Governor 'Moonbeam' beclowns himself over sea level rise at LAX airport

Proof positive politicians can’t do simple math.

From the LA Times today:Brown_LAX_SLR

Brown’s remarks came a day after the release of two studies finding that a slow-motion and irreversible collapse of a massive cluster of glaciers in Antarctica has begun and could cause sea levels to rise worldwide by four feet within 200 years.

“If that happens, the Los Angeles airport’s going to be underwater,” Brown told reporters at a presentation of his revised state budget proposal in Los Angeles. “So is the San Francisco airport.”

Source: http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-brown-sea-level-airports-20140513-story.html

Ok let’s do the math, first a look at the sea level rate from the Los Angeles tide gauge operated by NOAA:

9410660[1]

Source: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=9410660

Assuming nothing changes in the rate of sea level rise, and the airport would still exist there in the future, here is the math.

LAX airport elevation is 125 feet  ( Source: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KLAX )

125 feet = 38100mm

At the rate of 0.83mm/yr sea level rise seen at Los Angeles (from NOAA graph above)  it would take 45903.6 years to reach 125 feet, we’d be in a new ice age by then and sea levels would be falling…never gonna happen.

So, at current rates, Brown’s claim is bogus.

But he’s saying it will be due to Antarctic’s western ice sheet melting.

OK, the claims is from news coverage of two papers, “Marine Ice Sheet Collapse Potentially Under Way for the Thwaites Glacier Basin, West Antarctica“. This study is available here:

http://sciences.blogs.liberation.fr/files/glacier-thwaites.pdf

NASA says of the paper “Sustained increase in ice discharge from the Amundsen Sea Embayment, West Antarctica, from 1973 to 2013“. This study is available here:

http://www.ess.uci.edu/researchgrp/erignot/files/grl51433.pdf

Even as Rignot and colleagues suggest that loss of the Amundsen Sea embayment glaciers appears inevitable, it remains extremely difficult to predict exactly how this ice loss will unfold and how long it will take. A conservative estimate is that it could take several centuries.

The region contains enough ice to raise global sea levels by 4 feet (1.2 meters).

Source: http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/news/antarctic-ice-sheet-20140512/

4 feet, and LAX airport is 125 feet above sea level. SFO airport, also mentioned by Brown is Elevation: 13 ft. according to Airnav

NASA even calculates for the worst case scenario:

The Amundsen Sea region is only a fraction of the whole West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which if melted completely would raise global sea level by about 16 feet (5 meters).

So even 16 feet wouldn’t affect LAX airport, but might affect SFO …far in the future.

Governor Brown is in a gross error with his claims. You’d think his handlers would check this simple math before they allow him to beclown himself with unsupportable claims of doom that can’t possibly affect either airport enough to cause them to be moved.

Again all this assumes that SFO and LAX will still be there in 200 years. We might be driving antigrav personal flying vehicles by then. (Well, if you believe Popular Science).

Here is where I think Brown went wrong:

He listened to the Guardian’s Susanne Goldenberg, who conflated 4 feet to 4 METERS (13 feet), which would affect SFO airport, but not LAX.

Guardian_goldenberg_antarcticSLR

And the error is still in her story, a day later.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

There isn’t even that much water on the planet, is there? I mean, if all ice, everywhere melted, how high would the sea level go?

john robertson

Probably misspoke, forgot to add:”And when Guam tips over”.
The latest frenzy is rubbing it in, CAGW is an Intelligence Test.

TheMightyQuinn

The science is settled. Lefties have a compulsive need to prove they are stupid.

Ashby Manson

Oh good lord. (…and I’m an atheist.)

“Progressives” don’t care about math, which is why this won’t hurt Brown one bit with his supporters.
For them, it’s true if you want it to be true, unless you’re not one of them. And then anything you do is EVIL!

