Corps takes blame for New Orleans flooding

NOLA.com ^ | 6/1/2006 | Cain Burdeau

[Saints fan]

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A contrite U.S. Army Corps of Engineers took responsibility Thursday for the flooding of New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina and said the levees failed because they were built in a disjointed fashion using outdated data.

"This is the first time that the Corps has had to stand up and say, `We've had a catastrophic failure,'" Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, the Corps chief, said as the agency issued a 6,000-page-plus report on the disaster on Day 1 of the new hurricane season.

The Corps said it will use the lessons it has learned to build better flood defenses.

"Words alone will not restore trust in the Corps," Strock said, adding that the Corps is committed "to fulfilling our important responsibilities."

The $19.7 million report includes details on the engineering and design failures that allowed the storm surge to overwhelm New Orleans' levees and floodwalls Aug. 29.

[operation clinton cleanup]

Not Bush's fault?

[headstamp]

"The $19.7 million report......."

Must be a thick one.

[sinkspur]

The southeastern Louisiana coast is sinking at the rate of an inch per year. No levee can be built to withstand a foot drop every decade.

New Orleans will, in this century, have to be completely abandoned.

[JRios1968]

Of course it is! You see, Bush had Karl Rove use his time machine to send bad plans for the levees to the year 1950, then Karl Rove used his weather machine to send Katrina into New Orleans, so that it would flood the Lower 9th Ward, and it would destroy as many black-owned houses as possible, because the racists at Halliburton wanted to get the contract to rebuild New Orleans...

/Moonbat mode off

[capt. norm]

At last, they have referenced the Netherlands and their success (so far) in holding back the North Sea.

I would think that New Orleans could learn a lot from the Dutch as what they're doing seems to be working.

[sinkspur]

I would think that New Orleans could learn a lot from the Dutch as what they're doing seems to be working.

Is the Netherlands sinking? New Orleans and surrounding area is sinking, at the rate of one inch per year.

[capt. norm]

New Orleans will, in this century, have to be completely abandoned.

I agree. I'm wondering if they can re-locate the city on some higher and more stable ground, or would that take them all the way up to Baton Rouge?

[capt. norm]

Is the Netherlands sinking?

The Netherlands had already sunk. They reversed the process and reclaimed land from the North Sea.

[Torie]

It's one third of an inch per year, not an inch. Nobody knows the subsidence persists after all these years. Subsidence is due to the mushy ground slowly drying out over the decades due to the overlay of pavement. As the ground ceases becoming more dry over the decades, the subsidence should slow down, but it has not slowed down yet, for reasons not yet known. It is dropping one inch per year where the levees are, presumbably due to the weight of the levees themselves, but nobody knows for sure about that either.

The levees collapsed because they were built on mush, without an adequately wide base (which would require some billions of dollars and condeming a couple of blocks adjacent to the leveees, and deep enough pilings, and they collapsed like a cookie stuck in melting butter. There was seepage going on for a couple of years before Katrina, as water filtrated through the mush. It didn't take much added pressure to just bring them down, at the weakest points.

As to subsidence, I heard all of this today on NRP radio, per a new study that just came out, using sophisticated sattelite imagery or something. With respect to the levee thing, I am reading about that in Brinkley's gripping tale of it all, which is a great read, and I highly recommend his book.

[LasVegasMac]

Not Bush's fault?

Which rock have you been under?

This was a Rove deal from get go.

Who has that picture of the USS Rove launching torpedos at the NO leeves ?

[RobbyS]

When will people accept that any human construction will fail when the right storm comes? An earthquake the size of the early 19th Century earthquake in Missouri would half level St. Louis if it occured today.

[sinkspur]

WASHINGTON - Parts of New Orleans are sinking far more rapidly than scientists first thought, more than an inch a year, new research suggests.

That may explain some levee failures during Hurricane Katrina and raises more worries about the future.

The research, being published Thursday in the journal Nature, is based on new satellite radar data for the three years before Katrina struck in 2005. The data show that some areas are sinking -- from overdevelopment, drainage and natural seismic shifts -- four or five times faster than the rest of the city. And that, experts say, can be deadly.

Source.

[StJacques]

Torie, sinkspur is right.

