the Paris agreement and magically limit global temperature rise to less than 2C.

    The current average global temperature is about 15C, a rise of about 1 degree since the “perfect” pre-industrial world. Somehow a temperature rise by another one degree to 16C will be catastrophic? In Perth poor Jo has to survive with an average temperature that is already 19 degrees, while down in Hobart they desperately need some warming with an average temperature of only 13C. In Melbourne we are at the global average of about 15C. When are we going to be forced into accepting climate refugees from Darwin where the average temperature is 27C?

    161

    • #
      TdeF

      The variation in Darwin is a few degrees, +/-2C. Totally moderated by water. It cant get any hotter! In Melbourne, +25/-15C. Colorado and New England, +/-40C. So what does +1C in a mean portend anyway? Then Antarctica, -50C to -25C, a balmy summer. Do not forget this is air temperature. The giant oceans at 400 times the mass will take 400 x 100 years or 40,000 years to adopt this 1C and we should be well through the next ice age by then.

      In passing I had forgotten Malcolm Turnbull, lawyer and banker was the Environment Minister in the Howard Government, so he knows Greg Hunt’s brief. It was Malcolm who pushed a carbon tax and an ETS in Howard’s failure. It was Malcolm who then lost his job over his non negotiable insistence on an ETS policy for the Liberals.

      Of course Malcolm still wants his ETS and to get his own way and fully supports Hunt and is deathly quiet on his real intention but you can guess what is coming should Malcolm get in on his terms. Watch for an alliance with the Greens at every level in the next election. Against both Labor and the National party. Especially on evil carbon and an ETS is God’s gift to merchant bankers.

      101

      • #
        TdeF

        Imagine if the Greens move their preferences to the Liberals and v.v.? All but 8 Labor seats were determined by Green preferences and only a few Liberal seats. Richard di Natali is very quiet, but it would the Greens would get many more than one seat in the parliament and potentially damage the Nationals. What could be a better way of making the Greens the #2 party than the destruction of both Labor and the Nationals.

        So what would they want?
        1. The removal of the democractically elected minority senators, making it permanently only a 4 way contest. Agreed and done.
        2. An ETS/Carbon tax. Certain under ex Environment minister Turnbull who lost an election on this very issue.
        3. A swapping of preferences against both Labor and the Nationals. Allowing Greens to take many Labor and Nationals seats and Liberals to attack the Nationals through their proxy.
        4. Control of the senate. Guaranteed.

        and what happens to those ‘rusted on’ Labor and Liberal voters? They have nowhere to go. Small parties are outlawed in the Senate and doomed outside it. This is Machiavelli stuff, betrayal of their mandate and their parties, but then Malcolm sees it differently. He does not need Labor and Liberal and Country. It is the Turnbull party. It means he can govern in his own right as Monarch, along with the Lady PM and ex Lord Mayor of Sydney, who is presently visiting China with him as the Australian power couple. Soon there will be only one party, a Liberal Green party and we will pay our carbon taxes to the merchant bankers.

        We need Tony Abbott back now.

        80

        • #
          Graeme No.3

          For every action there is a reaction.

          30

        • #
          TdeF

          And whose idea was the VFT? Another carrot to the Greens. It makes no sense for Coalition voters, but Malcolm threw this up for a reason. You can either assume he is very dumb, or there is another game going on with the Greens.

          40

  • #
    Joe Lalonde

    Pretty good scam…
    Now home owner insurance can charge for risk of these homes…
    Speculators will drive down prices to buy on pennies on the dollar…

    Damn, I lost out again!

    60

  • #
    handjive

    If anyone should have a clue about sea level rise …

    It’s the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS)
    “Construction of the new $45 million Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) building on Hobart’s waterfront is complete.
    Staff and students began moving into the building on Wednesday 11 December. 2013.”

    Or, our fearless leader:
    Malcolm Turnbull spending $95,000 for a private jetty at his Point Piper mansion
    . . .
    If they aren’t ‘heading’ for the hills’, then neither am I.

    140

  • #
    TdeF

    The illustration is absurd. The roadways shown as being inundated include bridges and flyovers 20-30 meters in the air! While Melbourne’s Bolte bridge has been criticized in The Age as being too low at 25 meters, it is enough keep the cars out of an extra meter of water in say 150 years. Nothing to do with Global Warming anyway, just the end of the ice age.

    Perhaps they could show a picture of Amsterdam when the seas rise one meter. Oops. Amsterdam is already 2 meters below sea level. The last time I was there swimming was an option, not a necessity.

    These traditionally low lying areas of Melbourne are like all old cities, a relic of a port where people wanted to get close to the water for loading and unloading. In Shanghai, the car park along the Bund, under the pedestrian walkway has lockable portholes but they are no longer needed. Dams have changed the behaviour of the city docks completely. At an extreme Melbourne could build a flood barrier which would keep high tides out, lowering sea levels in the huge bay with only a 1km entrance, like Sydney harbour. Melbourne used to flood after a big rain and high tide, so it took 2,000 men twenty years with steam shovels to build the straight one mile Coode canal to Spencer street. Since then, hardly a problem.

