Gustav Raises The Question (Again): Is New Orleans Worth It?

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Gustav Raises The Question (Again): Is New Orleans Worth It? stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

LARA JAKES JORDAN | 09/ 2/08 10:10 AM | AP

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
This aerial photo released by the U.S. Coast Guard shows flooding from Hurricane Gustav in the Rigolets, in eastern New Orleans Monday, Sept. 1, 2008. The Rigolets is one of two passes that connect Lake Pontchartrain with the Gulf of Mexico and a key conduit of storm surge into the New Orleans area. (AP Photo/U.S. Coast Guard)

WASHINGTON — Those who love New Orleans say Hurricane Gustav is proof that the billions of dollars spent to protect the city and bring it back to life after the devastating 2005 storm season was worth it.

But what if Gustav had been stronger, a category 4 instead of a 2, and hit the city directly instead of 70 miles to the west? Would it be worth the cost to rebuild New Orleans again if the storm caused widespread destruction as Katrina did?

"That's a question that was there before and after (Hurricane) Katrina, and I think is going to come to the forefront again," said Don Powell, who oversaw the Bush administration's effort to rebuild the Gulf Coast in 2005.

"There's a lot of reasons to continue," Powell said Monday, his voice trailing off. "That's a debate we will continue to have."

Despite fizzling out shortly after it made landfall Monday, Gustav spurred the government into action, probably costing millions of dollars, and put a nation angered by the bungled response to Katrina three years ago back on alert.

Since Katrina ripped through New Orleans three years ago, the federal government has devoted at least $133 billion in emergency funds and tax credits for Gulf Coast disaster relief. Much of it went to rebuilding and better protecting New Orleans from future storms. How much more will be needed after Gustav _ or Hurricane Hanna, as that storm creeps up Florida's eastern coast _ is unclear.

Former GOP House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., infuriated Louisiana lawmakers when he suggested in 2005 that a lot of New Orleans "could be bulldozed" after Katrina and questioned the wisdom of rebuilding it. More dispassionate observers note that no matter how much is spent, New Orleans will continue to swallow federal dollars with each gulp of the Gulf or Lake Pontchartrain.

"New Orleans didn't rise up in the ground from where they were before," Harvey E. Johnson, deputy director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said shortly before Gustav's landfall. "They're still below sea level. So you're still going to get water inside of New Orleans. And they know that."

Story continues below
advertisement

A study last month by the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, concluded that 72 percent of the city's households that fled Katrina returned to New Orleans, as did 90 percent of its sales tax revenues. However, as many as 65,000 blighted properties or empty lots still mar the city, and house rents are up 46 percent.

To die-hard residents and other devotees of the Big Easy, the money poured into the Gulf Coast to continue oil production, preserve local culture and, most importantly, strengthen levees showed that New Orleans could withstand another battering by Mother Nature.

"This will actually be good news, because this makes clear that the historic city can be protected," said Walter Isaacson, former vice chairman of the Louisiana Recovery Authority during the administration of ex-Gov. Kathleen Blanco. "New Orleans rebuilt itself because people love the place, and we're all heartened that the new levee system seems strong, and the city seems safe.

"The worst has passed."

Some observers aren't so sure.

"It's a soup bowl and it's not safe," said Beverly Cigler, a public policy professor at Penn State University, referring to the city's cup-shaped geography.

Local political eagerness to develop property in New Orleans instead of protecting wetlands, which serve as a natural storm buffer, has hampered safety, said Cigler, co-chair of a Katrina task force set up by the American Society for Public Administration. Levees, meanwhile, are still three years away from being fully strengthened. And since there are differing levels of elevation throughout the city, "some places are safer than others."

"My own personal opinion is that you shouldn't rebuild in areas unless you can make them safe," she said. "And nobody's had the willingness to confront these kinds of issues."

Yet abandoning New Orleans hardly seems an option either.

The Gulf Coast is home to nearly half the nation's refining capacity, 25 percent of offshore domestic oil production and 15 percent of natural gas output. Tens of thousands of construction workers, hoteliers, nurses and other service employees who flocked to New Orleans in Katrina's aftermath have helped keep local unemployment low. Not to mention that giving up would, essentially, mean spending all those billions of dollars for naught.

"It's clear that a lot of the money was spent well _ even if it's far too early to declare victory," said Don Kettl, University of Pennsylvania public policy professor and co-editor of "On Risk and Disaster: Lessons From Hurricane Katrina."

"If you walk away, you are condemning the city to tremendous suffering," Kettl said. "As serious as the suffering was the last time, it didn't completely destroy the city. The real challenge is deciding what kind of city you want."

