@Thinkerbell And that was in reply to @Reason10’s comment, which was specifically about Florida. As was clear, but perhaps you conveniently overlooked that.
"Please explain how nuclear power (despite it being the most expensive form of energy, and taking years, if not decades to come online) is “the best, most realistic solution”."
Ice that is already in the ocean has no significant effect on sea level if it melts. Ice that is on land, however, has the immediate effect of raising sea level if the ice slides into the ocean.
True. And, to add more complexity, some ice sheets, like the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS), are grounded on land that lies significantly below sea level, a condition known as a "marine-based ice sheet". In these areas, the weight of the ice has depressed the continent's bedrock below sea level, forming a basin where the ice sheet rests and from which it flows into the ocean. Warm water can undercut this ice, accelerating glacial flow.
What the climate models predict is a "tipping point" at which ice sheets accelerate and serious sea level rise becomes inevitable. Al Gore used climate models from the early 2000s that assumed a steady rate of CO2 increase to predict a tipping point within a few decades. The rate of CO2 increase has been cut dramatically, pushing the tipping point farther into the future. The goal of the Paris Accords is to prevent the tipping point from ever occurring.
See that exponential rise between about 1997 & 2005 in the total CO2 equiv? That curve changed. And it changed due to dire predictions from better and better climate models. Science changed human behavior AMAZING!!
https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-coastal-flooding 