    It is amazing that warmists who call on science and engineering to solve all their problems do not believe that science and engineering can solve any problem. They would never have a tunnel which could fill with water. Amsterdam would be illegal. Many port cities are like this. London, for example is only 35 meters above sea level, but the underground goes to 60meters below. Crazy. I hope the Greenies avoid the underground for fear of drowning. New York is only 10 meters above sea level, but their deepest underground trains are 60 meters down. Run for your lives. The Ecopolypse is coming!

    111

    • #
      toorightmate

      TdeF,
      Do not underestimate the power of a blue pencil.
      One relatively small blue pencil can suck in millions of people in one foul swoop.

      80

    • #
      TdeF

      The area shown in the illustration is a known low level which can flood in a heavy rain. The swampy area up to Albert Park was part of the meanders of the Yarra and the water here formed a backdrop to the military area on St. Kilda road, as protection against aborigines. It has been flooded in very heavy rains, with waters up to a meter deep.

      However in this picture there is no sign of how the water gets into this low lying area? There is no obvious connection with the Yarra river unless along Queensbridge road, so it is not an overflow of the Yarra. Has someone left the tap on?

      Is this someone just plotting the low points blue? In which case the Albert Park lake would fill too, but the water has to come from somewhere and amazingly, it does not. This is not a prediction of flooding. It is a relief map with the low points painted in blue, posing as science.

      30

      • #
        Raven

        Is this someone just plotting the low points blue?

        Not only the low points.

        See #8.2.1.1 above.
        That map shows water flowing over the M1 which is about 10 metres above ground level, but remarkably there is no water underneath.
        Below the M1 must be in drought . . .

        http://oi67.tinypic.com/xdh4lh.jpg

        10

  • #
    handjive

    Get ready for climate change!
    Learn how climate change is likely to affect you, your property or your business, then create your own Climate Ready action plan.

    This website is for residents, holiday home owners and businesses of Bayside City Council, Kingston City Council and Mornington Peninsula Shire to prepare themselves for the risks that climate change is likely to bring – floods, fire, drought and heatwaves – more frequent or severe than any of us have experienced so far.

    Start Your Plan!
    . . .
    They have a hints & tips page.

    i suggested walking around the peninsula wearing sandwich boards proclaiming the end of the world is nigh.

    Not sure they have considered it yet.

    100

    • #
      Raven

      i suggested walking around the peninsula wearing sandwich boards proclaiming the end of the world is nigh.

      See . . that’d be one of those Green job creation plans right there.

      10

  • #
    el gordo

    This is a couple of years old and I’m not sure what’s happening, requires further research.

    ‘The Queensland government, however, recently removed sea level rise from its state planning policies, as did the New South Wales government. In NSW, the former Labor government’s sea level rise planning benchmarks, based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change data, were rejected, and decisions devolved to councils.’

    The Fifth Estate

    80

    • #
      el gordo

      Change of government saw Queensland cave-in and Baird in NSW is wavering under the weight of the green blob. Councils are now concerned over possible litigation and are being encouraged to back track.

      http://www.thefifthestate.com.au/politics/government/climate-change-affected-sea-level-rise-back-in-queenslands-planning-framework/75487

      60

    • #

      @ el gordo 10:25:
      Apparently not correct for Queensland. Module 10, Coastal Hazards as at 14 April 2016:
      http://www.dilgp.qld.gov.au/resources/policy/sdap/sdap-module-10-v-1-8.pdf
      ” … Coastal hazard areas are identified in accordance with the methodology set out in the
      Coastal hazard technical guide … and use the following factors to account for the projected impacts of climate change by the year 2100:
      (1) a sea-level rise factor of 0.8 metres
      (2) an increase in the maximum cyclone intensity by 10 per cent.”
      If the 0.8 metres was real it would already be evident. Anyone aware of any port facilities being raised because of this?
      There is no evidence of cyclone intensity increasing, rather the opposite. Those of us who determine design wind speeds already add +/-10% to calculated wind speeds to cover uncertainties, and errors in construction.
      They may be able to create further mischief over sea levels, but the wind speeds are set by federal standards, and as far as I know they haven’t changed.

      60

      • #

        I posted my comment at 20.2 before seeing your addendum at 20.1. Thanks for that – Seeney & co did respond to the complaint from me, and presumably from others.
        A while back, I had an interesting conversation with an insurance salesperson. I won’t quote their name, but it rhymes with “screwy”. They would not insure properties in my postcode because of proximity to the ocean. My place and 99.5% of the area is on sites at least 4m above sea level, most around 6-7m, and about 20% at 12m+, up to 70m. I asked if they insured properties in a couple of streets in another post code, and the answer was “yes”. So I gave their height above sea level – none more than 1.9m. Expletives followed …

        100

  • #
    Greebo

    Strange the ABC is so quiet… They’ll loose their studios if that graphic is a true prediction.

    91

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    It’s amazing the number of apparently function people who are taken in by the scam.

    Confident, sensible citizens who swear black and blue that the CO2 we make is controlling The Planet.

    Only virtuous politicians can save us.

    In the meantime our “virtuous” pollies are destroying people’s lives as we saw here with the Lake Macquarie council sea level fiasco a couple of years ago.

    KK

    62

    • #
      Yonniestone

      KK I recently saw ‘The Experimenter’ movie based on the 1961 Milgram experiments on radical behaviour in humans which would eventually lead to Stanley Milgram’s book Obedience to Authority.

