Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Water Flowing over New Orleans Levee
- Thread starter Whyren
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
the scariest part is, clay, that you wouldn't even pay for it. it would be your grandchildren. remember that bush will never touch taxes unless it is to lower them. so anything we do now goes on our tab to repay china and saudi arabia later. 
i do agree that we shouldn't rebuilt the city unless they move it elsewhere where it not in such danger again.
i do agree that we shouldn't rebuilt the city unless they move it elsewhere where it not in such danger again.
Um, explain to me how moving an entire CITY is less expensive than building an effective levee system.
SharksFan22 said:I like breasts. A lot. Those displaced flashers are more than welcome to migrate to San Jose during Mardi Gras this year.
Maybe selected women could hire on as cheerleaders. Would breast flashing help make watching a Sharks game any less painful?
I certainly hope so.wdlove said:
I agree, but do not expect this government to complete a thoughtful, exhaustive analysis before implementing a plan. Throwing lots of money at even the most vexing problem is much easier than opting for the intelligent and challenging choices likely to yield better results.
When people say that the government does things a** backwards, the a** must stand for: A simple solution.
at the risk of being extradited i think i agree with ClayJ. it does seem a little silly keeping a city/town/any amount of land in a potential flood area where hurricanes are likely to hit. with all this global warming malarky i think it could be time to relocate.
if England rolled over one of those fault lines and my village became a volcano i know what i'd do!
the world changes.
actually there was a little village up near me, that was based near a reservoir. anywho over time the man-made river that lead from the lake started to shift and the village became more prone to floods. eventually every year brought at least a small flood. so the residents left. and they lived happily ever after
if England rolled over one of those fault lines and my village became a volcano i know what i'd do!
the world changes.
actually there was a little village up near me, that was based near a reservoir. anywho over time the man-made river that lead from the lake started to shift and the village became more prone to floods. eventually every year brought at least a small flood. so the residents left. and they lived happily ever after
wordmunger said:
Actually, Clay said that in post #12.
Just making the levees better is only a short term fix and it's that kind of thinking that got NO in the mess it's in today. As we all know the Gulf of Mexico is actually moving closer to NO. Projecting 50 or 60 years into the future w/a worst case scenario what modern marvels need to be built today to protect NO in 2050? How much money will it cost to keep NO from becoming a below sea-level peninsula jutting out into the Gulf? And there is nothing mankind can build that Mother Nature can't destroy, so at what point do you cut your loses?
Lethal
LethalWolfe said:
In reality there is no one good solution. Probably the best plan would be to increase the size of the levees in some ares, abandon others that are not economical to protect, and raise the land with fill in other areas.
What makes me really uncomfortable about all this talk of not rebuilding the city is the lack of any consideration or seemingly any compassion for the thousands of people whose lives have been ruined by this and for them, you're talking about their home.
Anyway, there was a contentious yet interesting piece in The Guardian this morning by Naomi Klein.
This is turning into the ethnic cleansing of New Orleans.
Anyway, there was a contentious yet interesting piece in The Guardian this morning by Naomi Klein.
This is turning into the ethnic cleansing of New Orleans.
encephalon said:
Well, lets see. In-order to fix the levee system they would have to reinforce an older, weaker system [which was designed 50 yrs. ago to only with stand a category 3 hurricane], or build a completely new system which would take 15 years to complete.
Why not just flood the city, and start all over. I don't understand why people don't like learning for their mistakes. Or, at least the the French's mistake for building it below sea level in the first place.
Every time there is going to be an hurricane in the gulf that city will flood. Thats why the city has pumps running 24/7 365 days a year, to keep the city dry.
I say build the damn city somewhere else, on Higher Ground!
Blue Velvet said:
The essential point. Is $100 from each of our pockets (which, by my math comes to about 29.5 billion dollars) not worth the sense of home of 1.2 million people? I'll grant that many don't have the $100 to spend, but many have far more than that to give. I for one would not cry foul at a one time, one month "New Orleans" tax (structured to take more from the rich, of course) so long as that money were properly spent toward rebuilding.
Thanks for the link, BV -- may our worst social fears not be realized.
Sweetfeld28 said:
The French didn't build it below sea level. The selected the site because it was above sea level (see quotes below taken from Wikipedia). The problem is that people later on moved to areas below sea level, but this was long after the French no longer controlled the area.
thedude110 said:
Involuntary displacement is an awful burden to endure, but the key words in your comment are "properly spent." Whether this administration continues to borrow great sums from foreign governments and passes debt onto future generations or has a one-time special tax, my concern always revolves around money actually going for the intended purpose.
