Holland Haven – New Groynes New Beach And A Surprise

Posted on March 16, 2015 by Jeremy

The new beach at Holland Haven is open now new groynes have been built. I went to have a look and found a surprise. Sea level rise in next 100 years?

There’s now a beach at Holland Haven!

With plenty of dry sand in front of the sea wall.

And the sand almost reaches the prom – who needs steps?

But the groynes don’t reach the sea wall, I counted a gap of 15 paces.

There are 15 more paces to the high water mark and 59 to the sea at round about low tide.
So 89 paces in all. Noticeably more than the 55 paces I found with old groynes in April 2012. Still a bit less than 90-100 paces at Walton and quite a bit less than the 120 paces at Frinton.

The groynes are spaced about 200 meters apart which leads to the sea coming a significant distance closer to the sea wall in the middle of the groynes.

Round about low tide some of the shorter northern branch of the Y was in the sea

But almost all the longer southern branch was out of the sea

It seemed to me the groynes might be covered by the sea at high water so I went back close to high tide on 9 March 2015 when high tide was estimated to be 4.3meters.

And it looks like I was wrong as the groynes are still clearly out of the sea.

But not nearly as much as the large rock groyne at Walton (groyne 84).

High tide on 21 March is estimated to be 4.9meters – about 2 feet higher than on 9 March, which I guess will cover the groynes. If I’m free I’ll go back and take more photos, perhaps someone else can take photos as well just in case I’m not free.

Photos of super tide on 22 March covering groynes here.

So What’s The Surprise?

The new groynes at Holland are largely paid for my Environment Agency.

The groynes and new beach are supposed to last for 100 years.

EA follow DEFRA’s guidance of sea level rise for the next century which indicates sea levels are due to rise by between 0.37 and 0.53 meters (14 to 21 inches).

So the highest high tides could be 4 feet higher than those shown in pictures I took on 9 March 2015, which would clearly cover the groynes.

The locations in Tendring where the sea covered the groynes at high tide are those were the sea has washed away the sand the most. The most that is apart from the Naze and south of Seawick where there aren’t any groynes at all!

So either EA are not expecting that much sea level rise, or they don’t expect the groynes to keep the beach and seawall safe for 100 years.

Posted in Beaches, Groynes, Sea Level | Tagged EA, environment agency, holland haven beach, rising sea level | Leave a comment

EA Say Sea Levels Risen Less Than Expected

Posted on February 15, 2015 by Jeremy

David Evans emailed to point out wikipedia Thames Barrier entry quotes EA saying Environment Agency responded that it does not plan to replace the Thames Barrier before 2070, as the barrier was designed with an allowance for sea level rise of 8 mm per year until 2030, which has not been realised in the intervening years.

The Thames Barrier was opened in 1982, 48 years before 2030. Which suggests the barrier was built to cope with a rise in sea level from 1982 of 48 × 8 = 484 mm.

There are 88 years between 1982 and 2070 which suggests EA now expects an average rise of no more than 5.5 mm/year.

This is curious as rate of sea level rise as measured by tide gauges at nearby location are

Southend	1.2 ± 0.2 mm/year
Sheerness	1.67 ± 0.04 mm/year
Tilbury	1.7 ± 0.6 mm/year

An article in Telegraph on 18 Feb 2014 quotes Dick Tappin, an engineer who helped design in the barrier in 1970s and who has worked on it ever since, the barrier will work into 22th century.

If the barrier lasted until 2200, 218 years from when it opened, this would suggest an average rate of sea level rise of 2.2 mm/year, still more than what is measured by tide gauges.

Posted in EA, Sea Level | Leave a comment

No Correlation CO2 & Temperature From 2004-14 & 1960-76

Posted on October 16, 2014 by Jeremy

Lack of correlation disproves causation. Correlation only suggests it. Lack of correlation between CO2 and temperature shows CO2 does not cause rising temperatures.

Correlation measures how well 2 quantities are linked.