      I’m sure you know plenty about this but I was stunned to see the percentages of those that complied with inflicting perceived punishment simply because they were told to continue, I see this parallel with those sensible citizens that will politely comply to a cleverly disguised pseudo scientific authority that ironically wants a consensus, sometimes I don’t feel so silly after witnessing such stubborn resistance to freedom of thought.

      40

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        Hi Yonnie,

        I had a look at a clip of that movie, I don’t think that I could sit through the whole thing. Too much like modern life.

        And no, I don’t know “plenty about this” but may have had a brief exposure to it in lectures.

        It’s really spooky how people can be so conforming despite the fact that they are inflicting pain on people. Explains a lot about politicians.

        KK

        40

  • #

    Hmm! Just wonderin’ here.

    With all this talk about sea level rise, I was thinking about just how seriously the different levels of Government are actually treating it, or is just something not worth thinking about, or, you know, paying it lip service with the booga booga booga factor.

    Sydney’s underground rail system.

    How many of you have heard how much that would cost to replace, wiped out by rising sea levels? Not many I’ll bet, in fact not ANY.

    It, umm, seems to work okay now.

    Funny how they always find a way to manage eh!

    Tony.

    80

    • #
      toorightmate

      Tony,
      You will soon have to do all your shopping at the North Rocky shopping centre.
      Yeppoon will be gone – forever.

      40

      • #

        toorightmate,

        We’ve been shopping there (Stockland Mall) for the last five and a half years.

        Off Topic I know, but hey, everybody else is.

        Cyclone Marcia hit here at around 11AM on the Friday, and all the power went out immediately. On the Saturday, I went there on the off chance, with high hopes, of getting a loaf of bread. All shut up tight. Drove around the whole Centre and found one door open, and a Woolies guy walking out. I asked him if they were open and he said, “Don’t ask, but yes, just.”

        I went in and Woolies was all that was open, and there were more staff there than customers, and I was one of about four customers. I found the bread, and asked one of the roving managers on the floor how they were managing. She said that they were doing okay, as the centre had its own power, but lost power when it all went off, and the unit had to be manually started, which proved to me the false economy of mot having a mains UPS to automatically run up the units when the grid fails.

        The manager told me that they got the centre’s auxilliary power on at ‘Sparrers’, got in half the day shift who could make it, and they spent all day unloading every cold storage shelf and fridge units in the store, and every fridge freezer out the back, of every product and trashed the lot into the skip bins. Then clean them all out, and then load them with some items they could, which amounted to virtually nothing, as all shelves were empty. No questions asked, as everything was trashed, probably hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of stuff.

        The rigs started to arrive early AM Sunday, mostly from the North as the South was still cut off. The whole Centre opened for trading on Sunday morning, of a fashion anyway. There’s a Coles in the Centre also, so they lost the lot as well.

        We did okay here at our home, but come Tuesday, we were hanging out for a coffee in the cool for a couple of hours, and that was the only place operational with air conditioning. I was amused by the absolutely jam packed Centre, even bigger crowds than the Christmas rush. Two out of every three people had their phones chargers and lead, laptops, notebooks, pads and there were queues at every available power point. Most shops had signs out the front for people to come in and use their power points. The Food Court had not one seat to spare with all outlets doing ‘monster’ trade, all day from 7.30AM till 9PM closing.

        Now, the point I’m trying to make here is that this whole Centre consumes around 5MW on a daily basis, most of it being cold and cool storage at Coles and Woolies. That 5MW is around the same as for around a thousand homes.

        Woolies alone would probably consume around 2MW, as would the Coles. All of that is cool and cold storage, which, BY LAW ….. MUST be kept at zero (most lower than that) to minus 10 at ALL times, and each fridge and cold store is automatically monitored.

        Anything outside of that, and the food in it has to be tossed, full stop.

        Add up all the Coles and all the Woolies, and all the supermarkets and there is what is euphemistically referred to as (the inconsequential no meaning /sarc) base load, the absolute minimum requirement. 1500 Coles and Woolies alone, so there’s 3000MW of your 18,000MW absolute physical requirement, the Base Load, and it’s probably even more than that.

        That cannot be (reliably) supplied by wind, by commercial solar of any type, or rooftop PV, even with batteries. (2MW Of batteries, don’t kid me)

        Tony.

        110

  • #
    James

    By my calculations my back yard is 1.5 metre above sea level. I will have a bit over 1,500 years to get the hell out of my house with my family to make it to higher ground, should I begin to panic yet?

    171

    • #
      AndyG55

      Should you panic? … most certainly..!!

      You MUST immediately spend a million dollars to build a 4m high wall around to protect yourself….. . (Like gullible governments have done with wasteful un-renewables)

      Or you could just ignore it as a load of complete hogwash.

      82

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Or he could just sit on a throne at the waters edge ordering the water back, just as effective.

        41

        • #
          James Murphy

          South Australian Premier Don Dunstan saved Adelaide from an earthquake and a tidal wave in 1976

          The day after this, the Adelaide Advertiser editorial said
          “..Hopefully, the lesson we should all have learnt from yesterday’s pathetic anticlimax is to rely more on our common sense and less on the silly and unscientific speculation of self-appointed soothsayers…”

          I can see we’ve come a long way in 40 years.

