WTF "We cant let mother nature win"

[The Buddha]

Levees to resist cat 5 will be cost prohibitive, and the return period of a Cat 5 for NO is under 35 years. It will be destroyed before its even completed. You'd also have to build everything in that region to stand Cat 5 winds and ocean surges. You will find out soon enough. The spirit is there and everyone wants it. However its not going to be worth the expense. It may cost you 150,000 to build a 2,000 sqft Cat 3 house, and closer to 250,000 to build a Cat 5. You'd find that people will prefer to buy the 150,000 house in AR or TX or SC or GA instead of 250,000 in NO. Yes they all want it now. Just print up the numbers and ask them to hand over the insurance $$ and see what happens. The same damn thing as the handlebars. The first dozen or so that said they wanted it, I never heard from them ... ever ... Also Lower manhattan after 9/11, everyone wanted it rebuilt, and at this point there is still some unity because it was a terrorist act, but still the original sponsors of that plan have dropped by the way side, as has the original plan. Simply put ... wait till the bill comes, and we'll see who's left standing. I am just saying we shouldn't even take it that far, its dead, we had a great few hundred years, its done, memories are forever, and we hope to capture the mystique of the old NO in a new to be determined and safer location.
Cool.
Srinath.

[RVertigo]

seattle- left lane drivers, people that call you a day late.

In Seattle, the left lane is for slow driving only.  The right lane is for really slow driving, seeing how fast you can come to a stop, and merging at 20 MPH under the speed limit.  The center lane is only used for traveling from the right or left lanes.

And...

:nana: Bastard!

[davipu]

:nana:  you too     atleast in oregon the old fogies stay in the right lane most of the time.

[RVertigo]

in oregon the old fogies stay in the right lane most of the time.

They're pretty good about that in OR...  Their only redeeming quality...  If you ask me.

[davipu]

and the 5 is in alot better condition.

[Roadstergal]

Simply put ... wait till the bill comes, and we'll see who's left standing. I am just saying we shouldn't even take it that far, its dead, we had a great few hundred years, its done, memories are forever, and we hope to capture the mystique of the old NO in a new to be determined and safer location.

Yep.

In the old days, cities sprung up around ports.  Now we have the ability to design them rationally.  Why throw that opportunity away?  Why not pull something good out of a very painful event?

Not only does it no longer make sense to build cities around ports - it's a security risk, seperate from the nature risk.  The economic justification for cities has changed.  Will we stubbornly ignore reality in the desire to Have Things The Way They Used To Be?  Will we do away with pavement, too, in the original spirit of the city?

[Roadstergal]

"Listen, lad. I built this kingdom up from nothing. When I started here, all there was was swamp. Other kings said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built it all the same, just to show 'em. It sank into the swamp. So, I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So, I built a third one. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp, but the fourth one... stayed up! "

[RVertigo]

and the 5 is in alot better condition.

Around these parts, there's no "the" on "the 5."  It's "5" or "I 5."

[davipu]

well around these parts it's "the 5".

[pandy]

In the old days, cities sprung up around ports.  Now we have the ability to design them rationally.  Why throw that opportunity away?

This just isn't the American way!

Will we stubbornly ignore reality in the desire to Have Things The Way They Used To Be?  Will we do away with pavement, too, in the original spirit of the city?

Yup and doubtful! We must Have Things The Way They Used To Be, but only in The Ways That Suit Us!  :lol:

[The Buddha]

"Listen, lad. I built this kingdom up from nothing. When I started here, all there was was swamp. Other kings said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built it all the same, just to show 'em. It sank into the swamp. So, I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So, I built a third one. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp, but the fourth one... stayed up! "

For now  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  ... yea all the crap you built your castle with have now toxified the swamp, the fishies have died and the crocodiles are now prowling the streets looking for food. ... but Your castle is up ...  
Cool.
Srinath.

[davipu]

the standard republican stance on the issue:


the standard democratic responce:


and still nothing is done.

[The Buddha]

Seattle?  Portland?  
Atlanta?  Memphis?

None of those places are safe either...

Seattle - Earthquakes, flooding, snow/ice, crazy-ass wind storms
Portland - Earthquakes, tsunamis, Oregonians
Atlanta - Hurricanes, flooding, Georgians
Memphis - Tornados?  :dunno: , Elvis impersonators