A correlation

of around 1 indicates things move together
of around 0 indicates things are not linked
of around -1 indicates things move in opposite direction

It is very important to remember whilst 2 quantities may have a correlation close to 1, this may arise by coincidence. Hence the mantra

Correlation is not causation

Which students are encouraged to repeat when they say their prayers.

But perhaps not climate scientists.

Using HADCRUT4 temperature anomalies and CO2 levels from Mauna Loa there are 2 periods between 1960 and 2014 where CO2 levels are not correlated with temperature anomalies and one where CO2 levels and temperature anomalies are reasonably well correlated.

So if CO2 levels cause rising temperatures did someone switch this off from 1960 to 1976 and again from 2004 to 2014?

1960-1976	-0.02
1976-2004	0.78
2004-2014	0.02

This graph of CO2 Levels and temperature anomalies illustrates this

The three periods clearly have very different trends

However the plot of net change in CO2 from the same month the previous year appears to follow changes in temperature much more closely.

This was pointed out by Prof Murray Salby

The following graph compares observed CO2 levels with those where the current months CO2 level, C, is calculated from

The current months temperature anomaly T
The CO2 level in the same month the previous year Cl
2 numbers A and B

using the formula

C = A + Cl + T x B

A = 1.22 ± 0.03

B = 1.66 ± 0.09

So the first year is used to provide the annual shape

Each year there is an increment of a constant 1.22 ppm

For each month in the year add 1.66 x that months temperature anomaly and the CO2 level for the same month in the previous year.

It seems to be to simple to be true and no iterative models or supercomputers

Until you remember CO2 levels show a more or less linear increase with each year and the shape within each year is roughly the same.

The correlation between observed and calculated levels is 0.99971717

Correlation is not causation

But this method matches the entire period which is not true for CO2 drives temperature theory.

As Prof Murray Salby pointed out this method has a simple physical model

CO2 levels are the integral of past temperatures + annual constant increase

It is just about impossible (for me at any rate) to see how this can be true and simultaneously CO2 causing temperature rise

So I conclude rising CO2 levels do not cause temperature rise

And thus all the money being spent on renewable energy, and knocking down flood defences is being completely wasted.

Oh – it’s our money by the way.

Posted in Climate Change, CO2, Temperature | Tagged climate change, CO2, global temperature rise, global warming, green house gas, Prof Murray Salby | Leave a comment

2ºC Warmer 5000 years Ago In Orkneys

Posted on October 13, 2014 by Jeremy

Temperatures were 2ºC warmer 5000 years ago according to archaeological and geological evidence from Skara Brae in Orkneys, Scotland

Professor Ian Stewart presented the series Making Scotland’s Landscape, one program focused on historic climate.

I produced the following chart from 3 separate charts shown on the program, the original charts are shown lower down.

It is clear

current temperatures are not unusual
there have been a number of changes in temperature over the millenia

Here is the section which presents the archaeological and geological evidence temperatures were 2ºC higher around 3000BC and have cycled since then.

Here are the 3 individual charts I spliced together

For whatever reason the scale on this chart was different to the previous two, so I had to guess (err I mean estimate) rescaling to fit on one chart.

It is interesting to compare the temperatures from Making Scotland’s Landscape with these 3 charts which come from page 202 of Working Group 1 of IPCC AR1, the first IPCC report issued in 1990. Whilst they not exactly identical they show the same pattern of falling and rising temperatures and more or less the same times.

It seems to me as these records show past temperatures being higher than at present

If CO2 is responsible for higher temperatures then CO2 was higher in the past and this higher level could not be caused by humans.
Some mechanism other than CO2 was reponsible for previous higher temperatures, so how do we know current warming is solely due to CO2, in fact how do we know CO2 makes any appreciable difference?
As there has been cooling of several degrees in the past some mechanism must have caused this, how do we know it will not cause more cooling in the future?

Which ever way you look at it the past temperature record seems to show there is no reason to believe either

Human emissions of CO2 are solely responsible for current temperature
Temperatures will not fall at some time in the future.

If this is true all the measures being taken to avoid raising CO2 (and hence temperatures) are a waste of money, e.g.