I refuse to believe that anyone can claim the ability to foresee hundreds of years in advance, since no one was able to predict the past 18 years of climate from two years ahead. And this is certainly true for those who believe we can dial down the Earth temps by removing carbon emissions. So apparently these yokels think that 200 plus years fom now we’ll still be burning coal and filling up at gas stations? That is perhaps their biggest piece of illogical thinking.

Let’s see what the LA Times thinks of Brown’s blunder. Whoops, did I say “think?”

gbaikie

An idiot would not be so stupid.
I blame the statement attributed to the Governor on the flies surrounding this long dead zombie.

DJ

You guys all make big funny. Now.
But you wait. The Sepulveda underpass is below the runway, and it will be flooding in only 36,722.88 years!
Laugh while you can. Traffic’s gonna be backed up to Ventura Blvd.

M Seward, Somewhere in Oz, Gobsmacked.

This latest brainspurt from Governor Brown really epitomises the vortex of absurd alarmism he and the rest of the Warmistas are stuck in.
Lets assume that a 4ft sea level rise actually did pose a statistical threat to LAX and or San Francisco airports. His answer is to move them? Why not just build a bund wall to protect them? The Dutch have such walls to protect about half their country, for God’s sake! It would hardly be some engineering marvel to protect a bloody airport. What a complete idiot! What is with Californians that they vote this dingbat in time after time. Was Arnie that bad? Really?

JJ

Airports will be made obsolete by personal teleportation chambers long before sea levels rise to engulf the current location of LAX.

SIGINT EX

How embarrassing !
Governor ‘Moonbeam’ spouts a proclamation after deep thought, no doubt in the “Cone Of Silence” with fellow stoner Barak Obama.
Ah Ha !
The new Gojila movie is about to premier and then stomp the daylights out of of Tokyo and New York ! Of Course ! It and the ‘papers’ are a ‘Cecil B. DeMil production,’ however not staring our Bou vie Bou Charlton Heston as the Vanquishing Hero cum laude, heavy on the cum [porn star].
Ha ha 😉

kenwd0elq

I can EASILY believe that SFO will be under 15 feet of water.
From the tsunami caused by “The Big One”, which is expected in under 200 years.

lee

They say that ignorance is bliss. Not so much when the ignoramus is a politician.

Now, irregardless of your beliefs about climate, does anyone out there actually believe we
will still be filling our vehicles with gasoline a hundred years from now? Or burning coal or natural gas to make electricity? These people that predict well into the future always assume things won’t change much in the next hundred years (we’ll be on the iPad CLMXXV by then). That’s the most idiotic assumption I’ve ever heard. Nobody believes that. Not even the alarmists, which is quite illogical considering their beliefs. That’s the strongest argument I can think of for not doing anything.

Chris in Calgary

Obviously, he is the governor, and he knows what he’s talking about.
> LAX airport is 125 feet above sea level
He knows something we don’t. Either a tsunami or an asteroid strike in the Pacific will flood LAX in the next 100 years.
Count on it. 😉

Pamela Gray

Say JJ, can those teleportation chambers be programmed to leave a few fat cells behind?

KevinK

“who conflated 4 feet to 4 METERS (13 feet)”, dang those darned units, trips me up all the time. I still have trouble converting “furlongs per fortnight” into miles per hour.
Of course, once they ban all the automobiles “furlongs per fortnight’ maybe a handy metric to keep in mind.
Cheers, Kevin.

ffohnad

Say anything that enters his uninformed mind then spin it later. Typical of him and most all pols. How did it happen that the country is run by 2nd class minds?

KevinK

Oh yeah, I forgot, think about the country song possibilities;
“There I was, cruising down the interstate, doing 100 furlongs per fortnight, I would be in Tulsa a week after next Thursday, Hopefully, she’d still be there”,
Instant classic song.
/sarc off

Jim Bo

Good lord, I haven’t visited the LA Times in awhile and their “makeover” is atrocious. Can’t even get the article comments to load (wherein, generally, you can find the only reason to actually read an LA Times article).

