Lessons Learned from Katrina: How Can Engineers Apply Them for the Future?

[Ivan Seeking]

Greg mentioned this in GD and it seems that there are innumerable lessons to be learned from this storm and the resulting devastation. While this is all fresh in everyone's minds, what have you seen that could have been done better or prevented altogether? What lessons are learned? How can or should engineers apply these lessons in future endeavors?

 

[russ_watters]

Eek - from an engineering standpoint, Greg's suggestion of abandoning the city is probably the most sound. The infrastructure (the levy system) was designed to withstand a cat3 hurricane and this storm was right at the limit of that. I suppose you could up the design criteria to a cat4 hurricane, but in the battle between the armor and the bullet, the bullet generally wins.

 

[Astronuc]

First of all, do not build dwelling and commercial structures in an area that is below the prevail water level. On the other hand, if one does, learn from the Dutch in the Netherlands - they seem to do it very well - but then they do not get Category 3 or 4 hurricanes.

People may remember the floods along the Mississippi many years ago. The several levees collapsed because they were undermined when they became water-logged. I suspect that was what happened here. So one of the big engineering question is - were the levees that broke properly maintained.

OK, assuming the levee can be breached - what is the backup? The pumps were not working. Why not? It might not have made a difference in the current situation though. Perhaps more pumps or pumps of greater capacity were needed.

Any engineer must understand the technology her or she is employing, and must also understand the environment in which the technology is applied.

The American Society of Civil Engineers gives a periodic report on the infrastructure in the US. It is generally poor, and has been getting poorer for some time.

Congested highways, overflowing sewers and corroding bridges are constant reminders of the looming crisis that jeopardizes our nation's prosperity and our quality of life. With new grades for the first time since 2001, our nation's infrastructure has shown little to no improvement since receiving a collective D+ in 2001, with some areas sliding toward failing grades. The American Society of Civil Engineers' 2005 Report Card for America's Infrastructure assessed the same 12 infrastructure categories as in 2001, and added three new categories. Access the complete Report Card with details on each infrastructure category and state infrastructure information.

- http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2005/index.cfm

The Army Corp of Engineers has suspended some important work because funds have been diverted to the war in Iraq - with huge profits going to Kellog, Brown and Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton. That kind of money could have been spent to upgrade the levees in New Orleans and many other domestic projects.

 

[hitssquad]

How can or should engineers apply these lessons in future endeavors?

www.monolithicdome.com

 

[faust9]

I tend to agree with the "Don't live were the water wants to be" philosophy. Man Vs Mother Nature has a time tested result---Mother Nature wins. We have very few successes when actually doing battle with the old gal. We do our best but just like the rumble in the jungle we are only punching at the better figher wearing ourselves down.

I remember a few years back when a developer somewhere along the Mighty Miss wanted the Army corp to build new levies and breaks to dry out a flood plane---key words being flood plane---to make way for a strip mall. That is just stupid IMHO because it's taking my good taxdollars to expand the economy in the form of Old Navy Jeans and booze at some remote location. More importantly, the project was slated to be placed on a FLOOD PLANE---it was doomed to fail at some point give historical precident. Live near a river---you get flooded from time to time.

Live 2 feet below sea level right next to the Gulf of Mexico then a major flood was all but enevitable. Build a wall for a Cat4 then along comes a cat5. Build for a cat5 then whoops here comes a tsunami or the wall fails(classis Zeppelin might I add). There is little we can do to prevent something like this except live where the water doesn't to begin with.


All of that aside the only solution is to throw another dollar at it. Obviously the Levies were subpar. Then need to be built stronger and higher. The pumps were not up to snuff. Then need to be larger and probably from the looks of things designed to keep the flood plane dry in the face of 1 failed levy. A city evacuation plane needs to be put into place. The one used was inadiquate from what I saw on the news. Long linens with zero vehicle movement is what we'd expect; however, that doesn't make it right. I'm sure if a nuclear reactor was in the area and alarms started going off then traffic jams would probably not have been as bad. The levies---if designed for a cat three with a cat3-4 storm rolling in should have been suspect from the beginning. The news and officials were too relieved when the storm pushed east at the last minute---wrong. I was sitting at home and said to my wife that the area should be evacuated COMPLETELY and all caution should have been taken instead of false hope immediatly after the storm passed. It was a poor poor decision to let anyone stay and an even worse decision to hail the victors 10 minutes after the storm passed if bit a few feet to the right.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

According to the mayor of NO, and I don't know exactly how this is measured, but he stated that the storm surge drops one foot for every acre of intervening wetlands.

Also, don't forget, NO is just one town involved in all of this. Even if we ignore the general interpretation of Global Climate Change, meteorologists are predicting decades of increased storm activity as compared to our current definitions of "normal" activity. Of course, to me it seems reasonable to begin incorporating GCC into our thinking.

 

[FredGarvin]

Honestly, I don't think there are many lessons learned from an engineering standpoint, basically because of what Faust has already stated. Nature will win no matter what. Water will go to where it wants to eventually. Even looking at Biloxi, MS there's nothing really that can be designed to keep 8 feet of water from destroying everything you own. Mostly I see lessons learned for preparedness, evacuation schemes and recovery plannings.

With the current methods of thinking, especially when it comes to business and money, upgrading things like levees are not on the radar, even if they did have the money. If something has worked up to this point, why would anyone throw money at it? It always takes an event like this to point out shortcomings.

 

[Clausius2]

What I don't really understand is why there are some stubborn people who keeps on building below sea level, knowing this is a zone prone to floods and hurricanes.

I think that to prevent this situation there is needed some of more money, but constructors usually don't want to think of it. The SuperDome almost didn't resist the wind, it is something unbelievable.