Windfarms
Closing coal fire power stations
Burning wood from USA in UK power stations
Trying to stop using fossil fuels
Knocking down sea walls in face of rising sea levels

What do you think?

Posted in Climate Change, CO2, Temperature | Tagged archaeology, CO2, geology, global temperature rise, global warming, green house gas, Skara Brae | Comments Off

Naze Cliffs Fall Into Sea Even Though It’s Known How To Stop It

Posted on September 5, 2014 by Jeremy

The Naze cliffs are crumbling into sea. This is EA and so UK government policy. A few yards to south the cliffs have been stopped from falling into sea.

Here are cliffs near Naze Tower, the people on cliffs probably help the erosion.

At the north east end of Naze the part of path along sea wall has already been eroded away.

EA’s plan for how this area should look from 2055 to 2105 shows they plan to allow most of the eastern sea facing part of Naze to fall into sea. And they plan to manage realign the seawall (ie knock down the sea wall) to the north and west (along Walton Channel).

In other words not only do Environment Agency plan for sea to wash the Naze away, they are going to actively speed up the process.

Here are the SMP colour codes. SMP stands for Shoreline Management Plan, how EA plan to ‘protect’ the coast until 2105.

If we zoom in on the Naze, for the plan up to 2025 we can see EA plan to manage realign the cliffs by the Naze Tower, and let most of the rest of sea facing cliffs fall into the sea, NAI or No Active Intervention.

This strikes me as insane.

The cliffs are supposed to be eroding at 1-2metres per year, so in a few years the sea will be able to attack the Naze Tower from the north. So much for saving the Naze Tower.

From Clacton to the Naze, action has been taken to stop cliffs falling into the sea.

Three things are required.

Scuplt the cliffs so they have a gentle slope and not a shear drop.
Build groynes so a bank of dry sand accumulates in front of the cliffs which prevents the sea attacking the base of the cliffs.
Install drains so water can run away

There is a notice by Crag Walk which explains how the sea attacks the base of the cliffs.

Apart from the people who like to climb on the cliffs, another problem are these holes

Which are almost certainly made by rabbits, who tend to hide during the day

but not always

There are layers of sand and clay in the cliffs.

In the summer these dry out, when it rains the clay becomes slippery and sand layer tends to slide over the clay.

Scuplting and draining the cliffs helps to prevent this.

I remember in the 1960s there were cliff slides in Frinton, after the cliffs where sculpted to their current shape, the problem went away.

So lets look at the cliffs along Tendring coastline

Clacton south of pier

Clacton north of pier

Holland Haven

Frinton from near Pole Barn Lane looking south

Frinton from near Pole Barn Lane looking north

Naze below Sunny point, a few yards from Crag Walk

Groynes at Jaywick and Seawick, courtsey of Google.

Clearly showing a bank of dry sand protecting sea wall.

Groynes at Clacton south of pier, again a bank of dry sand in front of sea wall.

Groynes at Walton

Groynes at Dovercourt/Harwich

But don’t build groynes like these at Holland Haven (actually they’re being replaced)

Cliff drainage near Sunny Point, Naze

Cliff drainage at Holland Haven

Just in case you have any doubt, this aerial picture from Google clearly shows how the cliff falls start immediately there are no groynes and cliffs have not been sculpted.

Returning to the north east part of Naze, it looks to me this is part of the area where EA said they would hold the line until 2025

I guess their idea of hold the line must be different to mine

Why is the Naze being allowed to fall into the sea?

I guess there are 2 main reasons

People want to be able to find fossils.

Cost

People want to be able to find fossils

What will happen to the houses on the Naze as it erodes away?

What will happen once the sea breaks into Backwaters (aka Hamford Water)?

The EA map shows the Naze protects this area of intertidal habitat. So EA who have spent time and money attempting to increase salt marsh and intertidal habitat are simultaneously, by their neglect, threatening the very habitat they tried to protect.

On the bright side it will be quicker to get out to sea from the marina.