          61

          • #
            Graeme No.3

            James Murphy:

            That brings back memories. The ‘seer’ had seen West Terrace lapped by the Tidal Wave, so my father rang the Weather Bureau (which then was on West Terrace) and said to the receptionist “I have a silly question” to which she replied “192 feet”. Obviously he wasn’t the first to ring or the first to dismiss the matter. Some did panic, including 2 in Lockleys on the Torrens river who sold their houses to a neighbour for roughly a seventh of their value, and fled inland to Barmera (on the Murray river). When nothing happened they were indignant that he wouldn’t sell their houses back at the same price. He was only teaching them a lesson, and they were back home after about a week.

            50

    • #
      Glen Michel

      Run mate,run.

      10

    • #

      James April 16, 2016 at 11:27 am

      “By my calculations my back yard is 1.5 metre above sea level. I will have a bit over 1,500 years to get the hell out of my house with my family to make it to higher ground, should I begin to panic yet?”

      Not at all!
      If interested you could purchase a obsolete Pentax P10 theodolite with tripod for US$110. After much consternation, you will find this puppy can do level in every direction to within 0.5 meters per kilometer, with no batteries. Of course that is today, rather than in 15 years when the Earth’s COM has re-adjusted which way is down!

      20

  • #
    pat

    14 Apr: NL Times: Janene Pieters: Hundreds of Dutch green energy windmills operating at a loss
    Hundreds of wind turbines in the Netherlands are operating at a loss and are in danger of being demolished. The main cause is the very low energy prices, which mean that the maintaining the turbines cost more than what the generated energy bring in, the Financieele Dagblad reports based on own research.
    Subsidies for generating wind energy are in many cases no longer cost-effective. Smaller, older windmills in particular are running at a loss, but even newer mills are struggling to be profitable with insufficient subsidies.
    This is extremely worrying, according to the paper, seeing as the Netherlands is already behind in meeting green energy targets set in the Energy agreement.
    Teun Bokhoven, chairman of umbrella organization for sustainable energy companies, thinks that the subsidy arrangement need to change, he said to BNR. The current subsidies are based on long-term forecasts and do not take the current low energy price into account.
    http://www.nltimes.nl/2016/04/14/hundreds-dutch-green-energy-windmills-operating-loss/

    ***bad consensus?

    16 Apr: Guardian: Martin Lukacs: The Leap Manifesto opens horizon for bold new politics in Canada
    The media attacks are a sign: a New Democratic Party that takes on inequality and climate change can crack open the country’s political debate
    (Martin Lukacs was involved in the writing of the Leap Manifesto along with a broad coalition)
    From the headlines screaming outrage on the front pages of Canada’s newspapers, you’d think the New Democratic Party had shuttered their convention doors, armed themselves and made for Edmonton’s solitary hills.
    “A hard left turn to nowhere,” blasted the National Post, after NDP members voted to debate the Leap Manifesto in local ridings. “How to Kill the NDP,” Maclean’s exclaimed. Captured by the “loony left,” added the Toronto Star.
    Was it passionate concern speaking for the future of Canada’s social democratic party? Hardly…
    Here’s what they would prefer: a NDP shackled to a political ***consensus that has gripped countries like Canada for decades. This ***consensus tells us that we should leave our fate to the market…
    If they can help their party shake loose from this ***consensus, many Canadians will want to join them—or to listen…
    Like the crisis of climate change, which the manifesto says is not just an existential threat—it is an opportunity to transform our country for the better…
    The breadth of this vision is reflected in the diversity of hands that wrote it: labour unionists, migrant rights activists, food policy experts and feminists, Indigenous leaders and environmentalists and anti-poverty organizers…
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/true-north/2016/apr/15/the-leap-manifesto-opens-horizon-for-bold-new-politics-in-canada

    50

    • #

      Pat mentions this:

      This is extremely worrying, according to the paper, seeing as the Netherlands is already behind in meeting green energy targets set in the Energy agreement.
      Teun Bokhoven, chairman of umbrella organization for sustainable energy companies, thinks that the subsidy arrangement need to change…..

      Wait a minute.

      Please don’t tell me that subsidies are dependent upon how much power these things generate, and to be eligible to keep the subsidies, then they need to either make them generate more, or install more of them.

      Surely ….. surely this isn’t just about the money.

      No! Who’d believe that?

      Tony.

      140

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      pat:
      the obvious answer, as several have called for, is for the Netherlands to increase subsidies for “renewables”. This will result in more wind farms etc. which will generate more electricity at the same times as the existing ones, causing a bigger glut and lower prices at those times, which can only be overcome by higher subsidies which will bring more wind farms which will generate even more electricity (at those times) which…I wonder if those calling for more have thought it through?

      50

    • #
      Analitik

      Supremely ironic isn’t it. The renewables subsidies allow for generation of electricity at very low prices (free!) when the weather/sun is just right so the renewable generators can’t make money since
      THEY CAN’T PRODUCE ELECTRICITY WHEN IT’S MOST NEEDED

      30

  • #
    Turtle of WA

    So the Roman’s use of slaves (everyone had slaves back then, fossil fuels replaced slaves in the 19th C), led to the eruption of Mt Vesuvius in AD 79? Or is Bill Nye just mentioning this for dramatic effect.

