×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them
5

hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

(OP)
does anyone think it is realistic that absolutely enormous amounts of money be poured in to trying to build levees to withstand such an awesome force as a CAT4 or 5 hurricane?

i, as previously stated in threads, am against spending infinite amounts of money in to building/rebuilding levees against something that cannot be tamed...it's simply foolish. it is unfortunate for those that have ties to new orleans (my family does) but what will it take to see that some things are simply beyond our control. (and i see that a previous thread on the topic was deleted a few days ago...i, for one, am against deleting such threads simply becuase the topic is controversial. we, as engineers, have the responsibility to the public to openly discuss the topic and address such important issues head on...our job is tough and we must have "tough" discussions sometimes).

let's put this in to a different perspective...should we build all buildings to withstand a M7.5 earthquake or impact from a fully fueled 747 airplane? at some point, we must accept our own limitations (and probabilities of occurance) and move forward with "things" that we can effectively control on a regular basis.

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

msucog,
Just wondering what you suggest we do at this point. Stop trying to resist?  Export everyone form coastal locations permanently?  You certainly seem to have a firm opinion about how we are misguided, but what's the solution?

Joe Tank

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

You suggest we move forward with "things" that we can control on a regular basis.  Please emphasis what you mean by "things".  I see you also mentioned earthquakes (natural disaster) along with 747's (man-made disaster).  I for one would love to hear any and all suggestions for controlling any of Mother Nature's occurences and for controlling or even predicting the volatile nature of mankind.  How do we move away or control snowstorms, tornados, hurricanes, earthquakes or even just general heavy rainfall events?  Are you suggesting we live in caves?  

It seems to be easy for someone who does not live in New Orleans to criticize funding of any type of flood protection and simply relocate everyone.  I agree that just building up the levees higher and higher is a faulty path, but I do not agree with just abandoning it (major oil and gas port and all...).  There are several methods of coastal restoration (the key to storm surge control) that could succeed if done properly.  James Eads had it right when he challenged the levees only option.

Maybe as engineers instead of abandoning a complex problem due to past ignorant government decisions and poor construction, we should be looking into possible solutions that not only alleviate the issue at hand but continually improve upon the quality of life for all residents along the coastal region.

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

(OP)
if i had all the solutions, i'd be a rich man.

i don't take issue with trying to provide engineering in an attempt to protect the public and provide a better quality of life. however, living below sea level on the coast is not a reasonable place to live. i didn't say we should completely abandon the area but people should not live there expecting the government to spend an infinite amount of money to protect them against every possible scenario. and the government shouldn't write blank checks to people that lost their homes, build again, and keep losing everything everytime a hurricane comes through. if the folks there have insurance to cover their losses, then that's great...that's the way it should be. perhaps i should have expanded on the main intent of my thread--the public does not fully understand the reality of engineering. you design for something you think my happen with some estimate of probability but it's no guarantee as to what could happen. the public there sure seems to expect the corp to build a fortress around them to protect against every possible scenario. if people want to live there, then that's fine...but it should be at their own risk. new orleans is not simply a higher risk area like other coastal places...it has the unfortunate luck to be located such that you should expect a major event to be catastrophic. i think that the current levees should be "maintained" as is and leave it at that. if it floods, it's terrible...it sucks...i feel bad...but maybe it's much more realistic to live elsewhere (preferably at or above sea level).

i love the beach but i don't live there for one simple reason...hurricanes. i also don't live on top of high seismic areas because i'm not particularly fond of large earthquakes. i also don't live next to certain rivers because they flood every so often. if i do live in those areas, then i don't expect the government to pick up the tab in the event something major happens. i'll pay for insurance (assuming that it's even available) and weigh my options from there.

and as far as the comment about 747's, that's aimed at the comments i recall hearing from the public who said the twin towers were not designed appropriately...which is a foolish arguement. we do what we can but every single high rise building is not going to be built to withstand impacts and sustained fire from a huge airplane. what if the terrorists would have flown a b-52 in to the towers? should we then design everything to withstand that? absolutely not...we live with the risks and move forward and accept the losses that results from future acts. if there's something reasonable that we can do to minimize the effects of future attacks, then we do it. for earthquakes, it's the same thing...we design for some particular event based on what we think might happen with a little safety factor added in there. however, we don't design everything to withstand a direct hit from a massive earthquake.

all i'm saying is that i think someone has the responsibility to look at doing something else down there. as mentioned, i do not know the solution. but simply not discussing it because it might come across as insensitive helps no one. we, as engineers (as a whole), will be the ones to blame so if you're fine with being thrown in to that pile, then i'm glad at least someone can sleep good at night.