Is it really worth allowing this destruction just so people can find fossils?

Cost

The cost of Crag Walk was about £1.2 million for 110 million, very roughly £10,000/metre, curiously about the same cost as TDC have spent on defending coast elsewhere

The current repair and renovation to Holland and Clacton sea wall and groynes are budget at around £30million for around 5km or £6000/metre.

Very roughly there is about 1.5km of sea facing undefended cliff at the Naze so the cost might be in the region of £10-15 million.

Seems a lot until you consider the cost of the Gunfleet Sands wind farm is given by Wikipedia as £300 million.

As I was writing gridwatch.templar.co.uk gave the TOTAL contribution of ALL UK windfarms as 2/3 of one percent.

Windfarms produce no electricity when there is no wind. Although the maximum power Gunfleet Sands can produce is 172MW it is rated (optimistically) to be able to only deliver 35.4% of this – around 60MW. At a build cost of £300million this represents a cost of £5million/MW.

Here is a report of a gas electric power station which costs £300million and delivers 300MW, £1million/MW. Five times better value.

And guess what it will produce power when the wind doesn’t blow.

And it will not have to be paid NOT to produce electricity when there is too much.

To get 300MW of electricity from Gunfleet Sands there would have to be 5 times as many windmills costing £1.5 billion.

Am I making the case that if government stopped wasting money on pointless pet projects there would be ample money for defending the Naze (and rest of UK coast). There would also be more money for schools, NHS, defense.

But it’s worse.

The reason for building windfarms (at 5 times the expense of gas power stations) is so your electricity bills double.

I mean, to avoid emitting CO2 in order to stop global warming. But not only have global temperatures stopped rising, global temperaturs are actually FALLING. Since 2000 according to the RSS satellite.

It’s kind of hard to believe in global warming when global temperatures are falling, or that is necessary to stop emitting CO2 as CO2 is causing global warming, when there is global cooling.

Let’s look at how EA spends money.

In February 2014 John Redwood reported EA spent £540 million on staff but only £20 million on drainage.

EA Spend £593Million On Staff £20Million On Drainage – See more at: http://jeremyshiers.com/blog/ea-spend-593million-on-staff-20million-on-drainage-john-redwood/#sthash.fgbtrE4B.dpuf

In January 2014, during Somerset floods, it emerged EA had spent £31 million on wild life centre, but could not afford to dredge the levels.

By now I hope I have convinced you

It is possible to stop the Naze eroding away

What needs to be done has already been done in Tendring, and at the Naze

The amount of money required is peanuts compared to what has already been wasted on other unnecessary vanity projects.

There is never a shortage of money for projects politicians or bureaucrats want to pursue.

So what are we waiting for?

Normally at this point I would suggest you write to your mp, but if you live in Tendring Clacton constiutency you don’t have one at the moment as resigned. But why not write to Douglas Carswell anyway. As he’s joined a party which does not believe in global warming/climate change and is committed to get rid of the mitigation (much of prompted by EU) it’s just possible he might be more responsive.

If he want’s your vote.

On the other hand he might feel he has enough votes already.

Posted in Beaches, Breakwaters, Climate Change, CO2, EA, Electricity From Wind Power, Groynes, Salt Marsh Erosion, SMP, Temperature | Tagged climate change, CO2, EA, environment agency, global temperature rise, global warming, naze, sea defences, walton-on-the-naze | Comments Off

Global Temperature Pause September 1996 to July 2014

Posted on September 3, 2014 by Jeremy

Global temperature measurements from RSS satellite show temperatures have been flat from September 1996 to July 2014. No change for 18 years 10 months despite rising CO2.

This is a serious problem for the idea that CO2 causes global warming. If nothing else it means there is another more powerful mechanism which has been causing cooling.

One possibility is having risen for some years, temperatures are pausing before falling.

Just like slack water at high tide before sea level falls only to rise again on the next high tide.