Anyway this kind of great disasters are almost unavoidable. The best thing one can do is to run away from the zone. Now, Bush and the insurance companies are going to practise a well known field of engineering: economics engineering.

 

[LURCH]

I don't think bigger pumps would help. The pumps they had were adequate for almost any amount of rainfall, and once the levy breaks, no pump would help (for one thing, where would you pump the water to?).

Reinforcing the levy would be possible, but probably expensive. The idea that immediately came to my mind was to sink a cement barrier from near the crest of the levy (just a little bit to the "wet" side) all the way down to bedrock. If water can't soak through and undermine the base of the levy, it will probably hold.

But I think what is really needed is a more effective means of repair. I saw News reel footage of a busted Dyke (in Japan, I think) and it just happened that this particular Dyke had a railway running across the top of it. The emergency workers coordinated with the railroad to drive boxcars filled with scrap iron and other heavy payloads off the end of the railway. They just kept throwing railroad cars at it until they plugged the whole. Counties in which populated areas depend on a levy to protect them from flooding should have some means of repairing the levy available and ready for quick deployment. Until the hole is patched the waters can't recede, rescue work is hindered, neither can permanent repairs to the levy get started.

 

[arildno]

I totally disagree with those who essentially say that N.O. ought to be evacuated.
The mere fact that in the French Quarter, for example, there are lots of buildings from the 18th-19th century still standing shows that on the whole, the risk of building there is minimal, considering events in a longer perspective.

Freak events do occur, it doesn't follow that one should let them rule our building practices.

 

[mezarashi]

Freak events do occur, it doesn't follow that one should let them rule our building practices.

Well, evacuation and abandonment are two different things. I think that complete evacuation would have been the best choice. There's nothing you can do about it by staying back, as staying back will not help prevent your house from being torn apart, flooded, etc. In addition, you need to make sure you and your family survive it through with food, water, etc.

On the other hand, although I would like to advocate not going up against mother nature, I understand that people have a way of life and attachment to a place, so let them live where they want. If our technology allowed, I guess there would be people who would want to live on the Moon. I understand however, that these people keep in mind the risks involved, that their houses and everything they've lived for can be swept away. It's a threat they must accept the same way we know we can die in a car accident yet we drive, the same way we know we can die of a terrorist attack, but we continue on with our lives. Of course we try the best we can, technologically, to prevent disaster, but technology has shown its limits time and again unfortunately.

 

[arildno]

But the fact is that if there had been a great risk living in the French Quarter of New Orleans, those houses would have been destroyed ages ago by similar events.
Since they're still standing, it shows that in a 200-year perspective, it is, in fact, quite safe to settle down in New Orleans.

 

[Astronuc]

But the fact is that if there had been a great risk living in the French Quarter of New Orleans, those houses would have been destroyed ages ago by similar events.
Since they're still standing, it shows that in a 200-year perspective, it is, in fact, quite safe to settle down in New Orleans.

This is somewhat true. But the boundary conditions have changed in 200 years.

The development in the region has changed the flow of the Mississippi delta. There used to be more places for water to run-off. Now many places are developed, so the water has to go either into the Mississippi River or Lake Ponchatrain, which can only take so much from other areas, or not at all if a strong hurricane and tidal surge come along.

Also, the infrastructure is older. One would expect a certain level of maintenance. The infrastructure is not being properly maintained. How can I say this? Well, the levees broke, when they should not have. Perhaps the design was/is inadequate - and that is an engineering matter.

The environment is what it is, and we can't quickly change it the way we want it.

I suspect there has been plans to improve (and perhaps maintain) the levees, but these were deferred (deferred maintenance has destroyed many industries in the US, e.g. railroads during the 1960's-1980's).

I agree with others, no one should be building homes and business in areas that are prone to flooding. I know from example around Houston, Tx, where areas that were ostensibly in a 100-yr flood plain, began flooding several times per decade. This happened because stronger storms increased in frequency, the surrounding development reduced the capacity of the area to absorb water, and in some cases the ground actually subsided because of the huge amounts of water that have been removed from underground aquifers.

It is both a matter of public policy, as well as engineering, and engineers need to be heard in the public forum.

-----------------

It makes me ill and angry to see what has happened along the Gulf Coast, particularly in New Orleans, because much of it could have been avoided. All the death and destruction, and the economic cost, could have been prevented.

We can't bring back all those people who died.

 

[arildno]

Well, I don't know whether flooding is a recurring problem in the New Orleans area; if it is, then that certainly is relevant on its own "merit".
However, I am not that sure if that can be regarded as a lesson drawn from the Katrina event.

 

[ohwilleke]

The notable thing about Katrina is that it was not a surprise. Cat 4+ hurricanes happen, regularly. One was going to hit NO sometime or other.

One can engineer around some of these issues. In Okinawa, buildings are put above sea level and made out of reinforced concrete. They laugh at comparable storms. In Boston, they filled in the land until it was above sea level. Along Cherry Creek in Denver, where I live, near the flood plain, some of the newer apartment buildings sit atop parking garages, so that if the Creek does flood, it simply fills a parking garage with muck, and they turned flood plain itself into a park. Modern urban planning calls for using the areas most vulnerable to flooding as parks.

New Orleans can rebuild without being entirely stupid about it.

