Can more ships and boats and submarines cause the sea level to rise?

[Nicholas Kang]

This is just a pure thought. I am not very sure about this pure thought. My question is can more ships and boats and submarines cause the sea level to rise?

[Greg H.]

Since ships float by displacement, sure, given sufficient numbers. Note however, that sufficient numbers in this case would probably be equal to more ships than have been built in the whole of human history combined and then multiplied by several orders of magnitude.

 

In short, yes in theory, but in practical application no.

[Nicholas Kang]

I mean instead of suspecting global warming cause icecaps to melt and sea level to rise. There should be some other possible cause, shouldn`t it?

What about moving earth crust? Do you think when tectonic plates move, the water on the earth will be shaken a bit or somehow the tectonic plates create holes on the seabed and water will be effected?

Since ships float by displacement, sure, given sufficient numbers. Note however, that sufficient numbers in this case would probably be equal to more ships than have been built in the whole of human history combined and then multiplied by several orders of magnitude.

 

In short, yes in theory, but in practical application no.

 

May I know how you prove it mathematically? or Do you have any source?

Edited May 31, 2014 by Nicholas Kang

[Greg H.]

Except that we can observe the ice caps melting, and we know that the water has to go somewhere, ergo we get sea level rise. The part of the problem you have to come to grips with is the sheer amount of liquid we're talking about. I mean the oceans are fracking huge. Take an example. If you melted enough ice to get a volume of water equal to Mount Everest and dumped all that water into the ocean (ignoring evaporation, ground absorption, and any other effect that might reduce the volume), you would raise global sea levels by roughly 1/4 of 1 inch.

 

In other words, if a new Mount Everest sprung up from the Earth's crust and remained totally underwater, no one* would notice until they updated the sonar maps of the ocean.

 

If you wanted to raise the water level world wide by 1 inch, you'd have to drop in roughly 3 and 1/2 Everests.

 

---

calculations are rough, and are based on conversions between the volume of water indicated spread evenly across 361 million km² of ocean surface, and 2400 km³ of volume for Mt Everest.

 

* - Except of course the seismologists, and probably the SOSUS warning nets.

Edited May 31, 2014 by Greg H.

[Nicholas Kang]

One point is that ignoring evaporation and ground absorption is impossible on Earth. You can`t interfere nature`s habits. Even if you can, it is best not to.

If water are flown into the earth crust, what will happen to them? Will they evaporate due to high pressure or high temperature? or they will just show themselves out by flowing through other possible loops and holes they might encounter? By the way, will water evaporate through the atmosphere? I mean will water molecules just fly out of the atmosphere? If not, does this mean the water volume, ignoring E=mc² in earth is always the same because no matter where it flows, it will always retain in earth, no matter earth crust ,or earth surface or is it possible that metorites from outer space will somehow provide additional water source to Earth?

I am going to hit the sack now, Greg. By the way, thanks for your kind explanation. It is 11:40 p.m. in Malaysia. Bye! See you tomorrow.

Edited May 31, 2014 by Nicholas Kang

[md65536]

This is just a pure thought. I am not very sure about this pure thought. My question is can more ships and boats and submarines cause the sea level to rise?

Yes.

This estimate http://what-if.xkcd.com/33/ figures that all the ships in the sea contribute about 0.006 mm of sea level.

Edited May 31, 2014 by md65536

[Tim the plumber]

Except that we can observe the ice caps melting, and we know that the water has to go somewhere, ergo we get sea level rise. The part of the problem you have to come to grips with is the sheer amount of liquid we're talking about. I mean the oceans are fracking huge. Take an example. If you melted enough ice to get a volume of water equal to Mount Everest and dumped all that water into the ocean (ignoring evaporation, ground absorption, and any other effect that might reduce the volume), you would raise global sea levels by roughly 1/4 of 1 inch.

 

In other words, if a new Mount Everest sprung up from the Earth's crust and remained totally underwater, no one* would notice until they updated the sonar maps of the ocean.

 

If you wanted to raise the water level world wide by 1 inch, you'd have to drop in roughly 3 and 1/2 Everests.

 

---

calculations are rough, and are based on conversions between the volume of water indicated spread evenly across 361 million km² of ocean surface, and 2400 km³ of volume for Mt Everest.

 

* - Except of course the seismologists, and probably the SOSUS warning nets.

The area of the World Ocean is 361 million square kilometers.

 

A quarter of an inch is about 7mm. So that would mean the mountain would have to be 2,500 cubic kilometers, but 2,400 is good.. I don't know how much volume there is in Everest or how you would actually decide which bits of rock were or were not that particular mountain but I think it's not going to be that big. It's only 8.8km high.

