hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them 5

[msucog]

does anyone think it is realistic that absolutely enormous amounts of money be poured in to trying to build levees to withstand such an awesome force as a CAT4 or 5 hurricane?

i, as previously stated in threads, am against spending infinite amounts of money in to building/rebuilding levees against something that cannot be tamed...it's simply foolish. it is unfortunate for those that have ties to new orleans (my family does) but what will it take to see that some things are simply beyond our control. (and i see that a previous thread on the topic was deleted a few days ago...i, for one, am against deleting such threads simply becuase the topic is controversial. we, as engineers, have the responsibility to the public to openly discuss the topic and address such important issues head on...our job is tough and we must have "tough" discussions sometimes).

let's put this in to a different perspective...should we build all buildings to withstand a M7.5 earthquake or impact from a fully fueled 747 airplane? at some point, we must accept our own limitations (and probabilities of occurance) and move forward with "things" that we can effectively control on a regular basis.

 

[RWF7437]

http://www.nwcn.com/topstories/stories/NW_083008NAB_hurricane_gustav_saturday_SW.299bbf9c.html

 

[JoeTank]

msucog,
Just wondering what you suggest we do at this point. Stop trying to resist? Export everyone form coastal locations permanently? You certainly seem to have a firm opinion about how we are misguided, but what's the solution?

Joe Tank

 

[Trackfiend]

You suggest we move forward with "things" that we can control on a regular basis. Please emphasis what you mean by "things". I see you also mentioned earthquakes (natural disaster) along with 747's (man-made disaster). I for one would love to hear any and all suggestions for controlling any of Mother Nature's occurences and for controlling or even predicting the volatile nature of mankind. How do we move away or control snowstorms, tornados, hurricanes, earthquakes or even just general heavy rainfall events? Are you suggesting we live in caves?

It seems to be easy for someone who does not live in New Orleans to criticize funding of any type of flood protection and simply relocate everyone. I agree that just building up the levees higher and higher is a faulty path, but I do not agree with just abandoning it (major oil and gas port and all...). There are several methods of coastal restoration (the key to storm surge control) that could succeed if done properly. James Eads had it right when he challenged the levees only option.

Maybe as engineers instead of abandoning a complex problem due to past ignorant government decisions and poor construction, we should be looking into possible solutions that not only alleviate the issue at hand but continually improve upon the quality of life for all residents along the coastal region.

 

[msucog]

if i had all the solutions, i'd be a rich man.

i don't take issue with trying to provide engineering in an attempt to protect the public and provide a better quality of life. however, living below sea level on the coast is not a reasonable place to live. i didn't say we should completely abandon the area but people should not live there expecting the government to spend an infinite amount of money to protect them against every possible scenario. and the government shouldn't write blank checks to people that lost their homes, build again, and keep losing everything everytime a hurricane comes through. if the folks there have insurance to cover their losses, then that's great...that's the way it should be. perhaps i should have expanded on the main intent of my thread--the public does not fully understand the reality of engineering. you design for something you think my happen with some estimate of probability but it's no guarantee as to what could happen. the public there sure seems to expect the corp to build a fortress around them to protect against every possible scenario. if people want to live there, then that's fine...but it should be at their own risk. new orleans is not simply a higher risk area like other coastal places...it has the unfortunate luck to be located such that you should expect a major event to be catastrophic. i think that the current levees should be "maintained" as is and leave it at that. if it floods, it's terrible...it sucks...i feel bad...but maybe it's much more realistic to live elsewhere (preferably at or above sea level).

i love the beach but i don't live there for one simple reason...hurricanes. i also don't live on top of high seismic areas because i'm not particularly fond of large earthquakes. i also don't live next to certain rivers because they flood every so often. if i do live in those areas, then i don't expect the government to pick up the tab in the event something major happens. i'll pay for insurance (assuming that it's even available) and weigh my options from there.

and as far as the comment about 747's, that's aimed at the comments i recall hearing from the public who said the twin towers were not designed appropriately...which is a foolish arguement. we do what we can but every single high rise building is not going to be built to withstand impacts and sustained fire from a huge airplane. what if the terrorists would have flown a b-52 in to the towers? should we then design everything to withstand that? absolutely not...we live with the risks and move forward and accept the losses that results from future acts. if there's something reasonable that we can do to minimize the effects of future attacks, then we do it. for earthquakes, it's the same thing...we design for some particular event based on what we think might happen with a little safety factor added in there. however, we don't design everything to withstand a direct hit from a massive earthquake.

all i'm saying is that i think someone has the responsibility to look at doing something else down there. as mentioned, i do not know the solution. but simply not discussing it because it might come across as insensitive helps no one. we, as engineers (as a whole), will be the ones to blame so if you're fine with being thrown in to that pile, then i'm glad at least someone can sleep good at night.