* Some neighborhoods, which are the furthest below sea level and least historic, should be razed and turned into parks that can double as drainage areas. Other less historic neighorhoods should be infilled before being rebuilt.
* Likewise, don't rebuild every single suburb -- NO needs wetland space surrounding it, to buffer rainfalls and storm surges. The metro area needs greenbelts.
* Every significant public building and apartment complex should have a back up power supply system and back up water supply system.
* New buildings should be built to withstand a Cat 5 hurricane with only minor damage.
* Mobile homes should be banned within 50 miles of the coast in every state within the hurricane zone.
* The electrical delivery system should be rebuilt in places where fallen wires won't do much harm.
* Don't put your primary shelter for people who don't have the means to evacuate, which was the Superdome in this case, in a flood plain with no high ground escape route attached to it. And, take extra care to insure that your primary emergency shelters can function even when the water, sewage, power grid collapses.
* Build attics with roof escapes. Mandate roof escapes in the building code.
* Pre-emptively shut down natural gas lines and the electrical system (or at least large segments of it) when facing a massive hurricane hit, in order to prevent fires and live wires in the aftermath.
* Reconsider rebuilding the most vulnerable bridges.
* Consider building a levee to segregate industrial areas like oil and gas facilities from urban/commercial areas, in the event of flooding.

 

[kdinser]

I'll agree 100%, Iraq, huge mistake. On the other hand, do you seriously think that if the money was not being spent on Iraq, it would have been spent to prevent this disaster? No chance, it would have been wasted and abused somewhere else.

The real enemy here is complacency. We dodged the bullet before, so of course, we will dodge it every time it comes. Sounds like a friend of mine who has just been arrested for DUI for the 5th time.

As far as rebuilding goes, of course they will rebuild. Then, when it happens again, people will actually stand and wonder what they have done to deserve this tragedy.

 

[russ_watters]

But the fact is that if there had been a great risk living in the French Quarter of New Orleans, those houses would have been destroyed ages ago by similar events.
Since they're still standing, it shows that in a 200-year perspective, it is, in fact, quite safe to settle down in New Orleans.

Well, I just read that the levee system in the Netherlands is built to withstand a 1250 year flood. 200 years (if that's the actual criteria) just isn't enough when you're talking about the damage that can be done to a modern city. They rolled the dice on, say, a $10 billion levee system and lost perhaps $100 billion due to the damage.

 

[faust9]

I'd like to add that arildno's point about the French Quarter is meaningless because the French chose that area for a city because it was the highest point in the entire flood plane. So, if the highest point STILL got flooded then the rest of the area REALLY got flooded(the 80% of NO underwater stat plays that out too).

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Here's an easy one that has come to my attention. Not really engineering so much as a disaster planning issue, but one problem cited often is that survivors don't know where the rescue centers and relief supplies are found. It seems seems that something as simple as a big white helium balloon with a bright red cross could be set aloft as a marker easily seen from miles around.

When the evacuation order was first given, it also seems that evacuation busses should have been rushed in for those who were unable to evacuate due to age, health, or other reasons.

 

[russ_watters]

When the evacuation order was first given, it also seems that evacuation busses should have been rushed in for those who were unable to evacuate due to age, health, or other reasons.

Ie, "mandatory evactuations" need to be a little more mandatory.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Ie, "mandatory evactuations" need to be a little more mandatory.

But beyond that, many people simply didn't have the means to go anywhere.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

a related article

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina's devastation, some Americans--particularly Gulf Coast residents--may be wondering whether there are places in the U.S. that are safe from such natural disasters.

The short answer? No [continued]

http://www.forbes.com/realestate/2005/08/30/safestplaces-insurance-realestate-cx_sc_0830home_ls.html

 

[ohwilleke]

But beyond that, many people simply didn't have the means to go anywhere.

Indeed. Juxtapose this. In one part of New Orleans, a long line of school buses now submerged. In another part of New Orleans, tens of thousands of people in the Superdome because they lacked transportation to leave the city.

 

[ohwilleke]

Well, I just read that the levee system in the Netherlands is built to withstand a 1250 year flood. 200 years (if that's the actual criteria) just isn't enough when you're talking about the damage that can be done to a modern city. They rolled the dice on, say, a $10 billion levee system and lost perhaps $100 billion due to the damage.

In contrast, the New Orleans levees were built to handle a Category 3 Hurricane. Needless to say, that is not a 200 year event, or even a 1250 year event. (BTW, floods and hurricanes tend to have logorhythmic frequency-magnitude distributions, which is how 100 year and 500 year flood plains, e.g., are determined, if you know the frequency of low severity events you can usually make a best log fit approximation that is very accurate).

 

[arildno]

Well, from what I thought, N.O. has never experienced any thing like Katrina before.
Having that as a premise, I really can't see much reason for labeling life in N.O. as unsafe, UNLESS you have reason to believe that similar events like Katrina will occur more frequently in the future than they have done in the past.

If the premise is wrong, i.e, that N.O. is facing flodings and hurricans on a regular basis, that's a whole different story.

 

[FredGarvin]

There was a story on last night's news about a local guy who was stationed in Biloxi the last time it was destroyed by a hurricane ('64 I think). So it is not a one time event for Mississippi anyways.

Of all the footage I see on the news, it seems like there is a large percentage of people in N.O. that are even incapable of helping themselves. Perhaps it's just the clips I keep seeing, but it makes it seem like N.O. was populated by morbidly obese people that have respiratory problems. I would think it would take weeks of evacuation efforts to move them alone since they obviously can't move themselves. IMO that is a daunting task.

I would be very surprised if the levee system there is not going to be upgraded to handle exactly the level storm Katrina was.

I would tend to disagree with Ivan's Forbes link. Detroit, apart from the occasional snow storm, really doesn't get hit with natural disasters. The manmade disasters are much more frequent though!

 

[russ_watters]

Well, from what I thought, N.O. has never experienced any thing like Katrina before.
Having that as a premise, I really can't see much reason for labeling life in N.O. as unsafe, UNLESS you have reason to believe that similar events like Katrina will occur more frequently in the future than they have done in the past.

If the premise is wrong, i.e, that N.O. is facing flodings and hurricans on a regular basis, that's a whole different story.

I don't know if the exact conditions have been met before, but from http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastdead.html , I count 3 similar events and several near-misses in the past century.

