Frank F. Matthews wrote:
>
>
> Paul E. Lehmann wrote:
>
>> Frank F. Matthews wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Paul E. Lehmann wrote:
>>>
>>>>Frank F. Matthews wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Paul E. Lehmann wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>snip
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>And neither side will admit that New Orleans has been a doomed city
>>>>>>for
>>>>>>decades and will continue to be so even it it is rebuilt. It sits on
>>>>>>active Gulf Coast down to the basin faults and is sloughing off into
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>Gulf of Mexico. I have been telling people for years that the
>>>>>>Government should be honest with people and move the city and let the
>>>>>>river claim what
>>>>>>it intends to claim. I worked as a Gulf Coast Geologist for over 20
>>>>>>years.
>>>>>>I know what I am talking about. It is time to let science be at the
>>>>>>heart of decision making but I fear this will not happen and there
>>>>>>will be a repeat of this disaster but the next time may be worse even
>>>>>>though some may think this is not possible - IT IS.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>If you are going into the business of moving doomed cities I can think
>>>>>of a few others that need it. Galveston comes to mind. And, perhaps,
>>>>>a few in Florida.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes, Galveston is vulnerable but NOT AS vulnerable as New Orleans. Even
>>>>if a hurricane never hits New Orleans again, it is SINKING and sliding
>>>>down
>>>>into the Gulf Basin. The Corps of Engineers can never defeat mother
>>>>nature
>>>>in this situation. They have been and will continue to fight a loosing
>>>>battle. Just think what will happen when a Mississipi levee breaks in
>>>>the middle of the night with NO advance warning and with NO evacuations
>>>>- not
>>>>even rich white folks. I have no respect for the Speaker of the House,
>>>>Dennis Hastert, but when he initially cautioned against rebuilding, he
>>>>was
>>>>absolutely correct. The decision to rebuild New Orleans will be based
>>>>on "Faith Based" levee(s) and NOT science.
>>>
>>>In case you hadn't noticed most all of the gulf coast is sinking
>>>including Galveston. I wonder if anyone has surveyed Florida lately?
>>
>>
>> Yes, the ocean is encroaching on ALL the US coastlines. The reason for
>> most
>> of this is a rise in sea level. AGAIN, New Orleans is in an ESPECIALLY
>> high risk category because it is ALREADY below sea level.
>>
>>
>>>Personally I think that we should quit insuring and providing
>>>infrastructure to building on barrier islands. After that we can
>>>consider not rebuilding the port of New Orleans.
>>
>
> Triage is more what I was proposing. Barrier Islands first. Now that I
> think upon it start with Miami beach and, perhaps, Miami.
Bad choice. Geologically, Florida is on a relatively stable carbonate
platform - NOT uncompacted mush - as is the case of New Orleans and the
Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi Gulf Coast.
>
>>
>> Let's start with New Orleans and then consider the barrier islands. It
>> is
>> called Triage in the Medical profession. Treat those most at risk of
>> dying first.
>>
>>
>>>By by to the midwestern grain crops for a few years.
>>>Most of the Port of Houston is subject to storm surge as well.
>>
>>
>> True, Houston was built on wet lands and was a real estate scam by the
>> Allen
>> brothers back in the 18whatever year. I lived there for 24 years and in
>> my opinion it is best suited for mosquitoes and alligators and not human
>> habitation. Houston also has large areas that have been sinking due to
>> huge amounts of ground water withdrawal by industry and the subsequent
>> compaction of the dewatered shales. I did volunteer work for the USGS
>> and
>> helped map areas of subsidence in the Houston area. There are now areas
>> that flood that never used to flood because of piss poor city planning
>> and the issue I mentioned above.
>>
>
> The ground water withdrawal has pretty much been stopped for a good
> while.
It has NOT. It is STILL continuing. For example, the area west of Houston
proper, specifically the Katy area is subsiding. If you live in that area
you will find that neighborhoods that never flooded when new will start to
experience flooding.
> It's a nice place to live especially in what would normally be
> winter. Lots of wildlife & birds.
Obviously you have not travelled much outside Houston if you really believe
what you say. I lived there for 24 years and left 11 years ago. if you
visit some of the state parks near Houston, you will find a sparcity of
wild life and very little diversity compared to other areas that have not
converted their forest to pine plantations for the lumber industry.
companies. Diverse wild live needs more than pine cones to survive. At
one time the Gulf Coast was a mix of hardwood and pine forest. Now it is
predominately pine plantations.
>
> I think you will find the compaction a problem in the clay beds not
> shales.
Shale is compacted clay. Clay refers to grain size and not mineralogy. In
oder (biggest to smallest) you have cobbles, pebbles, sand, silt and clay.
>
>>
>>>Better
>>>shut that and all the associated refineries. Maybe give folks a year or
>>>so to bring refineries in the Hudson Valley on line.
>
>>Put them in all the
>> solid Republican States. As they say, the smell of the refineries is
>> "The smell of money".
>>
>>
>>>If the corps would only dump all the upstream flood control measures NO
>>>would be a good bit better off in 30-40 years. No we can't do that
>>>Hastert's district might get damage.
>>
>>
>> The Corps as already .ed up by building the numerous levees they have
>> on
>> the upstream Mississippi. They are turning the Mississipi from a natural
>> stream into a drainage ditch. Of course this helps barge operators ship
>> to New Orleans but it also provides a fast track for the water down there
>> also. The farm lands that were naturally fertilized by periodic flooding
>> no longer get the flooding from waters topping the natural levees. A
>> case in point - The High Aswan dam in Egypt has stopped a lot of the
>> natural
>> flooding of the Nile delta. The delta farm land is becoming nutrient
>> poor. Now a lot of the energy produced by the dam goes into producting
>> chemical fertilizer because the natural nutrients no longer get to the
>> fields.
>>
|