John Slayton

M Seward, Somewhere in Oz, Gobsmacked: Was Arnie that bad? Really?
Well, uh, as a matter of fact…. I suppose if you like California’s cap and trade program.
“Governor Moonbeam” was the late Mike Royko’s gift to California, although he later took it back. Too bad he’s not still around; I suspect he might bestow it a second time. Maybe a title that could be shared with the Governator.
: > )

Dave N

“There isn’t even that much water on the planet, is there? I mean, if all ice, everywhere melted, how high would the sea level go?”
This table shows approximate volumes of ice sheets in Antarctica and Greenland:
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2000/HannaBerenblit.shtml
According to this link:
http://chartsbin.com/view/wwu
The total sea surface is 361,132,000 sq km
Bring out your calculator 😉

Politicians, (politichickens) will tell you what they want you to know.

Mac the Knife

Inability to do basic math is a ‘progressive’ disease….
Acceptance of that intellectual failure serves their common core values.

SumTingWong

High speed rail will have taken over by then so airplanes will be obsolete.

John F. Hultquist

The Gov intends for the people of CA to pay for a train system designed to fail. That will become ever clearer as the delays and the costs compound. Eventually, the tracks and infrastructure will end at LAX. At about that point in time the northern end can be torn up and loaded on train cars and carried to the airport. With that for fill, one runway, then another, then the terminals and all the rest can be slowly raised in place. Up north, as the tracks are ripped up and loaded for the trip south the land can be reclaimed and planted with wine grapes or other useful things. This plan will keep the spenders in CA pleased, and as with Seattle’s tunnel machine Bertha, lawyers, courts, politicians, DOTs, MSM, and others can remain gainfully employed. What’s not to like?

Pamela Gray

It sounds to me like Jerry is troling for guvmnt money and pick pocketed coinage. No mistake on his part I be thinking.

It is 200 ,years worst case and then 1mm would be added per year. So its ,200 ,years until the onset of a ,1mm rise per year. Best case 1000 years until the onset

Truthseeker

Haven’t the Antarctic Sea Ice levels increasing and have been for some time?

pat

everyone has their hand out for CAGW monies:
13 May: RTCC: Ed King: UN climate treaty vital for global security, warns senior NATO official
Militaries will bear the brunt of worse disasters if world fails to strike emissions reduction deal in 2015, says Jamie Shea.
One of NATO’s most senior officials says militaries could find themselves overwhelmed by the scale of natural disasters if a global agreement to tackle climate change is not reached in Paris next year. In an interview with RTCC, Jamie Shea, Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Emerging Security Challenges, said projected temperature rises above and beyond 2C were alarming the global security community.
Further global warming had the potential to exacerbate what he termed the “development-terrorism nexus”, encouraging Al Qaeda and other terror groups, as well as placing extreme stress on military efforts to deliver humanitarian aid to areas affected by drought, flooding or storms.
“If we do nothing and there is no agreement, we could go up to more alarming scenarios. Then even the military, particularly with the budgets we have at the moment, could be somewhat overwhelmed,” he told RTCC…
NATO does not have an official position on the UN’s proposed climate treaty, but Shea said he agreed with those who believe global warming is one of the world’s greatest security threats.“Personally – and if I can be so arrogant as to talk for the global security community – I think it is. The problems that we are already facing today, the fact that disasters seem to be more frequent and violent, particularly in Asia, they have a paralysing effect on the economy, electricity grid and transport system.” …
“It would be very short sighted to think that suddenly that because a crisis like Ukraine has come up we can forget about all of the more intellectually demanding and complicated, but potentially much more in the long run significant causes of unrest,” he said…
NATO’s focus on climate change could increase later this year, when former Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg replaces Anders Fogh Rasmussen as chief of the organisation. Currently serving as Ban Ki-moon’s climate change envoy, Stoltenberg arrives with a reputation as one of Europe’s most progressive and green politicians, with a keen awareness of the variety of threats posed by a warming planet…
http://www.rtcc.org/2014/05/13/un-climate-treaty-vital-for-global-security-warns-senior-nato-official/
RTCC: About us
Responding to Climate Change (RTCC) is a news and analysis website focused on providing the latest updates and insight into global low carbon developments. Our sister website Climate Change TV (CCTV) offers an online channel hosting interviews and footage from international climate change and development summits. We are accredited as official observers to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and run a TV studio for the UN at its climate, biodiversity and desertification talks. Our annual ‘Respond’ publication is distributed at every major UN climate summit, covering advances in low carbon policy, technology and research. RTCC and CCTV are funded by sponsors and web advertising. A list of business partners can be found on our front page…
The RTCC and CCTV team work from the London offices of our parent company Entico Corporation, which specialises in organising conferences and summits in emerging economies.
http://www.rtcc.org/about-us/
RTCC Media Partners
UNFCCC
Guardian Environment Network
Entico
UNCCD
Climate News Network

