By: Larry J. Schweiger

The historic trend of rising sea-levels during the period of the industrial revolution and into modern times is unmistakable.  For beach lovers, let me make just one suggestion, don’t buy that beach house now.  The price will be coming down soon.

Scientists are now re-projecting their estimates of sea-level rise while you can see their current projections at the IPCC website:

http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/408.htm

Predicting sea-level rise is a complex problem because the various climatic and ecological factors influencing sea-level rise all seem to be operating at a different pace with varying levels of predictability. 

The existing climate models with their sea-level projections do factor in a range of human responses from "business as usual" to various carbon dioxide control strategies.  What humans do in the days ahead will either add to the problem or slow the pace of global warming and sea level-rise.

           Sea Level Rise Projections to 2100

           Source: IPCC Third Assessment Report (2001).

Just as a pot of water expands as it is heated, so the oceans will expand as the water warms.  Humans have warmed the oceans almost by one degree and a second degree is largely in the pipeline.  The IPCC models will have little difficulty predicting the range of changes caused by predicted warming with a fair amount of certainty.

Mountain-top ice formations around the world are melting at a measurable but increasing pace.   Artic ice is shrinkage at an alarming pace. Since it is floating ice, this melt does not add to the ocean directly but the snow and ice loss decreases albedo increasing energy absorption and thereby causing a feedback that leads to ever warmer surface temperatures.  The scientists have taken these factors into consideration in their climate modeling with increasing accuracy.

Thawing of permafrost all across the polar region will increase the decomposition of widespread high-latitude peatlands, significantly increasing the rate of CO2 and methane escaping to the atmosphere.  This is of particular concern in Siberia where there is estimated to be 70-80 billion tons of trapped methane that is beginning to escape into the atmosphere at a rate five times what was earlier predicted. Atmospheric methane could also come from breakdown of clathrates which are frozen gas hydrates that have been stored beneath the vast Arctic continental shelves.  Changes in predicted methane releases are not following earlier scientific estimates and their potential powerful influence on the climate system can create a significant amount of uncertainty for predicting future sea-level rise. 

I look forward to seeing how the upcoming IPCC final report handles these questions in light of recently published science.

Ten years ago, Greenland was spilling an excess of water equal to one Nile River.  Today, Greenland loads about three Nile Rivers into the ocean each year.  Most troubling, Greenland is experiencing a dramatic increase the number and magnitude of ice quakes as large blocks of ice begin to move.  One six cubic mile block of ice got my attention when it slid 42 feet in under a minute. At best, the melting of ice on Greenland will be non-linear.  Worst case, Greenland begins to calve massive ice formations into the ocean.  The same kind of pattern is happening in West Antarctica. 

How can scientists accurately predict mass ice failures?

Forests particularly boreal forests are an important carbon sink that are being threatened.  Insects that over-winter in mild conditions are causing extensive damage and recent studies suggest forest fires are four times as frequent and burn six times as much land area as they did a few years ago.  We risk turning important forest carbon sinks into troubling carbon sources.

Forest scientists, particularly wood scientists, can calculate how much load a tree limb can handle before it breaks but they are unable to accurately predict when multiple human-made forces act synergistically, overtake and cause a forest ecosystem to collapse.  Forests are noisy systems with too many moving parts.

All of the above climate-forcing mechanisms will have global climate consequences.  Some will increase greenhouse gas loadings which in turn will amplify the warming processes.  Melting ice tends to increase the absorbtion of energy which further accelerates additional ice melting and the expansion of water leading to sea level rise.

Until last September 1st, two million people lived in coastal Louisiana within two feet of sea level.  The same development pattern occurs up and down our coasts.  While it is generally understood that twenty-feet of sea-level rise will trigger catastrophic socioeconomic dislocations and millions upon millions of environmental refugees, a sea level rise two feet will displace millions of Americans, do extensive damage to the built environment and destroy millions of acres of coastal wetlands.

It is easy to jump to the false conclusion that uncertainty makes inaction an acceptable option.  Make no mistake about it; sea levels will be rising dramatically if we do not act now. The only real question is how much and how fast?  We can slow the pace of sea level rise if we are willing to act to wean carbon fuels from our energy diet.  There is no time to waste.

Election Day clearly propelled global warming to the top tier on the nation’s agenda for action. The public has already moved beyond a debate over science to a demand for action.

The Zogby post-election survey of nearly 20,000 voters found that three-quarters of the electorate say Congress should pass legislation promoting renewable and alternative energy sources as an effective way to reduce global warming pollution.

This makes clear that from here on out, no candidate for political office can ignore the issue of global warming. It is not going away, and voters clearly expect candidates for public office to offer solutions.

There can be no question on Capitol Hill that the American public wants immediate and aggressive action to address global warming. We have a new Congress with a clear mandate from the public to get on with the task of finding global warming solutions that create energy independence from fossil fuels.

Americans want a new energy future that reduces our dependence on foreign oil, creates more American jobs and develops clean, renewable energy sources that will benefit us all. Energy independence from fossil fuels means national security and climate security.

This is not a matter of left or right, it’s a matter of right or wrong. We have a moral responsibility to solve this problem to protect our children’s future.

America’s voters have delivered a clear message that the newly elected Congress must set the nation on a path to a clean energy future to address the joined priorities of national security and climate security. Energy independence in the form of a clean energy future is the common denominator linking concern about American military commitments in the Middle East, domestic job insecurity and the looming threat of global warming. A clean energy future means breaking America’s addiction to foreign oil. It means creating a new generation of jobs developing the technologies and alternatives for cheaper, cleaner and safer energy supplies. And it means using the engine of free market innovation to confront global warming by steering the economy away from fossil fuels.

The new Congress should take this charge on as a top priority. We need policies to create incentives for innovation. We need legislation to cap U.S. global warming pollution by sending market signals that it’s cheaper to reduce the use of fossil fuels than it is to continue business as usual.

Congress also needs to jolt the federal bureaucracy awake to recognize the imperative need for responses to global warming’s cumulative threats of more intense hurricanes, more widespread drought, heat waves and wildfires, a rising sea level and added stress to the survival of wildlife.

For its part, the Bush administration could make a start by ending its state of denial in which mere exhortations to industry to voluntarily reduce global warming pollution are intended to pass as policy adequate to the challenge.

The test of those just elected will be to see if they can catch up to where the people who elected them are leading.