BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: pdq
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 11:02 PM

"During his last term as Louisana governor, Edwin Edwards had all the mechanical voting machines replaced by electronic ones. The old units were sold as surplus to Sinaloa, Mexico.

In the next election, using the US machines, Edwin Edwards was elected governor of the state of Sinaloa by getting 68% of the vote".

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 10:58 PM

"Two rings of levees-"
That would be quite some engineering project.
N. O. City, esp. Jefferson Parish, is on both sides of the Mississippi. An important barge canal runs through the City from the River to Lake Ponchartrain (major breaks were here, although there was another break on a major drainage canal). Efforts are already underway to clear the Industrial Canal for traffic.

Area that would have to be "ringed" to include metropolitan N. O.-
Orleans Parish- 180 sq. mi.
Jefferson Parish- 307 sq. mi.
Parts of the following:
St. Bernard Parish- 1794 sq. mi. Chalmette here. Much flooding in the City part.
St. Tammany Parish- 854 sq. mi. Metairie here.
St. Charles, Plaquemines, Lafourche and St. John the Baptist Parishes- areas in these with contiguous populations to N. O.

Today, it looks like more than 100 billion will be allocated to immediate concerns of clean-up and repair. "For want of---"
-----------------------
Interesting sidebar, pdq-
Gamblers in Louisiana spend about 200 million per month in the casinos (about 40 million per month in the greater N. O. Area). Don't know if machines are included in this total.
Yes, I would like to know how much of it goes into the State's coffers and what it is spent on. Is the accounting that is reported meaningful?
Gambling is a growth industry all over the USA and Canada, even here in western Canada, where I am located now. I recently had a look-in at the casinos in New Mexico, and a large and expensive hotel-golf course-casino complex near Albuquerque, owned by the Indian pueblos (but controlled by--?). The State gets a cut, but accounting?

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: pdq
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 03:32 PM

Edwin Edwards was first elected governor of Louisana in 1971. Maybe, just maybe, some of the levees should have been modernized during the last 35 years.

Here is a statement from a book review:


"Snake Eyes Sink the Cajun King"

by Carmela Ciuraru
         
       He grew up poor in a small Southern town, but his intelligence, perseverance, and ambition got him to law school and then to the governor's office. He adored pretty women and had trouble being faithful to his wife. He was a seductive politician who often got himself, and those connected with him, into skirmishes with the law. He accused Republicans of doing everything they could to get him ousted from office. When he finally left, his legacy was tainted.


This isn't the story of Bill Clinton, but of Edwin Washington Edwards, also known as the "Cajun King." Until his recent conviction on racketeering and extortion charges, Edwards served four terms as governor of Louisiana, the last of which proved to be his downfall.

"Bad Bet on the Bayou" is Tyler Bridges's often entertaining account of Edwards's corruption-ridden reign. (This was a man reelected to office despite exit polls showing that 6 out of 10 voters thought he was a crook.)

Now a reporter for The Miami Herald, Bridges covered the Bayou State's many scandals as a reporter for The Times-Picayune in New Orleans in the early 1990s.


"There are said to be several truths in Louisiana politics," the author writes. "One is that an honest politician is one who stays bought. Another is that politics is theater, and there is always demand for an encore." The state's unofficial motto is, "Let the Good Times Roll."

In the early 1990s, Louisiana found itself mired in fiscal ruin. Governor Edwards, a lifelong lover of gambling, proclaimed that legalizing it again would lead the state back to financial security. By creating a state lottery and luring casino businesses to Louisiana, he said, its economy would be revitalized, thousands of new jobs would be created, crime would drop, and all would be well.


Under Edwards's watch, plans were made to erect a gambling empire. Applications for casino bids flooded the governor's office, and there was little Edwards wouldn't do, the FBI later learned, to ensure that his friends and political supporters got their licenses approved. He hosted a weekly poker game where the pot would often reach thousands of dollars. His cronies understood that losing large sums of money to their powerful friend was a good way of securing favors.


By the mid-1990s, the gambling business had become both hugely damaging and hugely influential. A newspaper report revealed that the industry had become the most generous of all contributors to political campaigns. Yet Edwards emerged unscathed from more than two dozen legal investigations into his financial dealings, and retired in 1996 at the end of his term.


