Will New Orleans survive? (Just posted on Times-Picayune web site)

New Orleans Times-Picayune ^ | August 30, 2005 | James Varney

[Boundless]

> ... point out where on Earth there is a place that
> is immune to any concievable natural disaster, ...

There isn't any, but in any locale, one can engineer to
meet the threats, insure against the rest, and re-think
if both are not possible.

Here in KS, we are building a house:
- above the 500 yr flood level
- strong enough to meet any likely seismic threat
- landscaped to forestall prairie fire reaching structure
- tornado-proof basement

The main risk to the home is tornado (1 in 500 yr).
It's designed to handle an F1. Above that, we fall back
on the basement and insurance. Had we wanted to spend
more, we could have built an all-masonry structure,
like an ICF or Monolithic Dome, as some neighbors have,
and been F5-proof as well.

Should we get hit by an F5, I don't expect sympathy from
New Orleans.

[Anticommie]

"Will New Orleans survive?"

As it exists now, mostly below sea-level?

Should it?

Should the taxpayers be on the hook for it?

No the contemporary ATLANTIS will not survive for the better interest of our people.

[bikepacker67]

But leave the Democrats at the origional site to fill in the low spots.

IS "snake belly level" enough to do that? ;-P

[wireman]

Bite me!

[tortoise]

Should the tax payer be on the Hook when San Fransisco falls apart after the next big quake hits???

No. No one is making anyone live in San Francisco.

[Lester Moore]

Geez. Some folks have no sense of how history and the love of the land can bind people to a place.

Sure I do. Just have your 'sense of history' on your dime and not on mine.

Some people have no sense of whose money they have a right to spend.

[SeniorMoment]

Let's see if any of those big hoity-toity hollywood people put up as much money and raise as much money for hurricane relief as they did the Tsunami.

If they are so worried about poverty in the world, why the hell don't they start here at home instead of Africa and other third world countries?

Bunch of doofus airheads.

[cyborg]

No it won't but it will be resurrected better than ever. THIS IS AMERICA people.

[Boundless]

> So perhaps the best solution is to bulldoze the entire
> city (yes, I'm serious), fill it with silt and debris
> then rebuild it ten feet higher - above sea level.

10 ft might not be enough, and it wouldn't be there long,
as the city is still sinking.

Raising and strengthening the levees is probably more
economical, and not unthinkable. A key question is:
why hadn't that already been done? We can argue about
whether or not this disaster was tragic, and how much
sympathy is merited, but it was definitely no surprise.

The devastation is almost precisely what was modelled.

[The Duke]

In 30 years New Orleans will be one of the brightest jewels in the national crown. But only after immeasurable suffering and hard work. It'll be rebuilt better than ever, just like Tokyo after WWII.

[tortoise]

If we said nobody should live in places that are dangerous, then that eliminates pretty much everywhere in the US I'd like to live.

People should be able to live wherever they want -- that is not the problem. The problem is that a lot of people want the taxpayers to foot the bill for the consequences of their choice of locales. TANSTAAFL.

[bikepacker67]

Blizzards are sooo.... NOT A DISASTER.

Inconvenient? Sure.
Deadly to the unprepared? Absolutely.

But once the hard work of clearing the shyt out of the way is done, it's basically a harmless (and actually pleasurable - I love me a good "shut in" Blizzard) event.

[kabar]

The Great USA Flood of 1993

The 1993 midwest flood was one of the most significant and damaging natural disasters ever to hit the United States. Damages totaled $15 billion, 50 people died, hundreds of levees failed, and thousands of people were evacuated, some for months. The flood was unusual in the magnitude of the crests, the number of record crests, the large area impacted, and the length of the time the flood was an issue.

From May through September of 1993, major and/or record flooding occurred across North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Illinois. Fifty flood deaths occurred, and damages approached $15 billion. Hundreds of levees failed along the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers.

The magnitude and severity of this flood event was simply over-whelming, and it ranks as one of the greatest natural disasters ever to hit the United States. Approximately 600 river forecast points in the Midwestern United States were above flood stage at the same time. Nearly 150 major rivers and tributaries were affected. It was certainly the largest and most significant flood event ever to occur in the United Staes.

Tens of thousands of people were evacuated, some never to return to their homes. At least 10,000 homes were totally destroyed, hundreds of towns were impacted with at least 75 towns totally and completely under flood waters. At least 15 million acres of farmland were inundated, some of which may not be useable for years to come.

Transportation was severely impacted. Barge traffic on the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers was stopped for nearly 2 months. Bridges were out or not accessible on the Mississippi River from Davenport, Iowa, downstream to St. Louis, Missouri. On the Missouri River, bridges were out from Kansas City, downstream to St. Charles, Missouri. Numerous interstate highways and other roads were closed. Ten commercial airports were flooded. All railroad traffic in the Midwest was halted. Numerous sewage treatment and water treatment plants were destroyed.

Finally, it should be recognized that this flood event was so big, it simply overwhelmed everyone and everything. As Mark Twain said a hundred years ago, the Mississippi River "cannot be tamed, curbed or confined.....you cannot bar its path with an obstruction which it will not tear down, dance over and laugh at."

Do you blame these victims for living near the Mississippi River?

[bikepacker67]

In 30 years New Orleans will be one of the brightest jewels in the national crown. But only after immeasurable suffering and hard work. It'll be rebuilt better than ever, just like Tokyo after WWII.

If it's built in the same should-be-sea locale, then it'll be as vulnerable as it is today.

[Tall_Texan]

I think Hollywood *will* rally around relief for New Orleans if not the entire Gulf Coast. New Orleans is one of their favorite pits for sin and debauchery of all flavors. They would insist on rebuilding it (with your money, not theirs). Had it just been Mississippi that was destroyed, Hollywood would just sneer at "those rednecks" and probably not think about it longer than a couple of days.

[Keith in Iowa]

After that flood, whole communities relocated to higher ground...

[snowsislander]

Will New Orleans survive?

Yes.

[Boundless]

>> "Either the city needs to become Cat5-proof..."

> How would you make it Cat5-proof? Cat5 is an open-ended
> category, both as to size, strength and forward speed.

The design targets would be some carefully-selected
arbitrary level above Cat5, with a high-tide landfall
during a full moon, etc.

It sounds like N.O. was perhaps Cat3-proof.

But Cat6e-proof would be excessive :-)

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

[Dick Bachert]

Yes, but the REST of us should NOT be required to subsidize their "love of the land" with constant infusions of taxpayer $$$.

This is a piece I did back when Andrew roared through south Florida and Louisiana (on about the same track as Katrina) 13 years ago. Simply change the names of the places and date and you pretty much have the current situation.

Now that we're in a period of major hurricane activity, wanna bet YOUR income that we'll be doing this more often than every 13 years?

I shall now batten down the old hatches for the inevitable cries of (with a nod to "Johnny Dangerously") "heartless farging bastich."
Enjoy!

---

WHAT GEORGE SHOULD HAVE SAID
by Dick Bachert

On the evening of September 1st, 1992, President George Bush went on national TV to announce that the already empty federal coffers would pour forth uncounted billions of dollars to totally rebuild the Florida and Louisiana communities destroyed by Hurricane Andrew. A vast majority of Americans seem to agree with this action, providing yet more evidence (as if more were needed) that we have come very, very far from the philosophy of self-reliance articulated by one Colonel Davey Crockett. (See "Not Yours to Give" available from FEE)

Instead of attempting to purchase his reelection with plundered resources, this is what George Bush should have said.

"My fellow Americans:

As you all know, a devastating hurricane has struck the southern tip of Florida and Louisiana. Our hearts and prayers go out to all who have lost so much. There is now a great cry for the federal government to "do something". And
we shall. I have dispatched otherwise idle military resources -- men and women involved in our national defense who will profit from what will amount to a real-life field exercise -- to the area to render whatever aid the local authorities deem appropriate to restore basic communications and public safety infrastructure. But, beyond that, we can do little else. Before you brand me a heartless monster, allow me to explain:

"The area involved has been regularly struck by many such storms since long before we have inhabited this continent. There is reason to believe that this pattern will continue. All who have vacationed or visited there will agree that it is a beautiful area and by driving a short distance, residents there can avail themselves of the ocean waters and sandy beaches of that coastal setting. I, too, understand the attraction. That's why I spend as much time as possible
in Kennebunkport. That's the upside of living in such an area.

"The downside is that the area is regularly struck by these terrible storms. Which is why responsible and intelligent residents of the area insure their property against the inevitable resultant damage.

"That the largest private insurers have determined that certain of these areas are so likely to be struck by storms such as Andrew as to make them "actuarially unsound" risks is a matter for the insurers and the property owners. Government will only, through the lawfully established court system, do its best to see to it that any contracts between these private parties are honored.

"If a prospective property owner is unable to secure private insurance against these calamitous eventualities, he or she had better reevaluate his or her position. If a prospective owner cannot bear the financial loss which would flow from the destruction of an uninsured home in one of these high risk areas, he or she is well advised to purchase in an area where such insurance is available. It is not, nor can it ever be, the government's place to levy a compulsory tax on citizens who do not live in these high risk beach areas to subsidize the folly of those who choose to do so! It would be criminal to force citizens who themselves already pay hundreds of dollars each year to protect their homes from
normal hazards such as fire and the occasional tornado to also pay for the beach front lifestyle of others! To increase their taxes so that some of their less responsible fellows may enjoy the benefits of living in these normally
beautiful -- but statistically periodically dangerous -- surroundings is unconscionable.

"As much as our hearts go out to those who have lost so much, I must remind them that just as it has happened in the past, it will happen again. If you chose to remain there, you do so at your peril. This is an election year and the temptation is great for me to obligate the already strapped taxpayers of the entire nation to pay for the rebuilding of these damaged areas.

"Though it may cost me another term as President, I must, because of the dangerous precedent it would set, resist it. To do otherwise would be the grossest unfairness to, say, a citizen in Kansas whose roof might be blown off during a tornado. Would that citizen not have the right to ask the federal government to do the same for him? Multiply that by the numbers of isolated, individual-but equally calamitous disasters each year and you will come to see that the treasury of even the richest nation on earth (which, thanks to decades of such nonsense, we no longer are) would soon collapse under the load.

"On a technical level, I would also remind you that expert analysis of the destruction of these homes quickly disclosed that it was government and the building codes -- rather the false security of their enforcement -- which led to the loss of nearly 85,000 dwellings. You who now look to government to solve your problem ought to consider that it was the failure of the government mandated building code enforcement that reduced your home to a pile of rubble. Your reliance upon government enforcement of these codes and their assiduous observance has proven to be an error.

"In that connection, I would point out that engineers who surveyed the damage discovered a number of structures which survived. It was found that these buildings had been built under an older, ostensibly less stringent code and/or were constructed using a number of proven, but more costly, techniques designed to improve survival.

"If you do plan to rebuild in one of these uninsurable sections, please, in order to minimize the destruction the next time another killer storm comes ashore, employ these construction techniques.

"Let me now turn to what we must now do to help those in such desperate need at this moment.

"I submit that we should continue and intensify what we've been doing thus far: The volunteer activities many of you have undertaken as individuals, small businesses and large corporations are doing exactly what I envisioned when I
launched my "Thousand Points of Light" campaign. What we need now are millions of such points. And, if the response continues to swell as in the past few days, we'll get there.

"Let me also remind you that the first folks into the area with meaningful relief were not government people. As we have seen, these huge bureaucracies possess equally huge levels of static inertia. They lack the flexibility and
sensitivity to function efficiently. People helping people is the highest embodiment of the faith our forefathers brought to these shores over 300 years ago.

"America and -- and, I fervently believe, still is – a nation of people who understand this basic concept. It is time we remembered that government's role is to only do for citizens those few constitutionally limited things we cannot
individually do for ourselves. I'd remind you what George Washington said about government: "Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. It is force! And like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

"It is also time for us all to remember that we must take individual responsibility for ourselves. We must remember, for example, that we cannot construct our homes in places where the forces of nature periodically rage against us without adequate preparation for those periodic rampages.

"To be more specific, if we must build in those areas, we must take personal responsibility for the soundness of construction and/or insure against the certain eventuality that these natural assaults will occur. The days when
individuals can look to a government to force the rest of us to underwrite the folly of the few are gone! I urge those of you now digging out from the destruction in Florida and Louisiana to remember that as you consider your future. I pledge that if you grant me another term in office, I shall devote my next 4 years to bringing government back under the United States Constitution in order to ensure that it does only those few things we cannot do for ourselves and does them as efficiently and effectively as possible.

"Let me again urge us to continue the enormous volunteer efforts we have already begun until this tragedy is behind us.

"Thank you and good night!"