DOCSLIB.ORG

The Solid Earth's Influence on Sea Level

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Solid Earth's Influence on Sea Level The solid Earth’s infl uence on sea level 1888 2013 CELEBRATING ADVANCES IN GEOSCIENCE † Clinton P. Conrad Invited Review Department of Geology & Geophysics, School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University of Hawaii at Mānoa, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA ABSTRACT when continental transgressions were occur- processes such as erosion and sedimentation ring worldwide. This global drop results from operate in completely different ways across Because it lies at the intersection of Earth’s several factors that combine to expand the sea level. The fundamental nature of the sea solid, liquid, and gaseous components, sea “container” volume of the ocean basins. Most surface implies that changes in sea level drive level links the dynamics of the fl uid part of importantly, ridge volume decrease since the fi rst-order shifts in the landscape of our planet the planet with those of the solid part of the mid-Cretaceous, caused by an ~50% slow- and dictate changes in the ranges of its biologi- planet. Here, I review the past quarter cen- down in seafl oor spreading rate documented cal inhabitants. For example, the ongoing 1– tury of sea-level research and show that the by tectonic reconstructions, explains ~250 m 2 mm/yr rise of sea level during the past cen- solid components of Earth exert a controlling of sea-level fall. These tectonic changes have tury (e.g., Church et al., 2004; Douglas, 1991, infl uence on the amplitudes and patterns of been accompanied by a decline in the volume 1992; Ray and Douglas, 2011) and its recent sea-level change across time scales ranging of volcanic edifi ces on Pacifi c seafl oor, conti- acceleration (e.g., Church and White, 2006, from years to billions of years. On the short- nental convergence above the former Tethys 2011) affect human activities (e.g., Houghton est time scales (100–102 yr), elastic deforma- Ocean, and the onset of glaciation, which et al., 2010; Pilkey and Cooper, 2004) and will tion causes the ground surface to uplift in- dropped sea level by ~40, ~20, and ~60 m, re- do so even more dramatically if sea level rises stantaneously near deglaciating areas while spectively. These drops were approximately another ~0.8 m by 2100, as forecast (Meehl et the sea surface depresses due to diminished offset by an increase in the volume of Atlantic al., 2007). Even more drastic scenarios that pre- gravitational attraction. This produces spa- sediments and net seafl oor uplift by dynamic dict 1.3–2.0 m of global rise in the next century tial variations in rates of relative sea-level topography, which each elevated sea level by (Grinsted et al., 2009; Jevrejeva et al., 2010; change (measured relative to the ground ~60 m. Across supercontinental cycles, ex- Pfeffer et al., 2008; Rahmstorf, 2007; Vermeer surface), with amplitudes of several millime- pected variations in ridge volume, dynamic and Rahmstorf, 2009) make sea level one of the ters per year. These sea-level “fi ngerprints” topography, and continental compression most tangible and dramatic consequences of are characteristic of (and may help iden- together roughly explain observed sea-level future climate change. tify) the deglaciation source, and they can variations throughout Pangean assembly and Although the sea surface divides the dispa- have signifi cant societal importance because dispersal. On the longest time scales (109 yr), rate subaerial and submarine realms, sea level they will control rates of coastal inundation sea level may change as ocean water is ex- itself is sensitive to a variety of external forc- in the coming century. On time scales of changed with reservoirs stored by hydrous ing factors that act on the whole Earth system. 