RSS showing no change has already been reported by many websites. However this report relies just on the trend value. If we take into account the error in determining the trend we can say there has been no rise in temperature since January 1996, as the trend is 0.002 ± 0.002ºC/year. Here the error is the same size as the trend so it is not possible to say the trend is different from 0.

The HADCRUT4 dataset shows a rise of 0.007ºC/year from September 1996 to July 2014, larger the rise reported from 1880 to 2010 (about 0.0061ºC/year), which the UK Met Office claim is “statistically significant” – thought it’s entirely unclear what they mean by this.

This Met Office statement seems to have been taken by politicians and media to mean

Global Warming Is Real

The UAH satellite measurements shows a larger rise of 0.009/year from September 1996 to July 2014

On the other hand CET (Central England Temperature record – the longest running instrumental temperature record in the world) shows a fall from September 1996 to July 2014.

UAH temperatures are flat from January 2002 to July 2014, as the error is larger than the trend.

Or from February 2001 if you are happy to count from when the trend is the same size as the error in calculating the trend.

HADCRUT4 is flat from January 2001 to September 2014

or November 2000, if you are content to count from when trend is same size as error.

So depending on which dataset you pick temperatures have been

flat for 19 years 6 months
flat for 12 years 6 months
flat for something in between
or falling for 18 years 10 months

CET shows a rise of 0.02 ºC/year from September 1966 to September 2014 which would amount to a rise of 2.6 ºC over 130 years, over 3 times as much as the 0.8ºC UK Met Office got so worried about from 1880 to 2010.

The CET record runs from 1659 and the trend is 0.0026ºC/year, ie about 10 times smaller than for the period 1966 to 2014.

The CET record show recurring rises and falls from 1659 to 2014.

There have been regular maximums in temperature anomaly of about 4ºC from about 1677 to 2014. There has been effectively not increase in these maximums.

It seems any warming trend is due to the reduction in number of minimum temperature anomaly.

There are several lows of below -6ºC below about 1820 but none after.

It is known that temperatures were lower from 1650 to 1820.

Using a linear trend implies you think the temperatures (or at least average temperatures) will rise continuously in a straight line for ever.

CET record clearly shows there are cycles in the temperature record.

Sometimes temperature go up.

Sometimes temperatures go down.

This is hardly news to anyone who has realised winters are colder than summers.

Cycles look something like this (which should be familiar to anyone who lives by the sea).

Depending on which part of the cycle you fit a linear trend to, you may find it is

rising
flat
falling

As CET shows there have been cycles of temperature rise and fall of temperatures for over 350 years, the simplest explanation for the pause (be it 19 years or 12) is temperatures are about to fall globally and we should expect a fall of at least 4ºC, possibly 6ºC and a worst case of 8ºC.

A fall of 4ºC would be dramatic and have a huge negative effective on agricultural yields.

A fall of 6ºC let alone 8ºC is likely to be catastrophic.

If temperature is rising and falling in cycles, as it has for at least the last 350 years then CO2 is having a negligible effect.

On the other hand if CO2 was responsible for the rise in temperatures towards the end of the 20th century what is causing the pause. Do we have to invoke some other, as yet unknown mechanism which can overpower CO2.

Just suppose CO2 was responsible for the 20th century temperature rise, how do we know the unknown mechanism which is causing the pause will ever stop and let temperatures rise again.

How do we know this unknown mechanism causing the pause will not get even stronger and cause temperatures to fall?

RSS shows a fall from November 2000

HADCRUT4 falls from June 2004, which you can check with the wonderful wood for trees

woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1995/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2004.42/trend
UAH shows a fall from July 2008
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/plot/uah/from:2008.42/trend
As we have seen CET shows a fall from September 1996.

So it’s a FALL not a pause

The next time I hear anyone talking about the pause I think I’ll complain to Advertising Standards.

Finally it temperatures continue fall, at the very least it makes continued sea level rise less likely and we may even see sea levels fall.

Technical note

Months follow the woodfortrees scheme

Months are counted as 1/12 of a year, starting from January which is 0/12, through to December which is 11/12.

