Tim the Plumber wrote:
Do you have a referance to an actual scientific paper which says that a 1m sea level rise is on the cards?
Did you miss the link I posted after the chart to the actual scientific paper the legislature made "illegal" to use. It has the references used in the determination of the rise presented. http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us/slr/NC%20Se ... 0Panel.pdf
A set of sea-level curves is presented in Figure 2, which present scenarios of differing rates of SLR acceleration. The curves are projected to 90 years in the future (2100 AD) and the initial rate of rise is set at 4.27 mm per year (Zervas, 2004). A rise of 0.4 meter (15 inches) is considered a minimum, since this is the amount of rise that will occur given a linear projection with zero acceleration. Various models and observations indicate that accelerated rates of SLR in the future are likely (IPCC, 2007; Rahmstorf, 2007; Pfeffer et al., 2008). In fact, various investigations indicate a two- to four-fold increase in rates of rise over the last century (Church and White, 2006; Rahmstorf, 2007; Kemp et al., 2009).
Rahmstorf (2007) proposed that there is a roughly proportional relationship between global mean near-surface air temperature and global MSL. Rahmstorf’s “method” for projecting future SLR has been adopted by several states and municipalities. The method has produced highly accurate hindcast results, particularly for the thermal expansion component of rise, and predicts a total rise of 0.50 meter to 1.4 meters (20 to 55 inches) by 2100. Rahmstorf cautions that delayed positive feedbacks might result in the method underestimating the contribution from land ice, resulting in total rise of over 1.4 meters. In spite of this caveat, the Science Panel believes that the Rahmstorf method is robust and 1.4 meters a reasonable upper limit for projected rise.
Pfeffer et al (2008) attempted to constrain the upper limit of land ice contribution to sea level by investigating the physical ability of glaciers and ice sheets to discharge into the ocean. The research was intended to provide a basis and methodology for incorporating land ice contributions into calculations of future global MSL. The research concluded that a range of 0.80 meter to 2 meters is a more plausible range than the figures presented by the IPCC. A 2-meter rise is considered very unlikely, but still possible, and could only occur with rapidly accelerated and very high rates of warming and ice sheet melting.
The assesment report you quoted is not a peer reviewed paper.
4.27 mm per year is more than a 2 fold increase in sea level rise over last centuary so the proposed 2-4 fold increase is already factored into that. Don't apply another 4 fold multiplier.
You want there to be a 1.4m sea level rise by 2100. Where is all the water coming from and how much temperature increase is expected to give such a reasult?