 

[Trackfiend]

I may have misunderstood your initial comment and apologize if I came across harsh. I absolutely agree that it is NOT the government's place to bail people out when they (general public) take no precautions themselves (hurricane protective straps, building up on piles, carrying insurance...). That is absolutely a waste of money and manpower.

In trying to keep with the tone of the thread, I believe that we live in a world with increasingly demanding and complex engineering problems. The world's population is only increasing, thereby expounding the problem of residential locations even further. Japan, for instance, can only build up at this point (save for any man-made islands) creating a unique challenge for engineers. Can we create designs in mind to protect from the worst possible scenario? Sure. But costs and resources will always limit this. Heck, build levees 100 feet high and pumps capable of flows in excess of 100 million gallons per minute. Yet the cost is not reasonable. I agree that there is a compromising “middle ground” that we as engineers have to accept, as well as the general public. If you live in New Orleans, you should accept that fact that at least once in your lifetime, your house MAY flood, and that is mainly due to the uncertainty of Mother Nature.

In my extremely short career in engineering, I’ve come to realize that our efforts to control nature’s forces are futile and rarely lack the fortitude to look ahead beyond several years. Then again, I seem to deal with a lot of government (parish) entities.

 

[msucog]

perhaps i didn't state my side very well either. i don't dispute that the government should be there to help ensure that some basic quality of life can be achieved...but they should not provide complete bailouts time after time. if the folks down there can accept that the levees will hold "something" back and not expect it to be a complete savior of sorts, then i got no problem with it. it, at least for now, appears that the population down there learned some lessons from katrina and got the heck out of town. that in itself is a great improvement but i will interested to see if it holds true the next time or the time after that. either way, as long as the realities of the difficulties of trying to hold back the ocean are realized (and not blaming non-complete success on engineers), then all i can say is "good luck" to the news folk and people in new orleans.

i still maintain that the greater american states should not be the funding base for trying to protect the below sea level area. if the lowest lying bayou cannot sustain its own self, then perhaps there should be some restriction to living there. however, i doubt that the politics of it all will allow such a unique place to fade away with the tides that try to drown it. time will tell i suppose...and let's hope that the engineering mind can provide at least some resolution to future potential catastrophes at a realistic cost.

 

[Trackfiend]

I agree that the politics of it won't allow complete relocation (not that I agree with complete relocation...). The levees option allows developers access to a very profitable substance...land. Once a levee goes up and all the land is pumped dry, developers move in and entice people to build. This is one of the main causes of the problems in New Orleans and the lower parishes. More construction with increased pumping speeds up subsidence to a point that entire areas are sinking at rates above 1 inch per year. Not smart, but extremely profitable. New Orleans could have avoided much of the problems that persist today if certain "correct paths" had been chosen by those in charge at the time. Increased canal constructions for oil and gas (2/3's of which are currently unused) thereby increasing saltwater intrusion (which erodes our coastline), and poor USACE decisions concerning "management" of the Mississippi river are just a few of the compounded issues at hand.

I agree that the other states should NOT bear Louisiana's burden. Maybe all the money that is made by the oil companies could be put to good use....other than the golden parachutes they provide to upper management....

I live in Terrebonne Parish and although I love the area I'm from, I have actually argued the point that maybe the best approach would be to let the Mississippi regain its original path and allow alluvial flooding to occur to help retore all the sediment that is not deposited due to our wonderful levees. Maybe this could help to restore our coastal regions to what they used to be and actually help with coastal erosion. Just a thought. Maybe Dubai can lend a hand with some of that sand they've been dredging off the ocean bottom and deposit it in my back yard...

 

[concretemasonry]

Trackfiend -

I generally agree your comments on the devopment of the New Orleans jungle. - It goes back to habitual following going back to the days Hewey Long and has only gotten worse (possibly due to scope or recent inability to control). There are some very sound areas for residences that the original settlers discovered, but some newer areas should never have ben built on. The country should not rotate around a small piece or real estate.