103–105 yr, the solid Earth’s time-dependent minerals within the mantle interior. Mantle From above, warming of Earth’s surface climate viscous response to deglaciation also pro- cooling during the past few billion years may induces sea-level rise by melting landed ice and duces spatially varying patterns of relative have accelerated drainage down subduction by thermally expanding seawater (e.g., Bindoff sea-level change, with centimeters-per-year zones and decreased degassing at mid-ocean et al., 2007; Cazenave and Nerem, 2004; Hock amplitude, that depend on the time-history ridges, causing enough sea-level drop to im- et al., 2009; Lombard et al., 2005; Meier et al., of deglaciation. These variations, on aver- pact the Phanerozoic sea-level budget. For 2007; Nerem et al., 2006; Rignot et al., 2011; age, cause net seafl oor subsidence and there- all time scales, future advances in the study Wigley and Raper, 1987). From below, the fore global sea-level drop. On time scales of of sea-level change will result from improved solid Earth drives sea-level change by altering 106–108 yr, convection of Earth’s mantle also observations of lateral variations in sea-level the shape and volume of the basins that contain supports long-wavelength topographic re- change, and a better understanding of the the oceans, and by defl ecting the ocean surface lief that changes as continents migrate and solid Earth deformations that cause them. in response to changes in Earth’s gravitational mantle fl ow patterns evolve. This changing fi eld (Fig. 1). On relatively short time scales “dynamic topography” causes meters per INTRODUCTION (instantaneous to 105 yr), these boundary defl ec- millions of years of relative sea-level change, tions occur as a rheological (elastic or viscous) even along seemingly “stable” continental Sea level has remained a fundamental bound- response of the solid Earth to the redistribution margins, which affects all stratigraphic re- ary on Earth’s surface for as long as oceans of hydrological loads on Earth’s surface (Figs. cords of Phanerozoic sea level. Nevertheless, have existed on our planet. Most of Earth’s spe- 1A and 1B). On longer time scales (106 yr and several such records indicate sea-level drop cies, including humans, have adapted to life on longer), these defl ections are associated with of ~230 m since a mid-Cretaceous highstand, one side of this barrier or the other; geological surface tectonics and the convective dynamics †E-mail: [email protected]. GSA Bulletin; July/August 2013; v. 125; no. 7/8; p. 1027–1052; doi: 10.1130/B30764.1; 11 fi gures. For permission to copy, contact [email protected] 1027 © 2013 Geological Society of America Conrad of the mantle (Fig. 1C). Sea-level change, which The past 25 yr have seen a growing recog- motions. Such local observations of sea level, has been documented for all of these time scales nition of the fact that observations of sea level whether obtained from tide gauges, land (Fig. 2), thus links a wide variety of Earth pro- (both geological and historical) are made records, beach terraces, or stratigraphy, mea- cesses, ranging from the climatic and hydrologi- relative to the solid Earth, which moves verti- sure relative sea level (sometimes referred to as cal systems that operate above Earth’s surface cally on all time scales (Fig. 1). Thus, rates of regional sea level), defi ned as the local eleva- to the plate-tectonic and mantle convective sys- observed sea-level change may vary between tion of the sea surface measured relative to the tems operating below it. coastal locations, depending on vertical ground solid surface of Earth. Here, I will be careful to A B C Figure 1. Mechanisms by which the solid Earth affects sea level, separated by operative time scale. Shown are the solid Earth and oceans (fi lled areas) and their surfaces after an applied change to the system (lines). (A) On the shortest time scales, the solid Earth deforms elastically in response to an imposed load (Farrell, 1972). Here, melting of an ice sheet uplifts the ground near areas of mass loss and depresses the ocean basins, which gain mass. The sea surface drops near the mass loss because the diminished ice sheet gravitationally attracts less seawater (i.e., the geoid depresses). Relative to the ground surface, sea-level drops near melting ice but rises faster than average over the rest of the ocean (Clark and Primus, 1987; Farrell and Clark, 1976). Observations of spatial variations in sea-level change can be used to “fi ngerprint” the source of the change (e.g., Blewitt and Clarke, 2003; Conrad and Hager, 1997; Mitrovica et al., 2001; Tamisiea et al., 2001). (B) Following glacial un- loading, Earth deforms viscously on time scales of 103–105 yr as the mantle fl ows back into the depressed region. This uplifts the region near the former ice sheet (locally causing relative sea-level drop) and depresses the sur- rounding peripheral forebulge (Clark et al., 1978; Davis and Mitrovica, 1996; Farrell and Clark, 1976). If the forebulge collapses beneath the sea surface, the added basin volume causes far-fi eld (eustatic) sea-level drop, which Mitrovica