 

If there had been a slow rise in the sea bed of a particular region I don't know if it would have been detected. SOSUS is a listening system for finding submarines. It is, I expect, not particularly tuned for sensing the exact depth of the sensor. If the mid ocean ridge has moved up a few tens of meters then i don't see how we would be aware of it. that would produce enough volume change for centimeters of sea level change.

[md65536]

I mean instead of suspecting global warming cause icecaps to melt and sea level to rise. There should be some other possible cause, shouldn`t it?

Why do you say "instead"? Do you not accept that melting icecaps contribute to sea level rise?

 

There are other factors too. Increase in water temperature expands it and I think is a major factor in sea level rise. Land masses shifting contributes, either up or down. Precipitation too... a couple years ago there was a measurable decrease in sea level while Australia was being flooded, and a lot of the water was temporarily on land [http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/23/australian-floods-global-sea-level].

 

All of these different factors can be measured or estimated, and they all contribute a certain amount. It's not that there is just one reason for sea level rise. As far as I know, melting of ice on land is the biggest contributor and its effect on sea level is well understood.

Edited May 31, 2014 by md65536

[Nicholas Kang]

I think the rising of sea level depend on 2 factors, both the water input and output. Water input includes increasing in water content to the sea level like raining while water output includes decreasing in water content in sea level like evaporation and ground absorption. If the water input is higher than the water output, then the global sea level will rise and vice versa. However, if the Earth is a closed system, then the total amount of water content in Earth does not change, I mean no water is escaped to outside the Earth`s atmosphere, thus it is the human or environment factor that exert pressure to change the water input and water output. For example, The ideal water input and water output on Earth should be 50% input and 50% output. Due to continuous global warming, the ice caps melt and water input is higher than water output, but the water output is too slow to catch up with the speed of the water input, thus causing imbalance water cycle. My new thought is instead of arguing on global warming causing ice caps to melt, why don`t we judge the whole story form a new perspective, that is speed up the water output to accelerate the water cycle. If the water output is on the same track with the water input, I think, if Earth is in a closed system, the problem would have been solved.

[md65536]

y new thought is instead of arguing on global warming causing ice caps to melt, why don`t we judge the whole story form a new perspective, that is speed up the water output to accelerate the water cycle. If the water output is on the same track with the water input, I think, if Earth is in a closed system, the problem would have been solved.

That could work. Where would you put the water? We could build a few large dams, maybe flood a continent or two.

 

Wait a minute, what is the problem you would have solved? The problem of sea level rise? Sea level rise is only a problem because if you raise the sea, then the sea goes onto what is currently land, and then it's under water. So you want to solve that problem by manually putting the water onto land? One way to store a significant amount of sea on land is in a frozen state, in very thick glaciers and ice sheets. Do you have a viable replacement? How much energy and cost would you estimate it would take to take some number of centimeters of global ocean surface out of the sea? How would you do it?

[Nicholas Kang]

That could work. Where would you put the water? We could build a few large dams, maybe flood a continent or two.

 

Wait a minute, what is the problem you would have solved? The problem of sea level rise? Sea level rise is only a problem because if you raise the sea, then the sea goes onto what is currently land, and then it's under water. So you want to solve that problem by manually putting the water onto land? One way to store a significant amount of sea on land is in a frozen state, in very thick glaciers and ice sheets. Do you have a viable replacement? How much energy and cost would you estimate it would take to take some number of centimeters of global ocean surface out of the sea? How would you do it?

 

Thanks for your comment, do vote my post up if you want. I think it is possible to store water on other planets or celestial body (maybe moon). Since we have excess water, we may somehow bring water to stored on moon or maybe Mars. You see, if one day human civilization have expanded to moon or mars, then we can just live at there by creating artificial water cycle originated from Earth. However, this would only possible if Earth is not a closed system. My answer to your question is I am just a 15-year-old boy. I am limited to my own ability. Yet, these are the methods I have thought of:

 

Methods:

1. Set up a committee to regulate the project. It is a multinational project. Every country can share money to build pumps and suck out water from their coast day and night,except form country which do not have coastal lines. To be fair, those country that don`t have coastal lines can help to monitor the progress and give labor work forces or store water temporary. Then, purify the water and finally stored by all means, as long as It is easier to transport and save storage space. Finally, if possible, deliver the water to remote areas to help poor people in desert or third-world countries or if you want, you can actually flood the desert areas with as much water as you can with certain controlled factors to reverse desertification, which means desert can become plain lands too. Yet, this would alter natures law.

 

2. Send water to space for preparation of future immigration to other celestial body like mars and moon.

 

3. Used for scientific experiment if needed in large scale.

 

4. Produce hydrogen and oxygen out of water. if possible, the hydrogen could be used for nuclear fusion in large scale.

 

5. To generate electricity

 

7. Any other possible answers as long as practical and possible.

 

Thank you.