What was a little unique about this one, as I understand it, is that while the hurricane backed-down from cat5, the storm surge remained on par with a cat5 storm.

 

[hitssquad]

What was a little unique about this one, as I understand it, is that while the hurricane backed-down from cat5, the storm surge remained on par with a cat5 storm.

Reportedly, the fact that it slowed down to 12 MPH helped it build up the surge. If it had come in faster, the surge would have been smaller.

 

[arildno]

I don't know if the exact conditions have been met before, but from http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastdead.html , I count 3 similar events and several near-misses in the past century.

What was a little unique about this one, as I understand it, is that while the hurricane backed-down from cat5, the storm surge remained on par with a cat5 storm.

Thanks for the links, russ.

 

[Astronuc]

I posted some links to US hurricane history here -

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=731458#post731458


What has happened has been predicted for sometime - and was emphasized in Aug 1992 with hurricane Andrew (also a Category 5).

Also - NOAA RAISES THE 2005 ATLANTIC HURRICANE SEASON OUTLOOK
Bulk of This Season's Storms Still to Come

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2005/s2484.htm

The Atlantic has become steadily 'warmer' during the past few years, and is the warmest its been in a long time, which means the probability of Cat 4-5 hurricanes has increased.

What will happen when we have another Andrew/Katrina?

 

[Astronuc]

What was a little unique about this one, as I understand it, is that while the hurricane backed-down from cat5, the storm surge remained on par with a cat5 storm.

Possibly due to momentum or inertia. It became a Cat 4 (just shy of Cat 5) just about the time the eye hit land. However, the surge had already developed and it takes hours to dissipate.

Apparently some cooler, drier air moved in from the NW and reduced the strength of the Katrina just about the time it made landfall.

 

[arildno]

I was unaware of that necessary work to keep the levees functional seems to have been neglected.
Perhaps the most important lesson to be drawn from this, is that one ought, on occasion, to pay for stuff whose value is not immediately apparent..

 

[LURCH]

I was talking with a friend today, and heard the most infuriating news yet. He informed me that the city of New Orleans had drawn up plans and budgetted for upgrades to the entire levy system. I believe they even took bids and awarded a contract but, just when it was time for the work to brgin, the contract was pulled, its funding cancelled. Had the work gone ahead as planned, the improvements would have started five years ago, and finished last year.

Has anyone else heard this? Can anyone confirm/deny?

 

[Astronuc]

I was talking with a friend today, and heard the most infuriating news yet. He informed me that the city of New Orleans had drawn up plans and budgetted for upgrades to the entire levy system. I believe they even took bids and awarded a contract but, just when it was time for the work to begin, the contract was pulled, its funding cancelled. Had the work gone ahead as planned, the improvements would have started five years ago, and finished last year.

Has anyone else heard this? Can anyone confirm/deny?

There are lots of rumors out and about. It will take some time to sort out what happened or didn't and why.

However, it is generally understood (but perhaps only anecdotally substantiated) that there is a problem with corruption in New Orleans and Louisiana politics. Perhaps its somewhat worse than most places, or maybe this is just a big city problem.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It seems that communication is lacking. This has been a huge problem. The emergency workers can't talk with each other, and perhaps more importantly, there is no information getting to the masses of victims. One guy was just asking for someone in charge [with the N. Guard] with a loudspeaker. People need information in order to help reduce the panic. People seem to be starting to lose their minds.

 

[Astronuc]

It seems that communication is lacking. This has been a huge problem. The emergency workers can't talk with each other, and perhaps more importantly, there is no information getting to the masses of victims. One guy was just asking for someone in charge [with the N. Guard] with a loudspeaker. People need information in order to help reduce the panic. People seem to be starting to lose their minds.

Emergency Management - Hey, isn't that what FEMA is supposed to do?!?

OK - here's a revelation -

http://news.yahoo.com/s/krwashbureau/20050902/ts_krwashbureau/_wea_katrina_levee - on Yahoo, By Pete Carey, Knight Ridder Newspapers

The levee system that protected New Orleans from hurricane-caused surges along Lake Pontchartrain was never designed to survive a storm the size of Hurricane Katrina, the Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday.

The levees were built to withstand only a Category 3 storm, something projections suggested would strike New Orleans only once every two or three centuries, the commander of the corps, Lt. Gen. Carl A. Strock, told reporters in a conference call. Katrina was a Category 4 storm.

"Unfortunately, that occurred in this case," Strock said.

Strock said that the levee system's design was settled on a quarter of a century ago, before the current numerical system of classifying storms was in widespread use. He said that studies had begun recently on strengthening the system to protect against Category 4 and 5 hurricanes, but hadn't progressed very far.

Strock added that despite a May report by the Corps' Louisiana district that a lack of federal funding had slowed construction of hurricane protection, nothing the Corps could have done recently would have prevented Katrina from flooding New Orleans.

"The levee projects that failed were at full project design and were not really going to be improved," Strock said.

Strock's comments drew immediate criticism from flood-protection advocates, who said that the Corps' May report was a call for action and a complaint about insufficient funding, and that no action took place.

"The Corps knew, everybody knew, that the levees had limited capability," said Joseph N. Suhayda, a retired director of the Louisiana State University's Water Resources and Research Institute. "Because of exercises and simulations, we knew that the consequences of overtopping (water coming over the levees) would be disastrous. People were playing with matches in the fireworks factory and it went off."

Suhayda, an expert in coastal oceanography, said, "the fact the levee failed is not according to design. If it was overtopped, it's because it was lower in that spot than other spots. The fact that it was only designed for a Category 3 meant it was going to get overtopped. I knew that. They knew that. There were limits."

Some critics Thursday questioned the usefulness of levees, saying that all of them fail eventually.