    80

  • #
    TdeF

    It hardly matters to Northern Europe however, from Scotland to Finland, as the land is rising faster than the ocean.

    However I read that the annual sea level steady rise from the end of the Ice Age was in fact suddenly slowing . My calculations from the NASA reported massive increase in ice in central Antarctica corresponds to a 6mm drop in the sea level. While Sea ice at the North Pole does not change the sea level, the huge amount of ice in the centre of Antarctica comes from the oceans. So instead of worrying about a steady increase in sea level, perhaps we should be worrying about why the sea level rise is slowing. That does indicate a change in the world climates. Maybe we need more CO2?

    110

  • #
    pat

    multiple links:

    14 Apr: Carbon Brief: Roz Pidcock: The IPCC’s priorities for the next six years: 1.5C, oceans, cities and food security
    At a three-day meeting in Nairobi this week, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) made a few important decisions, including what the topics for its next “special reports” should be.
    Climate impacts at 1.5C, the oceans and cryosphere, and food security will all be getting special treatment in the next few years.
    The IPCC also confirmed today that it will be “updating” its strategy for talking to policymakers, public and the media, a recognition that it needs to be better at communicating its findings to the outside world…
    Lee told a press conference in Nairobi this morning (see video below) the timing of the synthesis report is deliberate, so that it would be “in good time” for the global stocktake that nations will be undertaking in 2023, as agreed at COP21 in December.
    The IPCC will also consider publishing its big reports every five years, rather than every six or seven…
    The report from the meeting also recognised that “the media landscape is changing rapidly” and contained the intriguing recommendation that the IPCC should “be nimble and responsive so that it uses the best technology when future reports appear”.
    Plans to hold a workshop on the “science of science communication” is an opportunity for the IPCC to see how lessons from the psychology and social science literature can help with the challenges it faces, says Dr Adam Corner, research director at Climate Outreach…READ ALL
    http://www.carbonbrief.org/the-ipccs-priorities-for-the-next-six-years-1-5c-oceans-cities-and-food-security?utm_term=0_876aab4fd7-ac0778d847-

    15 Apr: CarbonPulse: Mike Szabo: World Bank CO2 price support group holds inaugural meeting, appoints first chairs
    A World Bank-led initiative to provide support for governments and companies that want to put a price on carbon this week held its inaugural meeting and named its first co-chairs.
    French Environment Minister and COP-21 President Segolene Royal and Feike Sijbesma, CEO of the Netherlands-based nutrition and materials company Royal DSM, were appointed to the head the Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition during the bank’s annual spring meeting in Washington DC…
    The first-ever CPLC High-Level Assembly also brought together UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim, IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde, and finance and environment ministers and CEOs of major multinational companies.
    In a communique released after the meeting, the coalition called for global goals to expand the coverage of GHG emissions by “meaningful carbon pricing systems – as a way to drive collective ambition for the next decade.”…
    “This movement needs to rely on three principles: a price that is high enough to change behaviours; a price that is stable and predictable to give economic and financial actors the visibility they need; ***and a price that is coordinated, such that it is an instrument of cohesion, not of competition,” said Royal…
    http://carbon-pulse.com/18499/

    00

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    site can’t cope with the traffic at 2:30am here in Perth

    That is morning in Canada and the US. We are consumed with the need to know when and where to pounce on the cheap beach-houses.

    Actually, I think the server is in a closet in Hillary’s bedroom.

    71

  • #
    pat

    comment #28 in moderation.

    14 Apr: NYT: Reuters: EU Weighs Stress Tests for Banks’ Climate Risk Exposure
    Financial firms in the European Union may have to undergo stress tests on their exposure to climate change risk, such as floods, and to energy intensive sectors where assets are more exposed to repricing, a document seen by Reuters showed.
    The proposed move would be designed to reduce long-term systemic risks linked to extreme weather or volatile energy prices.
    European Union finance ministers and central bankers will discuss the opportunity of “carbon stress testing” in the financial sector at a monthly meeting in Amsterdam on April 22-23, a document of the Dutch presidency of the EU said…
    “Financial firms are potentially exposed to stranded assets and sectors that need to adjust,” the document said, listing steel, transport and real estate among the riskiest sectors…
    The issue is presented in the paper as a subject open for discussion with no decisions expected…
    ***The issue remains “controversial,” the official said, as many states oppose saddling their banks and insurance companies with new regulatory and capital requirements…
    http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2016/04/14/business/14reuters-eu-finance-climatechange.html?_r=0

    ***not to mention public fury!

    15 Apr: Science Daily: Fossil fuels could be phased out worldwide in a decade, says new study
    Source: University of Sussex
    The worldwide reliance on burning fossil fuels to create energy could be phased out in a decade, according to an article published by a major energy think tank in the UK.
    Professor Benjamin Sovacool, Director of the ***Sussex Energy Group at the University of Sussex, believes that the next great energy revolution could take place in a fraction of the time of major changes in the past.
    But it would take a collaborative, interdisciplinary, multi-scalar effort to get there, he warns…
    In a paper published in the peer-reviewed journal Energy Research & Social Science, Professor Sovacool analyses energy transitions throughout history and argues that only looking towards the past can often paint an overly bleak and unnecessary picture.
    Moving from wood to coal in Europe, for example, took between 96 and 160 years, whereas electricity took 47 to 69 years to enter into mainstream use.
    But this time the future could be different, he says — the scarcity of resources, the threat of climate change and vastly improved technological learning and innovation could greatly accelerate a global shift to a cleaner energy future…
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160415125641.htm

