Too Many People in Nature's Way 705
Ant writes "Wired News report that the dead and the desperate of New Orleans now join the farmers of Aceh and the fishermen of Trincomalee, villagers in Iran and the slum dwellers of Haiti in a world being dealt ever more punishing blows by natural disasters... ... "We rely on technology and we end up thinking as human beings that we're totally safe, and we're not," said Miletti, of the University of Colorado. "The bottom line is we have a very unsafe planet."
By one critical measure, the impact on populations, statistics show the planet to be increasingly unsafe. More than 2.5 billion people were affected by floods, earthquakes, hurricanes and other natural disasters between 1994 and 2003, a 60 percent increase over the previous two 10-year periods, U.N. officials reported at a conference on disaster prevention in January.
Those numbers don't include millions displaced by last December 2004's tsunami, which killed an estimated 180,000 people as its monstrous waves swept over coastlines from Indonesia's Aceh province to Trincomalee, Sri Lanka, and beyond. By another measure -- property damage -- 2004 was the costliest year on record for global insurers, who paid out more than $40 billion on natural disasters, reports German insurance giant Munich Re. Florida's quartet of 2004 hurricanes was the big factor.
But generally it's not that more "events" are happening, rather that more people are in the way, said Thomas Loster, a Munich Re expert. "More and more people are being hit," he said..." I'd also like to point out a project here to find housing for Katrina's victims; it tries to combine lists of sites offering housing, and do a meta-search.
But then again (Score:5, Insightful)
From the captain-obvious department (Score:5, Insightful)
As a preemitive strike! (Score:1, Insightful)
The new
Building housing 20 feet below sea level. (Score:2, Insightful)
It's not just how many people there are, but how stupid they are. On the bright side, it kicks evolution into action. And guess what, "They will rebuild", the mind boggles.
The big question.. (Score:3, Insightful)
To what degree have we done this to ourselves?
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:2, Insightful)
Population (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. I don't think our planet is any more unstable then 100, 1000 or 10000 years ago. Yeah, maybe we have global warming but even so it makes much, much more of a difference that a hurricane making landfall at the Mississipi estuary affects several million people today compared to 10,000 in 1803 or maybe a couple hundred in 500 BC.
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:3, Insightful)
Additionally, maybe it's time we stopped building homes out of sticks.
Maybe About time (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe it is time to America to Stop rejecting proposals to reduce emissions and to do what the world is asking. Most other countries seem to do alot more, and the states will probably have to have some more Natural Disasters before the Muppets in The white house will understand this.
Re:Population (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure it makes much MUCH more of a difference. Katrina was a Cat 1 when it hit florida, the hot gulf waters drove it to a Cat 5 right quick. Whether that's global warmings fault is debatable, but certainly plausible.
Also, New Orleans used to have 150 miles of wetlands between itself and the open ocean, that could absorb storm surges. Because of human management of the mississippi river it's rapidly eroding, down to about 30 miles of wetlands. So humans are definately doing some things to make the situation worse.
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:4, Insightful)
Depends on where you live: what holds up wonderfully against a hurricane or tornado can fail miserably the first time San Andres sneezes.
Mad Max (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:4, Insightful)
Disasters are always just a matter of time.
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps we shouldn't rebuild on the lands that keep getting destroyed... I hear that's what they did in the days before governmental disaster relief.
Actually, that's not true. The Sumerians consistently rebuilt in the same spots after (constant) floods. Same with the Egyptians. The Romans did not abandon any of the cities around Pompeii (i.e. Capua). Many cities in Africa were completely rebuilt after disasters. The Yangtze floods a lot, and they rebuilt. The Japanese learned to build earthquake-proof buildings. Cultures everywhere still rebuild at the foot of volcanoes. The Indians/Sri Lankans rebuilt after typhoons/tsunamis.
While it's not a great idea, people certainly still do it. While most of them would wait for the city to stabilize naturally, a good location is a good location. New Orleans is a fairly unbeatable location for a port (like Alexandria, which is still there after half the damn went into the Med), and any culture in their right mind would rebuild.
The possible loss of human life in the future, while an awful possibility, does not preclude them rebuilding.