"There are lots of ways for levees to fail. Overtopping is just one of them," said Michael K. Lindell, of Texas A&M University's Hazard Reduction and Recovery Center. "There's a lot of smokescreen about 'low probabilities.' Low probabilities just means 'Takes a long time.' "

Strock said that stopping the flow of water over the levees has proved to be "a very challenging effort."

Engineers have been unable to reach the levees themselves and have had to draw up plans based only on observations from the air, he said. "We, too, are victims in this situation," he said.

In Louisiana, Army Corps officials said they hoped that one break, in what's known as the 17th Street Canal, might be closed by the end of Thursday, but that a second break in the London Avenue canal is proving more intractable.

Short sections of the walls that protected the city from the waters of Lake Pontchartrain caved in under storm surges, including an area that recently had been strengthened.

A fact sheet issued by the Corps in May said that seven construction projects in New Orleans had been stalled for lack of funding. It noted that the budget proposed by President Bush for 2005 was $3 million and termed that amount insufficient to fund new construction contracts.

"We could spend $20 million if the funds were provided," the fact sheet said. Two major pump stations needed to be protected against hurricane storm surges, the fact sheet said, but the budgets for 2005 and 2006 "will prevent the corps from addressing these pressing needs."

Acknowledging delays in construction, Corps officials in Louisiana said that those projects weren't where the failures occurred. "They did not contribute to the flooding of the city," said Al Naomi, a senior project manager.

"The design was not adequate to protect against a storm of this nature," he said. "We were not authorized to provide protection to Category 4 or 5 design."

Ooops!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Here's a couple of things that come to mind wrt the comm problems

Solar powered cell phones, or at least chargers are needed. And the little hand powered radios are huge in remote areas of Affrica and other regions where there is no power, this also seems a good option for disaster response and survival...and cell phones.

I just don't see how it is that even the emergency workers have no common communications network. They could bring in communications blimps, or even planes like those used to broadcast to Iraq during the war. But I'm not entirely sure why the emergency workers can't communicate. I assume that all towers are down.

 

[FredGarvin]

It is frustrating about the communication issues. However, how does one plan to have an unknown number of people come to an area from unknown areas in the country and expect there to be a protocol or way for them to immediately talk to each other? The only ways I can think of is to have standardized com. techniques throughout the country and to immediately establish the central point for all communications in the stricken area. I am sure they have to haveset up some kind of command structure by now. The question is, how fast can they get the com net to spread from the central point? That may be the real crux of the issue.

 

[engineer type]

Katrina Lessons Learned:

Every levee or dam ever built will overtop in a given storm event. Several factors are making extreme storm events more common. Human interference aside, climate change is the norm for the planet Earth. Our atmosphere is not a static system but our regulatory and engineering design tools do not reflect this fact and are not kept up-to-date. I work in the northeast US and it has been known for 15 years that the design storms legislated for use are not conservative enough. No disasters have resulted yet so nothing has changed. Some areas will naturally have increasing average rainfall, others will have increasing extremes in weather while others areas see decreases. Global warming due to any greenhouse effect only exacerbates some natural trends. The continued filling of wetlands and mangroves, especially on the gulf coast, contributes to increase flooding.

Urbanization also contributes heavily increasing flooding. Any area that is/was zoned for urban or commercial development should have compensatory stormwater detention. Relying on individual site owners to build and maintain stormwater detention facilities is largely a failed policy. It only takes 4-20 years for a small detention basin to silt in if it is not maintained. Many small site specific stormwater detention facilities actually contribute to major flooding events. A majority of urbanization takes place in the lower portion of watersheds near rivers and other water sources. Because site specific detention facilities associated with urban commercial sites are located in lower areas of the water shed they hold back stormwater until peak flows from upriver reach them. Flood control detention facilities on the middle to upper reaches of a watershed are the most effective at regulating the flood/drought cycle of rivers. Each municipality should be assed by the state on the amount and maximum percent impervious area of its existing and new zoning districts. The states should then use than money to create and/or expand their own stormwater management nature preserves like Clough State Park here in New Hampshire that can be centrally managed in conjunction with weather reports to reduce the flow in river systems ahead of the track of major storms.

Although not all of the specific measures I suggest below are practicable due to cost concerns a mix of a few could avert another disaster:

Only the highest half of New Orleans should be rebuilt. Dredge and construction demolition material from the lower half used to raise the grade of the portion to be rebuilt to at least 8 feet above sea level. The residents and businesses from the lower half of the city should be resettled in a new planned city in rural Louisiana, far away from any floodplains. Lower New Orleans could be turned into a mangrove park as environmental and flood storage mitigation of earlier destruction. Any portion of New Orleans to be rebuilt below the level of the Mississippi should be a canal based city like old Venice or Bangkok. This principle is applicable elsewhere, by removing old substandard levees and restoring the function of floodplains we can we can gain storage capacity to reduce pressure on other areas. Anyone who wants to remain living in the floodplain will have to mount their house on a barge or build site specific levees and pumps.

Storm-proof bunkers are needed on vital levees, pre-equipped with trucks or barges, excavators and sand bags and concrete mix and manned and maintained by trained volunteer organizations made up of people living behind the levee.

Planned failure (overflow) points spaced along levees, armored with pavement or stone located will cause less damage downstream and decrease pressure on unarmored sections of the levee system. In the New Orleans case this would have allowed some water from Lake Ponchatrain to be passed through the city and its flood pumps out to the Mississippi (obviously putting it back into Ponchatrain would have been futile).

Concrete crown bars for vital levees protecting urban areas should be installed after initial settlement of the levee is nearly complete, usually 10 to 20 years after construction. These crown bars are recommended by the Army Corps of Engineers but they seldom follow their own recommendation because of cost and shoddy construction at previous installation attempts.

