BTilke

This isn't meant to be inflammatory--it's a question being raised on news stations around the world (we get news channels from about 20 different countries on digital satellite).
I think it's an interesting issue worth serious consideration. First of all, OF COURSE, I want people (and businesses) to be compensated for their loss and given every help possible to restart their lives with as much normalcy as possible.
But if it's true that we are entering another active hurricane cycle (as many experts have said), should we really keep a major city in such a vulnerable location? As discussed on one news program, when the French were first settling New Orleans all those years ago, the local Indian tribes even then basically told them they were making a big mistake. I know that other parts of the southeast are vulnerable to hurricanes, but NOLA (and perhaps Gulfport and Biloxi too) are especially vulnerable due to its below sea level location.
And IF global warming is a reality (note, I said IF), then doesn't that make NOLA even more vulnerable and could possibly render rebuilding attempts ultimately futile?
Obviously it's a prime port location and we need the port, but should the city be rebuilt to the size and dimension that it was until this week? Is it worth spending billions of dollars rebuilding a city on such a vulnerable location that could very well be hit with another monster storm in the not too distant future?
Some have suggested filling in the "bowl" that is NOLA, raising the entire city above sea level--is that genuinely feasible?

Interested in Fodorite views, esp. from those who have lived or traveled extensively in Gulf Coast region (which I haven't). No name calling or blame gaming please.

USNR

Bear in mind that N.O. is the world's fourth-largest shipping port. It takes people to run this kind of year-round operation. They have to live somewhere.

Most of our grain exports move through N.O. Your morning coffee most likely came in through N.O. Petroleum and petrochemicals move in and out of N.O. in gigantic quantities.

From a purely logistical standpoint, N.O. is vital to American commerce. Can it be improved? Can it be protected? Yes. The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers made just such proposals -- repeatedly -- and was rebuffed by budget-cutters in Washington and local politicians in Baton Rouge. The facts speak for themselves. And ALL of us are now paying the price for this shortsightedness. When will we start thinking and acting like the great nation our forefathers built for us?

sobolik

I posted this on another post and transfered it to here.

Your question is completely wrong - let me explain.

I work for the Gov. I have all my adult life and some of my youth. University, Military, National Guard, Prison System, Natural Recourses. I speak as an insider.

The University System can spend about anything they want on what they want - They simply charge more to a captive customer. The "sheepskin" is how this system is set up so we pay the going rate. Period.

The Government System that you are talking about is a completely different situation.
All (most) of the "public" servants in charge of local operations were victims themselves. Who is assisting them as they swim for it so to speak? While the others swiming along side them are crying why don't you do something, would it be too much to ask?
The National Guard is YOU so to speak. So ponder how you are going to be ready at any moment to respond. And at the same time YOU must pay all bills and neglect all people and stuff that you are leaving and YOU must pay all costs for where you are going. (public servant role and taxpayer role and private responsibilities role) The National Guard is in a very bad situation. Think it through.
The Military. One half of this Countries United States Navy Seabees are stationed in Gulfport Miss! What happened to them? What are they doing? Who is going to serve in their relief? If they serve who is going to pay for it? I do not want to pay for it (stay tune for my later comment) REMEMBER SOME OF THEM JUST GOT BACK FROM FIGHTING A WAR IN IRAQ! AND SOME ARE NOW GOING! The military often assists in these areas but again the cost is on YOU. It is not free and it is not easy.

All that money - What money? A local prison sells Soda and Candy bars to raise money for "Emergency Response Unit" personnel training! Every prison dime is cried about by the taxpayer on one hand and crime activities are cried about on the other.

I said your question is completely wrong - let me explain.
Let me grow very COLD and unsympathetic. THE QUESTION IS HOW LONG MUST WE PAY AND BE READY TO PAY FOR OTHER PEOPLES BEHAVIOR?
I QUOTE: "Every year, we have a hurricane season. Every year, we have areas that receive damage. Would it be too much to ask for Army bases along the Gulf and South Atlantic to have” I SAY WOULD IT BE TOO MUCH TO ASK FOR US TO COLLECTIVELY WAKE UP AND CHANGE BEHAVIOR? Stop this REPETITIVE behavior. There was another post "will New Orleans be rebuilt” I say yes and then we will be doing this all over again. AND PEOPLE WILL BE DYING ALL OVER AGAIN And you and I will pay for it ALL OVER AGAIN. Yes, it happens every year. Would it be too much to ask... NO YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WE MUST REBUILD! I know it is not so simple.

platzman

New Orleans is the fourth largest port in the world in terms of tonnage. But I have one important fact to add. The Port of South Louisiana, headquartered in Laplace Louisiana (about 20 miles upriver from N.O.) is number ONE in the world in tonnage.

I'm fairly certain that New Orleans will not come back as it was.
The population will be significantly reduced. Already this week, $21 million in real estate was purchased in my city by New Orleans' residents and businesses seeking to relocate. I think you'll see people moving permanently to Baton Rouge, Lafayette, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, St. Louis, etc.

There will be very little commerce in N.O. for the foreseeable future. And people have to live.

Fairhope

I think we will be pleasantly surprised by the amount of damage. The FQ is dry and other areas did not flood. The Miss. levees are not damaged, only two breeches of the lake levees.
NO is TOO important to the economy not to be re-built immediately.

rkkwan

Let's understand the nature of the problem now. Most of the City of New Orleans is "wet". So is the suburbs to the east of the city. But the West Bank is dry, the large suburb of Metairie and the airport is dry. In central NO, downtown is mostly dry, as is the French Quarter. The roads into NO from the West and West Bank are fine.

The port, oil refineires, etc... will definitely be up running again soon. Business in FQ and downtown to also reopen when they drain the water and when electricity and fresh water is restored. People who live in the West Bank and western suburbs will go home, clean up, and then fill the jobs in downtown and French Quarter.

This is not going to be fast, but in a few months after they empty out the water and restore electricity/fresh water, it will happen.

However, all the residental houses in the worse-flooded area basically have to be levelled. They are not worth saving. That's tens of thousands of homes for hundreds of thousands of residents. Many don't have flood insurance, and many of these people will not return to NO for various reasons - like in the following months, they'll have found new places to stay elsewhere. With their jobs either gone, or having filled by "dry" residents, these people have no reason to return.

So, you'll have a vast area north and east of central NO that will be "dead" for many years. Just tearing down the buildings and removing them will take years. How long did it take to remove the debris at WTC in New York? You're talking about an area much larger, though less material per acre.

So, it's not really a matter of should NO be rebuilt. Somebody will, at some time, when the economics of it make sense. Most of it is private land with hundreds of thousands of owners. Again, while the WTC has one owner (Port Authority) and one lease owner (Larry Silverstein), the bickering is already horrible, and nothing has been built 4 years after 9/11. Now, you're talking about tens of thousands of land and business owners - you do the maths.

It's not as simple as "let use federal money to rebuild the city". Some things, sometimes, cannot just be rebuilt with money and will, in a short period of time.

Another thing people do not realize is that this is not Chicago over 100 years ago. Nowadays, people move around the country all the time. At least those with skills. They will not sit around in shelters and wait. If you want to resettle in the west, you don't need to take wagons or long train trips. All those left behind will be the old and poorest - like what we're already seeing at the Superdome and elsewhere.

What kind of city will it be when the middle class is emptied out?

USNR

Platzman: the world's largest port in terms of tonnage handled is Rotterdam.

jacketwatch

Amsterdam is also below sea level as is its intl. airport. I think we should have learned a lesson from the Dutch who solved there flooding problems with engineering. A tour of Amsterdam will, in various places show 3 large red X's. These symbolize the plagues that for centuries beset the Dutch: fire, floods and rats. They solved these issues and we should do the same inre to flooding for this iconic American city. JM2C.

xkenx

Of course New Orleans should be rebuilt
(with better infrastructure safeguards). What happened this week was what the scientists call a 100-year event, a natural disaster catastrophe of such magnitude that it occurs only once in 100 years. There is practically nowhere in the US that is not vulnerable to such an event from hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunami, blizzard, ice storm, rain-induced flood, drought, etc. We are all Americans. When disaster hits some, we collectively help them because it's what Americans do. It could be our turn the next time.

BTilke

100 year events do not really mean something will happen only once in a hundred years. Austria, for example, has had two "100 year event" floods in the last 6 years.

nytraveler

It's true that Amsterdam has many of the same problems as New Orleans - but not so severe since it;'s not situated in the middle of a hurricane zone. But they managed to make themselves secure with a combination of excellent engineering and the expenditure of massive amounts of money and effort.

As long the American people continue to elect public officials who do little but cut the taxes of the their rich cronies and major corportins - at the expense of services and projects that are vital to the good of the average person - we will continue to end up in the same kind of mess.

I never understood why so many people with low/moderate incomes voted for Bush when his avowed policy was to tax them/reduce their services to give benefits to the wealthy and "business".

My beau and I - who would be the reciepients of some of these tax cuts - voted against him because impoverishing the many at the expense of the few is simply a bad - never mind unfair - policy for the future of country as a whole? (This is like refusing to pay for repairs on your house and then being surprised when it falls down - any counry MUST invest in basic infrastructure - education, healthcare, public works).

Why did so many poor/moderate income people not see this? Do they think they're going to be rich soon and benefit from the cuts - useless to anyone whose income doesn;t reach $400? Can;t they read the numbers? Don;t they understand that our public services are so much worse than those in europe because of our policy of reducing services to the majorityy to make the rich richer?

I just don;t get it!

crefloors

I saw a very intersting program on PBS last night, and it went a long way to explain the problems facing NO. The wetlands are dying and these wetlands give a natural barrier to the gulf waters. The french were the first ones to build the levees because of course their houses all flooded when they were trying to build the city. The entire area is sinking and the natural flow of the Mississippi had been manipulated and distrpted so that the silt that woould normaly be deposited into the delta can't get there. Also, flood control has prevented silt from being deposited all along the river to build up the sinking land. Nature knows best. Of course I know that we cannot undo the dams, levee's etc. along the river, but much of the wetlands can be reclaimed, but of course there is a huge lack of funding for such a project as well as no funding to re-do the levees. These dollars were cut both in the Clinton administration as well as the present Bush administration. There was enough dollars to reclaim a very small portion of wetlands and it has prooved to be successful. Another issue with the sinking land is that there is over 20,000 miles of gas pipes running through the delta. These pipes were originally buried under the ground but now sit ABOVE the ground and are exposed and vulnerable to damage and breakage. No one is saying that this is the answer to totally protect the city from and category 4 or 5 storm but it would have helped with the flooding issue, and when you have a city that is at least 6 feet below sea level, every foot of wetland between them and the gulf can make a difference. It will be interesting to see if reclaimation of any of the wetlands is part of any agenda when it comes to the rebuilding.

sobolik

nytraveler: 2 things. 1)Did I read in your post that John Kerry is not rich? Or did I miss something? 2)I work with a Blue collar average wage earner who immeadiately informed all as to how many stocks he bought in order to cash in on this disaster. I did not hear any comment on how much he is contributing. After all that should be the greedy rich peoples job since they and Bush blah blah blah. Dang and I though John Kerry was a rich guy all this time.

aileen679

Here's an excellent article about rebuilding the wetlands form National Geographic.

http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0410/feature5/

I also live in an area that has large areas that are below sea level.. It took decades, but the county has quit issuing building permits in some areas, insisting that houses be built and certain number of feet about ground and have met building codes that require more than just cracker box construction.
Can, or better question, WILL New Orleans do something similar.

sobolik

crefloors: Fortunately we are/have learned the immense value of wet lands as you point out. From a Department of Natural Resourses point of view it is very bad that we can not turn back the clock very quickly

Budman

nytraveler, I think all those rich U.S. Senators who were against the tax cuts (Corzine, Lautenberg, Schumer, Clinton, Kerry, Kennedy, et al) refunded the money to the U.S. Treasury (not!!). If you feel so strongly, give back the money. Please make yours and your beau's checks payable to "Treasury of the United States" or stop bitching.

P.S. Kerry's not rich, his wife is, and the poor/moderate don't pay taxes except into the social security welfare program.

hdm

For anyone who read this on an earlier, now-deleted thread, I apologize for repeating myself.

Just to give some idea of his level of expertise, my husband's field is environmental management and large-scale risk. He's a unversity professor, an author and a consultant in these areas. He feels that since NO is not a large area and very self-contained, it would be possible to rebuild it on landfill that would bring it above sea level.

Yes, I do think it should be rebuilt. It will never be exactly the same, of course, but this will just become part of its history as it grows and settles and re-ages.

karens

Nytraveler - have you read the book "What's the Matter with Kansas". The author asked similar questions to yours - why Kansans, many who don't benefit from the Republican tax cuts for the rich agenda, still overwhelming vote Republican.

soccr

No one has ever accused me of being a pollyanna or even an optimist, but -- acknowledging that this Armageddon is a horrific time and will continue to be so for several months at least -- there is an amazing opportunity here to get it right. How many other cities with major design problems are likely to be completely empty and needing ground-up reconstruction?

I hesitate to jump right in with a plan for a city I never had the chance to visit, but it seems to me that limiting the number of people who actually live within the levees and requiring an infrastructure that has certain failsafes and will permit quick evacuation would be a starting place. Tourism and oil are, I gather, the primary economic engines. Why not devote much of the area within the levees to tourism -- transient residents, services, etc.? The people who work there could be housed on higher ground, outside the levees, and/or in buildings designed with storm surge and wind in mind. And perhaps some reclamation of the wetlands could be part of the plan.

But for now this is all pie-in-the-sky, because there are hundreds of thousands of people, including those from the impoversished parrishes around N.O., who are not only suffering immediate privation but who have no job prospects and no home to return to. I'm wondering how many will stay in Texas or Tenn. or wherever they end up. If it were me, I don't think I'd never go back.

Jean

Shame on any politician (including president) of either party who is connected to the pork barrel spending that for decades has diverted our tax money to projects of questionable necessity and away from projects of public safety and security.