Re:Read The Fine Print (Score:3, Insightful)
"Too Many People" in Nature's Way? (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a lot of people who would even say that Nature's fury can't compare that to the fury of our fellow man. I'd have to wonder about that: Lung Cancer deaths related to smoking kill off about 440 people per day in the United States alone. Compare that to the rougly 2 and a half US soldiers per day killed in Iraq.... I'd say we are far better at intentionally killing our own selves than we are at killing others, and natural disaster takes a distant 3rd... or at least, disasters can't compare to other natural causes such as disease.
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:4, Insightful)
Build a reinforced bunker going from a basement to two stories. Built a bamboo and paper house around it.
Trouble on the way, get in the bunker. Cheap to rebuild what gets blown or washed, etc. away.
Problems with this thought?
all the best,
drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/41879 [ourmedia.org]
Isn't the bigger problem (Score:4, Insightful)
The first rule of risk management is that the amount of time, effort, and money that you spend on security should be proprortional to the probability of a breach times the amount of damage it would cause. I guess Louisana didn't get the memo.
Back atcha, Cap'n. (Score:5, Insightful)
Serious. Check out the history of the Yangtzee and Ganges rivers going back almost 5,000 years, and the Tigris and Euphrates in Mesopotamia at the very dawn of civilization. Cities are generally built where they are useful, not where they are safe.
Those with a Libertarian or Conservative leaning sometimes forget that Taxes purchase something useful for you: civilization.
The government diaster relief you deride so much makes civilization happen in North America. Just the cost of doing business here. Move to Somalia if you want to live someplace where there's no tax burden.
SoupIsGood Food
Self-evident (Score:2, Insightful)
Engineering Not Applied! (Score:5, Insightful)
Planning so so poorly thought out, a kid playing SIM City [ea.com] would come up with better plans. And that is exacly my point. We have simulation software that is inextensive. Tons of historical data to pull from. We know how to design better levee systems, bridges and canals. But the political system fails us again and again.
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:4, Insightful)
What a maroon.
Contrary to what you imply, traffic on the Mississippi can get along just fine without the city of New Orleans. Reinforced port facilities could be built without surrounding them with a city that is below sea level. Ports are useful. Cities built without adaquate mitigation are not.
Your reality:
Reality's reality: Require improved building codes and effective fire fighting codes.
Your reality:
Require improved building codes for hurricane resistance. Don't allow people to build directly on flood plains. Don't drain hurricane-buffering wetlands for million dollar condos.
New Orleans is built on delta silt, notoriously unstable and has been documented for decades to be slowly sinking, eventually turning into Venice of the Gulf. For decades the artifically channeled river continues to silt up, raising the water level ever higher, faster than dredging or levy improvements can check.
Your claim: New Orleans is useful so continue to throw money at a losing proposition that is guaranteed to result in massive loss of life and an environmental disaster beyond imagination. (By the way... since all of those toxic chemicals are about to be pumped directly into the Gulf, I would advise against eating any shrimp or other seafood from that region for the next few years).
Do you absolutely need port facilities at that specific location? For the cost of a failed levy system with infinite maintenance and improvement requirements you can build a deep-water port on pilings to bedrock in the middle of the gulf itself, complete with ballast tanks to raise the entire infrastructure well above even 50' storm surges or simply made water-tight and let storm surges wash harmlessly over the entire facility. Multiple rail trestles (including light rail to easily and painlessly transport employees to/from their homes which are located safely inland) ensure efficient transportation of labor and goods.
Don't abandon Florida, simply require everybody to be self-insured. Insurance subsidies of people who want to enjoy ocean views force people living in trailer parks in Des Moines chip in to guarantee that people who build on the barrier islands of North Carolina (which repeatedly get wiped out) are close enough to repayment so ensure that the FEMA assistance will be enough for them to rebuild the same house in the same dangerous location.
"Pretty to live in" is not the same thing as "useful". "Useful" can be engineered. A governor who drives past houses with rooflines 10 feet below sea level on her way to celebrate agreeing to pay $190 million to the NFL Saints so they remain in the city is doing nobody a favor while refusing to even address the problem of the city sinking, the waterways silting up and an increase of hurricanes that exceed the design limitations of the city's levyworks is not "useful" by any stretch of the imagination.
My two cents: rebuild the port but not the houses. If people want to live there, let them assume their own risks. Ditto for people who build on barrier islands that repeatedly get hit by storms and people who build on steep slopes that unleash mudslides every few years.