Annual survey grade checks of the levee systems to monitor settlement identify low points. Better funded inspection and repair of undermining and seepage problems is imperative. Toe caps, bentonite clay cores and geotextile reinforcing are common repair solutions.

During an evacuation plan to have your cities school bus drivers take their normal routes with loud speakers. They can drive through neighborhoods announcing the evacuation and what times they will be back to pick everyone up. Then they make a couple more runs through the neighbor hoods to pick up everyone who doesn’t have a car and take them to safety.

Review by the office of Homeland Security of municipal, County and State disaster planning so that no one can get away with being as unprepared as New Orleans and the State of Louisiana obviously where. Punitive federal taxation in addition to garnering the wages of emergency planning personnel should be imposed on districts repeatedly failing readiness planning standards and testing.

FEMA and insurance companies need to charge higher premiums for properties located in low-lying, flood and hurricane prone areas. I for one am tired of my tax dollars being used to subsidize reconstruction of the same homes and businesses again and again. State and Federal Government funds need to be dedicated to emergency search and rescue, land swapping deals (taking disaster prone beach front and low lying properties for parks with destroyed buildings and giving back inland property for the insurance company to build on), strengthening but not repairing damaged buildings, and

 

[Astronuc]

It is frustrating about the communication issues. However, how does one plan to have an unknown number of people come to an area from unknown areas in the country and expect there to be a protocol or way for them to immediately talk to each other? The only ways I can think of is to have standardized com. techniques throughout the country and to immediately establish the central point for all communications in the stricken area. I am sure they have to haveset up some kind of command structure by now. The question is, how fast can they get the com net to spread from the central point?

Good questions Fred, but I would expect FEMA and Homeland Security should have already figured that out years ago. What we keep finding out, as was the case in 9/11 and other major disasters, is the system is not working, and has not been working. Communications was a problem in NYC. Whatever happened to lessons learned.

What have these people been doing? On what have they been spending the $billions?

Doesn't each state have a FEMA coordinator? Isn't there already a database with all the comm frequencies of each police, fire, emergency response unit? If not, why not?

Whatever happened to the Civil Defense infrastructure?

Given that Hurricane Andrew occurred 13 years ago, and they had comm problems back then, and 9/11 was almost 4 years ago, what was done to prevent the same problems?

Isn't it the job of FEMA and HS to ask these questions and find solutions - already?

I answered one of my questions, regarding CD infrastructure -

The Federal Emergency Management Agency - a former independent agency that became part of the new Department of Homeland Security in March 2003 - is tasked with responding to, planning for, recovering from and mitigating against disasters. FEMA can trace its beginnings to the Congressional Act of 1803. This act, generally considered the first piece of disaster legislation, provided assistance to a New Hampshire town following an extensive fire. In the century that followed, ad hoc legislation was passed more than 100 times in response to hurricanes, earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters.

President Carter's 1979 executive order merged many of the separate disaster-related responsibilities into a new Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Among other agencies, FEMA absorbed: the Federal Insurance Administration, the National Fire Prevention and Control Administration, the National Weather Service Community Preparedness Program, the Federal Preparedness Agency of the General Services Administration and the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration activities from HUD. Civil defense responsibilities were also transferred to the new agency from the Defense Department's Defense Civil Preparedness Agency.

from http://www.fema.gov/about/history.shtm

 

[Astronuc]

engineer_type raises some good points.

The New Orleans area is a drainage basin - and it needs special engineering to handle the volume of water that would otherwise OK the city. I heard a discussion about NO and its situation this morning.

Mangroves might be a bit problematic given the latitude of 30 N for New Orleans. The mangrove density is very low this far north, and the varieties are limited. I have pondered the idea for years since I read about the loss of the delta area at the mouth of the Mississippi and the salt water intrusion which has damaged the marshes.

Diversion areas, such as the Atchafalaya swamp, need to be properly developed. The current disaster is related to the location of Lake Ponchatrain drainage area to the north of New Orleans - the water has to flow south - and this may not be practical with a storm surge. If New Orleans takes a direct hit from a similar storm, the disaster will most likely reoccur.

Concrete crown bars for vital levees protecting urban areas should be installed after initial settlement of the levee is nearly complete, usually 10 to 20 years after construction. These crown bars are recommended by the Army Corps of Engineers but they seldom follow their own recommendation because of cost and shoddy construction at previous installation attempts.

Annual survey grade checks of the levee systems to monitor settlement identify low points. Better funded inspection and repair of undermining and seepage problems is imperative. Toe caps, bentonite clay cores and geotextile reinforcing are common repair solutions.

The question becomes, why wasn't this already done and in place. Preventative maintenance. Ground penetrating radar (GPR) has been available for years to ascertain the subsurface condition of things like levees and dikes - even seepage monitors.

Shoddy construction - it still happens today - WHY? I can't believe what I have seen around the country and in my area in recent years.

 

[Cliff_J]

As frustrated as I am watching TV, being embarrassed as an American with how poorly our government has responded to this horrible situation, this thread is really inspiring.

My hope is that we (as a country, maybe world) learn from blunders like this and take positive action to correct the issues at hand and not just play a game of sound-bites for the media.

Its like how Eli Goldratt teaches that in manufacturing the common pitfall is too much emphasis on local optimization and not on widespread optimization. So while it may be cheap for builders and profitable for the city to allow the zoning and building of homes on land no one wants because it is a floodplain, it costs us all more in the long run. Yet do we have a FEMA standard for what is considered acceptable? I remember seeing a Discovery channel program where residents who had been flooded 3 times (and rebuilt) fought until the end to try to prevent the moving of their city to higher ground. Living here in Atlanta, the infrastructure problems that I know about as a layperson are staggering. While not susceptible to natural disasters like other cities, its a bad spiral that seems to be accelerating with each area operating in conflict with the others. To borrow a cheesy cliche, more people would benefit if they could think globally and act locally.