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

I may have misunderstood your initial comment and apologize if I came across harsh.  I absolutely agree that it is NOT the government's place to bail people out when they (general public) take no precautions themselves (hurricane protective straps, building up on piles, carrying insurance...).  That is absolutely a waste of money and manpower.  

In trying to keep with the tone of the thread, I believe that we live in a world with increasingly demanding and complex engineering problems.  The world's population is only increasing, thereby expounding the problem of residential locations even further.  Japan, for instance, can only build up at this point (save for any man-made islands) creating a unique challenge for engineers.  Can we create designs in mind to protect from the worst possible scenario?  Sure.  But costs and resources will always limit this.  Heck, build levees 100 feet high and pumps capable of flows in excess of 100 million gallons per minute.  Yet the cost is not reasonable.  I agree that there is a compromising "middle ground" that we as engineers have to accept, as well as the general public.  If you live in New Orleans, you should accept that fact that at least once in your lifetime, your house MAY flood, and that is mainly due to the uncertainty of Mother Nature.  

In my extremely short career in engineering, I've come to realize that our efforts to control nature's forces are futile and rarely lack the fortitude to look ahead beyond several years.  Then again, I seem to deal with a lot of government (parish) entities.  
 

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

(OP)
perhaps i didn't state my side very well either. i don't dispute that the government should be there to help ensure that some basic quality of life can be achieved...but they should not provide complete bailouts time after time. if the folks down there can accept that the levees will hold "something" back and not expect it to be a complete savior of sorts, then i got no problem with it. it, at least for now, appears that the population down there learned some lessons from katrina and got the heck out of town. that in itself is a great improvement but i will interested to see if it holds true the next time or the time after that. either way, as long as the realities of the difficulties of trying to hold back the ocean are realized (and not blaming non-complete success on engineers), then all i can say is "good luck" to the news folk and people in new orleans.

i still maintain that the greater american states should not be the funding base for trying to protect the below sea level area. if the lowest lying bayou cannot sustain its own self, then perhaps there should be some restriction to living there. however, i doubt that the politics of it all will allow such a unique place to fade away with the tides that try to drown it. time will tell i suppose...and let's hope that the engineering mind can provide at least some resolution to future potential catastrophes at a realistic cost.

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

I agree that the politics of it won't allow complete relocation (not that I agree with complete relocation...).  The levees option allows developers access to a very profitable substance...land.  Once a levee goes up and all the land is pumped dry, developers move in and entice people to build.  This is one of the main causes of the problems in New Orleans and the lower parishes.  More construction with increased pumping speeds up subsidence to a point that entire areas are sinking at rates above 1 inch per year.  Not smart, but extremely profitable.  New Orleans could have avoided much of the problems that persist today if certain "correct paths" had been chosen by those in charge at the time.  Increased canal constructions for oil and gas (2/3's of which are currently unused) thereby increasing saltwater intrusion (which erodes our coastline), and poor USACE decisions concerning "management" of the Mississippi river are just a few of the compounded issues at hand.  

I agree that the other states should NOT bear Louisiana's burden.  Maybe all the money that is made by the oil companies could be put to good use....other than the golden parachutes they provide to upper management....

I live in Terrebonne Parish and although I love the area I'm from, I have actually argued the point that maybe the best approach would be to let the Mississippi regain its original path and allow alluvial flooding to occur to help retore all the sediment that is not deposited due to our wonderful levees.  Maybe this could help to restore our coastal regions to what they used to be and actually help with coastal erosion.  Just a thought.  Maybe Dubai can lend a hand with some of that sand they've been dredging off the ocean bottom and deposit it in my back yard...  

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

Trackfiend -

I generally agree your comments on the devopment of the New Orleans jungle. - It goes back to habitual following going back to the days Hewey Long and has only gotten worse (possibly due to scope or recent inability to control). There are some very sound areas for residences that the original settlers discovered, but some newer areas should never have ben built on. The country should not rotate around a small piece or real estate.

The levee commisions and their powers coupled by the other commissioners that rely on increasing the development and population(voters) only increased the lack of use of engineering and common sense and accepting outside controls. (It is strange how much political power local politicians can exert on a bunch of nationally elected members of Congress).

When the local politicians rejected the proposal that the C of E should manage the design, construction for flood and disaster control, it was hard to believe. This is especially true when I had to look at damages for several homes that were flooded by the owners unknowingly being paid to pump water from one neighborhood to reduce the water levels from 3 feet to 1 foot and flood his own home in order to qualify for goverment relief for that area.