States along the Gulf get hit by destructive hurricanes than California gets hit by destructive earthquakes: why is California spending so much more on mitigation than Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida?
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:2, Insightful)
Not Bush's fault that Katrina happened, BUT... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is certainly his fault that the disaster recovery wasn't handled well - the aftermath of Katrina was absolutely awful and Bush seemed asleep at the wheel. That is unforgivable. Disasters have happened all over the world this year - in Portugal and Romania, fire and flooding respecitvely. The people from other countries in Europe, and the governments of those countries, helped the victims. Spanish and French rescue efforts were underway very quickly when the fires in Portugal were blazing - yet in the USA, help was very slow coming from the US itself, and when Europe initially offered the US help, they were turned down - why? What the hell? What the hell is going on with Bush?
Don't criticise Slashdot readers for criticising Bush - they are quite right to. Slashdot's audience, being geeks, are generally more intelligent and well-informed than the average US consumer: Think about it - could there possibly be a reason why so many Slashdotters are criticising Bush? I'll leave you to ponder it.
Re:Rule #1: Don't build on flood plains (Score:5, Insightful)
New Orleans is built on a flood plain not because of agriculture but shipping. If you're going to build a deep water port on the Mississippi river, you need to do so near the water.
Holy Sysiphus, Batman! (Score:3, Insightful)
If the build takes 15 years, what are the odds of a Cat5 coming along within that timespan to put you back to square one?
Re:Engineering Not Applied! (Score:3, Insightful)
We pay so many taxes, that the government now gets surpluses all the time in billions of dollars. They are masturbating right now just by thinking about the amount of taxes they are collecting on fuel for example. How much taxes do you need to collect to just build better infrastructures?
At some point you can collect 100% income and this will not make the things any better. The money still goes to contractors who bribe the officials and build roads so that they have to be rebuilt every few years, it's pathetic.
The USA pays so much taxes that they could afford a 300 billion + war, don't tell me you don't pay enough taxes.
The problem is not that you are not paying enough, the problem is where your money are going.
Now THAT is the question.
Unspecific Verbiage (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is the word "affected". I had a cold last year, was I one of the people "affected" by natural disasters? How are they defining whether or not someone was affected? You could say anyone who donated money to a relief fund was affected, or are they only referring to the number of people injured or that had property damage. What about someone who hid out in his bomb shelter for a week. Was that person affected? Does emotional disurbance count as being "affected"?
I'd prefer a concrete statistic, like number of people killed, number of homes destroyed. Saying that x people were "affected" doesn't tell us anything useful.
Reports like these remind me that we're not in the information age, we're in the data age. The information age will be next when we start compiling all this data into useful information.
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:5, Insightful)
So let's see... let's say there is an exceptionally active tornado season that spawned 500 tornados, each twister 100 yards wide (on the larger side) with a ground track of 5 miles each, which result in approximately 150 square miles (heck... let's round up to 200 square miles) of devestation.
At 2nd landfall Katrina had hurricane force winds extending 105 miles out from the center. Let's pretend that the storm made it 20 miles inland and collapsed, causing no subsequent damage. 2,100 square miles of devestation. From a single storm. That is, on average, only one of multiple storms in any given season.
So compare:
Some communities are faced with the odds of being randomly selected by mother nature to be included within 150 square miles of destruction and make endless plans, preparations, code changes, modifications to standard building concepts and the development of new structures, technologies and strategies.
Other communities are faced with the prospect of being included in over 2,000 miles of destruction, elect a governor more interested in retaining a football team than the Mississippi, and not only wipe out the only natural protection they have (the wetlands) but actively discourage storm-and-flood resistance by incorporating strict historical accuracy codes and walk along the bottoms of their earthworks and never think once that the silt deposits are now several feet above their heads, let alone the ever-rising water surface.
Yeah, the city cared about being prepared.
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:3, Insightful)
Contrary to what you imply, traffic on the Mississippi can get along just fine without the city of New Orleans. Reinforced port facilities could be built without surrounding them with a city that is below sea level. Ports are useful. Cities built without adaquate mitigation are not.
True, it can get along fine, but the next major river city is Saint Louis. What, praytell, should they do with the warehousing of the goods going from the river out to sea, and visa versa? The oil from the Gulf going to the refineries? There is not a port that can take up the slack in the meantime.
