PDA

View Full Version : Should New Orleans be rebuilt at all?



Gayle in MD
08-31-2005, 06:38 PM
I'm wondering, since the ACOE is trying to do something they have never done before, come up with a plan to handle the problem of re-designing a pumping/levee system for New Orleans, should New Orleans be rebuilt at all? It seems to be a losing battle. Do you think people will be at greater risk in the long run if the city is continually rebuilt? Can you imagine if another hurricane were to hit that area in its present condition? If global warming is part of the scenario, are we being unrealistic to think that areas such as New Orleans can ever be reasonably protected? Just wondering what you folks think....

Gayle in Md.

Sid_Vicious
08-31-2005, 07:19 PM
With global warming, cities such as New Orleans will suffer again, just a matter of time. Look at what happened with Florida with those three hurricanes one after the other. Our leaders should first heed the environmental dillema instead of insisting it isn't real. But folks that would impede the soft money from big business wouldn't it. It is sad but true, we're in for more mahem to come down the road...well let's wait and see what attention Hillary gives when gets in....sid

Gayle in MD
08-31-2005, 07:24 PM
Meanwhile, my home owners insurance went up $600.00 last year, and I haven't had any insurance claims, either. I am assumming the increase was for covering the insurance money spent on the hurricane areas. Natural disasters are pretty rare in Maryland.

Gayle in Md.

pooltchr
08-31-2005, 07:30 PM
Gayle,
I think global warming is a crock created by environmentalists to promote their causes. (No nuclear plants, no refineries, no oil drilling, etc) I wonder if they will change their tune when they are paying $10 for a gallon of gas, or can't even buy it at any price.

As for New Orleans, the city was built for purely economic reasons. The port, the river, the gulf...it was a perfect location for commerce. However, mother nature has her own ideas of how things should be. Man made levees to hold back lakes are problems waiting to happen. In south Florida, they fill in the everglades to make more land to build more houses, then wonder why that area floods during heavy rain. On our coast, they build houses on barrier islands, and whine and cry when the tide washes away the sand.

I remember some Sunday School lessons about building your house on solid rock, and not shifting sands. The lesson wasn't this literal, but it certainly applies!

The disaster in New Orleans is extremely tragic, and I feel sorry for those who are suffering. But every time a hurricane threatened the gulf coast, the same warning came out...that the city was built below sea level, and flooding has always been a major concern. Yes, the city should rebuild, but possible a few miles in a different direction and above sea level. As long as we think we can control nature, we are going to have problems. We aren't that smart!
JMHO
Steve

Gayle in MD
08-31-2005, 07:40 PM
Well, on the global warming, I don't have a set opinion. The scientific community seem to think it is a reality, although there are some scientists who don't.

I feel sorry for those who live in that area, but I wouldn't live there, nor would I live in California,(Earthquakes & mudslides, and brushfires) or Florida. I'
m just wondering if all this rebuilding isn't putting those people at risk, since the ACOE admits they will be attempting to do something they have never done before to save New Orleans. I mean, really, the area is still going to be terribly vulnerable regardless of what they come up with, and when you think how many live there who are economically unable to get out of dodge when they are at risk, I am beginning to question the whole attempt.

Gayle in Md.

PoolFool
08-31-2005, 10:17 PM
I'm with you pooltchr. Since 1900 - 1992 there have been 9 Cat 4 and 4 Cat 5 hurricanes. The storm of 1900 killed 8,000 people in Texas (I know, not enough for some of you).
The water surface temperature has less than a 10% effect on the intensity of a hurricane. In 1944, Cape Henry , VA. recorded 134 mph sustained winds. In 1960, a Cat 4 storm hit the Carolinas and traveled up the coast and was a Cat 3 when it reached N.Y. My point is that there has always been and will always be dangerous hurricanes. And, unless we decide not to inhabit the coast from N. Carolina to Mexico, there will always the possibility of another catastrophe.
New Orleans made it over 200 years. Not bad odds to try again.