The levee commisions and their powers coupled by the other commissioners that rely on increasing the development and population(voters) only increased the lack of use of engineering and common sense and accepting outside controls. (It is strange how much political power local politicians can exert on a bunch of nationally elected members of Congress).

When the local politicians rejected the proposal that the C of E should manage the design, construction for flood and disaster control, it was hard to believe. This is especially true when I had to look at damages for several homes that were flooded by the owners unknowingly being paid to pump water from one neighborhood to reduce the water levels from 3 feet to 1 foot and flood his own home in order to qualify for goverment relief for that area.

I love the people, the general are, fishing and eating, but was previously there for a few days every year or two. When I had to be there after Katrina od many months, and see the problems and understand the local engineering/political controls over development, I got my real education after graduating, graduate school and 40 years professional experience.

I just got 2 messages that indicate that I will have to return after the current problems. At least I know my favorite restaurants are open and that I will be able to do some fishing in the next few months after the waters settle.

 

[MiketheEngineer]

Mother Nature is a bitch - and She always wins....

If she wants New Orleans someday - she will take it back!!

 

[RWF7437]

http://www.ffma.net/pdf/ERPreport1.pdf

 

[BRIS]

As engineers our job is to give impartial advice so that others can make informed decisions. Ideally the "others" should include engineers who are able to understand the advice. Invariably the others are politicians who are not prone to making impartial rational decisions.

Any engineering development should be based on a cost benefit analysis. (The World Bank will not consider financing any overseas development project unless it returns a benefit that exceeds costs). If benefits exceed costs then the decision is clear. The problem is one of finding the finance and ranking projects for implementation in terms of affordability. How much tax do we want to pay now to invest to prevent future losses. If costs exceed benefits then, as engineers, our advice is to abandon the land to nature.

 

[twopie56]

Alleluiah Guys......
Engineering is an art and science by which the properties of matter are made useful to man......defined by webster
in its simplest form......

and its only my opinion that " An Engineer has got to do
what an Engineer has got to do." that is make all matter useful to mankind. Mother Nature is a matter like wise all sorts of energies...

So leave the money problem to the politicians, accountants,
Economist, bankers etc..... But for once lets all think as
Engineers.....

to all of you, I had fun reading your comments thanks to
all who participated and sharing their opinion especially the guy who triggered it.. many thanks

 

[ACtrafficengr]

As engineers, we have a pretty good definition of "impartial, rational decision." Gather the data, make some supportable assumptions, crunch the numbers, and see what answer pops out.

Unfortunately, New Orleans doesn't lend itself to such a dispassionate view. As Einstein said, "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted, counts."

I family live nearby for a few years in the mid-80's, and even this Yankee white boy could see there was something special there. How do you put a dollar value on a historic city? What is the value of a social fabric that could not be replicated elsewhere?

The events of three years ago showed proved what experts have been saying for years: The current development pattern and storm protection methods are unsustainable.

The historic districts are worth preserving,as is the culture. The city outside those areas probably should look a lot different than it does now. The question is, will someone step up and show the courage to make it happen?

"...students of traffic are beginning to realize the false economy of mechanically controlled traffic, and hand work by trained officers will again prevail." - Wm. Phelps Eno, ca. 1928

"I'm searching for the questions, so my answers will make sense." - Stephen Brust

 

[civilperson]

The flood wall featured on the current news broadcast built on Galveston Island is strong enough to remain in place for a Category 5 hurricane. It is too low to stop all the current storm surge but strong enough to remain and survive for future storms. Saying "infinite amounts of money" is a dis-service for the designers/builders of this structure when the cost/benefit ratio has beeen proven to be among the best of public work projects. I would rather the moneys be allocated in a "low hanging fruit" priorty, the easiest built with the most payback be funded and the other projects deferred forever.

 

[msucog]

Ike is perfect example of the whole "cat 4" or "cat 5" system. well educated folks realize that since the rating is based on the winds, it doesn't necessarily tell how "dangerous" the storm is. Ike is cat 2 but since it's so large across the gulf, the surge in the water will be huge. then add the waves on top of that and will people still say "well it was designed for a cat 5 but it failed on a cat 2". again, the "cat" part is based on the winds...not the sea levels. i suspect that in the future, someone will incorporate surf surge in to the system.

so here's a new perspective...we're not talking about the population of new orleans that lives below sea level. we're talking about a town very near sea level that was hit hard 100 years ago by a hurricane. if i'm not mistaken, i recall that back in the day, a whole population moved inland after that massive hurricane wiped out the area back then.