Reality's reality: Require improved building codes and effective fire fighting codes.
Require improved building codes for hurricane resistance. Don't allow people to build directly on flood plains. Don't drain hurricane-buffering wetlands for million dollar condos.
The fact that there's a disaster does not necessarily require improved codes. Improved building codes would not have prevented this any more than they'd prevent a major fire. If some slummy warehouse explodes, sure, but a major fire could just as easily start from any number of things.
So how much will refitting all the buildings in the entire hurricane zone for new (ineffective) codes cost us? How 'bout retraining every firefighter in the country? We haven't had a major fire in years. Do you think a better code in San Diego would have helped? Bad things happen, and it's a fact of life. More regulation won't help.
New Orleans is built on delta silt, notoriously unstable and has been documented for decades to be slowly sinking, eventually turning into Venice of the Gulf. For decades the artifically channeled river continues to silt up, raising the water level ever higher, faster than dredging or levy improvements can check.
Ok, that's true. I don't know about "notoriously unstable," but it's definitely not safe and sound. Guess what? Texas is sinking too. Most of the places on the Gulf are. People prevent flooding, and it sinks. We caused this problem, and it's not restricted to New Orleans.
Your claim: New Orleans is useful so continue to throw money at a losing proposition that is guaranteed to result in massive loss of life and an environmental disaster beyond imagination. (By the way... since all of those toxic chemicals are about to be pumped directly into the Gulf, I would advise against eating any shrimp or other seafood from that region for the next few years).
Do you absolutely need port facilities at that specific location? For the cost of a failed levy system with infinite maintenance and improvement requirements you can build a deep-water port on pilings to bedrock in the middle of the gulf itself, complete with ballast tanks to raise the entire infrastructure well above even 50' storm surges or simply made water-tight and let storm surges wash harmlessly over the entire facility. Multiple rail trestles (including light rail to easily and painlessly transport employees to/from their homes which are located safely inland) ensure efficient transportation of labor and goods.
Yes we need port facilites at that specific location. The nearest major port city on the river is Saint Louis. New Orleans is the only location where we can warehouse river good and goods from the Gulf for redistribution.
The cost of constructing a port on pilings in the Gulf would be extreme. Offshore derricks aren't safe, and the city wouldn't be either. What happens if there's tectonic movement? Do all the rail trestles break? Do you seriously expect the cost of such a feat of engineering to be less than rebuilding New Orleans 3 times? This isn't even mentioning the tourist economy, location of the airport, business travel, etc.
Don't abandon Florida, simply require everybody to be self-insured. Insurance subsidies of people who want to enjoy ocean views force people living in trailer parks in Des Moines chi
PAH! (Score:3, Insightful)
Compaired to Venus? Mercury? Omicron Persei 8? I think not!
Re:Not Bush's fault that Katrina happened, BUT... (Score:3, Insightful)
Many of them hate him entirely for past issues, and are eager to seize upon any excuse to bash him more? I mean, be realistic - for every informed criticism of his policy, there's nine other people just tossing out crude insults because he's not a Democratic-style leftist. This isn't meant as an apology or a defense of him - just that I generally find the level of political discourse to be pretty childish and crude, not well-thought-out at all. It's essentially sand-box name-taunting by three year olds.
Y'know, there are also social and economic conservatives who won't think we should be an Anarcho-capitalistic state where big campaign contributors get put in Undersecretary of (whatever) positions. The government needs to be seperated from the private sector, and it's not. Not every conservative is a Limbaugh/O'Reilly listening, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism preaching neocon. I take it by "Democratic-style leftist" you mean moderate who gets bought off just like the Republicans? The fact that the political center in the administration has shifted more and more to the right doesn't mean that moderates are liberal nutballs. For real leftism, see Sweden or Switzerland.
I also think that Europeans don't really "get" the dual federal/state government system that the US has. Calling out national guard is typically a state, not federal function, for instance. If the federal government has to call out the National Guard, it means the _state_ has screwed up. Many of the things Europeans are blaming the federal government for are typically _state_ functions. Evacuating the citizens is also a state function (or a city function). This is not to say that the federal government shouldn't assist - but we have separation of powers between state and federal governments over here, apparently to a much larger extent than in, say, Europe.
