Sea Level Change Using GRACE and Implications for Continental Hydrology PowerPoint PPT Presentation

presentation player overlay
1 / 47
About This Presentation
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Sea Level Change Using GRACE and Implications for Continental Hydrology


1
Sea Level Change Using GRACEand Implications for
Continental Hydrology
R. S. Nerem Colorado Center for Astrodynamics
Research University of Colorado at Boulder John
Wahr CIRES, University of Colorado Don
Chambers Center for Space Research University of
Texas at Austin
GRACE Hydrology Workshop March 22, 2004
UC Irvine
2
TOPEX/Poseidonand Jason
3
Global Mean Sea Level from Altimetry
(3.1 mm/year after correcting for PGR)
http//sealevel.colorado.edu
4
Tide Gauge Estimates of Global Sea Level Rise
  • Investigation
    Rate (mm/year) Note
  • Peltier and Tushingham 1989 2.4 0.9 Global
  • Barnett 1990 1-2 Global
  • Nakiboglu and Lambeck 1990 1.15 0.38 Global
  • Trupin and Wahr 1990 1.75 0.13 Global
  • Douglas 1991 1.8 0.1 Global
  • Shennan and Woodworth 1992 1.0 0.15 Europe
  • Unal and Ghil 1995 1.62 0.38 Global
  • Davis and Mitrovica 1996 1.5 0.3 U.S. East
    Coast
  • Peltier and Jiang 1997 1.8 0.2 U.S. East
    Coast
  • Douglas 1997 1.8 0.1 Global

5
Steric Sea Level Trends 1955-1996
Cabanes et al., 2001
6
Tide Gauge Sea Level versus Dynamic Height
2.0 mm/yr
2.0 mm/yr
0.5 mm/yr
0.2 mm/yr
Atlantic
Pacific
Miller and Douglas, 2004
7
Large Eustatic Contribution?
Antonov et al., 2002 (figure from Munk 2003)
8
Current Global Sea Level Change Debate
Tide Gauges 1.8 mm/year e.g. Douglas
et al., 2001 Steric Component 0.5 mm/year
Levitus et al., 2000 How to explain the
difference? Theory 1 The tide gauges are
located in regions of greater warming, and thus
are biased high by a factor of
2-3 Cabanes et al., 2001. Holgate and
Woodworth 2004 provide some additional
support for this theory by showing
tide gauges have measured 1 mm/year higher
sea level rise than TOPEX over
1993-2003. Theory 2 There is a large eustatic
contribution of 1.3 mm/year, as observed by
Antonov et al., 2002. This theory
is also supported by Miller and Douglas 2004,
who performed an alternative
analysis of the hydrographic data to Cabanes et
al, and concluded the tide
gauges are not biased.
9
TOPEX/Jason EOFs 1-5
10
TOPEX/Jason EOFs 1-5
11
Tide Gauge Locations
12
Acceleration of Sea Level Change?
0.5 mm/year
1.1 mm/year
2.7 mm/year
Rate 1.0 mm/yr (1930-2000) Acceleration
0.0056 mm/yr2 (1930-2000)
13
TGR MSL versus Levitus Steric MSL
TGR MSL Observed Steric Change
after Cabanes et al. 2001
14
GRACE Global Ocean Mass
  • Optimal ocean averaging kernel applied to 11
    GRACE monthly fields (no difference seen when
    averaging from 300 km maps).
  • Degree 1 terms are not included.
  • Barotropic ocean model contributes no significant
    global ocean mass signal.
  • No significant changes seen when averaging is
    restricted to the TOPEX latitudes (66).
  • GRACE global ocean mass errors are roughly 3.8 mm
    each month (2 mm when J2 is not included),
    computed two different ways
  • A) GRACE pre-launch errors x 40 estimate of
    leakage of land hydrology signal
  • B) Using GRACE calibrated error covariance

15
Global Ocean Averaging Kernel
16
GRACE Global Ocean Mass Variations
Chambers, D. P., R. S. Nerem, and J. Wahr, Global
Ocean Mass Variations from GRACE Gravity Fields,
AGU-CGU Joint Assembly, Montreal, Canada, 2004.
17
GRACE Global Ocean Mass Variations
Chambers, D. P., R. S. Nerem, and J. Wahr, Global
Ocean Mass Variations from GRACE Gravity Fields,
AGU-CGU Joint Assembly, Montreal, Canada, 2004.
18
Global Water Storage Variations
Chen, J. L., C. R. Wilson, D. P. Chambers, R. S.
Nerem, and B. D. Tapley, Seasonal Global Water
Mass Budget and Mean Sea Level Variations,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 25(19), 3555-3558, 1998.
19
Ocean Mass from Hydrologic Variables
20
Global Mean Ocean Mass Variations
Chen, J. L., C. R. Wilson, D. P. Chambers, R. S.
Nerem, and B. D. Tapley, Seasonal Global Water
Mass Budget and Mean Sea Level Variations,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 25(19), 3555-3558, 1998.
21
Annual Global Ocean Mass Variations
22
Runoff Versus Latitude
Dai and Trenberth, 2002
23
Regional Runoff
Dai and Trenberth, 2002
24
Conclusions
  • With only 11 months of data, GRACE has observed a
    clear annual variation in global mean ocean mass,
    with an amplitude of 7.5 mm and a maximum in
    October (280).
  • Estimates of global mean ocean mass from TOPEX
    corrected for steric variations show similar
    amplitude (8.7 mm) and phase (288).
  • The hydrologic models also reproduce the annual
    ocean mass variations quite well.
  • An estimate of global ocean mass from an analysis
    of loading at GPS sites shows a similar amplitude
    (7.6 mm), but an earlier phase (234).
  • GRACE clearly has the precision to monitor
    long-term changes in global ocean mass, and
    determine the continental sources of that water
    mass.

25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
Annual Global Ocean Mass Variations
28
Global Mean Sea Level Estimates
29
Tide Gauge Sea Level Reconstruction
  • TOPEX/Jason EOFs 1-10 covering 1993-2003 (11
    years)
  • Testing done different numbers of EOFs, 10
    appears to be optimum at this time
  • PSMSL Tide Gauge Data covering 1930-2001
  • Revised Level Record (RLR) data used
  • Tide gauge must have record length gt 25 years
    between 1970 and 1998
  • Record must be 90 complete
  • Tide gauge data corrected for land motion using
    ICE-4G post-glacial rebound (PGR) model.
  • Both data sets have annual and semi-annual
    signals removed.
  • Neither data set has an inverted-barometer
    correction applied.

30
Enhanced Coastal Sea Level Rise?
Holgate and Woodworth, 2004
31
TOPEX/Jason EOFs 6-10
32
TOPEX/Jason MSL EOF 3
33
TOPEX/Jason MSL EOF 3
34
Tide Gauge Sea Level Reconstruction
Tide Gauge Measurements
From TOPEX and Jason
35
Number of Gauges Available (PSMSL, RLR)
36
Tide Gauge Locations
37
TGR Error Analysis
7 mm
6 mm
3 mm
38
EOF Contributions to the TGR MSL
39
EOF Contributions to the TGR MSL
40
Comparison to Surface Temperatures
41
TGR MSL versus PDO
42
TGR Secular Sea Level Change 1930-2000
43
TGR MSL versus Latitude
44
Comparison to Levitus Global Heat Content
Levitus et al. 2001
TGR MSL Observed Heat Content
Ocean-Atm Model Heat Content (GHGs, sulfate
aerosols, solar irradiance, volcanic
aerosols) Ocean-Atm Model Heat Content (same,
minus solar irradiance, volcanic aerosols)
45
TOPEX/Jason MSL versus PDO
46
TOPEX/Jason Global Sea Level Change Versus
Latitude
47
Spatial Pattern of Sea Level Rise (1993-2003)
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com