[md65536]

Since we have excess water, we may somehow bring water to stored on moon or maybe Mars. [...] I am limited to my own ability. Yet, these are the methods I have thought of:

Yes, I meant how would you propose that it might be done.

 

A useful skill, probably too rare at any age let alone 15, is the ability to estimate things. Figure out how much sea level rise you're talking about here, and google "ocean area", and multiply to figure out the volume of water. How many kilograms is that? Google/research how much it costs to to lift a kg to orbit (let alone lunar orbit). Then you'll see how much this idea costs with current technology. Or computing it in terms of energy needed is also a good measure.

 

Thinking about ideas like this and calculating them is a good thing, because if current technology is not up to it, it can inspire new ideas for doing it better. But in this case you'd have to find a solution that is many many many magnitudes better than what exists for getting stuff out of Earth's gravitational well. It costs a LOT to send a person into space, never mind the entire fleet of boats on Earth (or 6 microns worth of sea level), never mind glaciers and icecaps.

 

But other problems, like "What part of Earth would I flood?" might lead to possible solutions, and it might be a good idea too. There might be somewhere where a dam and diverted river could flood a desert enough to save some cities??? Or at least, if we can't think of any way to stop icecap melt and global flooding, we might as well at least think of ways to mitigate the effects.

 

 

Better to figure out the magnitude of the problem before forming a committee to regulate a solution.

Edited June 1, 2014 by md65536

[Nicholas Kang]

Yes, you are right. But I can`t understand what you mean throughout your answer. Do you mean I am wrong or I am correct or you are giving new advice. I mean I couldn`t figure out your emotion when you are writing your answer. Especially the last sentence, is it an advice or it is a criticized sentence? You sound like angry or giving advice or not comfortable with my answer? I don`t mind criticized words. I won`t do foolish jobs. Don`t scare.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

This is just a pure thought. I am not very sure about this pure thought. My question is can more ships and boats and submarines cause the sea level to rise?

Yes, but not by very much. xkcd's What If? has covered the opposite of this question:

 

How much would the sea level fall if every ship were removed all at once from the Earth's waters?

 

About six microns—slightly more than the diameter of a strand of spider silk.

http://what-if.xkcd.com/33/

 

So all of the ships in the world contribute very little to the rise in sea level. Read the full article for all the fun details.

[Nicholas Kang]

Thanks for your kind and warm advice, Cap`n Refsmmat. I appreciate a lot of it.

However, based on some numbers for naval fleets and recreational boats, neither one contributes much to the total.

 

This is an extract from the article http://what-if.xkcd.com/33/. In this context, I don`t believe in one thing. For sure, richer people are start to getting rich, so there is no doubt that the recreational boat number will increase as China`s millionaire are getting richer and richer. On the other hand, as the conflict in the west Pacific is getting worse while the same for South China Sea too, have you ever thought of increasing naval fleets across the globe, especially Asia and the Pacific?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Sure, but even an enormous increase in naval and recreational fleets will only contribute another few microns to the total sea level.

[Nicholas Kang]

Ok, thanks. I will welcome opinions from all of the science community.

Edited June 1, 2014 by Nicholas Kang

[md65536]

I mean I couldn`t figure out your emotion when you are writing your answer. Especially the last sentence, is it an advice or it is a criticized sentence?

I just meant it as advice. Ideas generally aren't right or wrong. Even impossible ideas can lead to useful creative solutions. The advice is to estimate the magnitude of the problem before figuring out the details of a possible solution. For example, using values from google searches I estimate the cost of putting 1 mm depth of ocean surface into low Earth orbit with current methods (rockets) would cost about 300 times the value of all resources on Earth. So, organizing who would do it is not the problem that needs to be solved.

 

Another example: You mention Earth's fleet increasing in time. Using the 6 micron current estimate, how many microns of depth would you estimate would be significant relative to other contributions to sea level rise, and how many times or orders of magnitude bigger would the fleet have to be to contribute that depth?

Edited June 1, 2014 by md65536

[Nicholas Kang]

I got what you mean. sorry for misunderstanding your words.

[Sensei]

Why don't you use math to calculate it?

 

Volume = Area * Average Height

so

Volume of all seas = area of all seas * average depth

 

Then

mass of all seas = volume * density

 

Find size of submarine (almost capsule figure)

Pretty easy, as it's volume of tube + sphere.

 

Then make graph in Excel/SpreadSheet with y axis increase of height, and x axis quantity of submarines and show us your results..

Edited December 17, 2014 by Sensei

[capada]

This is just a pure thought. I am not very sure about this pure thought. My question is can more ships and boats and submarines cause the sea level to rise?

