Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jeffers

Largest port how? Certainly not in volume.


472 posted on 08/31/2005 5:54:06 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies ]


Senator Mary L. in major buttcovering mode. And apparently now she's decided that the failure of the levees was a separate event from the hurricane.

The phrase of the day may need to be 'cause and effect'...


519 posted on 08/31/2005 6:04:32 PM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 472 | View Replies ]

To: BurbankKarl

"Largest port how? Certainly not in volume."



According to the 2005 World Almanac, the busiest U.S. port in tonnage handled (as of 2002) was the Port of South Louisiana, with over 216 million tons handled. The Port of South Louisiana extends for 54 miles along the Mississippi River between New Orleans and Baton Rouge, and it was probably badly damaged by Hurricane Katrina and the ensuing flooding. In addition, the Port of New Orleans is our 5th busiest port (85 million tons handled) and the Port of Plaquemines is our 10th busiest (59 million tons handled), and neither of these ports will be operational for quite a while; to put things in perspective, the combined 145 million tons handled at the ports of New Orleans and Plaquemines are greater than the tonnage handled at the Port of New York and are exceeded only by the Port of South Louisiana and the Port of Houston (177 million tons handled).


574 posted on 08/31/2005 6:13:11 PM PDT by AuH2ORepublican (http://auh2orepublican.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 472 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson