Would it be too much to provide a reference for those claims. And tell us if you think it's relevant to the future.

For those of us who are only passingly familiar with New York it doesn't really seem like a new increase of 10 feet would not be a disaster.

My google-fu was weak today :-(

How is that possible when sea levels elsewhere didn't rise by 10s of feet? Even if you count tides it defies common sense; a lot of NYC is below 10 feet from sea level.

Anyway, Lomborg is a controversial figure with an anti-global-warming agenda. I tend to trust more objective sources for stuff like this.

He unequivocally says that global warming is real, and man-made. How is that an anti-global warming agenda?

What he does say, is that the proposed solutions would make little differnce, and the proposed effects of global warming are exaggerated.

He seriously downplays potential risks of global warming, and he's built his career on this single argument. I know objective science, and he doesn't practice it (most people who write editorial books don't). To be clear, I don't have a strong opinion on how global warming will play out due to a lack of data, and I think he may very well be correct. But I don't trust him either.

Anyway, do you have a citation? I didn't mean to start an argument about his character, but I'm skeptical of the claim about New York.