At the end of September 2009, renowned climatologist Stefan Rahmstorf spoke to an international climate change conference in Oxford, England. Rahmstorf is a respected authority specializing in analysis of ice melt and sea level changes. He and other climate scientists made this startling announcement:
A rise of at least 2 meters (~6 foot) in the world's sea levels is now virtually unstoppable.
Sit with that for a moment.
"Unstoppable."
No matter what we do now to rein in greenhouse gases, the processes that initiate significant sea level change are already underway. A tipping point in the ice melt processes has been reached. The best outcome, said Rahmstorf, would be that after temperatures stabilized, sea levels would only rise at a steady rate "for centuries to come," and not accelerate. This assumes we can halt global warming after about 1.5 degree C increase.
Realistically speaking, though, given political issues and climate change denial resistance from the various ostriches on the scene - the much more likely scenario is that humans collectively will not be able achieve the 1.5 degree C limit, in which case the rise in sea level will be much more rapid.
Rahmstorf's best guess is a one meter rise this century, assuming three degrees warming, and up to five meters over the next 300 years. This and other estimates are also affected by unknown variables such as what will transpire with large sheet ice at the poles, and transient sea rises, which are different from long-term global sea levels. Should the climate heat up more than that, or sheet ice or transient events occur, it is easily possible to see a 2 meter rise this century, and possibly much more. (For considerable discussion on this and related points, see the excellent content at Real Climate: Climate Science from Climate Scientists.)
But the tipping point is already here, and passed. That means global processes are underway with their own inexorable march towards ever more melting ice and rising seas. This will proceed at its own pace, as inevitable and unstoppable as the rising tide.
This is not a distant eventuality, but a sea change (literally) whose effects we will see within our lifetimes. By 2050 certain populated coastal areas will be significantly impacted by this impending change in sea level. It is no exaggeration to say entire cities will be flooded or submerged: a 2-meter sea rise will, for example, obliterate built-up urban areas in the southern San Francisco Bay, including parts of San Jose. It will submerge chunks of the Port of Los Angeles, threaten Washington D.C., and drown portions of the densely built Jersey shore and industrial New York waterfronts. Low-lying coastal islands off the Carolinas, Florida, and along the Gulf Coast will simply vanish.
Most people have not even begun to contemplate (much less plan for) the real-world consequences of such a fantastic change in the world as we have known it.

Part 2 in this series: What Does a 2-Meter Sea Rise Look Like?
Part 3 in this series: Global Warming in Science Fiction
(By the way, if you're a climate change denier, I'm not really interested in debating the science with you and won't be engaging with remarks in that vein. This series of posts is intended to explore the "what if" science fictional aspects of projected climate change. See footnote #1 here for comments about the denial and science issue.)


Salon.com
Comments
And the Dutch, I read, are planning to re-engineer the height and expanse of their own system of dikes that hold back the sea in the Netherlands.
Global warming could result in inland Canada having some of the world's most desirable real estate.
Given that our coastal cities are full of artists, LGBTs, racial minorities and liberals, part of me wonders whether or not right-wingers will cheer on global warming when its effects are felt. Never mind the devastation it will wreak on everyone, I know a lot of people in my native Arkansas who will high-five each other over all the "queers" in New York City and San Francisco being underwater. The idiots will claims it's their god's judgment.
And then there is always the likelihood of an inland-moving flux of refugees leaving coastal innundations. The heartland won't be so happy about that either, I'm sure, as the intellectual and artistic and countercultural elite move in next door.
Hahahahaha.....
We should reduce carbon and other pollution. It should be done is a sensible and timely fashion. All countries should equally participate with no exceptions. China and India should not be granted a 30 year pass. And Al gore should relabel his work sci-fi.
That is not the finding of the sea and ice melt climatologists working with most current data as of September 2009 and referenced at links in this post. And I'm not here to argue climate change science with climate change deniers. As noted above, "See footnote #1 here for comments about the denial and science issue."
So, if NY is going to sink into the sea within 100 years, so what? Let's just plan for it - we have plenty of time. In the history of civilization cities have come and gone - that's nothing new. Fortunately human beings have these things called "feet" which allow them to MOVE SOMEWHERE ELSE before their home is under water.
It's gonna be like Waterworld, only without the craptasticness of Kevin Costner and the dystopian rustiness. I only wish I could be around to see us all living on massive ships, diving down to the bottom of the ocean for top soil, figuring out how to live on nothing but man made platforms and relying on our technology and ingenuity and grit.
This is just the impetus towards self-sufficiency we need to get off this rock and start exploring the heavens for better places to live.
Wouldn't it be the coolest if NYC was under a geodesic dome under the sea?
Awesome.
Do you know of any reports or studies online that speak to this impact on the NADW? I'd like to read more.
It prepares for this, but I have been blacklisted by both the mayor of NYC and the White House, threatened in person and in writing by numberous federal, state and city agencies. and of course completely ignored by the White House.
Does that make sense to you?
"Again it is only happening in computer models."
Information FAIL. I suggest you take up your case with the governments of Russia, Canada, Denmark and Norway, who are all at present jockeying for position to take resource rights on the Arctic as the ice fades. Even China understands what is going on and is moving in.
Perhaps when you rejoin us here on planet Earth you can discuss the matter with information. Meanwhile, please get out of the way so the rest of us to whom reality matters more than conservabites can secure the future.
T
However, just for fun, could you please explain where I can find the science proving that any global warming trend that may be occurring is caused by human activities?
Because if what you say is true (and just for the record, I'm sure it isn't), and the rise in sea level is "unstoppable," then fins2theleft is right on. Squabbling about how to stop it is pointless. Our energy and resources would be much better spent planning how to deal with it.
P.S. @MTodd: .... fix "global warming" by unplugging the computers. heh heh, that was a good one. I like it.