markx

Even 100 metres of sea level rise (not even possible?) still leaves a helluva lot of land sticking up…. I am pretty sure mankind could cope, given enough lead time!
http://vrstudio.buffalo.edu/~depape/warming/100meter.html

Steve C

ffohnad says: (May 13, 8:16 pm)
… How did it happen that the country is run by 2nd class minds?
3rd class education so the plebs will believe anything they’re told;
1st class lying media to tell ’em what the 2nd class minds say.
Valid over most of the (formerly) 1st world.

sunderlandsteve

He listened to the Guardian’s Susanne Goldenberg, who conflated 4 feet to 4 METERS (13 feet), which would affect SFO airport, but not LAX…….
A fool misled by an idiot!

pat

speaking of Goldenberg, Generals upgrade climate risk from a “threat multipler” to a “conflict catalyst” & the so-called antiwar Guardian is willing to go along as long as it promotes CAGW:
14 May: Guardian: Suzanne Goldenberg: Climate change poses growing threat of conflict in the Arctic, report finds
Report by former military officers says prospect of ice-free Arctic has set off scramble for shipping lanes and for access to oil
“Things are accelerating in the Arctic faster than we had looked at,” said General Paul Kern, the chairman of the Centre for Naval Analysis Corporation’s military advisory board, which produced the report. “The changes there appear to be much more radical than we envisaged.”
The prospect of an ice-free Arctic by mid-century had set off a scramble for shipping lanes by Russia and China especially, and for access to oil and other resources. “As the Arctic becomes less of an ice-contaminated area it represents a lot of opportunites for Russia,” he said. Oil companies were also moving into the Arctic.
“We think things are accelerating in the Arctic faster than we had looked at seven years ago,” he said, saying the situation had the potential to “spark conflict there”…
The report from the retired generals goes further, however, upgrading the climate risk from a “threat multipler” to a “conflict catalyst”…
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/may/14/climate-change-arctic-security-threat-report

Rabe

Pamela Gray, fat cells? Presumably the prototype he tested worked on brain cells.

