Regionalizing Sea-level Rise Projections for Urban Planning Bob Kopp Rutgers University E-mail: robert.kopp@rutgers.edu Collaborators: Ken Miller, Ben Horton, Jim Browning, Vladimir Pavlovic (Rutgers); Jerry Mitrovica (Harvard); Andrew Kemp (Tufts) Students and Postdocs: Carling Hay, Eric Morrow (Harvard) DIMACS/CCIADA Workshop on Urban Planning for Climate Events 23 September 2013
The coastal impacts, vulnerability and adaptation knowledge chain Past Sea Level Future Sea Level Coastal Planning for and Flooding and Flooding Vulnerability Resilience 2
Coastal Climate Change Research for Resilience Past Sea Level Future Sea Level Coastal Planning for and Flooding and Flooding Vulnerability Resilience Institute of Marine & Coastal Sciences Bloustein School of Planning & Public Policy Earth & Planetary Sciences Geography Center for Advanced Infrastructure & Transportation Environmental Science Walton Center for Remote Sensing & Spatial Analysis Jacques Cousteau National Estuarine Research Reserve CCICADA
Coastal Climate Change Research for Resilience Past Sea Level Future Sea Level Coastal Planning for and Flooding and Flooding Vulnerability Resilience This talk Greenberg Andrews Lathrop
Ship Bottom, NJ N N 2008 (Ken Miller) October 31, 2012 5
Storm surges take place in a context of sea-level change Sandy 13.9 ft Irene Dec. 93 9.5 ft Donna 10 ft 9.8 ft 100 yr storm sea level rise 50 yr storm 10 yr storm Heights in blue Miller; modified after relative to MLLW Zervas (2005) (FEMA standard) 6
Kemp & Horton (2013) estimates of the contribution of historical sea-level rise to flooding at the Battery tide storm tide Sandy storm surge 4.0 cumulative glacio-isostatic adjustment Contribution to Flood Height (m) cumulative sea-level rise (ICE6G-VM5b; 0.66 mm a -1 ) 3.5 3.0 Donna 2.5 Gloria 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 1788 1821 1893 1938 1960 1985 2012 Year (AD) 7
Dominant factors in global sea level rise: 1. Thermal Expansion Compare observed thermal expansion of about 8 Meehl et al. (2007) 1.0 mm/yr from 1983-2003 (Domingues et al., 2008)
Dominant factors in global sea level rise: II. Glacier and ice sheet melt Total Hazard Non-polar glaciers and ice caps 0.26 ± 0.11 m Greenland & Antarctic glaciers and ice caps 0.46 ± 0.17 m Greenland Ice Sheet 7 m West Antarctic Ice Sheet 5 m East Antarctic Ice Sheet 52 m Maps by P . Fretwell (British Antarctic Survey) 9 Lemke et al. (2007); Bamber et al. (2001); Lythe et al. (2001)
Road map • Why does regional sea level differ from global sea level? • What sort of regional sea level variations do we see? • How can we incorporate these into projections? • [How can understanding past sea level help us move beyond informed expert judgment for projecting ice sheet behavior?] 10
Why does regional sea level differ from global mean sea level? 11
Global Sea Level change is not the same as local sea level change • Ocean dynamic effects • Mass redistribution effects: Gravitational, elastic and rotational • Natural and groundwater withdrawal-related sediment compaction • Long term: Isostasy and tectonics 12
Global Sea Level change is not the same as local sea level change • Ocean dynamic effects • Mass redistribution effects: Gravitational, elastic and rotational • Natural and groundwater withdrawal-related sediment compaction • Long term: Isostasy and tectonics a 0.1 ¬0.1 60 ° N ¬0.3 ¬0.5 (m) –0.7 40 ° N –0.9 ¬1.1 ¬1.3 20 ° N 100 ° W 60 ° W 20 ° W SSH, 1992-2002 13 Yin et al. (2009)
Global Sea Level change is not the same as local sea level change • Ocean dynamic effects • Mass redistribution effects: Gravitational, elastic and rotational • Natural and groundwater withdrawal-related sediment compaction • Long term: Isostasy and tectonics c 0.4 Projected dynamic sea level anomalies 0.3 60 ° N from changes in 0.2 the Atlantic Meridional 0.1 Overturning (m) 0 Circulation in A1B in 2091-2100, 40 ° N ¬0.1 relative to 1981-2000 ¬0.2 ¬0.3 ¬0.4 20 ° N 100 ° W 60 ° W 20 ° W 14 Yin et al. (2009)
Global Sea Level change is not the same as local sea level change • Ocean dynamic effects • Mass redistribution effects: Gravitational, elastic and rotational • Natural and groundwater withdrawal-related sediment compaction • Long term: Isostasy and tectonics M E 15
