Reacción a "Sea level rise may be higher than previously thought, according to a study"

The article has good standards given that it handles a multitude of data—albeit from a meta-analysis, which always raises some doubts and increases uncertainties and the possibility of errors because the studies are not similar in their methods—and the methodology is solid, simple, and clear.

The implications are significant, as the authors themselves point out, since it changes the previous level of confidence about the effects of global warming on sea level rise, both globally and at the regional and local levels. In the latter case, for the global south, where fewer direct measurements of actual coastal levels have been made and, therefore, there is less data, the discrepancies between the most widely used geoid model and actual measurements are greater, with a difference of one metre or more.

This fact — that globally the average has to be repositioned about 30 cm higher, reaching a level of several metres in extreme cases in Southeast Asia — means that many more coastal cities and more people living there will be affected by changes such as those predicted by global models. In other words, there will be less time to have a greater impact, which is worrying as these regions are in LMICs (Low and Middle Income Countries), with little capacity to adapt to changes or mitigate their effects.

In Spain, the approximation of geoids is better, as is the case in other European countries with coastlines or in North America, as data records are much better and discrepancies are minimal. There is no substantial impact of this study in the sense that it will change the sea level rise projections that have already been published.

I believe that the margin of error in the methodological adjustments they propose, and therefore in the estimates made, will be greater precisely in those areas where the discrepancies are greatest: basically the different coastal regions of Asia, East Africa and Australia, but also the Pacific and in particular the South Pacific. However, it is a good study, very necessary, and one that further refines the range of future projections for sea level change on the different coasts of the planet.