Calling out the national guard is a state function, but the federal government could have, and should have, declared a state of emergency. Before Ivan, they had readied the military. It took less than 48 hours. Why is it different now? The fact that the state didn't call in the Guard fast enough (and Ray Nagin was doing his best to get help there fast) doesn't mean that the Fed didn't fuck up as well.
There are also Americans blaming the Federal government. The federal reaction to this disaster has been worse than any other disaster. Ever. Worse than any hurricane. Worse than any flood. Worse than earthquake response. Worse than major fires. State's rights (which are largely nonexistent nowadays) don't absolve the federal government of their responsibility to help. If I were shot and you saw it, would you call it my responsibility to call 911?
I wish you'd understand the reason our government is here. When I see all these uninformed arguments, it just tells me how fast we're going downhill.
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:5, Insightful)
Where do they get their low-cost workers if they don't have a major metro area nearby? Yeah, you can pay to fly them in and out each week (like they do for the oil rigs) but that costs a lot. I doubt shipping companies are willing to pay a premium for labor. Cities were built on the river for a reason - commerce (and therefore jobs) was there. You can't have one without the other (at least 'til the robots and teleoperators take over).
Re:As a preemitive strike! (Score:2, Insightful)
Then he flew back to resume his vacation.
The other bottom line (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:2, Insightful)
As long as there's oil... (Score:5, Insightful)
When we no longer have the means to protect ourselves (i.e. oil runs out), then Nature will be far more punishing than a hurricane, tsunami or earthquake. Just imagine other cities in the state of New Orleans because there is no electricity, water, gas or food production. All of those comforts are entirely dependent on a shrinking supply of oil.
Re:Not Bush's fault that Katrina happened, BUT... (Score:3, Insightful)
That must be why he's getting so much criticism from Republicans finally.
Seriously, you're laughable.
First, you think the Democrats are leftists when they're mainly moderately right wing with a few left fascists thrown in.
Second, your best attempt at a point even then was screeching out "leftist".
I generally find the level of political discourse to be pretty childish and crude, not well-thought-out at all.
I agree, but I wonder if you actually don't realise that you're a part of the problem?
Re:Runaway (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't think you actually need to build a large city around a port these day. In this day and age you need a bunch of cranes to move containers, and a mix of truck friendly freeways and rail lines. You need a town big enough to support the people that work in it but the number of people needed to run a container shipping port is dramatically lower than it was when everything was loaded and unloaded by hand.
In fact all the big ports I've seen are actually counterproductive to have in cities. They are an eyesore, they consume expensive real estate and are expensive to operate in an inflated urban environment. The truck and rail traffic ties traffic in the area in knots. They end up being warehouses/industrial, steep on urban blight and drug use when in the middle of cities. Good planning would suggest you build a port in one place, an industrial area near it but not in a place prone to flooding, and an urban/suburban area where lots of people live, not close to it at all and sure not below sea level.
All in all if you were a good planner I'd say you put a port where New Orleans is, make the French Quarter which is on high grand in to a tourist attraction enclave and move the rest of the city elsewhere. It was for the most part a failed city anyway with entrenched poverty and unemployment, steep crime, and rampant police corruption.
As for building on flood plains, that was done out of pure necessity in more ancient era. They didn't have industrial scale fertilizer and agriculture was very labor intensive. You pretty much had to build the agriculture part of your society on flood plains, and you had to build them with a degree of transience. You WANTED the floods because they replenished and fertilized the soil, otherwise it would have just been depleted with a few years of agriculture with no fertilizer. You WANTED to build minimal housing and infrastructure with the realization floods would destroy it every year or every few years. Building huts in a flood plain is different from building expensive homes, industrial capacity and high rises in a flood plain.
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:3, Insightful)
New York is just a disaster waiting to happen. They built a large city full of large sky-scapers that concentrates the population in a small area, making it a tempting target for terrorists.
Los Angeles is just a disaster waiting to happen.... earthquakes... wild fires... riots... San Francisco -- earthquakes.... St. Louis --- another large earthquake on New Madrid fault will destroy the city...