I love the people, the general are, fishing and eating, but was previously there for a few days every year or two. When I had to be there after Katrina od many months, and see the problems and understand the local engineering/political controls over development, I got my real education after graduating, graduate school and 40 years professional experience.

I just got 2 messages that indicate that I will have to return after the current problems. At least I know my favorite restaurants are open and that I will be able to do some fishing in the next few months after the waters settle.

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

Mother Nature is a bitch - and She always wins....

If she wants New Orleans someday - she will take it back!!

 

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

As engineers our job is to give impartial advice so that others can make informed decisions. Ideally the "others" should include engineers who are able to understand the advice. Invariably the others are politicians who are not prone to making impartial rational decisions.

Any engineering development should be based on a cost benefit analysis. (The World Bank will not consider financing any overseas development project unless it returns a benefit that exceeds costs). If benefits exceed costs then the decision is clear. The problem is one of finding the finance and ranking projects for implementation in terms of affordability. How much tax do we want to pay now to invest to prevent future losses. If costs exceed benefits then, as engineers, our advice is to abandon the land to nature.  
 

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

Alleluiah Guys......
Engineering is an art and science by which the properties of matter are made useful to man......defined by webster
in its simplest form......

and its only my opinion that " An Engineer has got to do
what an Engineer has got to do." that is make all matter useful to mankind. Mother Nature is a matter like wise all sorts of energies...

So leave the money problem to the politicians, accountants,
Economist, bankers etc..... But for once lets all think as
Engineers.....

to all of you, I had fun reading your comments thanks to
all who participated and sharing their opinion especially the guy who triggered it.. many thanks

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

As engineers, we have a pretty good definition of "impartial, rational decision." Gather the data, make some supportable assumptions, crunch the numbers, and see what answer pops out.

Unfortunately, New Orleans doesn't lend itself to such a dispassionate view. As Einstein said, "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted, counts."

I family live nearby for a few years in the mid-80's, and even this Yankee white boy could see there was something special there. How do you put a dollar value on a historic city? What is the value of a social fabric that could not be replicated elsewhere?

The events of three years ago showed proved what experts have been saying for years: The current development pattern and storm protection methods are unsustainable.  

The historic districts are worth preserving,as is the culture. The city outside those areas probably should look a lot different than it does now. The question is, will someone step up and show the courage to make it happen?

     "...students of traffic are beginning to realize the false economy of mechanically controlled traffic, and hand work by trained officers will again prevail." - Wm. Phelps Eno, ca. 1928

"I'm searching for the questions, so my answers will make sense." - Stephen Brust

 

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

The flood wall featured on the current news broadcast built on Galveston Island is strong enough to remain in place for a Category 5 hurricane.  It is too low to stop all the current storm surge but strong enough to remain and survive for future storms.  Saying "infinite amounts of money" is a dis-service for the designers/builders of this structure when the cost/benefit ratio has beeen proven to be among the best of public work projects.  I would rather the moneys be allocated in a "low hanging fruit" priorty, the easiest built with the most payback be funded and the other projects deferred forever.

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

(OP)
Ike is perfect example of the whole "cat 4" or "cat 5" system. well educated folks realize that since the rating is based on the winds, it doesn't necessarily tell how "dangerous" the storm is. Ike is cat 2 but since it's so large across the gulf, the surge in the water will be huge. then add the waves on top of that and will people still say "well it was designed for a cat 5 but it failed on a cat 2". again, the "cat" part is based on the winds...not the sea levels. i suspect that in the future, someone will incorporate surf surge in to the system.

so here's a new perspective...we're not talking about the population of new orleans that lives below sea level. we're talking about a town very near sea level that was hit hard 100 years ago by a hurricane. if i'm not mistaken, i recall that back in the day, a whole population moved inland after that massive hurricane wiped out the area back then.

i think part of my problem lies with those that not only live in very dangerous, "underwater" areas...but they try to wait out the storm and then the good people that are the first responders must risk their lives to save these fools. so the problem compounds itself. personally, i would like to see the beaches cleared of condos and housing and left as open beach...i'm not that old and i remember when that was the case. if people do live there, i don't think they should be receiving checks from the gov't when their home is knocked out because they live within 20' of the ocean or below sea level. i got no problem with helping the more inland people receiving monies when a catastrophic hurricanes hits a highly populated area. maybe i'm crazy but i'm pretty sure my city/state has restrictions on building in flood prone areas.

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

Galveston rebuilt pretty fast after 1900, though it never regained its economic standing.  It's still a historic town (in Texas, Victorian counts as historic) with several generations of "BOI" (born on the island).  That whole seawall & grade raising undertaking was a concerted effort to keep the population there.

