Well! Sho nuff!
You'd be an idiot if you did turn it down. Yet you don't strike me as an idiot. That's a good thing.
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!
Posted on 09/20/2005 11:38:42 PM PDT by CobaltBlue
Louisiana's top hurricane experts have rejected the official explanations for the floodwall collapses that inundated much of New Orleans, concluding that Hurricane Katrina's storm surges were much smaller than authorities have suggested and that the city's flood- protection system should have kept most of the city dry.
With the help of computer models and visual evidence, scientists at Louisiana State University's Hurricane Center have concluded that Katrina's surges did not come close to overtopping those barriers.
* * * * Ivor van Heerden, the Hurricane Center's deputy director, said the real scandal of Katrina is the "catastrophic structural failure" of barriers that should have handled the hurricane with relative ease.
"We are absolutely convinced that those floodwalls were never overtopped," said van Heerden. * * * * Tuesday, researchers showed numerous indications that Katrina's surge was not as tall as the lakefront's protections. They showed a "debris line" that indicates the top height of Katrina's waves was at least four feet below the crest of Lake Pontchartrain's levees. They also pointed out how the breached floodwalls near the lake showed no signs of overtopping -- no splattering of mud, no drip lines and no erosion at their bases. They contended that the pattern of destruction behind the breaches was consistent with a localized "pressure burst," rather than widespread overtopping.
Their model indicates that most of the surge around the lake and its nearby canals was less than 11 feet above sea level, and that none of it should have been greater than 13 feet. The Army Corps's flood-protection system for New Orleans was designed to handle surges of more than 14 feet above sea level.
"This should not have been a big deal for these floodwalls," said oceanographer G. Paul Kemp. There's no way this should have exceeded the capacity."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I love the smell of napalm in the morning!
Exactly how does a picture of the Slidell bridge prove anything about the 17th St. Canal, or the London Avenue Canal?
Are you geographically impaired? ;^)
Many of the major components of New Orleans government have a long history of corruption, including the school board, the police department, and yes, the levee board.
Keep in mind that the Corps of Engineers generally doesn't make decisions. They make studies and recommendations which the Congress uses to pass appropriations and which the state and local government debate to appropriate matching funds.
When the funding is in place, the CoE executes the projects, within the budget limitations.
Something else to note about the CoE. Odds are that if they fudged on the plans, then they 'cheated' to build something heavier and stronger than the plans allowed for. They are engineers, engineers behave in predictable ways, and the empirical evidence supports this.
As to the sequencing of flooding, this post:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1482715/posts?page=40#40
and the rest of the thread lay down the history of who reported what, when, and offer some analysis as to possible causes,
and this post:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1486492/posts?page=20#20
offers causal limitations raised by imagery of the 17th and London canal seawall failures,
and this thread raised possibilities which might concern you as well:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1484668/posts
That will give you a good background for what I'm working on now and hope to have done this week, but be aware that there are at least two significant limitations to the information presented there. One, photographs are not nearly as good as walking around on the jobsite and putting your hands on things that broke.
Two, computer modelling doesn't carry as much weight as empirical evidence gathered after the storm.
To understand a complex hydrodynamic sequence of events, the above is necessary reading, but understand in advance that some of the speculations listed in these posts have not been supported with empirical evidence. Read it, but don't cast it in stone yet, some modifications are already necessary and the empirical evidence assessment is only about 75% complete.
The timeline for the downtown and east Jefferson areas is finished, as are the imagery assessments for the 17th and London Canal breaches, which exist "as is" in the above listed threads and posts. I may sum that up and include it with the east Orleans and St. Bernard assessments I'm working on now, but I don't expect any of the conclusions to change.
As for Plaquemines Parish, initial (and superficial) assessments indicate that most structures below Port Sulphur are gone, no major urban areas there to begin with, and whether or not I do any more in depth analysis down there probably depends on how much havoc Rita wreaks.
In summation, I think that the CoE is probably the wrong target for most suits, that heavyweight class action hitters from all over the world are already in play on this, that there probably were design and perhaps construction errors at 17th and London Canals, that other design and maintenence issues will come out soon, and that the state and city government agencies most culpable have already or will soon declare bankruptcy.
Yes, thanks for noticing.
Since you were the one that got creamed in post after post after post with your smarmy nonsense being exposed as nothing more than the scummy avarice that it is, this statement is more than a bit ironic.
Great post! Thank you.
As you already noticed, the barge was in the Industrial Canal, which is between Orleans and St. Bernard.
The way I understand the article this thread is about, they were talking about the 17th St. Canal, which is between Orleans and Jefferson, and the London Avenue Canal, which is purely in Orleans. Neither of these carry barge traffic.
As for the "missing" levees in St. Bernard, those were clearly scoured away by the main storm surge. I've looked at a lot of photos of coastal St. Bernard and Plaquemines, and they were just wiped clean. You may have noticed that the Chandeleur Islands are "missing," too.
My dad had a fishing camp at Empire, and has sent me photos of the area. It's just awesome. I can email you the Powerpoint he emailed me, if you PM me your email address.
The word "awesome" is not one I usually use, because it's so over-used, but shock and awe are good words for the reaction to the devastation.
As for the "class action heavy hitters" already in play, I am sure you're right. New Orleans is home to some of the biggest players in that game. I don't intend to actually get involved in the litigation -- I just love a good, complicated lawsuit with lots of juicy issues. This one will be a beauty.
Well! Sho nuff!
You'd be an idiot if you did turn it down. Yet you don't strike me as an idiot. That's a good thing.
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!
You may want to capture the analyses at your profile page. Makes for a convenient place to "point to."
You're reading a different thread...she has run circles...
You fit the profile of the post 2000 idiot freeper to a T.
Oh, please. Then either God will be an unindicted coconspirator or Michael Newdow will have a whole new lawsuit to file.
That's my experience!
With all the graft and corruption for which that area is famous, I'd check the building materials before the engineering. Inferior concrete in the levee?
I'm a lawyer too, and I can tell you you're a long way from seeing anyone recover any money in a lawsuit against the Army Corps of Engineers. Fifteenth-hand scuttlebutt and wild conjecture at a political website does not prove negligence and win a lawsuit.
So the levee break was unexpected after all?
No offense, but I think the proper response is "Duh? No foolin'!"
But thanks for sharing. I hope you feel better for getting that off your chest.
Oh, I've been reading the right thread alright.
You need to get a new hobby; you're not very good at this one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.