Two years later, after an FBI raid on his home and office and a lengthy investigation, Edwards could no longer outsmart the law. A federal grand jury indicted him on 26 counts of racketeering and extortion.

Eighteen weeks and 66 prosecution witnesses later, he was found guilty on 17 of the counts. (Don't count him out just yet: Edwards, now 73, has appealed the conviction, and is free on bail pending a new trial.)

Today, the gambling industry still has a firm grip on Louisiana; the public school system is a mess; and there is widespread poverty and racial tensions. The author concludes that the Edwards story is tragic on many levels: "He used only a fraction of his awesome talents to better the lives of Louisiana's 4.5 million residents."

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 02:07 PM

I guess, Kevin, that a precise explanation of what "mankind doesn't like" would run to a LONG compound-complex sentence, and that any simple form will necessarily have exceptions. My original point was that politicians who decide these things do not usually have the long-term considerations as first priorities.

It is all very well to plan a cathederal which will take a couple hundred years to complete...the motivation is different; it is not 'in the way' while it is being done, and the costs are not incurred in a short time frame. To build a levee/dual-ring flood control system would require LOTS of money in a short period in order to cope with a 2 month storm season every year.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 01:48 PM

" the canal idea. It simply moves the levees to either side of every street"

That's to confuse two very different aspects of flood control. Street canals aren't meant for holding back big floods, they're for giving the water a safe palce to go, so that minor floods of a few feet aren't that big a problem, and even relativeluy major floods are less destructuve; ; levees are barriers for holding out water, and that is a very different aspect of flood control.

One thing that does strike me as foolish is having just a single wall of levees around a city, so that a breach is disastrous. Two rings would make far more sense, with locks at intervals which could serve as bulkheads localising any breach on the outer levee.
...........................................

"Mankind doesn't like long range policies." And thats why they never built those cathedrals in Europe, knowing that it'd be long after their deaths before they were finished? And that's not just ancient history - check out the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona).   It's too easy to assume that generalisations about our own nation and our own culture are true for "Mankind" as a whole.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 01:38 PM

gee, M.Ted, I hadn't intended to simply trade clichés, but "You don't know what's possible until you try" calls for "Throwing good money after bad" or possibly even "spitting in the eye of a hurricane" ;>)

But I think the best one might be "calculated risk", with 95% of the emphasis on the "calculated". It seems to me that many calculations were ignored around the Mississippi delta in the last 40 years. (I see in this morning's paper that, quite apart from whether they can 'rebuild', there is doubt that the water supply can be made safe for several years). There are a lot more factors than good levees in the decision about the future of the city.

(and it's possible I failed to convey that the picture I linked to was of the plaque on City Hall showing the height of the 1977 flood...8'6". *THAT* flood was not from a failed dam...and the 2nd picture was the partially cement ditch which was inadequate.)

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: pdq
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 01:11 PM

Not everyone has heard of the St. Francis Dam break, even in California, so here is a little about it...

St. Francis Dam

Here is a excert form that article:

"Officially, at least 450 people died. The real toll is believed to be higher because an unknown number of migrant farm workers had been camped along the Santa Clara River. After the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire, the St. Francis Dam collapse was California's deadliest disaster. It also was recorded as the worst American civil engineering failure of the century."

And more about the chief engineer:

Mulholland

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 12:53 PM

Of course "rapidly" is a relative term; I did not mean to imply that this will be an overnight job. I figure about two years overall, but much will be restored before then. The N. O. parishes of Orleans and Jefferson, where the flooding occurred, should be decontaminated and rebuilding well under way by then. Estimates vary on the extent of the flooded area; it seems to be about 60%. The "wooden" city will require a lot of lumber for repair and replace housing.

Schools will be a huge problem, as Bill D. says, but portable and temporary buildings can be put in place once the area is cleared and people move back.

Some parts of metropolitan New Orleans are going to be back in business soon. St. Tammany Parish inc. Metairie will reopen schools as soon as power becomes reliable. Some 200,000 people in this part of metro. St. Charles Parish says its water is now OK and the Monsanto and Cyrtec plants are about ready to re-open.

Algiers has minimal flooding. The temporary N. O. police HQ is there. Residents are setting up patrols to protect property. Water is on and safe and power is mostly restored. Some residents have returned.

Entergy has restored power to more than half of its 1.1 million customers. Limited power has been given to the Central Business District and Downtown N. O. They will shut off gas lines, including the French Quarter, probably Sept. 7, because of the leaks and fire danger.