The western half of the island is another story, though.  Most of the development there is new.  And built on stilts because of routine flooding.  I have no idea what their insurance situation is.

I also don't know how many of those people would have bothered to evacuate their livestock.  The horses weren't the ones who made the choice to live in a flood area.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

msucog -

The big danger of an "Ike" is the damage to infrastructure, cities and businesses.

The economics dictate where certain facilities can be located since they are dependant on receiving raw materials, processing and shipping finished products out.

The products (oil, gas, widgets, pvc pipe, plastics, steel) are greatly influenced by availability of the raw materials. The Houston area is a prime example that is somewhat dictated by the methods of transmission of the raw materials. Because of the available jobs, people locate near the place of employment. This also dictates the location of power plants that are needed by the tax payers and businesses.

New Oleans is similar. The city is not based on "Bourbon Street", but much is predicated by the shipping needs.  There is a tremendous amount of shipments on the Mississippi river and on the Ohio, Illinois, Misouri and other rivers that requires the facilities and employees. The shipments go both ways, with much of it in the form of agriculture products that go down the river. There is not excuse of the specific location of some of the residential areas, but the necessary facilities required still require the protection from the natural distacters. There was a proposal to relocate the mouth of the Mississippi westward, but no one wanted the expense and development.

Major cities are located near water, usually near low areas where the possibility of disasters is known, but must be accepted. New York, Baltimore, Boston, Los angeles, San Francisco, St. Louis, Chicago are the basis for business and population. A land-locked city not on a major river is a rarity.
 

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

Let's be clear here.  The levees constraining the Mississippi were never in danger from Katrina.

The levees separating the city from Lake Ponchartain and the various canals that traverse the city failed, and no one was particularly surprised, because for a lot of reasons that are mostly political, they were built low, maintained improperly or not at all, and many were of a design that makes you go, "Huh?".


The non- river levees are being repaired/ reconstructed, but their current state is such that I have decided to ride out Ike in Hattiesburg...

 

Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

Thanks muscog for starting this thought provoking thread. The truth is in a combination of what everyone has said.  However, I would like to add one additional glaring contributing factor for the Big Easy catastrophe:

As stated in Time Magazine and ASCE publications, there were millions if not billions of $ earmarked to repair and enhance the levee walls in the decades preceding Katrina.  The wall's inability to withstand a Katrina were well documented for years.

You guessed it. The repair funds were shanghaied to other pet projects by local politicians.  Where is the outrage against these politicians who literally sold out on their constituents? To make matters worse, we Engineers are being admonished by the US Congress for not doing more to prevent Katrina and the I-35 Bridge collapse! (Re: The Wall Street Journal and ASCE news).

My friends and colleagues, if you would just sit in on a session of Congress, you would understand just how clueless the legislators are in truly appreciating the importance of infrastructure, its design and repair. They are more concerned over whether Democrats or Republicans hold the power!

Part of the problem is that those making the funding decisions (legislators) have the least amount of knowledge or information to make them. More must be done to get the funding decisions in the hands of those qualified to make the decisions.  The US Army Corps of Engineers should have a budget that cannot be raided by political whim.

We collectively must do more to educate the politicians or get involved in the political process ourselves. ASCE, ASME, ASHRAE and others are simply not able to make enough impact without our help.

A good peaceful feeling while driving across any bridge is what is at stake.

One last thought:  The Boy Scouts and my big brother taught me to pitch my tent on the high ground. They ought to teach the people in New Orleans that.

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

(OP)
i suppose the "politics" and "engineering principles" don't mix well when it comes down to it. that is probably much of the point of my starting this thread. the corp has their hands tied by political posturing. likewise, the general public doesn't have the capacity to fully understand the engineering and funds involved with what they want. i suppose that if someone told them the true costs and told them that they must pay for it and vote prior to proceeding, the vote would not pass it. i do like the idea of having big oil pay for it. i had not thought of that before but that's a heck of an idea. maybe if the dems will stop blocking it, the next refinery could be built away from the coast...simply have a transfer port on the coast and send it inland to non flood prone areas.

thanks for everyone's opinion...i learned a few new ideas in this thread. any thoughts on how to cost effectively improve things along the coast?

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

The coast and water have always attracted people, plants, processors and commerce. Water shipping is so efficient and cheap that is it difficult to avoid taking advantage of. This applies to oil, grain, aggregate and even kids clothing.

A minor problem is the size of the new transports and limitations - Canals (Panama, Suez, etc.), river barges vs. ocean ships and topography for pumping and construction (costs) of pipelines for oil, gas, etc.

The transportation cost is real on a global scale and even locally.

