Originally Posted by The North One
The thing is, Montreal is also at risk, maybe not as much as New York, Philly, Boston, D.C. and Miami, but the city still needs to worry about rising sea levels. Vancouver is definitely the most at-risk city in Canada for sea level rise, just a 6-meter rise and almost all of Richmond is under water.
And I doubt many Americans will come running to Canada, those on the American coasts will move inland to cities that will stay wet in the Great Lakes region. I think in a century from now you'll see small cities in the far north connected to the Great Lakes like Duluth and Marquette explode in population as they're already in beautiful environments, have shipping access to the sea and the weather will be warmer.
It'll depend a lot on the city and the hydrology. The beach towns will likely have to be abandoned and rebuilt where the new beaches are, sure, but most of the major urban areas on the East Coast were built on protected harbors and in other environments where mitigation is significantly easier. For example, a tidal barrier built in the St. Lawrence narrows (where Québec City is) would protect Montréal; a similar such barrier built at the mouth of the Chesapeake would protect Richmond, Baltimore, DC, and the Hampton Roads, even if Virginia Beach has to be abandoned and rebuilt behind a levee system.
Plus, of special interest to Vancouver, the entire Ringsted is built in the Rhine's delta. Humans have plenty of knowledge of what it takes to convert deltaic wetland wastelands into arable land.
I would also augur that water issues become increasingly important in Southwestern and Southern politics as these regions become increasingly arid; they are unimportant in the humid Northeast and Midwest.