Among those in the City who have refused to evacuate are custodians at NOMA, the Museum of Art. FEMA has raised the ire of those interested in N. O. history by turning back trucks trying to reach and remove vital records. Many interesting stories developing.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: M.Ted
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 11:32 AM

You're going to drag us into a war of cliches, here, Bill--I'll see "well, they can do as well as possible what they MUST do, and they can not tempt fate by trying to do the impossible. " and raise you "You don't know what's possible until you try";-)

Charming though you are, you are wrong about the dam at Johnstown--here is a wonderful explanation of The Cause of the Johnstown Flood with a detailed description of how earth and rock dams were built, and a moment to moment account of the water build up--

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Mr Red
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 08:03 AM

The ex-town planner of New Orleans was on UK radio this morning.

She was debating whether or not they would fill the aras 30 feet below sea level. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Global warming, sea level rises, book your deja vu for the 2050 Mardi Gras.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 12:38 AM

"...what else can people do?"....well, they can do as well as possible what they MUST do, and they can not tempt fate by trying to do the impossible.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 12:35 AM

"THE Johnstown flood" ..the first, and biggest flood was caused by washing away the dam.....there have been several since. I took this picture several years ago of Johnstown City Hall. It was NOT caused by a failed dam, but simply by heavy rains and an inadequate (meaning 'not high enough') flood control system.

They built a deep concrete ditch, and no one wants to pay for, or look at, one high enough to guarantee no floods!

New Orleans is a problem of several magnitudes greater.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: M.Ted
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 12:12 AM

We had the technology and the economic resources available to properly reinforce the levees--we just didn't do it--as to the question of when or whether it will all come back--well, we always come back, bigger and better than before--Galveston, San Francisco, Chicago--and we've got more resources to draw on now than ever before--it may not be easy, but nothing is ever easy--and what else can people do?

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 10:44 PM

As someone pointed out above, it is the topping of the levees that causes failure. They (usually) don't just give way. The Johnstown flood was caused by topping (and nearly immediate erosion of) the Conemaugh Dam. The biblical flood may well have been caused by topping of a natural levee surrounding the black sea (followed by extremely rapid erosion). It is not beyond human engineering to build very tall levees that will hold even in an epic storm surge. Are we willing to pay for it (and can we stand the sight of them)?

Now, forget the canal idea. It simply moves the levees to either side of every street (unless you want to cover New Orleans with 12+ feet of fill).

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 10:31 PM

"Much of the area is NOT under water and will rebuild rapidly."

Q....well...maybe. Much of the area, including housing and services, is under 8 FEET of water, and will not be habitable soon. Since rebuilding the area as a whole is connected with having power, water and available living quarters for citizens, it is a matter of conjecture what "rapidly" might be.

The school districts have already announced that they will likely lose the whole year, and many, many buildings would need not only renovation, but also inspection, I would say 2 years is an optomistic estimate before the general metropolitan area could be anywhere near normal...IF there are no more storms and IF basic services can be restored and IF levees can be shored up to a reasonable standard. Would YOU want to move back in there with no more protection than before?

There will be MUCH wrangling over what is 'safe', how much money can be alloted to make things safe, and what to do if 27% of the residents can't be re-established in the city for various reasons.

one more thing...." ...you don't have to wear a parka to bed and still freeze like you do in Detroit or Chicago if you can't pay the heating bill."

We lived in New Orleans...my mother said she was never so cold and miserable in her life as when the temperature got down to 40°F or so and the wind started whistling in over Lake Ponchitrain...and she had lived in Colorado and Wyoming! It was a wet, chilling cold, though it almost never got down to freezing.

I do agree with one thing implicitly, though..." Mankind doesn't like long range policies."

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 09:26 PM

As posted before, N. O. has a metropolitan population of 1.3 million. City figures in the almanac reflect political boundaries, not the area of contiguous population. Much of the area is NOT under water and will rebuild rapidly.

New Orleans is the largest port city in North America, but that is just the tip of the economy. One quarter of petrochemical production is there. A great part of the oil refining capacity is there. Oil production is strong. It is the biggest grain handler, etc. All of us will experience higher prices for many products besides oil for the next year until industry there gets back on track. Once power grids are restored in the LA-MS-Al Gulf area, production and jobs will rise very rapidly. The band-aids will be larger than usual, but don't expect any revolutionary changes.
The entertainment industry (from food to the houses of the Rising Sun) get a lot of publicity, but they are a lesser part of the area's economy. Sun-seekers and gamblers along the coast are the money trees in this segment of the economy.