 

[LURCH]

I don't think the government's response has been poore at all. The National Gaurd is there to try to restore order, a truly huge hospital ship with several amphibious rescue ships is steaming to the area, relief is pouring in from both the government and private citizens. The reaction of both the government and the majority of the people seems pretty great to me. Problem is, it's a reaction. We need pro-active solutions.

I think that the communication problem may already be on its way to getting solved. The reason the cell phones are not working is because all of the towers have been knocked out, but I have heard that the cell phone companies have already been planning to switch to satellites, rather than towers. But the logistical problem of various emergency services being able to communicate and coordinate via radios is pretty disappointing. This is a problem that can be solved and simply hasn't been, largely for political reasons, I suspect.

One of the lessons suggested earlier in the thread is that we need to come to a realization that all dams and levies eventually break. To me, this underscores the necessity for a planned to repair breaks quickly. I have an idea of my own, and perhaps someone with more education and practical experience in engineering could critique this:

It seems to me that a gridwork of reinforcement rod could be fashioned pretty quickly to match the dimensions of the break. This grid could be lowered into place across the break, probably by helicopter (since one of the main difficulties is actually getting to the break). Then, debris from some of the leveled houses and other structures could be shoveled into the river. Because of the leak, currents within the river or channel will be running swiftly toward where the break is, and the debris will be carried along by this swift current. The gridwork will not allow the debris to exit through the break in the levy, and very quickly the debris will "clog the drain".

I think it would work, and it wouldn't take a week to stop the flow of water. If this levy had been patched within the first 24 hrs, we wouldn't have this major disaster. We'd still have a flood and storm damage, but nothing like what we have now.

 

[Astronuc]

One of the lessons suggested earlier in the thread is that we need to come to a realization that all dams and levies eventually break. To me, this underscores the necessity for a planned to repair breaks quickly.

Yes, quite true.

I have an idea of my own, and perhaps someone with more education and practical experience in engineering could critique this:

It seems to me that a gridwork of reinforcement rod could be fashioned pretty quickly to match the dimensions of the break. This grid could be lowered into place across the break, probably by helicopter (since one of the main difficulties is actually getting to the break). Then, debris from some of the leveled houses and other structures could be shoveled into the river. Because of the leak, currents within the river or channel will be running swiftly toward where the break is, and the debris will be carried along by this swift current. The gridwork will not allow the debris to exit through the break in the levy, and very quickly the debris will "clog the drain".

I think it would work, and it wouldn't take a week to stop the flow of water. If this levy had been patched within the first 24 hrs, we wouldn't have this major disaster. We'd still have a flood and storm damage, but nothing like what we have now.

The problem is the hydraulic force, with water having a density of 1000 kg/m³ or 1 metric ton/m³. That's a lot of force! They have tried to drop 3 ton sand bags, but with little effect. Another problem is that breaches continue to widen by virtue of erosion.

But keep thinking about it. I don't want to discourage creative thinking, but rather encourage it.

 

[russ_watters]

The reaction of both the government and the majority of the people seems pretty great to me. Problem is, it's a reaction. We need pro-active solutions.

Bingo! New thread forthcoming...

 

[Cliff_J]

I don't think the government's response has been poore at all.

Well we can agree to disagree, but I find it disturbing we can airlift aid to a disaster half-way around the world in 2 days and it takes 5 days for aid to reach people in a disaster in our own country that had advance notice.

MSNBC and CNN have reporters in Mississippi talking to people who did not see any government representatives much less aid until Thursday. The reporters are raising the question of basically if they can reach the site (they stationed themselves nearby) and get aid from their churches in FL all the way out there by Wednesday, how the government agencies could not match or exceed that effort.

If that were not a difficult enough question, the situation inside New Orleans with the conditions inside the superdome or convention center are beyond belief to me. We airlift supplies and even coal into Berlin decades ago and yet can't load up a few C130 cargo planes and land in a nearby city and load up a few semis to get some basic aid to people?

There are reports that the local police in New Orleans have to loot their own food and drink, and they looted as much ammunition as they could from local stores to prevent it from reaching the thugs.

I realize the media will dramatize things to a certain extent, but they seem to have plenty of fodder for this one. Knowing that there was a plan drawn up for a Category 3 Hurricane with broken leevies only a year ago (the Hurricane Pam scenario) and they were unable to proact/reactively handle the situation better is pretty sad. Sure there will be people stranded in their homes, they knew this from the study that found 1/3 would refuse to leave. I view that as an unfortunate reality and that is being handled very well by a lot of dedicated people, I agree there. But when the officials tell people to head to a concentrated area that should make relief efforts easy, and we can't get them food and water for a week what rationale can we give?

 

[russ_watters]

Well we can agree to disagree, but I find it disturbing we can airlift aid to a disaster half-way around the world in 2 days and it takes 5 days for aid to reach people in a disaster in our own country that had advance notice.

Where do you get 2 days? According to THIS timeline, it was 5 days before the worst-hit areas were reached for the first time, which occurred when the first US Navy ship reached the area. And I'm sure you remember that the US was initially criticized for its light response. It was December 31, (the quake occurred on December 26) when the aid was raised from $35 million to $350 million. (as of today, aid for the response itself is $10.5 billion)

http://www.redcross.org/news/in/tsunamis/timeline.html says the first Red Cross personnel arrived in the area on December 29. They were administrators. The first relief teams arrive on the 31st.

For Katrina, THIS article says

National Guard troops moved into the downtown business district, and state police squads backed by SWAT teams were sent into scatter looters and restore order, authorities said late Tuesday.

