3 ms·

Did I just miss the link to the research material? How much higher will it be? 6 inches? 2 feet?

• luu 7y ago
  I believe the paper is https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-12808-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-12808-z. If I'm reading the paper correctly, the authors don't argue that sea levels will rise more than previously predicted. Rather, they argue that the classical technique for estimating impact by using elevation (SRTM) is overestimating elevation and therefore underestimating the impact of rising sea levels. The authors claim that their technique (CoastalDEM) also underestimates the impact of rising sea levels, but reduces the systemic bias present in previous estimates.
  • radford-neal 7y ago
    Thanks for the link. One statement from the paper: "this analysis assumes a static coastal topography". This seems like a significant limitation, especially when a lot of the affected area consists of river deltas (eg, most of Bangladesh, the Mekong delta in Vietnam). One would expect that a rise in sea level in a delta would lead to increased silt deposition on the newly-submerged parts of the delta, reducing the impact compared to a naive calculation, perhaps quite significantly.
• listenallyall 7y ago
  "Central estimates in the recent literature broadly agree that global mean sea level is likely to rise 20–30 cm by 2050 ref.3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10" But what the paper is claiming, is that accepted methods of determining elevation are positively biased (estimates of land mass being higher than this new paper says): "CoastalDEM reduces linear vertical bias from 4.71 m to less than 0.06 m."