Month fractions are rounded to 2 decimal places so the sequence for January to December goes

0.00, 0.08, 0.17, 0.25, 0.33, 0.42, 0.5, 0.67, 0.75, 0.83, 0.92

Posted in Climate Change, Temperature | Tagged climate change, global temperature fall, global temperature rise, global warming, satellite temperatures, satellite temperaure measurements, temperature fall | Comments Off

Rates Of Sea Level Rise Around The World – August 2014

Posted on August 21, 2014 by Jeremy

PSMSL holds global tide gauge data. For a tide gauge PSMSL show graphs of sea level but not the rate of sea level rise. So I’ve done it.

There are more than 1400 tide gauges so I’ve put the results on JeremyShiers.com which shows a table of

tide gauge location
years in operation
rate of sea level rise/fall

Note tide gauge observations will be affected by rising or falling land, neither PSMSL or I have taken account of this. The tables and graphs presented here are a first step. Next would be to look at the description of each site at PSMSL, then maybe a site visit or investigation into land movement.

The following histogram shows

rates of sea level rise can be negative as well as positive
older tide gauges have smaller rates of rise/fall

There are a few tide gauges which only have a single year of observations. These may show a large rise

or a large fall

1142 out of 1418 tide gauges (just over 80%) have less than 60 years of observations.

Here is the histogram of rate of sea level rise/fall for those with more than 60 years.

The average rate of sea level rise is 0.6 ± 0.2 mm/year.

In contrast there are 723 tide gauges which have observations for more than 30 years, for these the average rate of sea level rise is 1.2 ± 0.3 mm/year.

IPCC claim the global rate of sea level rise jumped to over 3mm/year in 1993, coincidentally when satellites measuring sea levels were launched.

It should be obvious satellites and tide gauges are not measuring the same thing as

Tide gauges measure sea levels at the coast, usually near a port
Satellites measure (or attempt to measure) sea levels across the world’s oceans.

Satellite sea level measurements depend crucially on knowing where the satellite is.

The guys behind GRASP(Geodetic Reference Antenna In Space) clearly think there is a problem as they’re proposing another satellite to sort out this ‘problem’. Their proposal explicitly states global tide gauge measurements of sea level rise are in the range 1.2 to 1.6 mm/year. Satellite measurements are supposed to be around 3mm/year.

The tide gauge with longest record is Brest, no sign of 3mm/year rise there.

The longest tide gauge record in Britain is from Sheerness, though sadly therae a long gaps around 50 years!

The observations shown by PSMSL are adjusted, in part to account for relocation of tide gauges which can end up in the tide gauge being in a different position vertically. Here is the unadjusted Sheerness data.

Clearly there is the possibility of affecting the rate of sea level rise during this adjustment process.

Here is the unadjusted data for Felixstowe

and the adjusted.

how come 1920 to 1980 didn’t make it to the adjusted data?

Miyake Sima, Japan is a case where adjustments just seem to shift all the data vertically by the same amount

unadjusted

adjusted

but clearly something happened around 2000. Here is the description from PSMSL

=========================== BENCHMARK INFORMATION UPDATE ADDED 12-JUL-93 :
Miyake Sima 642/098 RLR(1969) is 9.7m below BM Miyake Sima
=========================== FOLLOWING PSMSL DOCUMENTATION ADDED 2002Oct22 :
Data fro 1996-2001 received from University of Hawaii.
The elevated mean levels of 9/2000-12/2001 are due to
island sinking as a result of the volcanic eruption
of Oyama during 6-8/2000.
=========================== FOLLOWING PSMSL DOCUMENTATION ADDED 06-Mar-2008 :
Data 2001 onwards flagged as there appears to a sudden rise in the
dataset.
=========================== FOLLOWING PSMSL DOCUMENTATION ADDED 21-Feb-2012 :
A massive earthquake magnitude 9.0 occurred at 14.46 JST (05.46 UTC) on Friday
11th March 2011 with the epicentre approx. 70km east of the Oshika Peninsula of
Tohoku. It was the most powerful known earthquake to hit Japan triggering a
tsunami with waves up to 40.5m and travelling up to 10km inland.