    ***The Sussex Energy Group: About Us
    Our funding comes mostly from the UK Research Council system and the European Commission but also includes a range of other sources. We engage with a wide range of stakeholders, including Governments, business, NGOs and the media, and our outputs are rated highly for their impact, especially on public policy systems.
    Within SEG we have had, since late 2013, a major new Centre on Innovation and Energy Demand, specialising in the radical innovation processes that are needed to reduce energy demand substantially.
    SEG also works with the Institute of Development Studies and the School of Global Studies at Sussex, with the UK Energy Research Centre and is a core member of the Tyndall Centre on Climate Change.

    40

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      pat:
      thank you for the warning about the Sussex Energy Group at the University of Sussex. I shall begin ignoring them immediately.

      30

  • #
    pat

    14 Apr: Thomson Reuters Foundation: Laurie Goering: To curb climate change, ‘we need to move everything’: investors
    Meeting the goals of a new global agreement to tackle climate change will require social change on an almost unprecedented scale, sustainable investment experts said on Thursday.
    That includes shifting trillions of dollars each year into renewable energy – up from $345 billion last year – and making everything from transport to agriculture and consumer products much greener very quickly.
    “This is about scale. It is about timing. It is about scope. We cannot move 500 companies and 200 investors in a few countries. We need to move everything,” said Mindy Lubber, president of Ceres, a U.S.-based business sustainability group.
    Failure to make big shifts fast would amount to putting our children and grandchildren in the path of a speeding bus, she told the Skoll World Forum on Social Entrepreneurship in Oxford.
    “We would each throw ourselves in front of a bus if it was coming at our child, regardless of our politics,” she said. “We have got to change this debate so people understand… climate change is that bus.”
    COAL’S DAYS NUMBERED?
    Some of that transformation is already underway, said David Blood, a senior partner at Generation Investment Management. Much of the clean energy technology needed is already available, and a surging divestment campaign is persuading investors that keeping money in fossil fuel companies is a growing financial risk…
    “It’s in the interests of the whole world that India gets (to clean energy) faster,” said Mary Robinson, a former Irish president who runs a climate justice foundation.
    But large institutional investors are wary of risk and want clear returns, which can make them hesitant to invest in emerging economies like India, the experts said…
    That must be done in a way that persuades investors who “don’t recognize the urgency of the problem”, said Blood, whose company is one of the world’s largest sustainable investment firms…
    Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, who spoke at the Oxford forum this week, put the value of unburnable fossil fuels at $22 trillion…
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-fossilfuels-investment-idUSKCN0XB2C6

    30

    • #
      Robk

      Thanks Pat,
      That’s pretty clear then; climate is a bus.
      Al Gore says $22 trillion of fossil fuels is unburnable.
      I’ll stick my neck out and say both are wrong.

      10

    • #
      bobl

      Pat, if you could kindly tell me what institutions re investing in renewables I’d much appreciate it. Much easier to avoid them that way.

      00

  • #
    AndyG55

    Hummmm.. they are putting in the NBN box at the moment.

    Its highly likely I could go lose internet connectivity for several weeks. !!

    41

    • #
      Yonniestone

      We had one installed months ago and connected last month, no drop outs or problems whatsoever yet, of course I’m shocked and appalled at Telstra for going against their customer performance trend.

      30

      • #
        AndyG55

        Any speed improvement ?

        31

        • #
          Yonniestone

          Probably a bit faster but hard to tell as I switched from IE to Chrome which is quicker anyway, if I use IE it’s slow regardless of NBN but the transition was smooth, still amazed at that.

          50

          • #
            Glen Michel

            I’ve had NBN connection for some years- we were the first in the roll-out.Can I say it’s a waste of money with very little change in streaming data etc.No different and very unimpressed.

            40

            • #
              bobl

              Yes,
              The lefties that carried on about fibre internet failed to realise that there is only around 476 Tbps capacity (2014). That is enough for just 400,000 Gigabit NBN consumers operating concurrently (accounting for overheads) and not accounting for businesses. About the population of newcastle.

              Of course coax cable can do that sort of rate too. If that domestic fibre were used to capacity (some 20 Gbps) you could manage just 20,000 connections in full flight at a time. This is why FTTP was pretty nutty. The bottleneck never was in the “last mile”.

              10

        • #
          AndyG55

          funny little red thumb :-)

          41

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Andy,
      that will give you time to cool down and realise that letting “ClimateSkeptic” bait you is counter productive. It’s what he is trying to do. Just ignore him.

      P.S. has it occurred to you that his title has a redundant k in it?

      32

    • #
      Robk

      Then you’ll be able to be agile and innovative!

      20

  • #
    ATheoK

    “…an App to scarify homeowners…”

    Um… scarify?

