USGS & Don Knabbe

Options for fixing the San Pedro Slide in southwestern Los Angeles range from several million to 62 million dollars.

It’s a long and inconclusive list of usual suspects that appear in the final draft report [PDF] released by the City of Los Angeles this week. The Department of Public Works tapped the Glendale geotechnical consulting firm Shannon and Wilson to investigate the slide that sent a 600-foot section of seaside roadway toward the Pacific last November.

My radio report and blog post back in April explained the slippery mix of water and soft sediment that permeates the Palos Verdes Peninsula, and what happens when too much water gets between those unstable layers of earth.

Shannon and Wilson’s report lists the following as “contributors” to the slide: irrigation — both residential and watering done inside the White Point Nature Preserve adjacent to the slide — coastal bluff erosion, precipitation, road construction and underground utilities. Just above the Preserve is a 13.2-acre complex of U.S. Air Force housing, and watering from those homes could be “influencing groundwater” near the slide.

Precipitation was a “significant effect,” investigators say: a smaller slide in December of 2009 “associated” with heavy rains may have destabilized the 2011 slide area. The report also mentions the two inches of rain between October, 2011, and last November when the most recent slide occurred. City of Los Angeles sewer lines, storm drains and gas and water lines built back in the 1960′s may have played a role. A city survey with video cameras late last summer and early fall found “some damage” to the storm drains. Interestingly, the only factor the investigators could rule out was the Nike Missile Base built into the hillside above the slide area.

Next come the discussions and decisions about solutions and their price tags. Check out some possible designs in a city video on L.A. City Council member Joe Buscaino’s website. He’s the Chairman of the Public Works Committee, which will be moving the repairs and reconstruction forward. The choices range from a low of several million dollars to leave the slide “as is” and build safe turnarounds for traffic on either side and several mid-range options including grading the slide or re-routing the roadway into the nature preserve for between four to eight million dollars. Two high-range options, 42 million to 62 million dollars, include restoring the roadway without a retaining wall or building a bridge across the slide.

Rising seas will irrevocably change life near the San Francisco Bay. That’s the premise of RISE: Climate Change and Coastal Communities, a three-part documentary by producer Claire Schoen. The second part, “Facing the Rising Tide,” airs this evening at 8 pm on KQED Public Radio.

Opinion by Claire Schoen

Jan Sturmann

Steve Mello's family has been farming this land in the Delta for generations. Climate change may prevent his son from carrying on the family legacy.

I recently dug out an old letter which I had written to my Dad back in 1982. “Have you heard about this thing called Global Warming?” I asked.

Back in the 80’s, I was already aware of what is now referred to as “climate change.” So why is it that so few Americans understand this threat today?

In fact, America is in retreat on the subject. According to Pew Research, the number of Americans who believe the planet is warming dropped by 20 percent from 2006 (79%) to 2010 (59%). “Believe.” As if this scientific phenomenon were a belief system, a question of faith.

This drives me crazy. Especially in the face of the overwhelming consensus in the scientific community that climate change is very real, man-made and increasing at a rate that is outstripping even the worst projections.

And it’s no secret. There is a treasure trove of information to be found at the click of a mouse. Indeed, it’s hard not to trip over it. For example, it took me about 2 minutes to pull up statements attesting to climate change from scientific societies in the US, the United Kingdom, Japan, Canada, France, Germany, India, Russia, Italy, China, Brazil, Australia and New Zealand. Everybody’s got one.

And yet so many people don’t get it. Or don’t want to get it. Or when they do get it, say it’s not really that important. Why is that? This was one of the questions I set out to explore in the RISE series. And it’s the focus of Part II: “Facing the Rising Tide.”

Jan Sturmann

Steve Mello and his son, Gary. They grow corn on Tyler Island, which is protected by levies.