The huge obstacles are: Streamlining bureaucracy ... avoiding contracts from being awarded to politically connected firms and lobbyists ... and eliminating (or at least drastically reducing) corruption and graft among politicians at the state and local level. When big money and humans meet, it is a matter of time before chaos and greed rule the day.
Sweetfeld28 said:
In order to relocate the city we would need to build new transportation and utilities systems, new schools (K-12 and colleges), hospitals, government buildings, industries, businesses, and residential housing for over a million people. Don't tell me that is less expensive than building effective levees. Don't tell me that would be a faster solution. And definitely don't tell the citizens of New Orleans that you've given up on them and their city.
Relocation is a pipe-dream, and I'm sure as hell glad nobody with that solution is in charge.
encephalon said:
I am relieved that Ivy League graduates are all over this one ... it'll be intriguing to watch it all unfold during the coming months and years. Louisiana will need all the prayers it can get. Good luck to those who call that area home.
encephalon said:
My point was that in the long run it would cost the city of New Orleans more money to fix old technology [levees, dams, etc.] than to try and build somewhere close, but on higher ground.
Anyways, yes it might be expensive now. But think of all the money it would save the city, state, and governments, every year from now on in which they would get aid for all the flooding, and hurricanes they will get. Hurricanes are prone to that area of the Gulf of Mexico, they aren't going away any time soon.
Besides, i never said that rebuilding, or relocating, would ever be easy.
I just think it would be smarter in the Long Term to relocate.
PS- i am not downgrading the city, or anyone from there, believe me i feel bad for those people and everything they are going through, but they like everyone else has to move on.
Could they use NEW technology to make the city safer where it is now?
That land is valuable, it shouldn't be abandoned unless absolutely necessary. I think this is one of the next great engineering challenges.
That land is valuable, it shouldn't be abandoned unless absolutely necessary. I think this is one of the next great engineering challenges.
With the amount of damage done to the city it will cost almost as much to fix up the city where it is than to move it. Yes you would have to build all new fire/police/hospitals/schools but they all need a lot of work right now and possibly a complete rebuild anyway. So with that and fixing the dyke system I don't think it would be much if any more to shift the city to slightly higher ground.
clayj said:
I agree. I don't see any point in fixing it back up. It's totally pointless. Like you said, it will happen again anyway. Yeah, and who will be paying for this? Taxes will go up for sure, I don't like the idea about paying for New Orleans, it's pretty much hopeless. Again it's pointless. I'm frustrated.
N.O. is a lost cause. Its not worth rebuilding it. Its been stated many,many times that its below sea level, and all I hear back is, "Make the levees better". OK, this is what people care about... Their homes.
So bascally, what we should be helping out in, is giving people their homes back.
1) building levees + People's homes = A hell of a lot of $$$
2) Filling the land + People's homes = A hell of a lot of $$$
_______________OR________________________
3) Building people's Homes SOMEWHERE ELSE = A lot of money, but less than 1 and 2
I'm all for helping people, but I don't want to use up so much money in a place thats is bound to be flooded again... And filling the land ain't cheap you know.
So bascally, what we should be helping out in, is giving people their homes back.
1) building levees + People's homes = A hell of a lot of $$$
2) Filling the land + People's homes = A hell of a lot of $$$
_______________OR________________________
3) Building people's Homes SOMEWHERE ELSE = A lot of money, but less than 1 and 2
I'm all for helping people, but I don't want to use up so much money in a place thats is bound to be flooded again... And filling the land ain't cheap you know.
Blue Velvet said:
This kinda relates to something I talked to friends about right after Katrina hit. How many people who fled NO will return? Many people have had to start over immediately where ever they settled. If a family that ended up in Dallas already has their kids in school, and already have found work locally are they gonna pull up stakes again to move back to NO after how many months (years?) it takes to rebuild the flooded areas? It's not like people can just put their lives on "pause" until their homes and jobs and schools can be rebuilt. The natural evolution and growth of the city has been highly disrupted and the question is can the area ever completely recover from it.
Lethal
Phatpat said:
Absolutely, the Dutch have some proven technology that is working and they are below sea level on the North Sea.
Check out Mega Structures on National Geographic channel. They did an episode on sea walls and other technology the Dutch have used.