and Peltier (1991) termed “equatorial ocean siphoning.” Ocean loading causes a similar viscous response along coastlines that also drops eustatic sea level (Mitrovica and Milne, 2002). (C) On time scales of 106 yr and longer, solid Earth processes associated with plate tectonics and mantle dynamics dominate sea-level change (Harrison, 1990; Miller et al., 2005). Shown here are the major processes that can elevate global average (eustatic) sea level (and depress it when acting oppositely). Global sea level rises when the “container” volume of the ocean basins decreases due to: ridge expansion associated with faster spreading (Cogné et al., 2006; Hays and Pitman, 1973; Kominz, 1984; Müller et al., 2008b; Pitman, 1978; Xu et al., 2006), expansion of continental area (Harrison, 1990; Kirschner et al., 2010), growth of submarine volumes of sediment cover or volcanic debris (Harrison, 1999; Müller et al., 2008b), and net dynamic uplift of the seafl oor by mantle fl ow (Conrad and Hus- son, 2009).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Eustatic Curve for the Middle Jurassic–Cretaceous Based on Russian Platform and Siberian Stratigraphy: Zonal Resolution1
    Eustatic Curve for the Middle Jurassic–Cretaceous Based on Russian Platform and Siberian Stratigraphy: Zonal Resolution1 D. Sahagian,2 O. Pinous,2 A. Olferiev,3 and V. Zakharov4 ABSTRACT sediment gaps left by unconformities in the cen- tral part of the Russian platform with data from We have used the stratigraphy of the central part stratigraphic information from the more continu- of the Russian platform and surrounding regions to ous stratigraphy of the neighboring subsiding construct a calibrated eustatic curve for the regions, such as northern Siberia. Although these Bajocian through the Santonian. The study area is sections reflect subsidence, the time scale of vari- centrally located in the large Eurasian continental ations in subsidence rate is probably long relative craton, and was covered by shallow seas during to the duration of the stratigraphic gaps to be much of the Jurassic and Cretaceous. The geo- filled, so the subsidence rate can be calculated graphic setting was a very low-gradient ramp that and filtered from the stratigraphic data. We thus was repeatedly flooded and exposed. Analysis of have compiled a more complete eustatic curve stratal geometry of the region suggests tectonic sta- than would be possible on the basis of Russian bility throughout most of Mesozoic marine deposi- platform stratigraphy alone. tion. The paleogeography of the region led to Relative sea level curves were generated by back- extremely low rates of sediment influx. As a result, stripping stratigraphic data from well and outcrop accommodation potential was limited and is inter- sections distributed throughout the central part of preted to have been determined primarily by the Russian platform.
    [Show full text]
  • Slab Pull? Density of Plate Slab
    The plate tectonic story www.earthscienceeducation.com Geography Workshop GA Conference 2021 Duncan Hawley in association with the Earth Science Education Unit and EarthLearningIdea www.earthlearningidea.com Image: Free download https://www.kissclipart.com/visual-tectonic-plates-clipart-crust-earth-plate-t-nnw9dx/ The plate tectonic story www.earthscienceeducation.com Aims of this session The workshop and its activities aims to: • provide an integrated overview of the concepts involved in teaching the processes of plate tectonics at KS3, KS4 and A level • survey of some of the recent evidence and key ideas in understanding how plate tectonics works • offer improved explanations for the distribution and characteristics of volcanoes, earthquakes, and some surface landforms • suggest approaches to teaching the abstract concepts of plate tectonics • help teachers decide if and how they should adjust what they presently teach to reflect the current understanding about the way plate tectonics operates • help teachers develop students’ critical sense of ‘the plate tectonic story’ encountered in textbooks, on diagrams, on the news, via the internet and in other media. The plate tectonic story www.earthscienceeducation.com Where on Earth are earthquakes and volcanoes? - geobattleships www.earthlearningidea.com/PDF/79_Geobattleships.pdf Battleship grid for Geobattleships © Dave Turner Galunggung eruption by USGS, public domain ‘North All Trucks’ © USGS The plate tectonic story www.earthscienceeducation.com Where on Earth are earthquakes and volcanoes?