___

EDITOR'S NOTE _ Lara Jakes Jordan covered the federal response to hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma in 2005 and 2006.

WASHINGTON — Those who love New Orleans say Hurricane Gustav is proof that the billions of dollars spent to protect the city and bring it back to life after the devastating 2005 storm season was...
WASHINGTON — Those who love New Orleans say Hurricane Gustav is proof that the billions of dollars spent to protect the city and bring it back to life after the devastating 2005 storm season was...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
75
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
- research I'm a Fan of research 235 fans permalink

The New Olearns Water Utilities sank the City.

artificial recharging of the aquifers should raise the city up 25 feet or more.

Search recharge vadose zone wells subsidence "new Orleans"

http://www.training.bossintl.com/html/artificial-recharge-training.html

Vadose Zone is a techie term for areas underground that can store water, above the water table.

Pumping out causes sinking,

recharging in clean water causes raising.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/144008

This is a well known mechanism for land that has underground aquifers of the New Orleans type.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:47 PM on 09/07/2008
- NL207 I'm a Fan of NL207 8 fans permalink

The reason New Orleans is sinking is not confined to water pumping which has been halted since it was recognized this contributed to subsidence.

New Orleans is built on Alluvial silt. Compaction is a natural process common to all alluvial deposits. It happens regardless of water extraction. source: http://direct.bl.uk/bld/PlaceOrder.do?UIN=224849082&ETOC=RN&from=searchengine In the case of New Orleans, the city is sinking about 1 inch per year. the city was founded in 1718. Do the math. It is now on average 6 feet below sea level. When it was founded , it was well above sea level.

Now... I suspect you cannot see this source without a subscription. I apologize for that inconvenience. There are probanby others available if you want to look for them.

Your source: http://www.jstor.org/pss/144008 , does not say that anthropogenic recharging of aquifers will cause uplift. It also pertains to the American Southwest, an arid region unlike NOL.
Even if it did, the point would be moot because New Orleans' problem is not principally due to aquifer depletion. It is caused by silt compaction.

I will repeat my claim that the better strategy is to abandon NOL. It cannot be rebuilt without a massive flood control system which cannot be prevented from faiing in the face of an appropriate natural disaster. Suppose NOL had been hit by Camille of 1969 instead of Katrina. Can you imagine the disaster that would have ensued?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:19 AM on 09/08/2008
- research I'm a Fan of research 235 fans permalink

If we are going to abandon it why not give this a try. It's pretty clear the pumping caused 80-160 inches of subsidence in since the 1950's 2-9 inches per year. It's also clear that pumping water or CO2 down the same wells, would lead to at least some "ground heave".

http://coastal.lic.wisc.edu/urpl969-katrina/urpl969-group2-paper-03May06.pdf

The rapid subsidence has been because of pumping water, oil and natural gas out of the ground. WHICH IS STILL GOING ON. Compaction is also caused by pumping.
Peak subsidence and peak cubic meters of oil gas and water extraction coincide.

http://coastal.er.usgs.gov/gc-subsidence/gcags-paper/GCAGS02.pdf

I also think new building should be built on pylons, abandon some the the lowest land, fill in where possible.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:56 AM on 09/08/2008
- research I'm a Fan of research 235 fans permalink

Here's an article about reversing subsidence by recharging. It works.

http://wwwrcamnl.wr.usgs.gov/rgws/Unesco/PDF-Chapters/Chapter7.pdf

The people extracting oil gas and water have a strong vested interest in denying they are causing subsidence. Thus they can't talk about reversing subsidence by recharging as it begs the question.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:03 AM on 09/08/2008

If we ask that question about NO now, of how many coastal cities are we going to ask this in the future as global warming causes higher sea levels?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:57 AM on 09/06/2008
- Exusian I'm a Fan of Exusian 25 fans permalink

Indeed. A recent comment at Realclimate.org pointed out that as sea level rises a good deal of very valuable land and infrastructure will become unsaleable and economically worthless. In other words, a good deal of wealth will simply be wiped out. The insurance and reinsurnace industry is keenly aware of this.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:02 PM on 09/07/2008
- Exusian I'm a Fan of Exusian 25 fans permalink

A new paper published in the journal Science predicts .8 to 2.0 meter rise in sea level by 2100:
Kinematic Constraints on Glacier Contributions to 21st-Century Sea-Level Rise
W. T. Pfeffer, J. T. Harper, S. O'Neel
Science, 5 September 2008:
Vol. 321. no. 5894, pp. 1340 - 1343
Abstract: http://science-mag.aaas.org/cgi/content/abstract/321/5894/1340
Your library should be able to get you the full paper.