Fact is new Orleans is one of the oldest cities in the US, and it has weathered many disasters before this one. It is *the* most vital port for American agriculture, and it is one of the most important centers of American culture (without the influence New Orleans you wouldn't have the Beatles or most of modern music)
Re:Holy Sysiphus, Batman! (Score:3, Insightful)
Past hurricanes in the area [jamaicaobserver.com]
1794
1812
1831
1860(3 major storms)
1915
1947
1956 - Flossy
1964 - Hilda
1965 - Betsy
1969 - Camille
1992 - Tornado spawned from remnants of Andrew
2005 - Katrina
Note that probably only Camille was a Cat5. If you DON'T try to upgrade the levee's, you stand zero chance. Whatever...the build can't be done in a week.
Re:Not Bush's fault that Katrina happened, BUT... (Score:1, Insightful)
Slashdot is full of idiots.
Katrina was the fault of Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and Lyndon Johnson.
Let's see if this gets "Insightful."
Especially since it is more fact-filled than the parent post.
Kyoto (Score:3, Insightful)
We need to act NOW, we should have started to act a loooong time ago. In the UK one of the reasons that petrol prices are so high is to discourage use, there are all sorts of other action being taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions -- it is not enough, but at least we are trying. The USA is doing nothing just in case it hurt's it's economy ... using the excuse that this or that effect is not 100% proven -- sorry: the big picture is well understood, the risks are so huge that to argue over uncertainties is irresponsible.
Sorry guys: time to wisen up; take a hit on your economy today or face many, many more things like this ... which will end up costing much, much more.
No: this is not a troll. My view is shared by many people in Europe. I know that citizens of the USA don't want to think about it, but the problem won't go away just because you shut your eyes to it.
Lobby your senator to ratify the kyoto agreement.
How this is being seen from abroad (Score:1, Insightful)
Three issues seem to be important to consider.
The first is the advisability of building below sea level and relying on dams. A lot of better informed people than me are currently discussing the civil engineering aspects of this.
The second is the political issue of how the rescue was handled, and the mistakes made. Everyone has incompetent politicians, and I suspect this subject is best discussed by those with local knowledge of the people involved.
The third is the issue of how the NO people behaved during the crisis. And here the world's press is having a field day. I can think of no other disaster where rape and murder were so immediate a problem.
While these reports are not yet fully confirmed (and I hope they will prove to be exaggerated), what we are reading astounds most of the world. I have seen right-wing blogs discussing the emergency, and suggesting that getting a gun and shooting anyone who approaches is the correct 'survivalist' thing to do. This seems to be what has actually happened in some sections of the city. I wonder how many of these reports refer to armed looters fighting, and how many are the simple shooting of strangers, or anything moving.
The American 'self-sufficiency' dream combined with the love of guns seems to produce a very ugly society, unlike anything elsewhere in the world, with the possible exception of Israel and the Middle East.
First US Camp deliberate attempt to kill blacks? (Score:5, Insightful)
And Mitchel Cohen [counterpunch.org] writes. . .
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:4, Insightful)
Well you obviously didn't read my port. The number of workers you need to run a port plunged in the last 50 years thanks to container shipping. You could support a large port with a small town now. Times changed.
A big percentage of the people who were left in New Orleans were unemployed and on welfare. It is a city with vast poverty. They weren't people who had longshoreman jobs. They were freed slaves who landed there after abolition, they started with nothing and in formerly segregated and still racist South they still having nothing today.
"but farming is simply not the reason they're on the floodplain in New Orleans."
New Orleans is where it is because it was a great port 200+ years ago, its still a good one now but you don't need the large urban city for the port.
When it was built there the French didn't grasp that it was sinking. Now in light of the fact its sinking you do either two things:
- Abandon it because its now prohibitively expensive to repair and defend in an era of super hurricanes, or you at least abandon all the low income housing which was substandard before and now is just rank and unlivable.
- Do what the Dutch do and spend billions building massive new levees and pumping systems to reclaim and defend it.