    [Show full text]
  • Sea Level and Global Ice Volumes from the Last Glacial Maximum to the Holocene
    Sea level and global ice volumes from the Last Glacial Maximum to the Holocene Kurt Lambecka,b,1, Hélène Roubya,b, Anthony Purcella, Yiying Sunc, and Malcolm Sambridgea aResearch School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia; bLaboratoire de Géologie de l’École Normale Supérieure, UMR 8538 du CNRS, 75231 Paris, France; and cDepartment of Earth Sciences, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China This contribution is part of the special series of Inaugural Articles by members of the National Academy of Sciences elected in 2009. Contributed by Kurt Lambeck, September 12, 2014 (sent for review July 1, 2014; reviewed by Edouard Bard, Jerry X. Mitrovica, and Peter U. Clark) The major cause of sea-level change during ice ages is the exchange for the Holocene for which the direct measures of past sea level are of water between ice and ocean and the planet’s dynamic response relatively abundant, for example, exhibit differences both in phase to the changing surface load. Inversion of ∼1,000 observations for and in noise characteristics between the two data [compare, for the past 35,000 y from localities far from former ice margins has example, the Holocene parts of oxygen isotope records from the provided new constraints on the fluctuation of ice volume in this Pacific (9) and from two Red Sea cores (10)]. interval. Key results are: (i) a rapid final fall in global sea level of Past sea level is measured with respect to its present position ∼40 m in <2,000 y at the onset of the glacial maximum ∼30,000 y and contains information on both land movement and changes in before present (30 ka BP); (ii) a slow fall to −134 m from 29 to 21 ka ocean volume.
    [Show full text]
  • Sea Level and Climate Introduction
    Sea Level and Climate Introduction Global sea level and the Earth’s climate are closely linked. The Earth’s climate has warmed about 1°C (1.8°F) during the last 100 years. As the climate has warmed following the end of a recent cold period known as the “Little Ice Age” in the 19th century, sea level has been rising about 1 to 2 millimeters per year due to the reduction in volume of ice caps, ice fields, and mountain glaciers in addition to the thermal expansion of ocean water. If present trends continue, including an increase in global temperatures caused by increased greenhouse-gas emissions, many of the world’s mountain glaciers will disap- pear. For example, at the current rate of melting, most glaciers will be gone from Glacier National Park, Montana, by the middle of the next century (fig. 1). In Iceland, about 11 percent of the island is covered by glaciers (mostly ice caps). If warm- ing continues, Iceland’s glaciers will decrease by 40 percent by 2100 and virtually disappear by 2200. Most of the current global land ice mass is located in the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets (table 1). Complete melt- ing of these ice sheets could lead to a sea-level rise of about 80 meters, whereas melting of all other glaciers could lead to a Figure 1. Grinnell Glacier in Glacier National Park, Montana; sea-level rise of only one-half meter. photograph by Carl H. Key, USGS, in 1981. The glacier has been retreating rapidly since the early 1900’s.
    [Show full text]
  • Slab-Pull and Slab-Push Earthquakes in the Mexican, Chilean and Peruvian Subduction Zones A
    Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 132 (2002) 157–175 Slab-pull and slab-push earthquakes in the Mexican, Chilean and Peruvian subduction zones A. Lemoine a,∗, R. Madariaga a, J. Campos b a Laboratoire de Géologie, Ecole Normale Supérieure, 24 Rue Lhomond, 75231 Paris Cedex 05, France b Departamento de Geof´ısica, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile Abstract We studied intermediate depth earthquakes in the Chile, Peru and Mexican subduction zones, paying special attention to slab-push (down-dip compression) and slab-pull (down-dip extension) mechanisms. Although, slab-push events are relatively rare in comparison with slab-pull earthquakes, quite a few have occurred recently. In Peru, a couple slab-push events occurred in 1991 and one slab-pull together with several slab-push events occurred in 1970 near Chimbote. In Mexico, several slab-push and slab-pull events occurred near Zihuatanejo below the fault zone of the 1985 Michoacan event. In central Chile, a large M = 7.1 slab-push event occurred in October 1997 that followed a series of four shallow Mw > 6 thrust earthquakes on the plate interface. We used teleseismic body waveform inversion of a number of Mw > 5.9 slab-push and slab-pull earthquakes in order to obtain accurate mechanisms, depths and source time functions. We used a master event method in order to get relative locations. We discussed the occurrence of the relatively rare slab-push events in the three subduction zones. Were they due to the geometry of the subduction that produces flexure inside the downgoing slab, or were they produced by stress transfer during the earthquake cycle? Stress transfer can not explain the occurence of several compressional and extensional intraplate intermediate depth earthquakes in central Chile, central Mexico and central Peru.
    [Show full text]
  • Sea-Level Rise in Venice
    https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2020-351 Preprint. Discussion started: 12 November 2020 c Author(s) 2020. CC BY 4.0 License. Review article: Sea-level rise in Venice: historic and future trends Davide Zanchettin1, Sara Bruni2*, Fabio Raicich3, Piero Lionello4, Fanny Adloff5, Alexey Androsov6,7, Fabrizio Antonioli8, Vincenzo Artale9, Eugenio Carminati10, Christian Ferrarin11, Vera Fofonova6, Robert J. Nicholls12, Sara Rubinetti1, Angelo Rubino1, Gianmaria Sannino8, Giorgio Spada2,Rémi Thiéblemont13, 5 Michael Tsimplis14, Georg Umgiesser11, Stefano Vignudelli15, Guy Wöppelmann16, Susanna Zerbini2 1University Ca’ Foscari of Venice, Dept. of Environmental Sciences, Informatics and Statistics, Via Torino 155, 30172 Mestre, Italy 2University of Bologna, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Viale Berti Pichat 8, 40127, Bologna, Italy 10 3CNR, Institute of Marine Sciences, AREA Science Park Q2 bldg., SS14 km 163.5, Basovizza, 34149 Trieste, Italy 4Unversità del Salento, Dept. of Biological and Environmental Sciences and Technologies, Centro Ecotekne Pal. M - S.P. 6, Lecce Monteroni, Italy 5National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Reading, Reading, UK 6Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, Postfach 12-01-61, 27515, Bremerhaven, 15 Germany 7Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, Moscow, 117997, Russia 8ENEA Casaccia, Climate and Impact Modeling Lab, SSPT-MET-CLIM, Via Anguillarese 301, 00123 Roma, Italy 9ENEA C.R. Frascati, SSPT-MET, Via Enrico Fermi 45, 00044 Frascati, Italy 10University of Rome La Sapienza, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, 00185 Roma, Italy 20 11CNR - National Research Council of Italy, ISMAR - Marine Sciences Institute, Castello 2737/F, 30122 Venezia, Italy 12 Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of East Anglia.
    [Show full text]
  • ASSESSMENT of the TSUNAMIGENIC POTENTIAL ALONG the NORTHERN CARIBBEAN MARGIN Case Study: Earthquake and Tsunamis of 12 January 2010 in Haiti
    ISSN 8755­6839 SCIENCE OF TSUNAMI HAZARDS Journal of Tsunami Society International Volume 29 Number 3 2010 ASSESSMENT OF THE TSUNAMIGENIC POTENTIAL ALONG THE NORTHERN CARIBBEAN MARGIN Case Study: Earthquake and Tsunamis of 12 January 2010 in Haiti. George Pararas-Carayannis Tsunami Society International, Honolulu, Hawaii 96815, USA [email protected] ABSTRACT The potential tsunami risk for Hispaniola, as well as for the other Greater Antilles Islands is assessed by reviewing the complex geotectonic processes and regimes along the Northern Caribbean margin, including the convergent, compressional and collisional tectonic activity of subduction, transition, shearing, lateral movements, accretion and crustal deformation caused by the eastward movement of the Caribbean plate in relation to the North American plate. These complex tectonic interactions have created a broad, diffuse tectonic boundary that has resulted in an extensive, internal deformational sliver slab - the Gonâve microplate – as well as further segmentation into two other microplates with similarly diffused boundary characteristics where tsunamigenic earthquakes have and will again occur. The Gonâve microplate is the most prominent along the Northern Caribbean margin and extends from the Cayman Spreading Center to Mona Pass, between Puerto Rico and the island of Hispaniola, where the 1918 destructive tsunami was generated. The northern boundary of this sliver microplate is defined by the Oriente strike-slip fault south of Cuba, which appears to be an extension of the fault system traversing the northern part of Hispaniola, while the southern boundary is defined by another major strike-slip fault zone where the Haiti earthquake of 12 January 2010 occurred. Potentially tsunamigenic regions along the Northern Caribbean margin are located not only along the boundaries of the Gonâve microplate’s dominant western transform zone but particularly within the eastern tectonic regimes of the margin where subduction is dominant - particularly along the Puerto Rico trench.