PoolFool

cheesemouse
09-01-2005, 04:44 AM
Just as water finds its own level so will the costs of rebuilding. If people, business, and government decide to use the same space where New Orleans used to recide then they/we will pay a very high price indeed.
It is the job of our elected leaders to make sure the immediate needs of those effected by this 'act of mother nature' are taken care of asap but will that same leadership have the political balls to do the obvious? Change the name of Lake Poncetrain(sp) to Lake New Orleans...time will tell.

pooltchr
09-01-2005, 04:55 AM
Gayle,
I'm glad you and I have found something we can agree on! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Coastal development, particularly in the southeast, is not the smartest thing for anyone. And every time something like this happens, it's a huge disaster for those directly affected, and something you and I end up paying for in higher insurance premiums and higher taxes. And so many people chose to ignore the warnings to evacuate last week are now suffering a great hardship. Did they think they were going to be able to save their property if they stayed there? As long as we ignore history, we are doomed to repeat it.
Steve

Qtec
09-01-2005, 05:57 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Gayle,
I think global warming is a crock created by environmentalists to promote their causes. <font color="blue">Their causes are YOUR causes. You are a member of the human race I hope! Ha. Saving the Planet is in all our interests. </font color> (No nuclear plants, no refineries, no oil drilling, etc) I wonder if they will change their tune when they are paying $10 for a gallon of gas, or can't even buy it at any price <font color="blue">Oil WILL run out! Thats a fact. </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

GW has been promoting the "better safe than sorry' message when it comes to Terrorism. What if he and you are wrong about Global Warming. Do you want to take that chance? What are you going to say when its too late? Sorry?

Q

Gayle in MD
09-01-2005, 05:59 AM
Hey, I'm sure we would find many things that we agree on if we ever had time together.

I am just wondering if others on here have had the same kind of increase in their homeowners insurance as I have had. I wonder if it is a regional thing. I try to just look at it as my personal contribution to those who have lost their homes, and will lose thier homes in the future.

Surely the officials in New Orleans must have known that many there had no resources to get out of town. You would think they would have tried to truck them out somehow, or bus them out. Then, if they refused to leave, so be it, but they shouldn't have been allowed to keep their kids there, IMO.

As I understand it, from friends of mine who have investment property in Florida, there are still many houses with roofs missing, mostly because they can't get roofing materials to replace them with. Surely, this must affect real estate values in places like Punta Gorda, for example?


I've always wanted to visit New Orleans. It certainly has a mystique about it. The architecture is beautiful in the French Quarter, and it would be a shame to lose those lovely old homes, but I think that area should be made into a kind of museum. For people to actually live there, well, it's crazy. We're obviously experiencing a span of time when we will have very active hurricane seasons, and the topography of that area is such that one begins to wonder if we aren't setting folks up for disaster.

Gayle in Md.

Qtec
09-01-2005, 06:10 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Well, on the global warming, I don't have a set opinion. The scientific community seem to think it is a reality, although there are some scientists who don't.
<hr /></blockquote>

Gayle, I,m disappointed. Global W is agreed upon by 99% of the worlds top scientists. The only disenters are the ones employed by the Oil industry. Your own Govt commisioned a report, compiled by the top scientists in the USA. It urged the Govt to act, but to no avail. Exxon M ,s man in the Whitehouse changed the report and once again, Global Warming ceased to be an issue.

Why wouldnt anyone want cleaner air? The only ones who are against cleaner air are the polluters! To them, saving the planet would cost them too much!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Its a a case of , 'cutting of your nose to spite your face'.

To put it in a nutshell, making a profit is more important than saving the Human Race!

Q

Gayle in MD
09-01-2005, 06:12 AM
I have to agree with you on this Q. First of all, one only has to inhale some exhaust to know that it is bad for us. The refusal of our political leaders to address the environmental issues surrounding fossil fuel, not to mention the costs, is totally irresponsible. Between all the chemicals in our air, food and water, it is no wonder that the cancer rate is soaring. As long as we have a political system which allows for lobbying, and a two party system which cripples the advancment of new environmental technologies, nothing will change. Having a president who is deep in oil profits doesn't help either, IMO.

Gayle in Md.

Dagwood
09-01-2005, 06:14 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> We're obviously experiencing a span of time when we will have very active hurricane seasons, and the topography of that area is such that one begins to wonder if we aren't setting folks up for disaster.

Gayle in Md.

<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="green">

If they rebuild it I totally agree with you Gayle. But this particular disaster was brought on by our forbearers. Anyone with any shred of common sense knows that you shouldn't build below the water table. That and they knew the levee and pump system there was only designed for heavy rains, not the kind of storm like Katrina was; the kind of storm that they knew was going to eventually hit that locale. I try not to blame the people now, but the people who encouraged the development of the city beyond what it should have been.

Dags </font color>

Gayle in MD
09-01-2005, 06:16 AM
LOL, don't be disappointed, we actually were agreeing simultaneously in cyberspace!