Report at Scientific American:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=how-much-will-global-warming-raise-sea-levels

Comment and discussion at RealCliamte:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/09/how-much-will-sea-level-rise/langswitch_lang/in

Still think it's possible to keep NOL dry?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:00 PM on 09/05/2008
- research I'm a Fan of research 235 fans permalink

Really. Pumping water down the existing, but unused wells, will raise New Orleans 25 feet or more.

Problem solved.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:32 PM on 09/04/2008
- NL207 I'm a Fan of NL207 8 fans permalink

Until the first flood or earthquake comes along that undoes all of that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:25 PM on 09/05/2008
- research I'm a Fan of research 235 fans permalink

Flood won't cause the underground aquifers any problems.

I doubt earth quakes would either. Any earth quake that powerful, would already wipe out the city anyway.

New Orleans stopped using the wells, because the city sank so much faster.

http://www.mb-soft.com/public2/venice.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:09 PM on 09/05/2008
- larry278 I'm a Fan of larry278 44 fans permalink

There is a slight problem with abandoning NOLA. It is at the end of a very big river & it is a port city. Cargo is brought down the river in barges. The cargo is transferred to ocean going ships. We export the crops of the Ohio, Mo & Miss valleys. Are you planning to move the port of New Orleans to Memphis? How do you get the ships from the Gulf of Mexico up the big muddy to a new port on higher ground? It's cheaper to rebuild New Orleans & continue to use it as a port. The people who work at NOLA's docks need to live close to their jobs. That means that housing in NOLA must be rebuilt & people must continue to live in NOLA. Even if we ignore NOLA's cultural heritage & only allow people who work in 'essential' occupations related to shipping to live in NOLA, where do we put the people who have been or will be forced out of NOLA who aren't employed in 'essential' occupations? Your answers will be interesting.
The fact that the USA is a free country could complicate relocation projects?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 PM on 09/03/2008
photo

You might have missed it but New Orleans weathered Gustav just fine. And by the way, that photo illustration allegedly showing flooded homes in the Rigolets is actuallly a shot of Venetian Isles, a subdivision of raised homes on the water for boating enthusiasts. And, of course, outside the levees. Not one home in Venetian Isles flooded in Gustav.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:51 PM on 09/03/2008

marignymitch - you may want to take a ride to Venetian Isles and the Rigolets. My parents live there and have their whole life and they had 4 ft of water in their home for Gustav. We spent Tuesday, wednesday & Thursday cleaning out the house that was full of mud and gook. Katrina was the first storm to ever flood them and now Gustav. send me your email and I will be happy to send the pics to you. Many of the VI homes are built up or are 2 stories. The homes in the lower section closest to Chef Pass Bridge are mostly built on ground. VI did FLOOD in Gustav and once again we cleaned it up and will move on. As usual this area is forgotten by the City of NOLA and I can bet the debris sitting out in front of the homes will remain there until th eend of hurricane season.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:03 PM on 09/09/2008
- BEHM777 I'm a Fan of BEHM777 11 fans permalink
photo

Yes, New Orleans is worth it. Visit the city for Pete's sake. You may fall in love with it like I have.

BEHusseinM777

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:55 PM on 09/03/2008
- CARTERJ I'm a Fan of CARTERJ 5 fans permalink

When the federal government built the Hoover Dam and the Tennesse Valley Authority, it should have shored up New Orleans for good. It can be done. With the trillions wasted in Iraq, this vital city must be saved.

Louis Armstrong, R.I.P.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:39 PM on 09/03/2008
- NL207 I'm a Fan of NL207 8 fans permalink

It is not econommically feasible and perhaps not even technically possible to save New Orleans, or for that matter, any of the Mississippi delta to the seaward of New orleans. Constructing Hoover Dam or the TVA are trivial technical feats compared to preventing or mitigating the natural subsidence of the Mississippi river delta. It is an even more dubious proposition to utilize federal tax receipts to try.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:24 PM on 09/05/2008
- lioness39 I'm a Fan of lioness39 39 fans permalink
photo

How could one possibly imagine a world without New Orleans? Impossible!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:12 PM on 09/03/2008
photo

The Big Easy is not simply a city - it is a culture and dream that is unique in this country. If New Orleans no longer existed this country would experience an empty space far greater than the actual geographical size of that city.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:25 PM on 09/03/2008
- jake106 I'm a Fan of jake106 4 fans permalink

Of course it is worth the effort to rebuild! That is what we do, as humans. It may be a stupid place to put a city, but who cares? Even if we weren't talking about a town that is as culturally and historically significant as New Orleans, we are still talking about someone's home! We are at our best as humans when we build a city like New Orleans. It is one of the ways we show that we are more magnificent than any other creature on the planet. Maybe a little more suicidal too, but hey...you have to take the good with the bad.

