3 ms·
https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=bGh3U7kAAAAJ&sortby=pubdate&citation_for_view=bGh3U7kAAAAJ:KxtntwgDAa4C https://scholar.go
by saboot 5y ago
https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=bGh3U7kAAAAJ&sortby=pubdate&citation_for_view=bGh3U7kAAAAJ:KxtntwgDAa4C https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&h...
This appears to be the article being discussed. Figure two and reference 30 give numbers for the magnitude of the 18 year variation due to moon wobble. In St Petersburg, Florida, it's a 4.7 cm variation. Other parts of the world can experience up to a 30 cm variation of high tide variation.
So basically it's definitely something to account for with the linear rise of sea level due to climate change, with some years being worse relatively to others.
- beowulfey 5y agoThank you for posting the original paper. Figure 2 has a great depiction of the effect. That 4.7 cm variation, because it cycles every 18 years, can increase or decrease the effects of inherent sea level rise: at a minimum of the cycle, an expected sea level increase of 8.9 cm instead ends up only being 4.1 cm; but by the next decade, an expected increase of 9.4 cm surges to a peak high tide of 14.1 cm higher than before. One main takeaway is this effect occurs at different times around the world–within the US, different states will experience flooding in different decades. Federal mitigation efforts can be focused on regions that would be impacted first. However, by the 2030s, most seacoasts will be flooding at least on occasion due to extreme high tides. The other effect predicted is, per year, the extreme high tide days will cluster together within a month or so in each region. They mention this because policy or planning for these types of extreme events usually think about it in terms of single isolated events, but this model predicts short “seasons” of extreme tides. Future mitigations should take that into account.
- saboot 5y agoNo problem, this article is being shared on other news sites now. And it's genuinely confusing to me why the original nature article isn't linked, or why Figure 2 isn't shown in any of them. The figure speaks for itself and even looks very nice. I don't understand reporting on scientific news. EDIT: Actually axios linked to the original article, so good for them https://www.axios.com/nasa-moon-wobble-coastal-flooding-c4623977-31be-44d6-a73a-1da9107f3316.html https://www.axios.com/nasa-moon-wobble-coastal-flooding-c462...