Earth Warming 50X Faster Than When Coming Out Of An Ice Age
Originally published on Skeptical Science.
Recently, The Guardian reported on a significant new study published in Nature Climate Change, finding that even if we meet our carbon reduction targets and stay below the 2°C global warming threshold, sea level rise will eventually inundate many major coastal cities around the world.
20% of the world’s population will eventually have to migrate away from coasts swamped by rising oceans. Cities including New York, London, Rio de Janeiro, Cairo, Calcutta, Jakarta and Shanghai would all be submerged.
The authors looked at past climate change events and model simulations of the future. They found a clear, strong relationship between the total amount of carbon pollution humans emit, and how far global sea levels will rise. The issue is that ice sheets melt quite slowly, but because carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for a long time, the eventual melting and associated sea level rise are effectively locked in.
As a result, the study authors found that due to the carbon pollution humans have emitted so far, we’ve committed the planet to an eventual sea level rise of 1.7 meters (5.5 feet). If we manage to stay within the 1 trillion ton carbon budget, which we hope will keep the planet below 2°C warming above pre-industrial levels, sea levels will nevertheless rise a total of about 9 meters (30 feet). If we continue on a fossil fuel-heavy path, we could trigger a staggering eventual 50 meters (165 feet) of sea level rise.
Predicting how quickly sea levels will rise is a challenge. However, two other studies just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that the Antarctic ice sheet could melt more quickly than previously thought, and thus contribute to relatively rapid sea level rise. Over the past century, global sea level has risen faster than at any time in the past two millennia, and most of the recent sea level rise is due to human-caused global warming. Several feet of sea level rise this century is likely, with a possibility of 5 feet or more.

The Nature Climate Change study didn’t just look at sea level rise; it also looked at global temperature changes. Earth’s sharpest climate changes over the past half million years have occurred when the planet transitions from a ‘glacial’ to ‘interglacial’ period, and vice-versa.
Right now we’re in a warm interglacial period, having come out of the last ice age (when New York City and Chicago were under an ice sheet) about 12,000 years ago. During that transition, the Earth’s average surface temperature warmed about 4°C, but that temperature rise occurred over a period of about 10,000 years.
In contrast, humans have caused nearly 1°C warming over the past 150 years, and we could trigger anywhere from another 1 to 4°C warming over the next 85 years, depending on how much more carbon we pump into the atmosphere.

What humans are in the process of doing to the climate makes the transition out of the last ice age look like a casual stroll through the park. We’re already warming the Earth about 20 times faster than during the ice age transition, and over the next century that rate could increase to 50 times faster or more. We’re in the process of destabilizing the global climate far more quickly than happens even in some of the most severe natural climate change events.
That rapid climate destabilization is what has climate scientists worried.
Reprinted with permission.
It has become increasingly clear that a desperate world dealing with the effects of global warming will be a very costly business. Trillions and trillions in business.
gotta move a little inland and if we don’t want to pay for energy, toward the equator. Meanwhile, earth will continue to get greener, prescriptive building code will continually adopt more sustainable building products, and life will be okay.
We don’t need to hand our money to a bunch of oligarchs any more than we already are.
*away from the equator
You base this on what?
The forecast impact on agricultural yields is negative pretty much everywhere south except New Zealand. Pests like mosquitoes are spreading north. Canada and Northern Europe look like at better options climate refugees.
Where are Bangladeshis supposed to move to? The Indian subcontinent is densely populated already. The current crisis in Europe over taking in a mere million refugees from Syria does not augur well for future forced migrations of tens of millions.
To prepare the federal government should no longer provide flood insurance for any land that is below current sea level plus 15 ft. That become the buffer zone. You can still by private insurance, just that fed will not back you and Freddy/Fanny Mac can buy those mortgages. That is the GOP’s private market solution.
Harsh yes, but the continue stalling by GOP and their puppet masters are driving us there.
New York City can actually survive 9 meters of sea level rise, because most of it is on very steep hills. Lotta seawalls needed. (Not 50. Nobody can survive 50.)
More problematic — Bangladesh, which would have to be evacuated.
And the southern half of Florida, which is mostly doomed even under *currently baked-in* levels of sea level rise.
Currently New York’s subway pumps water constantly to keep it dry. That would fail along with a major part of the infrastructure.
If that study is correct – and I’m afraid it is – these are very bad news. Even if they’re only half correct, we’ll be flooded well beyond the manageable.