Definitely it could but being so small for such a great amount of water, would not be measurable.

[Fermer05]

The seasonal increase in water level of the seas and oceans.

Forum of the Institute of Oceanology

http://www.oceanographers.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=9249

 

The discovery published in the Russian-German scientific journal "Eastern European scientific magazine" №3 / 2015.

The discovery is also published in the scientific journal "Reports of independent authors" №33 / 2015.

Positive review and obtained from the Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences..

 

The waters of lakes, seas and oceans of the Northern Hemisphere rotate counter-clockwise, and the waters of the southern hemisphere rotate clockwise, forming a giant whirlpool.

The main reason for the rotation eddies are local wind ..

 

The higher the wind speed, the higher the rotational speed of whirlpools, and as a consequence, higher centrifugal force whirlpools, thereby increasing the water level of the seas and oceans.

The lower rotational speed of whirlpools, the lower the water level of the seas and oceans ..

 

The speed of currents at the perimeter of the seas and oceans is not the same everywhere and depends on the depth of the coast.

The shallow part of the seas and oceans for moving quickly, and in the deep seas and oceans for moving slowly ..

 

The seasonal increase in water level is not observed along the coast of the seas and oceans, and only in the coasts, where the high angular velocity of currents and as a consequence, high centrifugal force of water. (Centrifugal force F = mv2 / r).

On the straight coasts, where currents do not have the angular velocity, water level does not rise ..

 

Waters of the Gulf of Finland are rotated counterclockwise, forming a whirlpool in the form of an ellipse.

And when the south-westerly winds seasonal unleash a whirlpool of up to 5 km / h, increases the centrifugal force of the whirlpool, so that on the east coast of the Gulf of Finland the level of water rises to 30 cm.

A similar scheme is the seasonal increase in water level is observed in all the lakes, seas and oceans ..

 

The average depth of the Gulf of Finland is about 50 meters on the east coast about 5 meters to the west of the Gulf about 100 meters, for this reason, on the eastern coast of the Gulf of Finland, the linear and angular velocity of currents is much higher (much less than the depth of the coast, in the much improved flows speed ) ..

 

In the Gulf of seasonal increase in water level are two peaks in August and September, and in December and January and in time coincide with the season of the south-westerly winds.

 

The flow rate in the Gulf reaches from 2 to 17 km / h and a top speed of flow in the world is up to 30 km / h wind speed over 100 km / h.

http://goo.gl/eYVTo6

http://esimo.oceanography.ru/esp1/index.php?sea_code=1&section=6&menu_code=1734

 

Caspian Sea Water rotate counterclockwise, forming a whirlpool in the form of an ellipse.

And when seasonal winds and polovodnaya Volga River unleash a whirlpool, a whirlpool increases the centrifugal force, so that on the north coast of the Caspian Sea water level rise of 1 meter ..

 

The average depth of the Caspian Sea is about 200 meters, on the north coast about 5 meters, on the southern coast near the 700m.

In the Caspian Sea the peak seasonal increase in water level is observed in June-August, and will coincide with the season of winds, and floods of the river Volga.

http://tapemark.narod.ru/more/06.png

http://goo.gl/47tXq2

 

In season westerly winds flow velocity along the coast of Murmansk in the Barents Sea increased to 5 km / h, thus, a seasonal increase in water level reaches 0.5 meters.

The maximum level observed in October - November, minimum in April-May.

http://proznania.ru/?page_id=2353

 

In the Bay of Bengal during the monsoon season winds whirl speed increases to 10 km / h, thus, a seasonal increase in water level reaches 1.2 meters.

http://www.aziya-tur.ru/bengal%27skii-zaliv.php

 

Seasonal changes in the Okhotsk sea level is 0.2-0.5 m highest level of values ​​recorded in November and January, the lowest in March -. April.

http://parusa.narod.ru/bib/books/fareast/1406-1.htm

 

The seasonal increase in the level of the Black Sea (40 cm) is best expressed in the southeastern part of the sea, where the angular velocity of currents in the summer reaches its maximum value.

http://tapemark.narod.ru/more/07.html

 

The assumption that the cause of the seasonal increase in water level can be the pressure of the atmosphere, river flow, temperature difference and salinity of the water does not hold, these factors can increase the level of water a few centimeters. But no more.

 

Cyclones moving over the surface of the sea from west to east at a speed of 40 km / h can be for a few days to increase the level of the sea, whirling maelstrom.

http://www.okeanavt.ru/tainiokeana/1066mifosrednemurovne.html

 

Representation theory can be easily checked by the communication speed flows with the level of the seas and oceans.

(Based on the depth map and the currents of the seas and oceans).

Continued: Forum MEPhI

https://mephi.ru/communication/forum/talk/forum13/topic5498/messages/