Of course, it would help if we did it right. Build the city and it's protective levees and walls properly. Restore the wetlands around the city so they can do their job of buffering against the surge. Figure out a way to let old man Mississippi run its natural course without walling it in for hundreds of miles. But those are all goals to achieve, not reasons to quit.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:37 AM on 09/03/2008
- arvay I'm a Fan of arvay 140 fans permalink
photo

The Netherlands has solved this kind of problem for centuries.

If we want to divert the resources from insane military confrontations, we can certainly afford it.

The often unmentioned factor is the large black population of New Orleans, and the willingness of white Americans to step up to the task and preserve a vital part of our national cultural heritage. So we need to confront our racism, also.

Or, we can continue to be the next military-centered Sparta, and leave virtually nothing after we shred our Constitution, waste or vast resources and are soundly defeated, even destroyed, eventually. Sparta left no cultural heritage whatsoever. The Athenians used to joke that they could party and have a great culture, and beat the Spartans, too.

Somewhere out there, an Athens is waiting for us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:47 AM on 09/03/2008
- Exusian I'm a Fan of Exusian 25 fans permalink

"The Netherlands has solved this kind of problem for centuries."

You need to get caught up. The Netherlands is developing a new strategy for dealing with future sea level rise that includes buying out farmers to create sacrifice polders that will be allowed to flood, and building floating housing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:36 AM on 09/03/2008
- jake106 I'm a Fan of jake106 4 fans permalink

I think floating housing is going to be one of those technologies that 50 years from now you will see on every coast land in the world. I don't know if they will help in a catastrophic flood, like those caused by the tsunami's a few years back, but they will help offset the flood damage that comes every year from ordinary hurricanes, typhoons, and overflowing rivers.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:05 PM on 09/03/2008
- Bienville I'm a Fan of Bienville 13 fans permalink
photo

"The Netherlands has solved this kind of problem for centuries."

Not quite true. The Netherlands had a pretty severe flood in 1953. After that, they really got serious. They got so serious that they came to New Orleans to study the Wood pump, invented about 100 years ago by City Engineer A Baldwin wood.

Somewhere out there (I hope) is the next Baldwin Wood.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 AM on 09/03/2008
- NL207 I'm a Fan of NL207 8 fans permalink

The Netherlands has done nothing of the kind.

Comparing the outflow of the Rhine with the outflow of the Mississippi is an absurdity. The only greater flow on this planet than the Mississippi is the Amazon.

Most of the Netherlands has no subsidence because the Rhine delta is a tiny fraction the size of the Mississippi Delta. The Mississippi delta is 7 miles thick, extending out under the Gulf of Mexico. The upper delta, that portion extending northward to Vicksburg, MS is up to 200 feet thick.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:49 PM on 09/05/2008

When I lived in Japan we had Typhoons every year, of course. The forecast gave the wind strength, which corresponded to the damage that might get done if we did not slide the shutters shut over the windows. One year when the roof was getting old I lashed tarpaulins tightly over it: my wife took the hint and ordered a new roof that is still fine 12 years later. The expected rainfall was given, too, so that we would know how much flooding to expect.

Most of the real damage comes from a hurricane of large size, moving slowly and raining for a long time. The flood water does the damage. So if a category 4 hurricane worries you: fix the roof. If a metre of rain worries you, 40ins: better move to higher land that is not part of a dry river bed. The most rain we had was a metre and a half in a day and a half. Once in 1977 and again in 1998. As these Atlantic hurricanes get warmer water to breed over it might be best to prepare our minds, at least.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:09 AM on 09/03/2008
- Vern58 I'm a Fan of Vern58 13 fans permalink
photo

New Orleans is a national treasure. To suggest we just kill off one of the oldest and most vibrant of America's major cities is ludicrous. In the national history of this country, we would be much much poorer but for the existence of this cultural lodestone.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:20 AM on 09/03/2008
- NL207 I'm a Fan of NL207 8 fans permalink

Natural forces could care less what cultural value you think NOL has. They will erase that city from the map anyway. Only the irresponsibe will use tax dollars to encourage people to return to such a place after this has become clear. These people arte being placed in harm's way for no particular purpose.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:23 AM on 09/08/2008
- Triangle1 I'm a Fan of Triangle1 4 fans permalink
photo

There's nothing wrong with living below sea level - if you're a FISH. http://mespace.wordpress.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:00 AM on 09/03/2008
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect