Amazing stuff! Should we be concerned? What other human activities may contribute to alter the tilt?
Reminder: Climate models are not proven theories, but complex human artifacts loaded with human presumptions and biases! There are credible reports that the validation of climate models were not always successful, e.g. backcasting.
How much does this tilting actually affect climate on earth?
The scientists pointed out that the depletion of groundwater contributed to global sea level rise (not climate change)! However, the scientists used climate models????? So were e.g. the climate models adjusted for assumed groundwater depletion to fit the model simulation/predictions? It appears the scientists here stretched the use of climate models to the extreme!
This research raises some serious questions about popular narratives as well as causation!
What is also dubious about this study is the pretense of precision! The scientists claim a 6.24 mm rise of global sea level between 1993-2010. I don't think we can measure something like global sea level at mm precision!!! What about measurement error or measurement resolution across the globe.
"... Now, scientists have found that a significant amount of the polar drift results from human activity: pumping groundwater for drinking and irrigation.
“The very way the planet wobbles is impacted by our activities,” ...
The scientists built a model of the polar wander, accounting for factors such as reservoirs filling because of new dams and ice sheets melting, to see how well they explained the polar movements observed between 1993 and 2010. During that time, satellite measurements were precise enough to detect a shift in the poles as small as a few millimeters. ...
But when the researchers also put in 2150 gigatons of groundwater that hydrologic models estimate were pumped between 1993 and 2010, the predicted polar motion aligned much more closely with observations. ...
The effect was amplified because much of the water was removed in the northern midlatitudes, in groundwater depletion hot spots such as northwestern India and the western United States. If the biggest loss of water had occurred closer to the equator or the poles, the effect would have been smaller ...
The extra wobble is far too small to affect weather or seasons [highly speculative, climate not mentioned] ...
The new paper helps confirm that groundwater depletion added approximately 6 millimeters to global sea level rise between 1993 and 2010. ..."
The scientists built a model of the polar wander, accounting for factors such as reservoirs filling because of new dams and ice sheets melting, to see how well they explained the polar movements observed between 1993 and 2010. During that time, satellite measurements were precise enough to detect a shift in the poles as small as a few millimeters. ...
But when the researchers also put in 2150 gigatons of groundwater that hydrologic models estimate were pumped between 1993 and 2010, the predicted polar motion aligned much more closely with observations. ...
The effect was amplified because much of the water was removed in the northern midlatitudes, in groundwater depletion hot spots such as northwestern India and the western United States. If the biggest loss of water had occurred closer to the equator or the poles, the effect would have been smaller ...
The extra wobble is far too small to affect weather or seasons [highly speculative, climate not mentioned] ...
The new paper helps confirm that groundwater depletion added approximately 6 millimeters to global sea level rise between 1993 and 2010. ..."
From the abstract:
"Climate model estimates show significant groundwater depletion during the 20th century, consistent with global mean sea level (GMSL) budget analysis. However, prior to the Argo float era, in the early 2000’s, there is little information about steric sea level contributions to GMSL, making the role of groundwater depletion in this period less certain. We show that a useful constraint is found in observed polar motion (PM). In the period 1993–2010, we find that predicted PM excitation trends estimated from various sources of surface mass loads and the estimated glacial isostatic adjustment agree very well with the observed. Among many contributors to the PM excitation trend, groundwater storage changes are estimated to be the second largest (4.36 cm/yr) toward 64.16°E. Neglecting groundwater effects, the predicted trend differs significantly from the observed. PM observations may also provide a tool for studying historical continental scale water storage variations.
Key Points
- Earth's pole has drifted toward 64.16°E at a speed of 4.36 cm/yr during 1993–2010 due to groundwater depletion and resulting sea level rise
- Including groundwater depletion effects, the estimated drift of Earth's rotational pole agrees remarkably well with observations
Plain Language Summary
Melting of polar ice sheets and mountain glaciers has been understood as a main cause of sea level rise associated with contemporary climate warming. It has been proposed that an important anthropogenic contribution is sea level rise due to groundwater depletion resulting from irrigation. A climate model estimate for the period 1993–2010 gives total groundwater depletion of 2,150 GTon, equivalent to global sea level rise of 6.24 mm. However, direct observational evidence supporting this estimate has been lacking. In this study, we show that the model estimate of water redistribution from aquifers to the oceans would result in a drift of Earth's rotational pole, about 78.48 cm toward 64.16°E. In combination with other well-understood sources of water redistribution, such as melting of polar ice sheets and mountain glaciers, good agreement with PM observations serves as an independent confirmation of the groundwater depletion model estimate."
Drift of Earth's Pole Confirms Groundwater Depletion as a Significant Contributor to Global Sea Level Rise 1993–2010 (open access)
Figure 4 (a) Individual contributors to the PM excitation trend. (b) Sum of PM excitation trend contributors with (solid blue) and without (dashed blue) groundwater depletion. Red arrow is the observed PM excitation.
No comments:
Post a Comment