Locally, we were buying lightweight aggregate from a company we owned that was about 40 miles away by truck and determined that we could by lightweight aggregate shipped by river barge from Louisiana (800 miles) with a 4 mile truck haul. - The reason was the production of the aggregate used transported fuels and the down river aggregate was a cheap "back haul" rate up the river for the barges since the main traffic was down river to the gulf at that time.

Globally, we bought pumice aggregate from Greece and produced bestter products in Virginia cheaper than using locally processed materials, some from 80 miles away. - I also understand some Alaskan oil ("our oil") is sold to Asian countries because it is cheaper to supply oil needs for the east coast and gulf from foreign suppliers in Mexico, Venezuala and the middle east. - This may have changes recently.

Walmart is currently using a super ship for shipments from Asia to the west coast. It is so big it will not fit though the canal, so it limited to the west coast because long distance truck shipments are are not feasible. - The ship cuts about 4 or 5 days off a trans-Pacific crossing with a crew of 13 (not incuding cooks), so labor is not a factor.

The bottom line is that as long as we need materials and commerce, the challenging coastal areas make practical and economic sense for the entire country. These sites will attract business and money spent prudently in facilites and protection will be paid for by consumers untimately. If you have a local politically oriented area controlling design concepts, designs and construction, this voids the benefits. People will follow work. - About 6 months after Katrina, many restaurants (McDonalds, Burger Kings, Shoneys and not Brennans) in the New Orleans area were not open because there was no one that could get to work. I could not find abreakfast, so I had to drive 10 miles to a dister center instaed of across the stret just to start work and pick up a box lunch.

Dick

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

2
This is an interesting narrative about the Mississippi River.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/1987/02/23/1987_02_23_039_TNY_CARDS_000347146

It basically says that the Mississippi is being held in place against nature, which wants it to be where the ATCHAFALAYA River is. Of course, we can't let that happen because New Orleans would be ruined (economically). But one day, nature will win and the river will move, and it will be catastrophic because we've stopped it for so long.

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

drsensei -

That is very accurate and was an option many, many years ago, but politicians (and local money) vetoed it.

In an ideal world, engineers can design to resist most forces.

Unfortunately, most flatland ports are located on low, poor, unstable soil. The only good rock in New Orleans is the old ballast from the sailing ships and that is used for hardscaping. If you want good sand, you need to barge it in from 100-300 miles upstream.

A portion of the river flow could be diverted and may improve the delta storm barrier situation.

The combination of the poor soils, low elevation AND hurricanes makes for a costly and difficult solution. The city is in wrong place for people to live unless they want to drive further.
 

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

First, I would like to say this is a good post and very relevant and applicable to what engineers do.  In an ideal world with infinite money and resources engineers could design structures to withstand enormous forces.  But we have to take into account probabilities of occurances, and the financial aspect of construction and maintainance of our projects.  Levees could have been designed to protect New Orleans, but with a public works operation to build those levees would have cost the city a small fortune which means people would have to incurr a tax increase which would have to be voted on and would probably never pass because more taxes does not make people happy.  Now I know its not the exactly the same thing, but I live in Missouri and the condition of our highways is abismal.  MoDot could easily fix the problem with the correct funds, but thats never going to happen because of the state's budget and fixing the problem requires higher taxes.  

Yes, public safety first but we can not treat every job as if there is unlimited funds for it.  Money is always a factor in any job. there is no point in designing a building to withstand the force of a 747 plummeting from the sky.  If the building you designed gets hit, well thats just bad luck.  I am not saying we shouldn't try to protect against hurricanes and other powerful natural forces, but we need to be realistic about the situation.

RE: hurricanes and our feable attempt to withstand them

(OP)
i'm glad this thread has gotten such attention from all sides. i suppose it's even more relevant now in our struggling market where government funded projects have dried up significantly. i guess that you could always look at it from a "job creation" perspective as well so maybe it would be good...but the money has to come from somewhere and we can't even fund our own projects in our state much less 10 hours away. it's all about "absolute critical infrastructure" versus "critical infrastructure" verus "necessary infrastructure" and so on and so on as to which projects are funded and which ones are postponed or even cancelled (even after the project has been awarded). we, as engineer, and other such as the public and government folks have got to set priorities instead of handing out money to everyone with their hand out. i think the next year will be a real eye opener as to how our (country as a whole) perspective is really sort of ass backwards right now. it's now all about special interest groups and free handouts whether you earn them or not. and unfortunately, engineering will likely take a back seat to "we got to have it cheap"...and "cheap" they will get but at a significant price.

thanks for the posts.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources