Skip to main content

View Diary: Meanwhile.... (310 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I say rebuild as it was... (9+ / 0-)

    and redevelop the wetlands surrounding New Orleans that in the past protected New Orleans for centuries from the kind of storm surge that destroyed New Orleans last year.

    You cannot relocate New Orleans.  You cannot relocate Miami.  You cannot relocate Gulfport.  

    I mean, should we relocate Los Angeles and San Francisco simply because they are vulnerable to devastating earthquakes!!!

    •  We need to ask an expert in wetlands (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Coffee Geek

      But in the interim, I'm not sure that wetlands can do what they need to do if NOLA is built back where it was.  From what I heard months ago, When the French were first settling the area, the ground was a slosh of mud with huge tree trunks immersed in it.  There's a human arrogance about the idea of building wherever we want to live.

      Wealthy people take their risks voluntarily; the poor don't.  I don't know what to do about LA and SF, but at least there isn't an annual earthquake season.

      •  well, some of us inlanders.... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        balancedscales, llbear

        ....wonder about californians. between earthquakes, brush fires and mudslides, it seems pretty crazy to rebuild their outrageously overinflated pricey homes...

        The radical invents views. When he has worn them out the conservative adopts them. - Mark Twain

        by FemiNazi on Thu May 11, 2006 at 10:16:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  yes, but build it up (6+ / 0-)

      we should absolutely not try to relocate it, whether as far as baton rouge or iowa either.  although that seems to be how the GOP would like the population to go – dispersed, dispirited and powerless.

      but building it exactly as it was is a bad idea.  think blue is right that we should be discussing it.  my take is that we should take this opportunity to bring the land well above sea level to keep the flooding from happening again, which it certainly will since it has happened in the past.  second best would be building hundreds of miles of really tall seawall/dykes like the netherlands has to keep the north sea out.  i mean cripes, if the frickin' tulip-growers can do it, surely it's not beyond the capability of the world's last superpower, right?  (don't answer that...)

      it's not enough to survive: one has to be worthy of surviving — admiral adama

      by zeke L on Thu May 11, 2006 at 07:04:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Building it UP (5+ / 0-)

        Isn't this what Galveston, TX did, like, 106 years ago? and at the time, it was considered one of the most expensive and high-tech endeavors of land reconstruction. Why can't we do that with NOLA and other areas in this century?

        Read more if you're interested in learning how the 1900 rebuild effort for Galveston worked. It involved building a seawall around the city's coastal perimeter and elevating the city, in some places, up to 17 to 20 feet higher than its original elevation.

        After the devastating hurricane of 1900, which claimed about 8,000 lives, Galveston at its newer, safer elevation has not experienced anywhere NEAR the devastation from a hurricane strike since; and it, too, is a Gulf Coast city.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site