pat

funny how Suzanne Goldenberg didn’t mention these guys are “government-funded” or that the Report is just a re-hash of the 2007 report, with an upgrade to the “catalyst” nonsense:
14 May: NYT: Coral Davenport: Climate Change Deemed Growing Security Threat by Military Researchers
WASHINGTON — The accelerating rate of climate change poses a severe risk to national security and acts as a catalyst for global political conflict, a report published Tuesday by a leading ***government-funded*** military research organization concluded.
The Center for Naval Analyses Military Advisory Board found that climate change-induced drought in the Middle East and Africa is leading to conflicts over food and water and escalating longstanding regional and ethnic tensions into violent clashes…
In addition, the report predicted that an increase in catastrophic weather events around the world will create more demand for American troops, even as flooding and extreme weather events at home could damage naval ports and military bases…
In an interview, Secretary of State John Kerry signaled that the report’s findings would influence American foreign policy.
“Tribes are killing each other over water today,” Mr. Kerry said. “Think of what happens if you have massive dislocation, or the drying up of the waters of the Nile, of the major rivers in China and India. The intelligence community takes it seriously, and it’s translated into action.”…
In March, the Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review, the agency’s main public document describing the current doctrine of the United States military, drew a direct link between the effects of global warming — like rising sea levels and extreme weather patterns — and terrorism…
***Tuesday’s report is an update of a report by the center’s Military Advisory Board in 2007, the first major study to draw the link between climate change and national security…
The 2007 report also described climate change as a “threat multiplier”…
The 2014 report updates that language, calling climate change a “catalyst for conflict” — a phrase intentionally chosen, the report’s authors said, to signal that climate change is an active, driving force in starting conflict…
“In the past, the thinking was that climate change multiplied the significance of a situation,” said Gen. Charles F. Wald, who contributed to both reports and is retired from the Air Force. “Now we’re saying it’s going to be a direct cause of instability.”…
Senator James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee and a vocal skeptic of the established science that greenhouse gas emissions contribute to global warming, scoffed at the idea that climate change is linked to national security threats.
“There is no one in more pursuit of publicity than a retired military officer,” he said of the report’s authors. “I look back wistfully at the days of the Cold War. Now you have people who are mentally imbalanced, with the ability to deploy a nuclear weapon. For anyone to say that any type of global warming is anywhere close to the threat that we have with crazy people running around with nuclear weapons, it shows how desperate they are to get the public to buy this.”
Adm. David Titley, a co-author of the report and a meteorologist who is retired from the Navy, said political opposition would not extinguish what he called the indisputable data in the report.
“The ice doesn’t care about politics or who’s caucusing with whom, or Democrats or Republicans,” said Admiral Titley, who now directs the Center for Solutions to Weather and Climate Risk at Pennsylvania State University.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/14/us/politics/climate-change-deemed-growing-security-threat-by-military-researchers.html?hpw&rref=science&_r=0

pat

Nielsen Media Research: Monday’s Cable Ratings & Broadcast Finals
Years of Living Dangerously (8:00)* – Showtime
0.134 million viewers, #47; 0.057 million adults 18-49 (0.04 rating), #47 http://www.thefutoncritic.com/ratings/2014/05/13/mondays-cable-ratings-and-broadcast-finals-voice-dancing-continue-their-reign-61511/cable_20140512/

pat

13 May: WaPo: Wesley Lowery: Rubio clarifies climate change comments during National Press Club appearance
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R) acknowledged that the climate is changing, but said that there is no legislative proposal currently on the table that would put a stop to it, while speaking Tuesday at the National Press Club.
“Headlines notwithstanding, of course the climate is changing. The climate is always changing and that is a measurable that you can see. There is climate change.” Rubio said. “The issue is whether there is legislative proposals before us that can do anything about it, what I have said and what I disagree with is the notion that if we pass cap and trade it will stop this from happening.”
Rubio made headlines over the weekend when he told ABC News that the impact of man-made climate change is being overstated…
***Rubio was asked three times by the National Press Club audience about those climate change comments…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/05/13/rubio-walks-back-climate-change-comments/
13 May: The Wire: Abby Ohlheiser: Marco Rubio’s Stance on Climate Change Is a Hot Mess
“I’ve never disputed that the climate is changing,” Marco Rubio said on Tuesday. He added: “Of course the climate is changing.”…
“I do not believe that human activity is causing these dramatic changes to our climate the way these scientists are portraying it,” Rubio said on Sunday, placing himself firmly in the “climate change denier” camp…
But it appears that Rubio is uncomfortable with that label, hence his remarks on Tuesday that read like a walk back but don’t actually clarify much of anything. They’re the “I’m not not licking toads” statement of climate change denial. Here’s a portion of his statement on Tuesday at the National Press Club, via NBC (emphasis ours): …ETC
Rubio added that he’s fine with proposals that are more environmentally-friendly, so long as they are “also good for our economy.” He added, “for people to go out and say ‘if you pass this bill that I am proposing, this will somehow lead us to have less tornadoes and less hurricanes,’ that’s just not an accurate statement.” Except the quantity of tornadoes and hurricanes is not actually what most recent reports on the issue have pointed to…
http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/05/marco-rubios-stance-on-climate-change-is-a-hot-mess/370814/