Portland is it, has these huge multi storied match box apartments, and right across the street (highway) there is huge stretches of empty land. Evidently the city ends at that highway and no one can build on that empty land. Yea and that has given it many awards. Like WTF. Poor planning is the main problem in 99% of the country. we have land, lots and lots of it. What do we do, we all go and live in the same 2 block radius. Like WTF, we cant park, we cant walk and heck we cant even sneeze wihtout getting snot on a dozen people. I just think people are turned on by other people's body fluids ...  :dunno:  ... Yea even Charlotte, instead of openeing out and living in houses and working in offices where there is good open spaces and plenty of parking and trees and wide open views from your office ... we got a 5-6 block size of there huge ass buildings, and more comming, and every one is sitting in traffic to get here, then we have busses that try to take people there, and people dont use it cos its slow and ugly and noisy and in convenient and then they get here and drive round and round trying to park, then pay $20 a day to park and make it to work. Yea makes a lotta sense moron. Just freaking open up the thing, dont let people over build and build up wihtout planning for access and parking and just plain make them spread out. We dont need no 90 storied buildings, we have freaking acres of open space 5 miles out ... just build there. 2 stories and make for parking and open spaces and just get the whole match box thing out of your mind. Yea no one cares ... get hit with a 5 hurricane and we still want to build the freaking castle on the same filthy swamp ...
Cool.
Srinath.

[davipu]

when was the last time that portland had a tsunami?

[Cal Price]

It is not, and it should never be a case of taming or beating "Mother" nature, sometimes we can engineer things to make her work in our favour, like the Hoover dam analogy but once we start getting carried away with the idea of beating her we will come to grief.

Living on an island where about 60 million people live, none more than 80 miles from the sea and lots of it very low or below sea level we have an acute interest in coastal defence etc,. We used to fight coastal erosion all the time just about everywhere it occured. During the 1970s and 80s we started to look critically at what we were doing, where we left erosion alone, nature to its course if you like, we found that land disappeared in places and apeared in others by reversal of the process. The island stayed about the same size but constantly changed shape.

Considering the expense of defending the coastline successive Goverments decided to simply stop doing it except where there were already large urban connobations. Since then several villages and small communities have simply been allowed to fall into the sea.

I am sure if we were starting tomorrow we would not build on flood plains or below sea level etc but our problem, as mankind, is that these places already exist. NO being a prime example. If you don't come from around there or have any connections it's easy to say "Let it go" etc but many people have a lifetime investment in the place and for them it ain't so simple. Can a nation walk away from a city of 600,000? In terms of numbers to be assimilated elsewhere it's a small problem but for civic and state pride, not to mention national psi it may be a very much more complex decision.

I am sure the money and the engineering exists to put it all back in place but it's a big job that would take years and years, it may be quicker to build an alternative (ANO) or rebuild with some very big differences, especially that canal that seems to have been the pathway that led the water into town. I don't envy those that will make those decisions, they are on a hiding to nothing for sure.

I don't believe we can fight nature but sometimes we can cajole her along with our interests, even make her work for us, like wind, tide, hydro and solar energy etc but now and again we have to pay a price. The issue in this case is the "what if" question, how long before we can expect a similar event? Is it worth it? The engineering is possible. Politics is the art of the possible. Someone will have to answer the Is it worth it? question.
Politicians are not noted for the most rational decisions, may the Lord (or Mother Nature) help them. If they had waited for Political approval the great Victorian engineers would have stayed at home, instead they built the world as we know it.

[Jake D]

I agree.  I think the water will be pumped away, the streets cleaned-up, services restored, and people will come back.  The 25 story high rise, affected only on the first floor is too valuable to just abandon.  They have flood insurance, no doubt.  I really don't understand the theory behind writting the whole city off forever.  That is just stupid.

[juno]

I don't think we tame Mother Nature, no matter what we build.  We are only adapting to mother nature.

[Stephen072774]

I agree.  I think the water will be pumped away, the streets cleaned-up, services restored, and people will come back.  The 25 story high rise, affected only on the first floor is too valuable to just abandon.  They have flood insurance, no doubt.  I really don't understand the theory behind writting the whole city off forever.  That is just stupid.

No kidding.  Some people argue it'll cost too much to rebuild.  I think they'll lose too much to turn their backs on the city...  I think we all know what's gonna happen.  

I saw on the news at lunch that a Mexican Army convoy arrived bringing supplies and doctors, glad to see Mexico lending a hand (and for us accepting)  

[Roadstergal]

NO being a prime example. If you don't come from around there or have any connections it's easy to say "Let it go" etc but many people have a lifetime investment in the place and for them it aint so simple. Can a nation walk away from a city of 600,000?

That would be an appropriate argument if we were talking about buttressing an existing city against an encroaching storm.  But now the damage is done.  And since we have to rebuild from something that's so close to scratch already, we have the option to spend the same time and money and effort - or, more likely, less time and money and effort - building a more sensibly located urban area instead of rebuilding in that exact same spot.

I know we have a connection to the past.  But I don't see the sense in screwing over the future for the sake of the dreams of the past.  Suppose you build it in the same spot so it's twice as strong.  And only half the people die the next time.  That's still unacceptable.

[Jake D]

This seems really obvious to me too.  Oh well.