In telling this story, I met two very different families, both smart, educated, thoughtful. The Mellos are Delta farmers whose roots in the land go generations deep. Their talk of family, tradition, and legacy trumps the reality of climate change. The Fosters are urban land developers who have done extremely well financially by turning wetlands into real estate. Facing climate change is a threat to their investments. So, economics and lifestyle are, perhaps, two of the reasons for the wall of denial that America has constructed.

But I think there are others. There is a campaign of disinformation, underwritten by the oil business. And there is Fox News. I ran into an interesting study a few months back that found that people who watch Fox news are less well informed than people who pay no attention to news of any sort.

But I put the blame on public television and radio as well. Living in fear of being cut off by Congress and abandoned by their “enhanced underwriters” (don’t call them advertisers!), public broadcasting bends over backwards in the service of fairness and balance. So here is what we get: “Is there climate change? Or isn’t there climate change? Let’s have a debate.” On one side is a climate denier who represents a fraction of a percent of the scientific community and is most probably funded by a think tank that’s funded by an oil company. On the other side is a climate scientist who represents 99% of the scientific community. One side versus the other. Fair and Balanced. And the take-away for the public is, “Hmm…maybe there is and maybe there isn’t.”

And then there is the tyranny of the news headline. When strident, internal emails from the IPCC (the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) were first leaked, they screamed across the front page of the major dailies like a house on fire: “Faulty Data on Climate Change!” After thorough and exhaustive review, it was found that the emails may have been snippy and inappropriate. But none of the scientific data was invalidated. This follow-up was buried on page 14.

Religion is also part of the problem. A few months ago I attended a Seventh Day Adventist church service. The congregation was very welcoming, pressing a Bible into my hands. The preacher was a delight; thumping and stomping. It made you want to shout out, as many people were doing.

“Have you noticed what’s going on!” cried the preacher, to a wave of “Amen! Tell it, brother!”

“The floods, the hurricanes, the droughts, the heat waves, the cold snaps. They are raining down on our people like a plague from heaven.”

Right on! I thought. He’s preaching on climate change.

Silly me.

“The end times are at our door,” the preacher continued. “The rapture is about to begin!”

So, do I need to drive an electric car? Put up solar panels? Insulate my house? Why no! All I need to do is get right with God, so that I may be lifted above the fire and brimstone.

Sigh.

Meanwhile in 2010, global emissions of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels rose by 5.9%. It was the largest increase on record.

Part 3 of RISE, entitled “Facing the Rising Tide” airs on KQED Public Radio, on February 9. All parts and additional multimedia are available on the RISE website.

This week researchers at the US Geological Survey (USGS) issued a damage report that assesses how badly El Nino patterns tore up West Coast beaches during the winter of 2009-2010. Up and down the coast, the survey logged beach erosion 36% above average. The study’s authors point to the intensity of the El Nino conditions during that time, as well as a geological shift in the region of warmer water. They say high water, heavy storms and warmer waters were the culprits. And they warn that with the changing climate, these events may become more common.

“This little winter is a snapshot of what climate change may look like where we have baseline higher sea levels and more significant storms.” said Patrick Barnard, a coastal geologist with the USGS in Santa Cruz.

A sign warning of cliff erosion in Santa Cruz. (Photo: Craig Miller)

One Bay Area snapshot the authors highlighted was San Francisco’s Ocean Beach. The thin coast retreated more than 184 feet, dumping the southbound lane of the Great Highway onto the beach. It took nine months before the lane was reopened and the clean-up cost $5 million.

The collapsed southbound lane of the Great Highway. (Photo: USGS)

The authors were surprised at the property damage spikes along the coast.

“Almost all the sites we looked at had erosion that was comparable or exceeded the last big El Nino in 1997-98,” says Barnard. George Kaminsky, co-author and a Coastal Engineer with the Washington Department of Ecology, says there is hope among the wreckage along the coast.

“In terms of preparing, it gives us a sense of what’s possible when the perfect storm happens,” he said. “We should be able to anticipate better and prepare, in terms of evacuation and getting people out of harm’s way.”