Global Sea Level change is not the same as local sea level change • Ocean dynamic effects • Mass redistribution effects: Gravitational, elastic and rotational • Natural and groundwater withdrawal-related sediment compaction • Long term: Isostasy and tectonics M I M E -M I Farrell & Clark (1976), after Woodward (1888) Not to scale! 16
Global Sea Level change is not the same as local sea level change • Ocean dynamic effects • Mass redistribution effects: Gravitational, elastic and rotational • Natural and groundwater withdrawal-related sediment compaction • Long term: Isostasy and tectonics Gravitational-Elastic-Rotational Fingerprints of Greenland and WAIS melting, per meter GSL rise West Antarctica Greenland WAIS ~1.1x 17 Mitrovica et al. (2011)
Global Sea Level change is not the same as local sea level change • Ocean dynamic effects • Mass redistribution effects: Gravitational, elastic and rotational • Natural and groundwater withdrawal-related sediment compaction • Long term: Isostasy and tectonics Global predictions of the present-day rate of change of relative sea level (mm yr x 1 ; positive denotes sea-level rise). (a) is the prediction Sea-level rise due to GIA (mm/y) Mitrovica et al., 2001 18
Geoid trends inferred from GRACE, 2002-2009 Chambers et al. (2010) 19
What sort of regional variations do we see? 20
What do we actually see? NEW YORK ATLANTIC CITY 600 600 500 500 400 400 300 300 mm mm 200 200 100 100 0 0 − 100 − 100 1900 1950 2000 1900 1950 2000 Purple: Church & White (2011) GSL ~1.3 mm/y GIA Blue: Tide gauge data An additional ~1 mm/y on the shore Green: Long-term sea-level signal Interannual variability of ~10 cm 21
Local long-term ~linear sea-level anomaly rate (mm/y) Long − term linear sea level anomaly rate (mm/y) Long − term linear sea level anomaly rate (mm/y) 2 4 50 50 1.5 3.5 45 45 1 3 0.5 2.5 40 40 complicated GIA 0 2 + compact. 35 35 − 0.5 1.5 − 1 1 30 30 0.5 − 1.5 Erosion + compaction 0 − 2 25 25 260 265 270 275 280 285 290 295 300 225 230 235 240 245 250 255 260 265 after Kopp (2013) 22
LETTERS PUBLISHED ONLINE: 24 JUNE 2012 | DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE1597 Hotspot of accelerated sea-level rise on the Atlantic coast of North America Asbury H. Sallenger Jr * , Kara S. Doran and Peter A. Howd Really? Yes, but it’s too early to tell if it goes beyond natural variability (but it will likely, eventually)... smooth non−linear regional sea level anomaly rate (mm/y) 48 30 ARGENTIA a 1.5 b New York City NORTH SYD 46 20 BAR HARBO 44 1 SEAVEY IS 10 42 NEWPORT 0.5 SANDY HOO 40 0 ATLANTIC Latitude mm SOLOMON’S 38 0 PORTSMOUT −10 36 −0.5 34 −20 SPRINGMAI −1 FORT PULA 32 p=.03 AMO − 7 y −30 p=.14 −NAO − 2 y MAYPORT 30 p=.10 DAYTONA B −GSNW − 0 y −1.5 28 −40 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 Time Kopp (2013) 23
How can we incorporate these into projections? 24
Scenario-based localization example: SLR scenarios for NYC and New Jersey Global effects Regional effects Local eff. Totals Ocean Mass Coastal Thermal Glaciers GIS AIS dynamics redist. GIA subsidence Global NYC Shore cm cm cm cm cm cm cm cm cm cm cm 6 2030 best 5 3 3 2 -1 4 3 13 22 25 2030 low 2 3 1 1 2 -1 3 2 8 15 18 2030 high 11 4 4 6 8 -1 5 4 21 30 33 2030 higher 11 4 4 6 8 -1 5 4 24 36 40 2050 best 10 6 8 2 10 -4 7 5 25 38 43 2050 low 4 5 2 1 3 -1 5 4 16 27 32 2050 high 19 7 10 9 13 -3 9 6 39 52 57 2050 higher 19 7 10 9 13 -3 9 6 45 62 68 2100 best 24 14 27 8 20 -13 13 10 73 93 103 2100 low 10 13 4 2 5 -3 9 8 40 64 74 2100 high 46 19 35 33 25 -11 17 12 117 139 149 2100 higher 46 19 35 33 25 -11 17 12 133 164 176 2100 collapse 55 37 54 100 35 -6 17 12 246 292 304 after Miller et al. (in rev.) 25
Probabilistic localization example 1 GSL 95% 50% 33% 5% 1% cm Honolulu Exceedance probability 0.8 NYC GSL 47 77 89 151 233 Atlantic City 0.6 Honolulu 50 87 102 181 288 0.4 NYC 67 101 115 186 286 0.2 Atlantic 77 112 125 196 298 City 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Sea − level rise, 2000 − 2100 (m) using Bamber & Aspinall (2013) for ice sheets: 30 cm (10-103 cm, 90% range) Glaciers from Radic et al. (2013): 20 cm (10-30 cm) Thermal expansion from NRC (2012): 24 cm (10-46 cm) Dynamic sea level from Yin et al. (2009) GIA and subsidence from Kopp (2013) Fingerprints from Mitrovica 26
Seaside Heights, NJ 1 foot 3 feet 6 feet (likely by ~2040) (likely by 2090s) (~5% chance by 2100) Maps available from http://slrviewer.rutgers.edu/ and http://sealevel.climatecentral.org/ 27
Influence of moderate SLR on historical flood levels Miller et al. (in rev.) 28
Recommend
More recommend