Employment figures vary depending on the agency doing the estimating. Chicago unemployment is 5.9%. New Orleans, seasonally adjusted, is 4.9%, but I took the uncorrected figure of 6.2%. Remember that cost of living is lower in New Orleans, so a dollar goes farther there than in Chi, NY, etc. And you don't have to wear a parka to bed and still freeze like you do in Detroit or Chicago if you can't pay the heating bill.

Houston is welcoming the displaced. Its metropolitan population is over 5 million, and jobs are open. Dallas-Ft.Worth also has 5 million, but employment is less buoyant. Austin and San Antonio are both larger than 1 million, but the large low-income Hispanic population (59%) in the latter means competition for entry level jobs is fierce and some knowledge of Spanish is needed for some jobs.
The area as a whole will have no problem employing the approx. 250,000 moved there, if they wish to stay. Many probably will go back to metropolitan N. O.

The world's overpopulation and misuse of the planet are a whole nother bundle of problems. Little will be done until crisis time. Many of us condemm China for trying to implement the one child program. Mankind doesn't like long range policies. We are the grasshopper in Aesop's fable.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 08:30 PM

"... a disaster when doctors are badly needed.

But when Cuba's offer of 1500 doctors to help out is evidently being completely ignored. (I suppose it'd be embarassing if they failed to "defect" when they got there.)

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 04:56 PM

..and once again, I will try to make the point that population alone is not the most immanent problem....but it IS the nexus of most of the other problems. No matter what we do about crop engineering, flood control, disaster planning, highway construction, oil drilling, pollution control, power plant construction..etc..etc...etc, NONE of those issues can be effectively controlled if population keeps growing. It's all band-aid treatment.
   New Orleans, as a city of 75,000, could probably be sustained as a port forever...but, as a metropolitan area of 500,000-750,000 and growing, it will be forever on the brink of disaster. Many of the current problems have been exacerbated by trying to control the Mississippi river in an artifical channel for commercial purposes and thus losing the barrier marshes that was nature's flood control. It sorta worked...until Nature got mean. Yeah, it could work again..for what? 50 years? 30? 20? next year? If they decided to make the city safe against a category 5, how long would it take and how many billions would it cost?

   When I talk about population control, it's partly about reducing the strain on a very hard-to-control area that is below sea level, but also about reducing the strain on the country as a whole, so that flooding in New Orleans doesn't have Texas, Arkansas and other states groaning under the flood of refugees!

You want to read EXPERTS on it? Do a google search on "carrying capacity" with maybe terms like "flood plain" and "Mesa Verde" and "global warming" added. It ain't a pretty picture, and it's much easier to be 'optomistic' than to deal with REAL long range planning...like what are we gonna do a CENTURY from now? The politician who is just worried about re-election doesn't want to think about much beyond the next pork-barrel project.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: M.Ted
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 04:43 PM

There are certainly plenty of things to think about, related to our unfortunate impact on nature, and it's unfortunate impact on us--However, Shantieman's idea, a variation of a similar ideas bounced around lately, is just plain stupid--you can't get away from the perils of nature--You suggest moving the city up the river?

The levee, man's largest creation, runs for hundreds of miles, because the river has always, and will always, rise, and leave us not forget that it is the rise in the river and the break in the levee that has caused this damage.   Of course, let's not forget the New Madrid fault, somewhat upriver, recently active again, which was, in relatively recent history, the center of the most extensive series of earthquakes in our history--

Get away from the river and you are in tornado country, which actually kill more people and destroy more property than earthquakes--The west coast is just as perilous, with earthquakes and fires taking place of the tornados--

The northern cities are not safe, summer heat waves are actually the most fatal of all weather disasters--No way to fight the Tao--

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: pdq
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 04:26 PM

Right now, the US national unemployment rate is 4.9%. New Orleans is quite a lot higher than the average.