Pop it up here:

New Orleans is sinking

[smonk]

that's about $3K per page, isn't it?

[LasVegasMac]

They reversed the process and reclaimed land from the North Sea.

And now they are reversing that process and giving parts of it back to the sea.

To be natural again. And make room for a deeper port entry.

On Discovery / History channel (?) recently.

[Torie]

It must be the same study I heard on NPR, and so maybe NPR did not get it quite right, but it still may be due to the levees themselves in that 10%-20% area, or much of it, although I heard or read a couple of weeks ago, that there is one area sinking rapidly for reasons unknown, that may be due to some fault or something. In any event, it is not an accident that included within the area with more rapid subsidence is ground where the leveees are. Just why 15% or so should sink faster than the balance, is a question.

[StJacques]

Torie, there is a lot going on with subsidence in the New Orleans area.

In the late 19th century a famous engineer named James Eads worked out the "Jetty System" that was put in place to keep the Mississippi River channel [at the mouth of the river] open for navigation into the Gulf of Mexico. Eads' incredibly innovative work had the effect of changing the coastal ecosystem throughout southeast Louisiana by channeling Mississippi River sediments straight out into the Gulf, away from the coastal marshlands, where they were previously deposited. Those sediments used to help lessen the turbidity of ocean wave action and periodic storm surge and either prevented or moderated coastal erosion. If you take away that sediment, and then aggravate the situation further by dredging coastal shell beds, which has been done as well, then the turbidity of Gulf water becomes a much more destructive force acting upon Louisiana's marshlands. And then, on top of all of this, the ongoing erosion brings with it a rise in the sub-surface water table in areas that were previously removed from the coast, but are now adjacent to it, a phenomenon that can be particularly destructive when those sub-surface rocks are water-soluble limestone, which abounds in South Louisiana. I know for a fact that this is part of the problem in New Orleans, as I have seen some news stories about streets that have had enormous limestone sinkholes develop underneath them since Katrina.

I'm from Louisiana by the way -- I live in Lafayette about 180 miles to the west of New Orleans -- and my late father was a Petroleum Engineer who did a lot of work in "Reservoir Engineering" in Louisiana, so I've been hearing this problem discussed for years.

[Torie]

That is all in Brinkley's book, but that does not address the issue of subsidence per se does it? That addresses the issue of the severity of storm surges does it not? Solid levees can handle storm surges if enough money is thrown at it, but subsidence is forever.

[dfwgator]

The Netherlands had already sunk. They reversed the process and reclaimed land from the North Sea.

The Netherlands is just a wee bit smaller than the US.

[A CA Guy]

In a hurricane, who can do such a good job in a below sea level area that they can guarantee nothing will flood?

IMO this is ridiculous bordering on retarded.

[capt. norm]

And now they are reversing that process and giving parts of it back to the sea.

I read about that and it left me wondering how far it's going to go. Generations who have reclaimed some land from the sea and made it productive have to give up their land and their homes to be politically correct with the EU.

[capt. norm]

The Netherlands is just a wee bit smaller than the US.

Thought we were talking about New Orleans, not the entire U.S.

[StJacques]

"That is all in Brinkley's book, but that does not address the issue of subsidence per se does it? . . ."

Actually it does, at least in part. Subsidence is a function of the soil and rocks lying underneath the surface of the ground and their ability to support and maintain a constant ground elevation. When coastal erosion brings with it a change in the sub-surface water table, those sub-surface rocks may be weakened if the minerals which constitute them are water-soluble. Rock beds of limestone, mudstone, and siltstone are all weakened considerably by an increase in the sub-surface water table, which leads to a compression of their mass and a resulting subsidence.

Do yourself a little experiment to test this. Take a piece of chalk (which is calcite, the mineral in limestone), pour water over it and wait about 30 minutes. Then notice how easily you can smash the chalk with your finger after it has absorbed the water. It's the same principle at work with subsidence.

There may be other, long-term seismic shifts at work as well, as that article I linked pointed out. These refer to the movement of rock formations at greater depths away from the coast of Louisiana, but the evidence supporting this as a cause is less clear, though still plausible.