I agree ofcourse. Check out my post...

Gayle

Sid_Vicious
09-01-2005, 06:16 AM
Ditto, I was about to post the same overwhelming consensus from those educated in the field Q. It is dumbfounding to find intelligent people who don't understand, or WANT to understand maybe...sid

Gayle in MD
09-01-2005, 06:23 AM
I agree completely. They better brace themselves, these hurricanes of late seem to be drawn to a particular path. I don't think this will be the last to travel in that direction this season, unfortunately.

Gayle in Md.

Sid_Vicious
09-01-2005, 06:38 AM
I'll make the projection that Q was pinpointing the vague opinion on global warming Gayle. All we do to the environment culminates in that very thing, resulting in increased intensity of these natural disasters. Correct me if I got you wrong Q...sid

Qtec
09-01-2005, 06:44 AM
The Question is.....Did GW go AWOL again?

[ QUOTE ]
By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 1, 2005; A01



ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE, Aug. 31 -- As his blue-and-white jet swooped low over New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, President Bush pressed his face against the window and stared out at oblivion. <font color="blue"> Guess GW didnt want to get his feet wet. </font color>

He saw an expansive lake where a storied city used to be. He saw mile after mile of flattened houses turned into so many matchsticks. He saw highways that disappeared into water, a train plucked off its track, a causeway collapsed into rubble. And he saw the next daunting challenge to confront his presidency.

After a month-long retreat at his Texas ranch, Bush returned to Washington on Wednesday in crisis-management mode, where his administration is likely to remain indefinitely. With his poll numbers at an all-time low, Bush faces one of the stiffest leadership tests since Sept. 11, 2001, with continued violence in Iraq, gasoline prices topping $3 a gallon in many places and now what he called "one of the worst natural disasters in our nation's history."

In response, Bush mobilized one of the biggest relief efforts in history as his administration tapped the nation's oil reserves and dispatched Navy ships, medical teams, search and rescue squads, electrical generators, a mobile hospital, and millions of gallons of water to the region. Bush warned that it would take years to repair the damage, and aides said he expects to seek a special appropriation from Congress.

While critics accused Bush of being slow to recognize the horrible scale of the damage wrought by Hurricane Katrina on Monday, he moved Wednesday to reassert his public leadership role and reassure the American people that he is in charge. After his 35-minute flyover along the Gulf Coast, he raced back to Washington, met his disaster relief team in the White House and strode into the Rose Garden to address the nation.

"This is going to be a difficult road," <font color="blue"> Not for me tho, Ha. </font color> Bush said, flanked by Cabinet secretaries, and he rattled off statistics to illustrate all the federal government is doing to help. "The challenges that we face <font color="blue"> actually, not me! </font color> on the ground are unprecedented. But there's no doubt in my mind we're going to succeed."

The words echoed the language Bush used through much of his August vacation whenever he emerged from the ranch to defend his handling of the Iraq war, and it reflected his leadership style. In times of calamity, he seeks to project an air of undiminished confidence regardless of the dark circumstances. He fashions himself a take-charge leader who thrives at making decisions that he never second-guesses even if they do not turn out the way he imagined them.

"The can-do stuff, relating to some physical or material problem, is something he can do -- he has strength there," said Fred I. Greenstein, a scholar at Princeton University who has long studied presidential leadership. "I think this a more natural thing for him than the other cerebral stuff." <font color="blue"> I,m saying nothing! LOL </font color>

But in a capital suffused with anger and partisan division, it did not take long for Bush's leadership on Katrina to come under question. Noting that it took Bush two days to cut short his vacation and return to Washington, Democrats painted the president as dithering while New Orleans drowned. "He has to get off his mountain bike and back to work," Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said in an interview.

Other Democrats began circulating accusations that the administration had neglected disaster preparedness to pay for the Iraq war and noting that National Guard units that usually respond to natural catastrophes have been fighting overseas
<hr /></blockquote>

They knew it was coming, they knew it was a big one and they knew that the land that going to be hit is below sea-level.
On Monday, the day the storm hit land, GW was at a fundraiser.
Need I say more.
Q

Gayle in MD
09-01-2005, 07:04 AM
You're right, I was vague, Q was right, I don't dispute that. It's only that I didn't realize that the percentages of scientists who support the theory of global warming was so great. My personal uneducated opinion is that global warming is a result of many things, one of those things being overpopulation in general, which ofcourse leads to all of the others. We have certainly come to the time when corrupt political leaders actually threaten the health and survival of the world, not to mention those religious philosophies which preach, reproduce, reproduce, reproduce. It seems the world is eating itself alive.

