4 ms·
> for unforeseen disasters (the levy breach in New Orleans) Credible sources, including FEMA, predicted that one years in advance. Check out the October 2004
by droithomme 7y ago
> for unforeseen disasters (the levy breach in New Orleans)
Credible sources, including FEMA, predicted that one years in advance.
Check out the October 2004 issue of National Geographic:
> The storm hit Breton Sound with the fury of a nuclear warhead, pushing a deadly storm surge into Lake Pontchartrain. The water crept to the top of the massive berm that holds back the lake and then spilled over. Nearly 80 percent of New Orleans lies below sea level—more than eight feet below in places—so the water poured in. A liquid brown wall washed over the brick ranch homes of Gentilly, over the clapboard houses of the Ninth Ward, over the white-columned porches of the Garden District, until it raced through the bars and strip joints on Bourbon Street like the pale rider of the Apocalypse. As it reached 25 feet (eight meters) over parts of the city, people climbed onto roofs to escape it.
> Thousands drowned in the murky brew that was soon contaminated by sewage and industrial waste. Thousands more who survived the flood later perished from dehydration and disease as they waited to be rescued. It took two months to pump the city dry, and by then the Big Easy was buried under a blanket of putrid sediment, a million people were homeless, and 50,000 were dead. It was the worst natural disaster in the history of the United States.
> When did this calamity happen? It hasn't—yet. But the doomsday scenario is not far-fetched. The Federal Emergency Management Agency lists a hurricane strike on New Orleans as one of the most dire threats to the nation, up there with a large earthquake in California or a terrorist attack on New York City. Even the Red Cross no longer opens hurricane shelters in the city, claiming the risk to its workers is too great.
- tim333 7y agoI remember watching the New Orleans breach in TV in Ireland where I was at the time and it was a bit odd - the only US news we had pretty much was CNN and that had been going on about the levys being likely to be breached about every 20 mins for the 24 to 48 hours previously. And then they breached. And then the president came on saying no one could have predicted they would be breached. Which was odd - I guess no one unless they'd turned on TV anywhere on the planet...
- jcranmer 7y agoPedantically, Bush may have actually been correct: the levees failed by collapsing under the water load, whereas the concern was entirely on failing by being overtopped. In colloquial terms, people will use the term "breach" to refer to both failure modes, but these failure modes are actually quite different, and apparently the Army Corps of Engineers reserved "breach" to mean only the first one. On the other hand, I'm not really willing to give Bush much credit here. The middle of a disaster is not the right time for pedantry.
- jariel 7y agoYes, but with the levees, the cost is massive. It's one thing to say 'there will be a big earthquake' and put together operational plans, do some practice runs. With the levees it might be many billions in upgrades for a 'risk', meaning, it gets postponed until it gets politically untenable to do nothing.