What you don't do is put hundreds of thousands of people in a bowl below sea level AND cut back on the money you spend on the levees which is what the U.S. has been doing for years and which accelerated under the Bush administration, in particular as it diverted the Army Corp of Engineers to rebuilding Iraq instead of the U.S. Bush just signed a bill to build a $231 million bridge to an island in Alaska with 50 people on it some of whom probably like the fact there is no highway. Thats WAY more than New Orleans levees have seen in the last 5 years. What is going on here? Alaska has a powerful Republican congressional delegation and they get a vastly disproportionate percentage of pork. New Orleans being poor, black and Democratic gets nothing from this regime which lead to an accident waiting to happen and then it did. A constant of the Bush administration is they direct their pork to their own. They spend billions to rebuild Jeb Bush's Florida every year, they took care of Republican run Mississippi this time. Democrat leaning Louisiana and overwhelmingly Democrat New Orleans was dead last on their partisan priority list and it showed.
"Industrial scale fertilizer is very useful in the Midwest, the Ukraine, and other farming areas, but farming is simply not the reason they're on the floodplain in New Orleans."
Not sure why you think I said it was. You were referring to all the ancient civilizations that built on flood plains and I was pointing why they did it, that it was by design and with the realization floods were inevitable and in fact desirable.
New Orleans is where it is because its at the mouth of America's largest river. During an era when various factions were fighting for control of a new continent it was a strategically essential location. Times changed.
Another important point is that when New Orleans was built it had a lot of land around it to provide a buffer. Most of that land has sunk in to the gulf thanks to human beings messing up the natural floods of the Mississippi. Its made New Orleans less viable with each passing year.
Re:From the captain-obvious department (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure... when you're smart, talented, and have a healhty mind and body, it's pretty easy.
But, there are many people who are not as smart as you and have not had the education and opportunities you have had. There are those who are disabled in many ways who simply can't get a better job or a better life. And that's not even considering the racism, age-ism, and classism that exists in our society.
What should the widowed mother of 3 do to improve her lot, when she's already working 2 part-time jobs and can barely get by. She dosen't have a 401k, and if she did, she can't put any money in it anyway. I'm sure you like to cling to the idea of welfare moms eating potato chips and watching Regis, but there are a lot of poor people who aren't like this.
What about the 50 year old mechanic who hurts his back on the job and can't work. His case for workman's comp gets denied, all the way up to the state supreme court. His considerable savings are exhausted to pay his medical bills. And now he can't work in his profession. Try changing professions at 50 when you're not already highly educated. Maybe he'll be able to work at walmart when his back is healed enough he can stand all day.
It must be nice to be inusulated from the hard realities that many people live hand to mouth because there just is no slack to get ahead with. It's bad enough when the resources are limited, but it's made worse by people who prey upon others.
Not everyone who is poor simply chooses to be poor.
I hope you're lucky and don't have the world collapse around you - no amount of planning and preparation can spare you from everything.
The corruption and graft you talk about is usually done by "well off" people with power and connections. It's these people who are preying on the poor, uneducated, and disadvantaged.
Bill Clinton hates black people too (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, those funds were to be disbursed for fiscal year 2006. Iraq or no Iraq, the work would not have been done. And supposedly the levees that were breached last week were not on the list for improvement anyway.
If you can set aside your anti-Bush venom for a few moments, you might ask why Bill Clinton did not fix this problem back in the days of wine and roses. Nobody ever had a more fortunate time in the Presidency than his two terms in the 90's, what with all the budget surpIuses and peace and relatively minor terrorist problems. But he did fuck-all about it. Too distracted getting his dick sucked, I guess.
Does Clinton hate black people too? That's the logical corollary to all the accusations flying around about Bush.
-ccm
New Orleans can be a new Amsterdam (Score:4, Insightful)
Just because it was built below sea-level it is not a disaster-waiting-to-happen. Holland is proof that you can have a system of levees and pumps and live safely on a river delta below sea level.
For example, they could drain Lake Pontchartrain to the low tide level like the Zeider Zee in Holland... and put up flood gates to keep the high tides out, lower the gates to allow water out of the Lake at low tide. And dredge the bottom of the lake to build the city high enough that water will flow down into the lake from the city... thus having passive flood control. And where you need pumps, use windmill to help pump water (so as not to be dependent on electricity).
You could also use dredged mud to expand the swamps around lake Pontchartrain so as to build a natural barrier to disperse the energy from hurricanes.
That's just one solution. There's lots of ways to make New Orleans safe... and safer than many other major metropolitan areas.
Lawsuits maybe part of the reason for the disaster (Score:1, Insightful)
That's pretty funny, but I think it's true that lawsuits (or the fear of them) played a role in this disaster too.