Gayle in Md.

Vapros
09-01-2005, 07:09 AM
The Gulf of Mexico is where the oil is, and New Orleans is where they make gasoline out of it. Maybe you've noticed what happens to the price of gas when this is all shut down.
And to answer your question, Qtec, no, there is no need for you to say any more. There seldom is.

Gayle in MD
09-01-2005, 07:11 AM
I wonder if the presence of a brother Bush governor in that area would have hastened the federal aid?

Gayle in Md.

SPetty
09-01-2005, 07:41 AM
Hi Dagwood,

Last I recall, you thought they were going to send you to New Orleans to help out... Are you going?

Sid_Vicious
09-01-2005, 07:43 AM
"Noting that it took Bush two days to cut short his vacation and return to Washington"

I hope someone calculates the extra deaths incurred during that failure to act quicker in PROTECTING AND SERVING THE PEOPLE OF THIS NATION. This is dereliction, just as the school during 9-11. Thanks for that read Q...sid

PoolFool
09-01-2005, 08:17 AM
If New Orleans is not rebuilt we need to start now to relocate a few things. The Port of New Orleans that accepts oil and other goods will have to be relocated. Six new refineries will have to be built somewhere else in the U.S.,the pipeline that carries gasoline, heating oil, and natural gas to the North East Coast will have to be moved.
All of the barges that carry pertoleum products up the Mississippi river will have to find a new route. To make this task more difficult, we have to find a place to bring all this together where there will never be a hurricane.
If we start now , about 20 years should do it.

PoolFool

Gayle in MD
09-01-2005, 08:52 AM
I am only referring to the re-building of homes, not industry. My concern is for people living smack in the middle of impending disaster. Many of those people had no resources to get out, and the government didn't provide any. They had no credit cards, no automobiles and no money. You could make the argument that it was their own fault, and I'll admit wondering how so many poor people could be so overweight, but my question is this, if the government helps these people to re-build and live right back in that same area, aren't they just setting these same people up for more of the same?

I was recently in North Carolina, and CAMA had come in and drawn a line down the beach, designating non-rebuildable homes. If homes beyond that line become more than 50% destroyed, those people cannot re-build them. I'm wondering what is the coastal authority going to say about New Orleans?
Gayle in md.

PoolFool
09-01-2005, 09:31 AM
Gayle, I understand your thinking. I would never invest $2-5 hundred K in a beach house that you find all up and down the coast. But, without the petroleum products coming from that area, the north east will be in deep trouble. There is not a lot of dry land down there to live on but to get workers they have to make do. There is no place to commute from. I don't know the answere but I do know that if we take away the port, the refineries, the Mississippi river commerce and the largest pipeline in the U.S., we are in more trouble than anyone can imagine.

PoolFool

Gayle in MD
09-01-2005, 10:55 AM
Hi again,
I'm not at all familiar with the area, but are you saying that there is no land above sea level within say an hour of the actual bowl which is New Orleans? How far would people have to commute in order to drive in to work in the oil refineries, Government facilities, sports events, and other businesses?

Gayle in Md.

heater451
09-01-2005, 04:03 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Hi again,
I'm not at all familiar with the area, but are you saying that there is no land above sea level within say an hour of the actual bowl which is New Orleans? How far would people have to commute in order to drive in to work in the oil refineries, Government facilities, sports events, and other businesses?

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>There is, but it's not the bigger percentage of the land. Some of what runs along the Mississipi River is above sea-level.

At first, I actually wondered why there wasn't much shown about the Quarter, because I expected it to be flooded out, but I saw some aerial weather maps this morning, and it became clear: Being right up against the Mississipi River, the Quarter is higher up than the river itself--duh, or else it would be under the river. And, as the land lays farther away from the river, it's elevation drops. The levee is lower than the Quarter, so that when it broke, the water still did not fill all the way up to the river height, but flooded everything lower.


=======================================

Dagwood
09-02-2005, 08:50 AM
The latest news I have is that we are now on 24 hour recall status...basically on standby. All our bags are packed, and we're just waiting to see if they are actually going to give us a call. I'm in a Military Intelligence company, so I'll actually be one of the last people to get called. But the likeley hood stands at somewhere's around 50% if I had to put a number on it. I'll keep everyone updated on this...

Dags