To repeat what I said at the beginning neither I or PSMSL have made any adjustment for land movement. What has been presented here should be regarded as a first step.

Despite that do you see any sign of the global rate of sea level rise jumping to 3mm/year in 1993?

According to IPCC climate change/global warming should cause an acceleration in rate of sea level rise. Despite hype in media IPCC attribute most (say at least 70%) of sea level rise to thermal expansion of existing sea water.

So if there is no sign of acceleration in the rate of sea level rise – presumably there is no or negligible warming. And if there were falls in sea levels this would be a sign of global cooling.

Posted in Climate Change, Sea Level | Tagged climate change, global temperature rise, global warming, sea level rise | Leave a comment

Anti Fracking Gas Campaigners Cook On Gas

Posted on August 20, 2014 by Jeremy

Courtesy of Guido Fawkes at order-order.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

US EPA Heatwave Index 1895-2013 Shows 1930s Hottest By Far

Posted on August 14, 2014 by Jeremy

US Environmental Protection Agency website shows the this graph of US Annual Heat Wave Index, 1895-2013

www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/indicators/weather-climate/high-low-temps.html

So I guess the 1930’s were the hottest then?

Strange CO2 levels were much lower then.

h/t joannenova.com.au

Posted in Climate Change, Temperature | Tagged CO2, global temperature rise, global warming | Leave a comment

Sea Level At Vlissingen Falls Then Rises Around 1890 – As Does CET

Posted on August 5, 2014 by Jeremy

Sea levels at Vlissingen in Netherlands from PSMSL show a fall until about 1890 then a rise which mirrors Central England Temperature (CET) record.

Sea levels can appear to fall for a number of reasons among them

Local land rise
Re positioning tide gauge and failing to account properly for the move

So it’s best not to get too carried away.

Here are sea levels as recorded at Vlissingen and 5 other locations in France, Netherlands and Germany.

Bearing in mind sea levels are supposed to be rising more or less continuously, measurements at all locations show a fall around the same time as Vlissingen (if only slight)

Which is a bit clearer if we zoom in.

PSMSL have a monthly records from Vlissingen from 1862 with no gaps (as far as I can tell).

England has 2 locations with records from 19th century.

Liverpool shows a dip between 1880 and 1900, despite clearly having gaps.

The record from Sheerness is longer than for Liverpool, but seems to consist of gaps more than sea level observations!

If France, Netherlands and Germany can mange to keep long term records of sea level observations WITHOUT GAPS – why can’t the UK. It would help if UK tide gauges were kept operational, rather than being closed every few decades and a new one installed somewhere else.

If falling temperatures lead to falling sea levels
and if, as some people are predicting temperatures are set to FALL (another little ice age)
then perhaps sea levels will fall

And UK Environment Agency can stop worrying about sea level rises of over 1 metre.

Code and data for plots.

Posted in Climate Change, EA, Sea Level, Temperature | Leave a comment

JeremyShiers.com Blog

Holland Haven – New Groynes New Beach And A Surprise

So What’s The Surprise?

EA Say Sea Levels Risen Less Than Expected

No Correlation CO2 & Temperature From 2004-14 & 1960-76

2ºC Warmer 5000 years Ago In Orkneys

Naze Cliffs Fall Into Sea Even Though It’s Known How To Stop It

Why is the Naze being allowed to fall into the sea?

People want to be able to find fossils

Cost

Global Temperature Pause September 1996 to July 2014

So it’s a FALL not a pause

Rates Of Sea Level Rise Around The World – August 2014

Anti Fracking Gas Campaigners Cook On Gas

US EPA Heatwave Index 1895-2013 Shows 1930s Hottest By Far

Sea Level At Vlissingen Falls Then Rises Around 1890 – As Does CET

Subscribe

Recent Posts

Archives

Jeremy's Other Blogs

Data

News/Finance

Pro Climate Change

Half Warm Climate Change

Skeptical Climate Change

On The Inside