RCP8.5 as BAU study o' the day
(actually very good news here - would seem to imply an expert consensus on SLR <1m under more plausible scenarios, lots of uncertainties of course)
Sea levels could rise more than a metre by 2100, experts say theguardian.com/environment/20…
(actually very good news here - would seem to imply an expert consensus on SLR <1m under more plausible scenarios, lots of uncertainties of course)
Sea levels could rise more than a metre by 2100, experts say theguardian.com/environment/20…
Even including RCP8.5 studies the IPCC assessments of SLR to 2100 have been remarkably consistent over decades Garner et al 2019 agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/20… ) 
So too has the underlying peer-reviewed research on SLR to 2100
(from excellent Garner et al 2019 agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/20…)
Figures below
Top= high emissions (eg RCP8.5)
Center= middle emissions (eg RCP4.5)
Bottom= low emissions (eg RCP2.6)
Tan strip= IPCC range
(from excellent Garner et al 2019 agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/20…)
Figures below
Top= high emissions (eg RCP8.5)
Center= middle emissions (eg RCP4.5)
Bottom= low emissions (eg RCP2.6)
Tan strip= IPCC range
A decade ago we found that the media did an overall excellent job reporting on SLR science (it'd be interesting to update this analysis)
iopscience.iop.org/article/10.108…
iopscience.iop.org/article/10.108…
This is interesting
Garner et al 2018 plot the results from "high emissions scenarios" from published upper-end SLR projections in the literature
You can clearly see when RCP8.5 arrived on the scene
Blue is IPCC AR range (& IPCC seems to have largely discounted RCP8.5 studies)
Garner et al 2018 plot the results from "high emissions scenarios" from published upper-end SLR projections in the literature
You can clearly see when RCP8.5 arrived on the scene
Blue is IPCC AR range (& IPCC seems to have largely discounted RCP8.5 studies)
