See about a potential speed limit for SLR also this comment about Rohling et al 2013:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,130.msg17964.html#msg17964I checked this comment with Rohling himself, who completely agreed with it.
Particularly relevant seems this quote from Rohling et al:
The disequilibrium between rapidly increased anthropogenic climate forcing and slow ice-volume responses amounts to many metres of SLR at current atmospheric CO2 levels, and may not change significantly with increasing CO2 to 700 ppmv (Figure 1)24. Temperature adjustments to emission scenarios within that range follow a sigmoidal pattern with time, accelerating and then decelerating, with adjustment timescales between 150 years for low-emission scenarios and 400 years for high-emission scenarios15. We infer that the present disequilibrium is already sufficient to cause build-up toward major ice-sheet responses, and that further warming will occur over similar timescales as the developing ice-sheet responses, so that increased forcing would cause (rapid) shifts toward extremes of the parameter ranges considered here (high ultimate SLR rates and rapid adjustment timescales). The median global radiative forcing projections for high-emission RCPs is ~12 W m−2 (ref. 15). For deglaciations, this was 8–10 W m−2 (refs. 17,28). We infer that the long-term consequences of high-emission RCPs may be suitably gauged from the SLR adjustment rates and timescales of deglaciations, if we assume that such consequences would develop via naturally precedented processes (e.g., because the response becomes rate-limited).
Forcings and temperatures can rise faster than ice can melt, so there must be a limit to the melting rate somewhere. The question is what that limit is, and that's not easy to answer, since nature seems to have never done this experiment before.
The natural maximum rate of SLR over several centuries during past interglacials seems to have been about 1 meter/century, maybe some more for shorter intervals. So if the current climate forcing is or will be at least 10 times as strong as back then, even with strong mitigation, then maybe 10 meters/century would be a possibility in the coming centuries, unless this would be above the maximum rate that's physically possible.
But can we exclude that for example 4-5 meters per century is possible? There is less ice now than during the last deglaciation when this rate was apparently reached during several centuries (Meltwater Pulse 1A, about 14.000 years ago). But then again, it's warmer now, and there's still enough vulnerable, marine based ice available. So with a forcing 10 times or more stronger than in the past, who knows what is possible or not?