    [Show full text]
  • Physical Processes That Impact the Evolution of Global Mean Sea Level in Ocean Climate Models
    2512-4 Fundamentals of Ocean Climate Modelling at Global and Regional Scales (Hyderabad - India) 5 - 14 August 2013 Physical processes that impact the evolution of global mean sea level in ocean climate models GRIFFIES Stephen Princeton University U.S. Department of Commerce N.O.A.A. Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, 201 Forrestal Road Forrestal Campus, P.O. Box 308, 08542-6649 Princeton NJ U.S.A. Ocean Modelling 51 (2012) 37–72 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Ocean Modelling journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ocemod Physical processes that impact the evolution of global mean sea level in ocean climate models ⇑ Stephen M. Griffies a, , Richard J. Greatbatch b a NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, USA b GEOMAR – Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, Kiel, Germany article info abstract Article history: This paper develops an analysis framework to identify how physical processes, as represented in ocean Received 1 July 2011 climate models, impact the evolution of global mean sea level. The formulation utilizes the coarse grained Received in revised form 5 March 2012 equations appropriate for an ocean model, and starts from the vertically integrated mass conservation Accepted 6 April 2012 equation in its Lagrangian form. Global integration of this kinematic equation results in an evolution Available online 25 April 2012 equation for global mean sea level that depends on two physical processes: boundary fluxes of mass and the non-Boussinesq steric effect. The non-Boussinesq steric effect itself contains contributions from Keywords: boundary fluxes of buoyancy; interior buoyancy changes associated with parameterized subgrid scale Global mean sea level processes; and motion across pressure surfaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Concepts and Terminology for Sea Level: Mean, Variability and Change, Both Local and Global
    Surveys in Geophysics https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-019-09525-z(0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV) Concepts and Terminology for Sea Level: Mean, Variability and Change, Both Local and Global Jonathan M. Gregory1,2 • Stephen M. Griffies3 • Chris W. Hughes4 • Jason A. Lowe2,14 • John A. Church5 • Ichiro Fukimori6 • Natalya Gomez7 • Robert E. Kopp8 • Felix Landerer6 • Gone´ri Le Cozannet9 • Rui M. Ponte10 • Detlef Stammer11 • Mark E. Tamisiea12 • Roderik S. W. van de Wal13 Received: 1 October 2018 / Accepted: 28 February 2019 Ó The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Changes in sea level lead to some of the most severe impacts of anthropogenic climate change. Consequently, they are a subject of great interest in both scientific research and public policy. This paper defines concepts and terminology associated with sea level and sea-level changes in order to facilitate progress in sea-level science, in which communi- cation is sometimes hindered by inconsistent and unclear language. We identify key terms and clarify their physical and mathematical meanings, make links between concepts and across disciplines, draw distinctions where there is ambiguity, and propose new termi- nology where it is lacking or where existing terminology is confusing. We include for- mulae and diagrams to support the definitions. Keywords Sea level Á Concepts Á Terminology 1 Introduction and Motivation Changes in sea level lead to some of the most severe impacts of anthropogenic climate change (IPCC 2014). Consequently, they are a subject of great interest in both scientific research and public policy. Since changes in sea level are the result of diverse physical phenomena, there are many authors from a variety of disciplines working on questions of sea-level science.
