There's not enough ice in the Arctic for a 1 meter rise.

My calculations show maximum melted volume would give a 0.3 meter rise.

Also, you're not accounting for arid areas that would soak up the increased water as precipitation.

(Note recent precipitation trends in Arizona -- in last week 600% of normal!)

"This is the essence of science...you ask an impertinent question and you're on your way to a pertinent answer." -- Fox Mulder, S1E4, "Conduit"

My calculations show 2 polar areas, maybe you need to revisit your maths with this in mind.

I don't know about one meter - it might be a high or low estimate because we just don't know. So far, most areas in the US are experiencing regressed sea level rise rates of 1-4 mm per year.

Noted it that Arctic sea ice is already floating in the water, so by itself, sea ice melting is no big deal. When land ice and glaciers go, I'd be very concerned, since they don't displace ocean water right now. That's more of a heat-sink issue (I hate the term "feedback loop").

Back to my point, sea rise will NOT be uniform over all the oceans at varying rates. Additionally, different areas will be impacted especially if they are experiencing subsidence and coastal erosion, which can be highly variable.  Never trust one number!

Onward through the fog

If you multiply the area of Greenland by the average ice depth in Greenland and divide by the total surface area of the ocean you should get about seven meters, essentially the maximum ice melt contribution to sea level from the northern hemisphere alone.

If you are not in that ballpark, you have a mistake in your data or your calculations.

Everyone note please that sea level rises under warming even if the glacial balance is neutral due to thermal expansion of the water.

mt