2011-09-23 02:03:34Sea level rise due to floating ice


I have written a blog post: Sea level rise due to floating ice? Would be great if you could go through it and post your opinion!

2011-09-23 08:14:21


Though not a an important factor, I like this little bit of simple science.

2011-09-23 08:31:25


I like it.  

It simply and vividly settles one of those 'what if ...?' questions that sometimes give people pause.

2011-09-23 13:40:17
Sarah Green

A nice basic explaination.

2011-09-23 13:51:55
Alex C


I wonder, if the heat from melting the ice comes mainly from the ocean but the ocean, which has a lower albedo, has a higher flux in due to less ice, to what degree would that case thermal contraction to be reduced?

Since freshwater also freezes at a higher temperature than saltwater, when you melt it you are adding a higher temperature meterial to the just-cooled water.  It doesn't account for all of the heat, I would guess around <1% from these graphs/charts, but still a bit of a factor.

2011-09-23 13:53:13
Alex C


My one suggestion:

>>>...(note that the ocean hasn’t a density maximum in its liquid phase as salt free water has)... ["hasn't" or "has not" sounds a bit funny, I myself just prefer hearing "does not have" or "doesn't have."]

Looks good though.

2011-09-23 13:53:47
Alex C


Darned thumb.

2011-09-23 15:54:46
Rob Painting

-"The salt in seawater rises its density" =raises.

-"They are argueing that a huge amount of energy" = arguing, or perhaps "they argue."

-Maybe insert (reflectivity) in brackets after "albedo". The definition of some of the jargon is well familiar to us regulars, but maybe not so to the casual reader.

- This part is not very clear - "note that the ocean hasn’t a density maximum in its liquid phase as salt free water has"

Looks good!  

2011-09-24 00:11:06


Very good

2011-09-24 07:24:01


Thank your for your kind words and your suggestions!

I will think about how I can make the sentence "doesn’t have a density maximum in its liquid phase as salt free water has" easier to understand.

2011-09-24 08:04:18
Alex C


"Has a different density than liquid freshwater" perhaps.  No need to say that the saltwater has to be liquid too, you explain the concept of exclusion in the article.

2011-09-24 10:03:48


Whoops, thumb .....

2011-09-24 10:29:05


I'm not sure I buy the whole argument, but this may be a clearer statement:

"Hence the ocean will cool a bit and that causes the density of the ocean to increase (note that the ocean doesn't have a density maximum in its liquid phase as salt free water has)"

=> "Hence the ocean will cool a bit, causing the density of the briny water to increase. (It should be noted that fresh water exhibits the peculiar behavior that its density increases as the temperature falls ALMOST all the way to freezing; but just before freezing, the density is reduced. Briny water does not exhibit that reversal.)"

2011-09-24 13:21:40
Alex C


Edit: Ah, yes, I misunderstood, you can disregard my previous comment.

2011-09-24 22:12:19


I remember reading something similar at More Grumbine Science. Since then I have been careful not to say the classic "sea ice has no effect on sea level rice" (its enough though to say "sea ice has almost no effect on sea level rice"

Anyway, I started thinking last night that maybe it should be perfectly clear that sea ice is not infinite - so while it makes a slight sea level rise, it does eventually stop (when the sea ice stop decreasing).

2011-09-27 07:06:34


I am a bit slow...but now I think it's ready! Do I have to contact someone or will it get published automatically in some days?

@Neal: Thank you for your suggestion, that is exactly what I meant and I think with your formulation is should be clearer!

2011-09-27 08:00:09
Alex C


It will get put into the queue and then when your day comes Dana or John will publish it.  AFAIK it is all kept track of manually, so while it's now pending, you may get put into a spot pretty soon since we have only a post per day scheduled.

2011-09-27 08:35:07
Dana Nuccitelli

I'll put this one on the schedule for later this week.  Actually we might hold off on the next Pielke post until he responds to the last one, so maybe we'll publish this in its spot tomorrow.