The city of New Orleans had 400 municipal buses [utools.com] and 2500 school buses [mchsi.com], enough to take 100,000 people to Baton Rouge in a day and a half. The only one that was used was commandeered by a 20-year-old civilian, Jabbar Gibson [chron.com] (bless his soul), and driven to Houston with 70 strangers aboard. The rest were not only unused, but now lie destroyed by the flood waters. Why?
The answer could be simple ignorance and incompetence on the part of local Democrat politicians (at the risk of being redundant). However, the buses were part of the official State of Louisiana Emergency Operations Plan [louisiana.gov]: see page 13, paragraph 5:
I have a more likely theory to explain this appalling failure on the part of the local pols: I bet the Mayor and Governor were afraid there would be a traffic boo-boo, and everyone aboard would sue the city for millions.
(Especially if the evacuation turned out to be a false alarm. Which is why the incompetent Democrat schoolmarm of a Governor went out of her way at the Aug. 28 press conference to state that she and the Mayor were only evacuating the city at the express urging of none other than President George W. Bush. [blogcritics.org])
If you are a lawyer, you had better think long and hard about the damage your profession is doing to the American way of life.
-ccm
Re:Blame Bill Clinton (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:From the captain-obvious-lies department (Score:3, Insightful)
There are lots of cities that don't need to be kept on life support 24/7 - the fact that New Orleans needed so much cash every single year should have been the first clue that maybe the planners should have rethought the city. Note that the city of New Orleans was declining in population (down some 2% and some between 1990 and 2000) - the leaders should have encouraged this trend rather than fight to reverse it.
Re:This is what happens (Score:3, Insightful)
How good is your swimming skill in 25 mph current?
How long can you stay afloat?
How many impacts with buildings, trees, other debris can YOU sustain and still remain afloat?
Unless you take these factors into consideration, the fact that you *believe* you can swim out of flooding, tsunami surges, etc. only shows that you are bound to be the next victim.
There are water conditions so strong and trecherous that even the strongest swimmer cannot survive.
That is no excuse, it is just a fact.
An Alternate Technical Solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Looting (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd also like to ask a simple question that most news reports I've read fail to address. You're stranded in a city that's virtually abandonned; you have no electricity and your supply of food has run out. Is it looting to break into a supermarket to feed yourself? What about to get up batteries for your radio so you can listen for emergency broadcasts?
Sadly most of those in this situation are already living at or below the poverty line, and are now vilified for simply supporting themselves. That said, those who are truly looting -- attempting to profit at the expense of the victims of this natural disaster deserve to be vilified. That includes not only the guy robbing people on the street, but any corporates and other businesses who're taking the opportunity to price gouge.
Re:The REAL Deal on New Orleans (Score:2, Insightful)
Citing Florida as a success in recent years might be due to good governance, or it might be because Jeb can call up his brother and can instantly get anything he wants both in emergency relief and in giant FEMA handouts that insure both Jeb and George get Florida's precious votes. By contrast I don't think George even returns Blanco's calls because she is one of those subhuman Democrats that Bush and Rove just want to see thrown out in the next election. Making her look bad in a disaster was probably a political tactic by Rove that turned horribly wrong.
"massive truckloads of supplies and relief from outside the Hurricane devastation quickly"
The argument that the problem getting relief to New Orleans was due to blocked highways is B.S. A CNN reporter who had never driven to New Orleans drove in, in an SUV towing a boat. He had to stop and ask directions once. Was it straightforward no, but somehow I think a government with helicopters could have scouted some routes. Supplies didn't go in to New Orleans by design, not because of insurmountable barriers. Me personally I'm baffled that the didn't use barges to both get people out and supplies in. The bloody convention center is right next to the Mississippi and I'm pretty sure it remained open to barge traffic with some caution. I assume FEMA is so used to helicopters and trucks they didn't grasp boats work great when next to a giant navigable river.
A few days ago I pointed out here Walmart could have had supplies to all those people in 24 hours to someone whining about how hard it is to get truckloads of supplies together on short notice. I heard today that Walmart did in fact offer to drive their trucks in with food and water and FEMA told them to go to hell.
At this point I dearly wish for a truly independent, no white wash investigation though it probably wont happen, and find out exactly how much incompetence and how much malevolence there was on the part of all government agencies involved in this screwup.