THIS article from Wednesday morning discusses the mobilization of 125,000 local national guard troops, the dispatching of several navy ships, coast guard, air force, etc. that were in motion by then.

And technically speaking, aid reached New Orleans before the hurricane hit - that's what was going on in the Superdome.

I'm not saying the response was adequate, just making sure we're sticking to facts.
edit: Let me say that a little more forcefully - I'm not saying the response was adequate because I agree that it wasn't.

Edit - another one: http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/08/29/katrina.washington.ap/index.html article from Monday says FEMA was in place with supplies during the hurricane.

As the Category 4 the storm surged ashore just east of New Orleans, Louisiana, on Monday, FEMA had medical teams, rescue squads and groups prepared to supply food and water poised in a semicircle around the city, its director, Michael Brown, said.

 

[Astronuc]

I also cannot agree that the government's response was great, nor even good.

Saturday night - 36 hrs (Edit: corrected to 27 hrs below) before the eye came on shore, it was then 'known' that Katrina was a Cat 4/Cat 5 storm. That is when FEMA should have gone into action (proactive) and made arrangements to coordinate with folks in LA and MS. Then they could have simply checked a database (which apparently they just never got around to creating) for the appropriate comm channels (people, frequencies, equipment . . . .

The hurricane went through on Monday, and the appropriate aid wasn't really getting there until Thursday - at least from what I have seen on TV, and from comments by people there on the ground.

As for who did and did not evacuate. It would appear (I obviously don't know these people personally so I can't vouch for their financial situation) that most of those who did not evacuate simply could not afford to so (many many not have bank accounts), and they had no where else to go or no money if they got somewhere else.

Did the word get out. I don't know that either. I don't know how good or poor the communication is down there. I do know my friends certainly heard of the mandatory evacuation - but they also have internet access, TV's, phones, and are otherwise generally well-informed.

 

[russ_watters]

Saturday night - 36 hrs before the eye came on shore, it was then 'known' that Katrina was a Cat 4/Cat 5 storm.

I've been meaning to check that, since I used 24 hours in my scenario, so...

HERE are all the NHC warnings on Katrina...

Discussion #10 on Thursday, the 25th, at 11pm has Katrina over land (Florida), and dropping out of hurricane strength. The prediciton is for landfall on the 29th or 30th, with 85kt winds (cat2, I think). Nevertheless, it has this ominous statement at the end:

ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT KATRINA WILL BE A DANGEROUS HURRICANE IN
THE NORTHEASTERN GULF OF MEXICO IN ABOUT 3 DAYS.

Discussion 16, on Saturday morning had it at 100kt winds, with 120kts predicted for landfall (slighly under what it hit with). This is the earliest I would consider an "execute" order on a disaster plan being reasonable - but only just barely. That's about 48 hours before hurricane strength winds hit land.

Discussion 20, at 2:00 Sunday morning, was an unscheduled report, and the first indication that it would be much bigger than a cat3 storm. Winds at the time were 125kts, with 130kts predicted for landfall. If cat3 wasn't enough, this warning should have been a trigger. 28 hours.

Discussion 25, at 11pm Sunday night, had winds at 140kts, with 135kts predicted for landfall.

Landfall was early in the morning on Monday.

-------------------

Don't mean to flood, but this is info I want for more than one thread.

 

[Cliff_J]

I get two days from the media - TV doesn't lie does it? No slant, spin, or agenda.

But according to that link, help was on the ground within a couple days on Dec28. Yes its labeled as inadequate, but that was a very large disaster and remote to much of the western world.

My simple point was that if, after the hurricane had passed and left the devastation behind, a church in Orlandocan have a truck driver make an overnight trip and get some ice, water, and food to affected people, then so too I expect FEMA can do the same. Dallas, Chicago, Atlanta and so on are all major metropolitian areas that would be a 1-2 drive away and should plenty of stock for 50,000 people for a few days.

Maybe we're disagreeing on semantics, I'm not saying its zero aid being given because that would be embellishing and non-factual. I'm just saying the aid is worefully inadequate for the number of people affected and the weak and sick are really being put into an even worse situation. If the news crews are painting a very inaccurate picture of the actual happenings, they are doing an amazing job. But it would appear that the tiny amount of aid actually getting to the ground is being hoarded by the strong attempting to over-compensate for the small of aid (even if that is only perception).

FEMA director Mike Brown admitted on one interview that they learned of the people at the convention center from news reports. How can the news reports have a significant piece of information unbeknownst to the director of operations and one day prior? If not communication with New Orleans/Lousiana officials, the national gaurd troops on the ground (Tuesday) with a status report of the situation should have been able to find its way up the chain of command to the director, wouldn't it?

4-5 days seems like a very long timeframe to deliver the supplies. In comparison when we lose a ballplayer to heat stroke/exhaustion its a big deal, removing the feeding tube from a person who did not make her wishes known in writing even has congress involved. I know in my state I could go to jail if I had a pet and left them in my car in the heat without water for an afternoon. So our standards as a society are pretty high, I think we should make efforts to uphold those as my opinion on the matter.

Sure the scope of the devastation and number of refugees may have exceeded expectation by an order of magnitude in New Orleans, but those problems can be mitigated and not (seemingly) ignored while soundbites are given stating the facts otherwise, that the people are 'being fed' with a past tense implication when in reality that means 'en route'. I can't imagine the news crews are all that talented at finding small pockets of people to distort the truth too much about the lack of relief efforts and lack of authority or medical staff or communication within the 2 main shelters. Nor the continuing reports from MS where reporters have one example of 600 people in a high school shelter (atown Bush visited this morning) who have received private assistance but have not had any communication with a government official.

My apologies if I've drifted too far from facts with opinions, but this is really irratating me that it is even possible for this to occur. There might be more than a hundred preventable deaths from lack of water or medicine. To me that seems exceedingly high.