tty

There isn’t even that much water on the planet, is there? I mean, if all ice, everywhere melted, how high would the sea level go?
About 70-80 meters (250 feet). But that won’t happen. Neither the Ellsworth mountains (4900 meters), the Transantarctic mountains (4500 meters), the Executive Committee Range (4300 meters) nor Fimbulheimen (3100 meters) are going to become ice-free until Antarctica moves away from the pole or the sun turns into red giant, whichever comes first.
The Ellsworth and Executive Comittee ranges are in West Antarctica by the way.

tty

High speed rail will have taken over by then so airplanes will be obsolete.
Sure, particularly on the trans-pacific runs.

bazza

Has anybody told this fool he has got his maths wrong?If yes what was his answer?

Leo Morgan

@ Truthseeker
Yes, Antarctic Sea Ice has been expanding.
On the other hand, Ice over the continent itself has been shrinking.
There is a notoriously dishonest post on the SkS site that calls the increased sea ice a ‘myth’, because the land ice has been melting.(Non-sequiter, much?) I am told that the IPCC forecast has always been that the Antarctic should accumulate land ice for the rest of this century. That’s something that if its true really ought to have been mentioned by the site.

tty
It could be sooner than you think as China is planning a rail link to the US under the Bering straits
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2623491/China-considers-building-rail-link-AMERICA-8-000-mile-journey-two-days-involve-going-125-mile-undersea-tunnel-Alaska.html
tonyb

Stephen Skinner

So if the ice sheets are running out out to sea quicker than previously noted then is there no replenishment of ice at the top or has that stopped? In other words Antarctica is only losing ice?

Stephen Skinner

JJ says:
May 13, 2014 at 7:41 pm
Pamela Gray says:
May 13, 2014 at 8:00 pm
“Say JJ, can those teleportation chambers be programmed to leave a few fat cells behind?”
Yes, but remember Brundlefly.

sven10077

We’re not exactly dealing with rational individuals here.
1) Governor Brown is trawling for further license to act NOW NOW NOW!
2) The idiots he is aiming his hysteric rhetoric at are incapable of grasping geometry, geography, or geology….
they do embrace GEOMANCY however b/c LITERALLY it would take magic for the water to walk 113 ft uphill.

johnmarshall

Calving glaciers are taken as a sign of glacier collapse but it is the opposite. Calving takes place because glaciers reach their end point over water and the faster the glacier moves the faster the calving. Glaciers increase speed because there is a greater ice mass pushing the speed up under gravity, ie. the glacier is getting larger due to increased snow fall up route.
Currently we are entering the Antarctic winter and sea ice is at record levels and growing so the chances of this model derived scenario taking place is low to zero.

richard

“At the rate of 0.83mm/yr sea level rise seen at Los Angeles”
Is it sea level rise or other factors.
There are dams in the Mountains stopping sediment reaching the beaches causing coastal erosion.
Southern California is a geologically young and erosional coast.
The Los Angeles basin was formed in a gap left by rotating and uplifting blocks of crust 15 million years ago. Tectonic crust deformation including faulting, uplift, down drop and warping continues in southern California today.

richard

I would expect to see some sea level rise from this!
http://www.internationalrivers.org/dams-and-geology
Since the 1920s dams have reduced by four-fifths the sediment reaching the coast of Southern California.