> I’m not sure: when I was in high school / university it was well understood that places like Florida would be under water and unlivable by now.

This doesn't seem plausible - the worst-case predictions for sea level rise by the end of the century are around 2m.

That would certainly be bad for Florida, but like 80% of the population lives higher than 2m above sea level, so it certainly wouldn't be unliveable.

I'd note that "under water" isn't the only issue at hand.

Florida's homeowners insurance industry has largely collapsed in recent years.

Rising sea levels can impact fresh water supplies (https://www.wusf.org/weather/2024-11-27/trillion-dollar-hidd...).

> Up to 70% of residents between North Carolina and Florida, and a trillion dollars in property, could be impacted by the end of the century with just over three feet of sea rise. South Florida represents the vast majority of that risk, with about 7.5 million people and $750 billion dollars in property expected to face increasing risks as groundwaters rise, the study found.

Power failures get scarier in high temp, high humidity scenarios, too. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet-bulb_temperature)

Thwaites Glacier and the glaciers locked behind it are predicted to raise sea levels by 3 metres in the next 50 years. And that's just one source -- it doesn't include Greenland's glaciers, other parts of Antarctica, and the expansion effect of warming the ocean water.

Florida is particularly vulnerable because it's porous. We could build sea walls around NYC to protect it, but that wouldn't work well for Florida.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5wB2ur1S2w

A beautiful island archipelago with heaps of cool snorkeling in the ruins just below the surface.