Analysis of Variance of Flood Events on the U.S. East Coast: The Impact of Sea-Level Rise on Flood Event Severity and Frequency
By Paul Homewood
This new paper is relevant given recent events:
ABSTRACT
Schedel, J.R., Jr. and Schedel, A.L., 2018. Analysis of variance of flood events on the U.S. East Coast: The impact of sea-level rise on flood event severity and frequency.
This is an investigation to quantify the severity and frequency of coastal flood events on the U.S. East Coast. Flood events are defined as instances during which the water level exceeds a predetermined threshold. An examination of monthly water-level data from 13 locations on the U.S. East Coast shows an increasing mean sea-level trend. Analysis of variance was used to compare the frequency of flood events. At all 13 locations, flood events were compared to established moderate and minor flood stages in the pre-1990 and post-1990 time frames. Flood stages are defined as water-level heights associated with various levels of flooding. For all locations, compared to absolute water heights based on a fixed datum, these flood stages were exceeded more frequently today than in the past. However, when the effects of sea-level rise were negated, flood events were shown to occur at similar rates today as in the past. Flood events that were significantly higher than the mean sea level occurred with the same frequency over the past century. Based on absolute water levels, flood events are more severe and more frequent than in the past. However, if the effects of sea-level rise are negated, flood events show little to no change in severity or frequency. Coastal flood events are starting from a higher baseline height because of sea-level rise. Thus, the same severity of a flood event today reaches a greater absolute height than an identical flood would have reached 50 or 100 years ago.
http://www.jcronline.org/doi/abs/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-16-00205.1?code=cerf-site&journalCode=coas
Common sense tells us that higher sea levels will mean floods are now slightly higher on average than they were before. But the key message is that, discounting the sea level factor, coastal flood events have not changed in terms of frequency or severity over the period of the study.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
I thought sea level rise was the problem. It’s not surprising that if you discount it the problem is no worse!
Ports come and go, in importance and function. Where are the London docks? Where are the Toronto docks? Where is King Herod’s wonderful port, for all that?! (Respectively, ‘under condos’, ‘under condos’, ‘under water’).
It is all trivial. ‘What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger!’ is especially true for economic and geographic challenges.
I recall the sea level rise trend in Noth Shields UK between 1895 to 2017 was 1.92 mm year. I would suppose the sea level trend is global as liquids tend to find a common level. However, facts seem to upset the Warmist narrative.
There was a short article in the DM from Christian Aid (now a front for environmental activism apparently) claiming London was at risk of flooding from sea level rise proven by the fact that the Thames barrier has had to be raised more times in latter years.
How a mean sea level rise, since 1984, the height of the length of my little finger could possibly be an issue is anybody’s guess. Further, the highest level experienced since it was built was actually only 5mm higher than the highest before – according to the best/closest tide gauge record I could find.
The MSL trend around the South Coast of the UK is what it has been for 170 years unchanging, ~2mm a year. If the Thames barrier wasn’t built to comfortably cope with that, someone should be shot.
Or given the traditional Viking send-off, namely to be tied to a stake at the water’s edge – at low tide.
London is actually sinking along with most of the southern part of Britain as the loss of the icesheets is still having an effect.
but of course they still have to show that sea level rise has something to do with emissions.
or do they?
https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/09/14/cumulativeslr/
We are still in a period of isostatic rebound following the last glacial episode. Ice was not evenly distributed and thus the weight was uneven. The rebound is not like a rigid dinner plate, but more like a pancake with dips to it.
I found a concise explanation in Wikipedia and here is the gist of it.
“Recently, the term “post-glacial rebound” is gradually being replaced by the term “glacial isostatic adjustment”. This is in recognition that the response of the Earth to glacial loading and unloading is not limited to the upward rebound movement, but also involves downward land movement, horizontal crustal motion, changes in global sea levels and the Earth’s gravity field, induced earthquakes, and changes in the Earth’s rotation.”
This is why you have apparent sea-level “rises” when it is actually the response to rebound with rises and dips.
‘For all locations, compared to absolute water heights based on a fixed datum, these flood stages were exceeded more frequently today than in the past.’
And? So what? Some years it rains more than others. BFD.