[danielvf]

The currently quoted number in policy papers is around 1 meter in the next 100 years. The includes the assumption that sea level rise is accelerating beyond historical trends.

For fun, you can get sea level rise satellite data for the past 20+ years from http://sealevel.colorado.edu and run your own math. If you just naively run forward the observed rate over the last 22 years, you get 1 meter of rise in 300 years.

You can also see historical tide data for cities here http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.s...

It's important to know that tide data combines sea level information with information on how much the city is sinking. A bedrock city like NYC will give you better data on sea level rise than a city built on mud, like Venice, which is going into the water even if global sea levels were falling instead of rising.

[danvesma]

i heard more like 0.55m in the next 100 years

[danielvf]

You are correct. That's far more likely, and probably still too high.

The one meter over 100 years figure is the worst case number in the reports. Of course the bigger number gets the most press.

The last one hundred years have had a .10 to .20 meter rise, depending on who you ask.