Nick Mamatas ([info]nihilistic_kid) wrote,
@ 2005-09-01 11:05:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
It's the port, stupid
One of the nastier/stupider ideas propagated by morons and know-nothings in the wake of Hurricane Katrina was the idea that it was just plain ol' dumb to build a city in the New Orleans area. This doesn't even qualify as hindsight, of course -- NOLA was founded in 1718 and even if 2005 is the end, there are plenty of towns that have come and gone while New Orleans was around.

However, this is not the end, and indeed, cannot be the end, regardless of the ridiculous sort of harumphing about the city's location, as expressed today by the Waterbury CT Republican-American in this editorial:

Optimist authorities predict it will be months before New Orleans can be made habitable again; one is compelled to ask whether, everything considered, the effort would be worthwhile.

Gulf Coast states are threatened every year by erosion and hurricanes, yet people and businesses have built right up to the water's edge, safe in the knowledge that if disaster strikes, their government will bail them out.

...

So when subsequent big hurricanes blow through, the government can do it all over again and again and again? As it is, the government (read: taxpayers) will have to pay for the copious flood damage because owners of coastal properties have policies from the National Flood Insurance Program.

...

But if the people of New Orleans and other low-lying areas insist upon living in harm's way, they ought to accept responsibility for what happens to them and their property. And if the government insists on rebuilding ravaged homes and businesses along Gulf Coasts, it should stipulate that the next time a hurricane blows through, it will be up to the people living there to make themselves whole.

However, before the government commits to reclaiming New Orleans and its marshy environs, it should think long and hard about whether the investment of time and money would be worth it.


A few years ago, everyone was talking about the "Information Economy." Working with mere trade and capital goods was a thing of the past! Today, everyone goes to work, taps some keys on a computer keyboard in their little cubicles and then, via the machinations of the magical pixies, these actions mysteriously created commodities and utilities for all.

For, for those Waterbury, CT residents who like ...uh... things allow me to break it to you. Your tapping away is actually tertiary to the process.

New Orleans must and will be rebuilt because it contains the largest port in the US -- plus five other ports in the nearby region, all already under one coordinated framework. Six thousand vessels containing 134,000 shipping containers arrived there last year, and without the assistance of one sprite or fairy, moved through rail, highway, and ports along 14,5000 miles of inland waterways. The big port, cleverly named the Port of New Orleans for the city that necessarily springs up around ports, handled 32 million tons of cargo last year, three quarters of it imported. Most of the exported stuff is corn, soy, and cotton. