After the devastation of the 1900 hurricane, Galvestonians with turn of the century technology, built a 17-foot seawall and raised the entire city five feet in elevation. Another major hurricane hit in 1911 but a few hundred died rather than the thousands of 1900.
I think Louisiana would be well advised to rebuild the metropolis *north* of Lake Ponchartrain around where Hammond or Covington is now but those who see romance and culture as New Orleans' legacy will not allow that.
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.
It would take 1-2 years at best to begin making it a liveable city again but it would prevent the levee-breaking disaster we are witnessing this week. New Orleans would have a much happier long-term prospect if such a plan was done.
> 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.
Had it not been for the 1900 Hurricane, Galveston may have been one of the largest cities in the US, and Houston would have been a suburb of Galveston.