[Torie]

There is a lot of history connected to that reclaimed land in Holland. When reclaimed, it was settled by yeoman farmers, without a barron serf system in place, and that yeomanry created the seed corn of a new ethos in Holland, that took capitalism to the next step after the Rennaisance in Italy started, and in particular threw off the chains of certain suffocating conventions, of the time, but of sacred and secular nature.

[dfwgator]

The point is, that the Netherlands is such a small country that they need all the land they can get, and therefore such expenditures make more sense.

[Torie]

OK, I take your point. That was NOT in Brinkley's book (at least what I have read so far) or NPR or the linked study, but it makes sense. So if the area around NO is returned to nature, it might buy more time, no?

[Pikachu_Dad]

With respect to the levee thing, I am reading about that in Brinkley's gripping tale of it all, which is a great read, and I highly recommend his book.

Brinkley is a 'blame Bush' hack.

I read excerts from the middle of the book the last time I was in Barnes and Noble. Of the chapter I read, every page was an exercise in bashing Bush and praising Blanco. I would not recommend this book.

He also strongly insinuated that the decision to keep the people from crossing the bridge into Gretna was a rascist decision. Complete hogwash.

At least he mentions that Blanco 'inexplicably' closed all the other bridges out using the military the next day. But for some (political) reason, he fails to accuse her of rascism too.

[StJacques]

Torie, let me follow up my last post with one more quick comment, because I think I may have left some of your question unanswered.

I think you're really asking whether we can succeed in fixing the flooding problem in New Orleans or are we doomed because of long-term geologic changes that are inescapable. My answer to that is that we can fix the problem -- and I think I may differ with sinkspur a little on this, though we haven't discussed it at length.

What is needed is an effort to restrict the impact of wave action from the Gulf of Mexico on the Louisiana coastal areas and, what has not been discussed, to limit their salt-water content, since salt inhibits the growth of plant life in the marshlands. That can be done and it should be part of a larger plan of reconstruction for southeast Louisiana, something that should be viewed as a complementary project to that of renewing and raising the levees. Coastal erosion and subsidence go hand-in-hand. Address coastal erosion and you lessen the impact of subsidence.

There, I think I got it all now.

[capt. norm]

Point taken.

For a number of years I lived in Mobile (short drive to NOLA) and I used to love to go there. I love the historical sites, restaurants, and the old parts of town that have been preserved.

But the bad side of the city just kept getting worse and worse.

I still love the music, but I'm not sure I want to go there.

[SR 50]

ping

[StJacques]

On Brinkley's book . . .

Brinkley is much harder on Nagin than he is on Bush. But I would definitely agree that he is whitewashing Blanco's awful role in the post-Katrina tragedy.

To anyone and everyone who tries to explain what happened in New Orleans after Katrina, I ask this simple question:

What were the access roads open into New Orleans in the immediate aftermath of Katrina, who controlled those roads, and how did they manage passage over them?

It's a simple question that goes right to the heart of what went wrong in New Orleans after Katrina. The answer is that there were only two routes of access; U.S. Highway 61 (a.k.a. the "Airline Highway") overland from Baton Rouge on the east bank of the Mississippi River and the Crescent City Connector Bridge, which is the Business 90 (U.S. 90) bridge that comes from Gretna into downtown New Orleans. Since these were both federal highways the responsibility for their control fell squarely into the hands of the State of Louisiana, and that means BLANCO!

We still do not know the full story of how the State of Louisiana handled these access roads. We know that they turned back the Red Cross and Salvation Army from relief efforts and we know that Jefferson Parish and other local police agencies (not the City of New Orleans) closed the Crescent City Connector bridge and the State of Louisiana either permitted them to do so openly or in ignorance.

I never let anyone discuss the post-Katrina problem with me -- remember I'm from Louisiana and I watched it closely -- unless they demonstrate an awareness of the access road problem.

And I have yet to meet anyone who defends Blanco who understands the access road problem either.

[F.J. Mitchell]

Who can argue with the Corp, if they insist on flinging themselves upon their swords as scape goats , to cover the asses of many generations of corrupt political families.

Two questions still remain unanswered, however. Why did Nagin sit on his @$$ while people drowned along with the school buses that could have carried them to safety? And how were the survivors so d*mn stupid as to reelect the stupid SOB, just as a new hurricane season was beginning?

Stupid is as stupid does. Is there enough tax revenues on earth to finance the saving of these idiots from themselves?

[Pikachu_Dad]

http://thegreatdeluge.net/Great_Deluge_Excerpts.php#

Excerts from the first excert:

Inappropriate comment:
"and FEMA a missing-in-action joke"

Another inappropriate comment:
"while FEMA abandoned the stranded and then treated them as if they were human driftwood"

Here he makes sure you know who's side his hero's are on in this 'Cajun Navy' report:
"He and his wife, Sara Roberts, a Blanco supporter,"

Here he shows his rascits roots:
"A Lake Charles lawyer, he was the scion of Confederate royalty, a proud descendant of General P. G. T. Beauregard’s sister.9However, it didn’t escape Buisson, a student of history, that Beauregard, the "hero of Fort Sumter," might have deemed the idea of a citizen flotilla to New Orleans to rescue African Americans from floodwaters ludicrous."

Ooops - you mean there are more people on the way to the rescue besides the 'Cajun Navy' he is highlighting?

"When we all arrived at Causeway, there were literally hundreds of boats in a line," Roberts recalled. "There was quite a bit of confusion. Wildlife and Fisheries was trying to get some order to this because all of these people just showed up in boats"

Also known as FEMA (FEMA just coordinates - all action is done by the local groups.)
"to proceed to the LDWF staging area at Causeway Boulevard and I-10 in Metairie."

He makes sure to point out that they 'left their guns at home'. Later he points out how they felt naked and underamed.

NOPD rules:
"An NOPD officer gave the Cajun Navy the rules of engagement. "If you encounter a dead body, don’t touch it," the officer instructed. "Leave it alone. That will be handled later. We are here to help people. There have been some reports of rescuers being shot and boats being taken. If it gets too rough in there, we’re getting out. Bring those who will leave, but don’t force them. No pets. Do not travel alone. Go out in pairs. As far as weapons, carry what you need for protection.""

Just curious phrasing.
"The NOPD took three Cajun Navy boats and three R & R Construction workers with them, and disappeared for nearly five hours. When members of the Narcotics Division of the NOPD found out about the boat heist, they were livid, furious that fellow officers had infiltrated the Cajun Navy and "stolen" people. "

[H. Paul Pressler IV]

Since Katrina, there have been more than 200,000 flooded cars removed from the streets of New Orleans and tens of thousands of flooded cars remain on the streets today. There is no reason whatsoever that all those people that found themselves in the Superdome, Convention Center or their roofs could not have driven themselves out of New Orleans prior to Katrina. The people that stayed in New Orleans were stupid and no amount of Government school buses can cure people's stupidity.

[Pikachu_Dad]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5396118

Chapter 2 - This one is line for line attack and misrepresentation.

More FEMA attacks:
"In Washington, D.C. , Michael D. Brown, the director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, received a briefing on Saturday from the National Hurricane Center on the severity of Hurricane Katrina and the likelihood that it would indeed make a direct hit on New Orleans. Like Nagin, Brown responded by letting the day pass."

Who pushed her to make the proclamation?
"Governor Blanco stepped up to try to advance the preparations. She had proclaimed a state of emergency on the statewide level the day before."

Sure she did.
"Governor Blanco stepped up to try to advance the preparations. She had proclaimed a state of emergency on the statewide level the day before."

Is that all he thinks Bush did?
"President Bush, who was vacationing at his 1,583-acre ranch in Crawford, Texas, responded in turn to the governor's form letter. In a legally correct fashion, he complied with her request for federal assistance, authorizing..."

More Brown bashing:
"Unfortunately, FEMA Director Brown wasn't entirely convinced of the urgency. After receiving notification of the president's action, he released a statement that didn't even mention the importance of evacuation for Gulf Coast residents."

Our hero Blanco? Who knew?
"One person who really catapulted Governor Blanco into action mode that Saturday was Cedric Richmond, "

Ah.
""It was incredible," Richmond recalled. "Because the mayor's warning was so soft, nobody was taking Katrina seriously."

More rubbish. No wonder Nagin doesn't like Blanco:
""She really tried to help," Richmond recalled. "But Nagin just ignored everything. He should have called a mandatory evacuation earlier; the governor was having to do his job.""

[H. Paul Pressler IV]

Anyone one who failed to evacuate NOLA prior to Katrina should be given a Darwin Award.


BTW-On the morning of 27th of August Nagin held a press conference and strongly urged people to evacuate the city.
If people did not listen to the mayor or the weatherman they are morons.

[F.J. Mitchell]

You are absolutely right, but there are not enough facts on earth to bring rationality to the minds of those who willingly and rabidly choose to remain ignorant.

[Pikachu_Dad]

Anyone one who failed to evacuate NOLA prior to Katrina should be given a Darwin Award.

Really? I agree.

Perhaps you would care to hand Mr. Brinkley his award.

He not only chose to stay behind, but kept his wife and children with him...

[Timeout]

I've been reading the "subsidence" and reports of sinking...all of which left me with a question. This may be really stupid, but I can't get my mind around it.

My question:
The land is subsiding, which means levees are lower (in relation to sea level) than previously thought.

But river and lake beds would drop likewise, wouldn't they? Would that leave water level unchanged in relation to the levees? Or would water level rise---i.e. remain constant at "sea level", thus creeping upward on the sinking levees over time?

[HostileTerritory]

Do you have a link to indicate that this is "political correctness" or an EU initiative? I thought it was a cost-benefit issue by the Dutch who saw some farmland as too risky to protect against the ocean for the value they get from it.

[HostileTerritory]

There is no reason whatsoever that all those people that found themselves in the Superdome, Convention Center or their roofs could not have driven themselves out of New Orleans prior to Katrina.

The cars didn't belong to them. New Orleans had a pretty low rate of car ownership for a city outside the northeast, it goes with the poverty and the old pedestrian-friendly layout of some areas. Do you just assume that all poor people know how to hotwire cars, let alone disable alarms or clubs (which I would certainly use if I had to abandon my car in New Orleans whil evacuating in someone else's)?

[StJacques]

"My question:
The land is subsiding, which means levees are lower (in relation to sea level) than previously thought.

But river and lake beds would drop likewise, wouldn't they? Would that leave water level unchanged in relation to the levees? Or would water level rise---i.e. remain constant at "sea level", thus creeping upward on the sinking levees over time?"

Before I begin, let me put a "pop-up" link to the MSNBC article I referenced above, which you might want to use for reference:

Geologic Subsidence in New Orleans

The question you posed was not stupid, because part of what you are deducing is correct. The full answer is somewhat complex, and I don't want to try to pass myself off as an expert in Geology though I do understand the basics of it, so I'll try to state it in a simple form and then go on to explain at greater length. And it does appear that you are getting close to it at the end when you asked about "sea level."

As simply as I can put it, riverine systems and lakes which connect, either directly or indirectly, to the Gulf of Mexico have their water levels set by this connection since water always seeks out its own level. Obviously tides come into the mix here, but I'll leave that out of the picture for now.

You are correct to conclude that the subsidence of sub-surface rock formations, which run underneath dry land, as well as rivers and lakes, would have a common impact upon all surface features above them, regardless of whether those features are land or water. And you seem to have guessed that their proximity to the Gulf sets their water levels. But you still must take into account the geologic impact of the redirection of Mississippi River sediments away from coastal marshlands as it applies to two geologic processes which relate to subsidence in the area; namely, ongoing sedimentary deposition in the marshlands (a soil and rock building process) and ocean wave turbidity (an erosive process). And the complexity in the interplay between these two and the way they impact subsidence in the New Orleans area is such that Geologists and Geophysicists who study this phenomenon do not agree on just how much of the problem is man-made. So please don't expect me to resolve this issue here . . . lol!

In that MSNBC article I linked above, you will find that the two principal experts who present the findings on accelerated subsidence in the New Orleans area disagree with each other on the long-term causes. Let me post a quote:

". . . Dixon and his co-author Dokka disagree on the major causes of New Orleans not-so-slow falling into the Gulf of Mexico.

Dixon blames overdevelopment and drainage of marshlands, saying “all the problems are man-made; before people settled there in the 1700s, this area was at sea level.”

But Dokka said much of the sinking is because of natural seismic shifts that have little to do with construction. . . ."

I think there is evidence to support the case that both Dixon and Dokka are right, though I tend to side with Dixon's analysis that most of the problem is primarily man-made. When the Mississippi River "Jetty System" was put in place in the late 19th century, the process of redirecting Mississippi River sediments away from marshland areas where they were formerly deposited -- a process begun by levee construction in the 18th century I might add -- was completed. After that point, all the sediments were funneled right out into the Gulf of Mexico. Previously, they not only helped to build up dry land in and around the marshlands, they also provided valuable nutrients for plant life in the marshes -- the presence of plants helps to break wave action -- as well as increasing the density of marshland water (since some sediments were always in suspension before settling), all of which helped to cushion the corrosive effects of ocean waves hitting the coast from the Gulf of Mexico. There also was a further man-made development that made the corrosive effect of this wave action, i.e. "turbidity," more intense; by which I refer to the dredging of shell beds off the coast of Louisiana (shell used for road building and construction), which deepened the water near the coast, thus increasing the mass of the waves striking the marshlands, making them even more destructive. On top of all of this, you have to calculate the impact of highly-concentrated man-made construction (buildings and roads have mass) in the New Orleans area, which depresses the underlying soil.

Dokka's argument, which is that there are long-term geologic processes at work here that man cannot overturn, does have some merit, though I must confess that I only know some of the details of the theory supporting it. Part of it is that the process of subsidence was balanced out by the on-going deposition of sediments before man entered the picture, which "hid" the physical evidence of subsidence from view. And there is also some evidence -- and I'm really not qualified to comment on this -- that there is a "sliding" of these rock formations to the south, that is the result of sedimentary deposition farther inland, which puts pressure at one end of the rock formation and pushes it southward. But since it seems to me that the subsidence has been accelerated by the effects of man-made alteration of the land, I tend to side with Dixon.

So; given this underlying problem, all you have to do is throw in a truly violent hurricane, like Katrina or Rita, or even worse the two of them within a month of each other, and everything gets accelerated. It is truly difficult to put into perspective the impact major hurricanes can have on coastal ecosystems. I remember looking at some of the online satellite photos of Katrina's impact, but the ones I just found after Googling a search for them do not show the kind of effect I want to demonstrate for you. But take a look at this "before and after" image of the impact of Rita's storm surge on the southwestern Louisiana coast if you will:



I think you get the idea.

Forgive me if I went on too long on this Timeout. But this subject does fascinate me, as I think you can see.

[KMJames]

...Bush had Karl Rove use his time machine to send bad plans for the levees to the year 1950, then Karl Rove used his weather machine to send Katrina into New Orleans...

Then they both dynamited the levees just to be sure. Just ask Al Sharpton.

[Timeout]

Forgive me if I went on too long on this Timeout. But this subject does fascinate me, as I think you can see.

Thanks for the detailed response. Yes, fascinating...if it weren't for my sitting here on the Mobile gulf coast. I hate to think what a direct hit could do to our bay.

[dljordan]

"Not Bush's fault?"

No, it's government's fault. If the government hadn't intervened years ago the city would have been moved elsewhere due to flooding. The government promised safety and couldn't perform adequately.

[KC Burke]

I am curious if the book goes into the fact that the Corps Levees, totally built under the full Corps funding and management are the river levees and the lake poncitrain levees and the design and construction of canal levees and others were funded by levee districts and that the Corps was only partially responsible in supervising them in the field construction due to federal aid and the overall tie-in issues.

The Corps could have brought up some of this issue but I am sure it would have been framed as though they were dodging responsibility if they did. The NYT and others reporting on this aren't big enough to bring up the distiction of the overall responsibility and culpability of the Levee Districts.

It is also interesting to note that there were some levee districts south of NOLA that took the local responsibility and bit the funding bullet and built levees that withstood the same hurricane. That also is never mentioned.

[Torie]

No, not yet.

[JRios1968]

If not Al Sharpton, check with Louis Farrakhan, he saw it all happen from the mothership.