    Scarify
    [ˈskerəˌfī]

    VERB

    1.cut and remove debris from (a lawn) with a scarifier.

    2.make shallow incisions in (the skin), especially as a medical procedure or traditional cosmetic practice:
    “she scarified the snakebite with a paring knife”

    3.criticize severely and hurtfully”

    Did you intend one of these definitions?

    Perhaps one of these words will do? affright, alarm (also alarum), fright, horrify, panic, scare, frighten, shock, spook, startle, terrify, terrorize

    40

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Probably closer to number 2, make a small mental incision and bleed out any self respect.

      30

    • #
      Robk

      When I apply my scarifier (tractor drawn 40′wide) to newly germinated weeds, they are done over, curl up and die.
      Perhaps more like that, but yes I wondered about scarified homeowners too.

      30

    • #
      Gee Aye

      Another thing to blame the Simpsons for. Jo is part of that aweful Gen X and probably never had proper grammar at skool

      10

  • #
    Russell

    I’m guessing you’ve probably already seen this Jo but, if not, I think it’s well worth publicising: https://www.youtube.com/embed/iEPW_P7GVB8

    11

  • #
    John Watt

    Looks like Rod Laver Arena is going under. No worries. Thorpe and Hackett are looking for new careers. So perhaps an Aussie can win the Open sometime soon.

    20

  • #
    Analitik

    I’m sure this is why Tim Flannery sold his home on the Hawkesbury River (which he bought AFTER predicting catastrophic sea level rise) /sarc

    21

  • #
    jaymam

    Unfortunately most measurements of sea level rise use Mean Sea Level, i.e. an average of the tide at all levels from low tide to high tide. That does not have much to do with whether flooding will occur.
    Flooding tends to occur at King Tides, so obviously the level of King Tides should be plotted. If you do that, you will see that the level of King Tides has been reducing for some years now.
    You could also make a mark on a large immovable object down by the sea each King Tide. You will discover that the marks are lower than they used to be.
    Sea Level Rise (and Mean Sea Level) is a pile of rubbish. Please stop using and plotting MSL.

    60

  • #
    pat

    subscription required. would love to know where the story goes, if anyone can assist:

    16 Apr: UK Times: Ben Webster: Energy tycoons squabble over who is greenest
    They live in Cotswold mansions a few miles apart and have grown rich on green subsidies. Now they are engaged in a dispute over who can claim to sell the greenest energy and get the right to billions more in subsidies.
    Dale Vince, a former New Age traveller, is fighting Mark Shorrock, a ex-film producer, and Juliet Davenport, his polo-playing wife. Mr Vince owns the green energy supplier Ecotricity and Ms Davenport heads Good Energy. They live on opposite sides of Stroud in Gloucestershire, where hippies flocked in the Sixties and which retains a New Age flavour. The local football club, Forest Green Rovers, owned by Mr Vince, sells only vegan food at the ground…
    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/energy-tycoons-squabble-over-who-is-greenest-6lkxcgd67

    presumably it’s about the following, which involves Shorrock and ***Vince (see final two excerpts):

    18 Mar: RenewableEnergyFocus: Gail Rajgor: Time for tidal lagoons?
    The UK’s decision to give the planning and development green light to the £1 billion 320MW Swansea Bay tidal lagoon project in June 2015 was hailed by Tidal Power Lagoon (TPL) chief executive Mark Shorrock as a potential “game-changer”…
    As he noted, with a 120-year lifespan, the ability to produce predictable amounts of energy for 14 hours a day every day, the creating of a large local supply chain (and with it a significant volume of jobs), and by using what he describes as a “zero carbon energy infrastructure”, this and the other, much larger, tidal barrage projects planned by TPL across five other sites in the UK could provide up to eight per cent of the UK’s electricity supply alone. The next two proposed projects by TLP at Cardiff and Newport, for which planning applications are expected in 2017 and 2018 respectively, alone represent some 4000MW of lagoon power and £10 billion of capital investment.
    However, just months after the Swansea Bay project was given the green light, it was put on hold for a year, reportedly in part because of negotiations with Department for Energy & Climate Change (DECC) over the contract for difference (the subsidy the Government will pay for each unit of renewable energy produced by the lagoon)…
    One such investor in the project is Sanjeev Gupta, executive chairman of the Liberty Group and global energy and commodities company SIMEC. As well as backing the Swansea project and others planned by TPL in the UK, Gupta wants to see tidal lagoons built in India…
    ***”The Government has been agonising for a while about what level of support to give to the first tidal [lagoon] project in Britain. They’re clearly interested in the technology, which is a good thing, but they’ve been put off by the price tag of £168/MWh [over 35 years] proposed by Swansea Bay – that’s understandable,” commented Ecotricity founder Dale Vince. “We’re confident that tidal power projects can be built around Britain at much closer to £90/MWh. That’s the same price the Government are paying to support nuclear energy, but without the risks or clean-up costs.”…
    ***Nonetheless, Ecotricity’s Vince wants the UK government to open up the tidal energy market – including the Swansea Bay project – to competitive tenders…READ ON
    http://www.renewableenergyfocus.com/view/43905/time-for-tidal-lagoons/

    10

  • #
    TdeF

    Outrageously none of the self appointed “Climate Council” is a meterologist. It is hard to see how studying dead kangroos makes former Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery an expert in Climate let alone in civil engineering. CEO Climate Council CEO Mackenzie is a young enthusiast for disasters but there is no evidence of any relevant qualifications. Will Steffen has a PhD in Industrial Chemistry and makes profound statements about energy and climate. How such people can give advice on climate let alone civil engineering matters such as flooding in downtown Melbourne in another century is beyond explanation. If such a simple minded approach was taken to civil engineering matters, there would not be a tunnel, an underground or a basement in any city in the world. No one would live near a port.

    Perhaps that is why the previous 2014 Climate meeting was in Lima, Peru. Is it that at 5,000 feet (1,505 metres) these nervous nellies, these horsemen of the ecopalypse finally felt safe? Is that why the Climate Council show a map of downtown Melbourne, 100km from the ocean where even the river is not shown as flooding?

    Is there no comprehension that it is easy to raise the banks of the river in the next 100 years to cope with any rise, that a city which did not even exist 150 years ago can be adjusted? The conversion into billions of dollars of damage and worries about insurance does not allow for any ingenuity, any response and assumes people will lie face down in the streets and drown, that no one will be able to cope with even a tiny of sea level rise? What were the original builders of Venice in 1200 thinking? With Tim Flannery to advise, this masterpiece of art and engineering would never have existed. No kangaroos there either but perhaps a few in the far paddock.

    10

  • #
    Glenn999

    when we get to the point where we are technologically able to transport vast quantities of rock and dirt to the coast, we will be well on our way to overcome this extinction event.

    30

    • #
      bobl

      Glen the horrendous distance to transport the dirt in reality is what – 50 metres ( to pile it up as a levee bank ).

      00

  • #
    Dave in the States

    Even satellites are incapable of measuring the absolute values.

    Shows Sydney area around 4mm-6mm per year. (Sydney tide gauge measures 0.65mm/year)

    OOPS !!!! looks like the satellites are STUFFED and totally irrelevant for purpose..

    I’m late to the party but from scanning through the thread I can verify these statements as correct in the context of measuring sea level to an accuracy of millimeters or not.

    Radar measures distance by measuring the elapsed time it takes for the radio wave to travel to the object it bounces off of and to return to the point it was sent from. Since radio waves travel at a fixed rate of 299.99999 repeating…meters per microsecond this measurement can be made. (Two methods can be used: one where a magnetic deflection of the trace on a cathode ray tube is triggered at moment the echo pulse is received. And 2nd by comparing the phase angle of the frequency modulated wave form of the returned echo with a master modulation, which must of be used with a continuous wave radar, but can be utilized with both CW and pulse radar.) The accuracy of the measurement is strictly a function of how precise the elapsed time can be measured. The best accuracy is typically 0.01% of the distance being measured. Accurate to a mm? Come on!

    But they do not have to have the absolute distance measured exactly. They might use a nominal distance and measure the change over time. Yet once again establishing a nominal distance considering the huge amount of natural variation such as tides, swells..ect.. is quite a problem. Accurate to a mm? Come on!

    No, the thousands of tide gauges which indicate rise as only about 1mm per year are far more reliable.

    00

  • #
    ScotsmaninUtah

    London – and the buildings just keep on coming

    It is very interesting and an irony of our times, that with all the warnings of a 2 degree warming
    and rising sea levels, London development of it’s River based real estate shows no sign of abating.

    10

  • #
  • #
    StewGreen

    Land Level Rise is REAL and it’s happening right now !
    Your family home safely at ground level today, maybe be buried under the soil in as little as 1,500-2,000 years.
    We spoke to the Hadrian family who built a property in London in 200AD only to find it’s completely buried beneath the service today.

    Not confined to cities either : ‘Peterborough Pompeii’ An un-named Bronze Age family needed archaeologists to find their family home “two metres below the modern ground surface, as levels have risen over thousands of years” ..source

    Global In Morocco for one family “The Street Level has risen above the original Front Door in 250 years” photo
    In Sweden : “In the Viking Age the land level was 5 m below that of today” source

    London affected Dukes Place Wall : “The bottom of the Roman wall is actually around 4 metres below street level.”, “by the medieval period the ground level had already risen by 2 metres.” source
    - “as a ‘rule of thumb’, the land level has risen in the City of London by about a foot for every century.” source

    Faster than ever
    – there are 2 options ..either it’s happening “Faster than ever” or it’s NOT happening “Faster than ever”..but the precautionary principle tells us it’s best to assume the negative that “it’s happening “Faster than ever”

    Deniers : Not everybody believes this there are some people who DENY it’s problem eg Mr George Monbiot, but when you check his background you find that he works for the Guardian which uses offshore trusts for it’s funds and whose pension fund is heavily invested in fossil fuels ..So he “would say that wouldn’t he?”

    Just my thoughts after reading a scary scary story about coastal property sea level mapping in Australia.

    00

    • #
      StewGreen

      Caused by Man Made acid rain ? No Mother Nature’s dust rain, helps raises ground levels.

      “it does in fact, rain dirt from the sky. Well, it rains dust, and seeds that will grow into plants, that will die and form dirt.
      Furthermore It rains water, that will break down the rocks. “

      00