    [Show full text]
  • Master's Thesis
    Glacial Isostatic Adjustment Contributions to Sea-Level Changes The GIA-efect of historic, recent and future mass-changes of the Greenland ice-sheet and it’s efect on relative sea level Master’s Thesis Master’s Carsten Ankjær Ludwigsen June 2016 Abstract The sea level equation (SLE) by Spada and Stocchi 2006 [26] gives the change rate of the relative sea level (RSL) induced by glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) of melting ice mass on land, also called sea level ’fingerprints’. The ef- fect of the viscoelastic rebound induced by the last deglaciation, as seen when solving the SLE using the ICE-5G model glaciation chronology (Peltier, 2004 [22]) dating back to the last glacial maximum (LGM), is still today causing large fingerprints in particular in Scandinavia and North America, effect- ing the sea level with rates up to 15 mm/yr. The same calculations are applied to present ice loss observed by GRACE and for four projections of the Greenland ice sheet (GrIS) for the 21st century. For the current ice melt, the GIA-contribution to RSL is 0.1 mm/yr at Greenlands coastline, 4 and 5 10− mm/yr in a far field case (region around Denmark). For the ⇥ GrIS-projections, the same result in 2100 is 1 mm/yr and up to 0.01 mm/yr, respectively. In agreement with the GrIS contribution to RSL from other studies (Bamber and Riva, 2010 [1], Spada et al, 2012 [28]) this study finds that the GIA-contribution of present or near-future (within 21st century) change of the GrIS to RSL is not relevant when discussing adaptation to near-future sea level changes.
    [Show full text]
  • Sea Level Budgets Should Account for Ocean Bottom Deformation
    Vishwakarma, B. D., Royston, S., Riva, R. E. M., Westaway, R. M., & Bamber, J. L. (2020). Sea level budgets should account for ocean bottom deformation. Geophysical Research Letters, 47(3), [e2019GL086492]. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086492 Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record License (if available): CC BY Link to published version (if available): 10.1029/2019GL086492 Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via Wiley at https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019GL086492. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/red/research-policy/pure/user-guides/ebr-terms/ RESEARCH LETTER Sea Level Budgets Should Account for Ocean Bottom 10.1029/2019GL086492 Deformation Key Points: 1 1 2 1 1 • The conventional sea level budget B. D. Vishwakarma , S. Royston ,R.E.M.Riva , R. M. Westaway , and J. L. Bamber equation does not include elastic 1 2 ocean bottom deformation, implicitly School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, assuming it is negligible Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands • Recent increases in ocean mass yield global-mean ocean bottom deformation of similar magnitude to Abstract The conventional sea level budget (SLB) equates changes in sea surface height with the sum the deep steric sea level contribution • We use a mass-volume approach to of ocean mass and steric change, where solid-Earth movements are included as corrections but limited to derive and update the sea level the impact of glacial isostatic adjustment.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Dynamics of the Juan De Fuca Plate
    Earth and Planetary Science Letters 189 (2001) 115^131 www.elsevier.com/locate/epsl On the dynamics of the Juan de Fuca plate Rob Govers *, Paul Th. Meijer Faculty of Earth Sciences, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80.021, 3508 TA Utrecht, The Netherlands Received 11 October 2000; received in revised form 17 April 2001; accepted 27 April 2001 Abstract The Juan de Fuca plate is currently fragmenting along the Nootka fault zone in the north, while the Gorda region in the south shows no evidence of fragmentation. This difference is surprising, as both the northern and southern regions are young relative to the central Juan de Fuca plate. We develop stress models for the Juan de Fuca plate to understand this pattern of breakup. Another objective of our study follows from our hypothesis that small plates are partially driven by larger neighbor plates. The transform push force has been proposed to be such a dynamic interaction between the small Juan de Fuca plate and the Pacific plate. We aim to establish the relative importance of transform push for Juan de Fuca dynamics. Balancing torques from plate tectonic forces like slab pull, ridge push and various resistive forces, we first derive two groups of force models: models which require transform push across the Mendocino Transform fault and models which do not. Intraplate stress orientations computed on the basis of the force models are all close to identical. Orientations of predicted stresses are in agreement with observations. Stress magnitudes are sensitive to the force model we use, but as we have no stress magnitude observations we have no means of discriminating between force models.
    [Show full text]