Bill D. has pointed out, once again, that we simply have too many people. The US population went up by 40 million just since 1990. The people pouring in from Mexico are at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder in their own country, lower here. They come here with no doctors. That alone is a huge problem, one that is highlighted in a disaster when doctors are badly needed.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 03:40 PM

one more point...after pondering a bit, I realize I was 'thinking' poor & marginalized when I typed 'unemployed'. Even though some of those people had jobs of sorts, they might have a better life in other parts of the south...or even the country as a whole. The point is, a large 'underclass' who can't evacuate easily is a problem for a city with New Orleans' problems...even if they ARE employed.

The total population of the country, the state and the cities needs to be reduced, but that's a different, though related issue.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 02:36 PM

hmmm...6.2%...ok. Of course, as in any city, that only reflects those who are looking for work. (I guess I was hasty after looking at the status of many of the refugees)

My main point still is: It is possible to repair and operate the Port without needing to have a tourist Mecca to protect. Repair and protect certain necessities and be sure they are on the higest ground possible. All other construction to cafefully reviewed on a case-by-case basis...etc..etc...Not very 'interesting' or pretty, but perhaps a bit saner. (No...I do NOT imagine my suggestions will be adopted...)

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 02:18 PM

"Many of whom are unemployed"- wrong!
New Orleans unemployment was 6.2 %, which I think is about the U. S. Average and lower than in many cities. Many low-wage jobs, but necessary jobs to the American economy, and living is much cheaper than in NY, Detroit or Chicago.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 01:57 PM

no doubt the PORT will remain...it doesn't require a city of 600,000 (many of whom were unemployed) to run a port, however.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 01:38 PM

As the largest volume American seaport, as noted above, it will stay where it is.
Port of South Louisiana- 216 million tons
Port of New Orleans, same area- 85 million tons
Port of Plaquemines, same area- 59 million tons
--Combined-------------------------360 million tons
Adjacent Mississippi-Alabama Ports- 78 million tons
--Total----------------------------438 million tons
Other major ports
Port of Houston- 178 million tons
Port of New York- 135 million tons
Port of Beaumont, TX- 86 million tons
Port of Corpus Christi, TX- 78 million tons

Add the petrochemical and other industries centered around New Orleans and there is no way the metropolis will be moved. One-quarter of the American petrochemical industry is there.

For the shanty singers, Mobile is still around at 46 million tons.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 01:30 PM

"...why not rebuild the city further inland; on higher ground and out of the reach of maritime hurricanes?"

well, the answer WILL be that it wouldn't then be historic New Orleans, and people are VERY attached to history, even at high prices and danger.

I have been saying for years (and few times this past week) that serious thought needs to be given to where major populations ought to be allowed to build and live. The Port of New Orleans is pretty important, and I suppose some of that area MUST be repaired and rebuilt, but to allow it to just be patched back together and 'improved' a bit is sheer folly. The next disaster will cost even more. There are other cities engaging in high-risk expansion, like building in the hills around Los Angeles where fires hit every few years. It needs to be stopped............

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Schantieman
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 12:53 PM

...and what's going to happen when a cyclone hits Bangladesh?   Not a lot of money and other resources there to patch it up.

There, the people have no choice but to live in a dangerous location - they have nowhere else to go. The USA is rich and has lots of space: why not rebuild the city further inland; on higher ground and out of the reach of maritime hurricanes?

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Lowden Jameswright
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 09:05 AM

"Mother Nature is a pussy compared to humankind"
I hope Yellowstone don't prove you wrong gnu!

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Sep 05 - 10:54 PM

They started pumping out water today and temporarily filling the breaks in the Industrial Canal. Work probably will start soon on the other canal where a break occurred. I expect N. O. will mostly return to its old ways by this time next year. At least 1/3 of the city stayed mostly dry, and many houses there were only slightly damaged by the force 3 winds. There will be many jobs rebuilding in the areas that were inundated.

pdq, the metropolitan city is 1.3 million. I will guess about 0.3 million will permanently move to other areas, but they gradually will be replaced by others moving in. The Delta will be patched to some extent, but it will never return to its conditions of 50-100 years ago.

The Port of South Louisiana is America's largest port. Add the nearby Port of New Orleans (number 5 in the U. S.) and the importance of the area to the American economy cannot be doubted. Add other Louisiana ports- Port of Plaquemines, Port of Baton Rouge and the Port of Lake Charles- and other ports, except Houston and New York, are dwarfed. Other Gulf ports in the Texas and Mississippi hurricane-prone coast, when added together, far eclipse New York.   