i think part of my problem lies with those that not only live in very dangerous, "underwater" areas...but they try to wait out the storm and then the good people that are the first responders must risk their lives to save these fools. so the problem compounds itself. personally, i would like to see the beaches cleared of condos and housing and left as open beach...i'm not that old and i remember when that was the case. if people do live there, i don't think they should be receiving checks from the gov't when their home is knocked out because they live within 20' of the ocean or below sea level. i got no problem with helping the more inland people receiving monies when a catastrophic hurricanes hits a highly populated area. maybe i'm crazy but i'm pretty sure my city/state has restrictions on building in flood prone areas.

 

[HgTX]

Galveston rebuilt pretty fast after 1900, though it never regained its economic standing. It's still a historic town (in Texas, Victorian counts as historic) with several generations of "BOI" (born on the island). That whole seawall & grade raising undertaking was a concerted effort to keep the population there.

The western half of the island is another story, though. Most of the development there is new. And built on stilts because of routine flooding. I have no idea what their insurance situation is.

I also don't know how many of those people would have bothered to evacuate their livestock. The horses weren't the ones who made the choice to live in a flood area.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[concretemasonry]

msucog -

The big danger of an "Ike" is the damage to infrastructure, cities and businesses.

The economics dictate where certain facilities can be located since they are dependant on receiving raw materials, processing and shipping finished products out.

The products (oil, gas, widgets, pvc pipe, plastics, steel) are greatly influenced by availability of the raw materials. The Houston area is a prime example that is somewhat dictated by the methods of transmission of the raw materials. Because of the available jobs, people locate near the place of employment. This also dictates the location of power plants that are needed by the tax payers and businesses.

New Oleans is similar. The city is not based on "Bourbon Street", but much is predicated by the shipping needs. There is a tremendous amount of shipments on the Mississippi river and on the Ohio, Illinois, Misouri and other rivers that requires the facilities and employees. The shipments go both ways, with much of it in the form of agriculture products that go down the river. There is not excuse of the specific location of some of the residential areas, but the necessary facilities required still require the protection from the natural distacters. There was a proposal to relocate the mouth of the Mississippi westward, but no one wanted the expense and development.

Major cities are located near water, usually near low areas where the possibility of disasters is known, but must be accepted. New York, Baltimore, Boston, Los angeles, San Francisco, St. Louis, Chicago are the basis for business and population. A land-locked city not on a major river is a rarity.

 

[MikeHalloran]

Let's be clear here. The levees constraining the Mississippi were never in danger from Katrina.

The levees separating the city from Lake Ponchartain and the various canals that traverse the city failed, and no one was particularly surprised, because for a lot of reasons that are mostly political, they were built low, maintained improperly or not at all, and many were of a design that makes you go, "Huh?".


The non- river levees are being repaired/ reconstructed, but their current state is such that I have decided to ride out Ike in Hattiesburg...



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[YoBob]

Thanks muscog for starting this thought provoking thread. The truth is in a combination of what everyone has said. However, I would like to add one additional glaring contributing factor for the Big Easy catastrophe:

As stated in Time Magazine and ASCE publications, there were millions if not billions of $ earmarked to repair and enhance the levee walls in the decades preceding Katrina. The wall's inability to withstand a Katrina were well documented for years.

You guessed it. The repair funds were shanghaied to other pet projects by local politicians. Where is the outrage against these politicians who literally sold out on their constituents? To make matters worse, we Engineers are being admonished by the US Congress for not doing more to prevent Katrina and the I-35 Bridge collapse! (Re: The Wall Street Journal and ASCE news).

My friends and colleagues, if you would just sit in on a session of Congress, you would understand just how clueless the legislators are in truly appreciating the importance of infrastructure, its design and repair. They are more concerned over whether Democrats or Republicans hold the power!

Part of the problem is that those making the funding decisions (legislators) have the least amount of knowledge or information to make them. More must be done to get the funding decisions in the hands of those qualified to make the decisions. The US Army Corps of Engineers should have a budget that cannot be raided by political whim.

We collectively must do more to educate the politicians or get involved in the political process ourselves. ASCE, ASME, ASHRAE and others are simply not able to make enough impact without our help.

A good peaceful feeling while driving across any bridge is what is at stake.

One last thought: The Boy Scouts and my big brother taught me to pitch my tent on the high ground. They ought to teach the people in New Orleans that.