Many coastal cities around the world are in danger zones from earthquakes and tsunamis, and typhoons-hurricanes- there are commercial needs for them and they will always rebuild.

Will New Orleans host the Superbowl in 2008 (or next available unassigned date)? I am almost willing to bet on it.

Will a 'permanent' solution to the flooding be effected? Doubtful.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Sep 05 - 08:49 PM

Good point, pdq.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: pdq
Date: 05 Sep 05 - 02:00 PM

Once the living are all safe and the bodies all collected, it will be time to think about the future size of New Orleans.

It is ridiculous to have a city if over 1/2 million people located on marsh lands at the mouth of one of the largest rivers in the world.

If only half the city can be maintained efficiently, so be it. I don't want the federal government to confiscate trillions of tax dollars to keep "The Big Sleazy" open for business over the next 100 years while the land subsides. We will lose the battle eventually, so lets re-group and move ahead.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Sep 05 - 01:49 PM

Money talks...people walk. Nature waits.

Money is not real, and what is not real passes away.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Sep 05 - 01:46 PM

Cleanup, relief and repair probably will cost more than the solution would have been.   
Not counting the lives lost and disrupted.
Seems to be the human way, however.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Sep 05 - 01:11 PM

Mother Nature will finally defeat you, gnu, on the day you die, and will also most definitely and decisively defeat this entire civilization...unless this civilization has the sense to bow to Mother Nature and adapt to it...instead of attempting to conquer that which cannot be conquered.

We are living in a limited system here, and rapidly using up our available line of credit...all over the whole planet.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Sep 05 - 12:58 PM

I notice in that Time article where it says "The price tag for a complete solution could be as much as $14 billion in federal and state money"

Sounds like a bargain now, in the wake of Katrina.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Sep 05 - 11:13 AM

About 6000 died in the Galveston hurricane-storm surge of 1900. Now the wait to find out the toll in New Orleans-Gulfport area.

(The San Francisco earthquake-fire is sometimes mentioned for loss of life, but the total is uncertain. Estimates vary from about 600 to a few thousand; but many on the casualty lists had moved on and were never properly tallied.)

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 11:19 PM

Another informative article from Time Magazine- and predictions from a Louisiana State water-resource professor :
On the Brink

There have been warnings for years.

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 11:09 PM

As you say, an informative article. In addition to inadequate levees, the subsidence of the city also contributed; up to 3 feet additional protection needed, but somehow the subsidence not being measured.
It is questionable whether the levees, even if they had been strengthened and raised, would have held if the full force 5 hurricane had been directed to the city, rather than to the east and the Gulfport area.

The removal of fluids (oil, gas, water) from the subsurface anywhere around New Orleans must stop. The more the city sinks, the higher the levees must be. The subsidence perhaps could be halted by pumping in water, but this would also be an extensive, expensive process. The emphasis now is on oil recovery, not restoration of the subsurface, so more subsidence will occur.

And- 1900 sq. miles of coastal wetland has disappeared over the last 50 years.

See article from National Geographic Magazine, October, 1904, covering subsidence and loss of lands, and making a prediction. One year after, much of the prediction comes true. The car-less, the poor, left to the mercy of the rising water.
Louisiana Bayou

Subject: RE: BS: New Orleans Will Drown Again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 08:41 PM

This extract from an excellent round-up article in the New York Times makes interesting reading about the breaches in the levees. (It comes from page four of the article.)

A surge, probably 10 feet above normal, flowed in from the lake, rising until it began cascading over the top of the sleek, butter-colored walls that stood between the east side of the 17th Street Canal and the city's Bucktown neighborhood.

Greg Breerwood, a deputy district engineer for the Corps, said it appeared that as the weight of the water pressed on the high part of the wall, the water pouring over the top hit the ground on the other side and ate away at the soil supporting its base.

A section of the wall pushed in and the rush of water turned that breach into a gash as broad as a football field is long. The lake and below-sea-level city were becoming one body of water.

"We heard about the flood wall failing," Mr. Breerwood said. "Then we realized there was an open corridor to the city."

Two points. First, ten feet is not a lot, and it's an indication of how inadequate the margin of safety had been allowed to get, and how relatively minor improvements could in fact have made all the difference; and second, that explanation for how "the water pouring over the top hit the ground on the other side and ate away at the soil supporting its base" suggests there was a fundamental flaw in the way those levees were constructed.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 05:07 PM

Levees that aren't built high enough are one thing - there is always going to be the possibility of some level of water that will come over the top. If it does so you're going to get a flood. But one way and another cities can live with floods like that. Not easily, but it can be done, and having a network of canals within neighbourhoods and streets is one way of making things better.

But a levee that breaches means more than a flood, it means a disaster, and there is no way that that should ever happen. If the problem is they are built in such a way that they get weakened when submerged, they are built in the wrong way. And when they get rebuilt they need to be built in the right way, by people who know how to do that.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: alanabit
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 02:54 PM

I am not the only one who will want to see the city rebuilt and restored so that the inhabitants can return to their own way of life. I am also not the only one who will fear that the same fate could await other coastal towns, if the eco systems on which they depend, are not respected and restored along with the buildings. Screwing about with mother nature is a bit like jumping up and down on a sleeping lion's tail. You can't tell how and when it will react, but you do know it will not be good for you when it does.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: SharonA
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 02:41 PM

They'll have to rebuild SOMEthing SOMEwhere there, because New Orleans is/was too important and strategic a port location to just let the land and sea reclaim it. But turning it into New Venice won't help when the 25-foot storm surges swamp it. Maybe the more economical answer is to build a whole new port city on the north shore of Lake Pontchartrain or some other area location that is off the Delta and above sea level and that offers a land-buffer from the worst of the Gulf storms.

Whatever they do ultimately, they have to take care of the immediate need to repair the levees and pump out the sludge and rescue whoever is left alive to be rescued and count the dead and salvage the salvagable and let the banks and corporations empty their safes. After that, I'm all for filling in the "bowl" below sea level and either building on top of it or moving the city altogether. Sure, it would be immensely expensive, but it would be a better investment than putting N.O. back together the way it was (with higher levees) and waiting for the next big hurricane to wash the city and the money away again.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: GUEST,Alice w/out cookie
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 02:37 PM

The restoration of the wetlands and the river delta ecosystem has to be done and then New Orleans could be in a better position to survive storms and floods. This is a specific problem that has been studied and legislation stalled in Congress for many years. The rise of coastal water is a problem for all coast cities in the future global warming.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 02:34 PM

Just read the thread started by Poppagator. Losing people like him, who have done so much to promote New Orleans, is a major loss.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: Sorcha
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 02:18 PM

And now, they are saying that another hurricane will hit NO.....

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 02:14 PM

New Orleans, of course, will be patched up.
It will not, however, be much different from the current version except that part of the affluent portion of its population will move out. Some are already job and house-hunting in Houston and cities even farther afield.
The tax base of the city is not large, and money for major re-structuring must come from outside.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: GUEST,Peter Woodruff
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 01:52 PM

1 800 HELP Now! If you want to help.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: GUEST,Peter Woodruff
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 01:46 PM

We must save and rebuild New Orleans because the "Big Easy" is more than a cultural treasure it is the Gateway Port to Midland America. Dennis Herstart is wrong when he glibbly suggests never rebuilding New Orleans. Once we get rid of these absolutely incompetent people running this country, we will rebuild New Orleans and then the rest of America.

Peter

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 01:33 PM

Gee! Each little canal with its own levees. Trade the SUV in on a speedboat. Give the rebuilding contracts to the execs at Disneyland and Haliburton. Get rid of the half million non-taxpaying poor. Make it a gated city and tax, tax, tax the nation as a whole.


(Or could that be an alternative to spending on military misadventures around the world? Either way, there are fortunes to be made)

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 12:18 PM

For example, a network of canals, Q, instead of just paved roads.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: Amos
Date: 04 Sep 05 - 11:12 AM

Gnu:

I likes yore attitude boy!! It is worth thinking on.

A

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 09:01 PM

To the sea.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 08:56 PM

"money and time." Perhaps. But that day will be a long time in the coming, if ever.
The only plans so far are to rebuild at the breaks in the canal levees and repair the pumps to pump the water uphill to the river and lake. I hear of no plans to meet a force 5 hurricane. Then wait for the next major hurricane and the next disaster some 100 years down the road.
Remember, the hurricane center veered eastward and hit the Mississippi coast. New Orleans was hit by Force 3 winds. The area of Biloxi-Gulfport, where the force 4-5 hit, is expecting a body count of 1000 when the debris is cleared.

"Give the water somewhere to go"- Where?

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: gnu
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 08:09 PM

Oh FUCK. I forgot. The sky is falling! Run away!

And I shall too. No sense in nonsense.

gbyegnu

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 08:08 PM

And Amsterdam has more like three-quarters of a million people. The point isn't size, it's having cities which allow for the realites of their physical situation, for example by giving the water somewhere to go where it won't be disastrous. The actual details of how that can best be done would vary according to circumstances.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 08:02 PM

Well, you are wrong. I can defeat Mother Nature. No sweat. But, it takes money and time.

...and knowledge you haven't got.

And yes, gnu, I've seen the wheel and the autombile and CO2 emmissions.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: Cluin
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 08:00 PM

You are being facetious, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: gnu
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 07:58 PM

Well, you are wrong. I can defeat Mother Nature. No sweat. But, it takes money and time. The power of nature is nothing compared to the power of humankind.

Oh yeah... same as the whale thread... someone will rush in and go gaga and yaya and say that humans are stupid and don't know which way is up and whatever, ad infinitum.... with no logic or proof or any sense of common sense.

Sorry for sounding so cynical, even condscening (IN RETURN), but, golly gosh, c'mon.... have you not seen the wheel, the house, the automobile, the highways, electricity, the Shuttle? Mother Nature is a pussy compared to humankind.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 07:41 PM

Given enough time and money, we can do anything.

I don't believe that gnu. We can improve things and NO could have been made more safe, perhaps safe enough to have avoided this but I do have an overriding belief.

That is if anyone believes they can actualy defeat the powers of nature, they will be proved wrong at some point or other.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: Cluin
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 07:39 PM

Does Venice face seasonal hurricanes?

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: gnu
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 07:32 PM

Given enough time and money, we can do anything.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 07:23 PM

Venice is a quaint little city of about 350,000 and about 5 sq. mi. Add Mestre and double that.
Metropolitan New Orleans has 1.35 million; 907 sq. mi. of which 468 sq. mi. is land.
No comparison in scale.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 06:16 PM

The rational thing would be to build it so it was flooded all the time, with canals for streets, like Venice or Amsterdam, and have good enough flood defences to cope effectively with Category Five hurricanes.

Subject: RE: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: gnu
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 05:59 PM

Ah... Just temper all this with the knowledge that engineers can, indeed, defeat Mother Nature but NOT politicians.

Subject: BS: NEW ORLEANS WILL DROWN AGAIN
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 05:51 PM

"Trying to build a better river than God." Amos, thread 84276. It cannot be better said. BS: Columnists and Hurricane Katrina

The problem began, in a very small way in the 18th century. Bits of riverfront were levied to keep floodwaters at bay. As time went on, more and more of the Mississippi River and its main tributaries were levied and walled, to keep the spring flood waters from the towns and adjacent land. Fields that once reaped the benefits of nutrients from the floods became fed with fertilizer and water from irrigation. More and more water was channeled downriver towards the Delta.
The Corps of Engineers, that group who believe that they can control Nature, with the support of legislators and the uninformed citizenry, looked upon their handiwork and said it was good. More and more water was funneled into the Delta and its distributaries, changing the shape of the land, creating erosion where land was needed and depositing new soil where it was not. Lafitte and Mark Twain would not recognize their river.

Water and fluids were pumped from the sediments underlying the growing City, the land not only subsided below sealevel but additional land was pumped dry and settled.

The little French and Spanish entreprenurial backwater grew into a mighty industrial center, with refineries and chemical plants and a large population to man the enterprises. More levees and walls were built to keep the water out. The Corps of Engineers were given more and more work- after all, no problem was believed to be beyond their means and skill.

Other priorities intervened, and their unceasing attempts to keep New Orleans dry slowed to a crawl- not that their efforts would have succeeded in the long run. The law makers had other uses for the money and men.

As to the immediate situation, no one cares to spend money for actions that might not be needed for a long time. Men and material were hundreds and thousands of miles away. There was no clear chain of command or infrastructure. Nothing had happened except in some little known foreign places, and plans could wait.

Of course, agencies were created with euphonious acronyms for high-sounding action names, hire staff and make speeches about security. Talk costs little.

The inevitable tragedy. And it will be repeated.

---

Link shortened and title added. Holler if you don't like. --JC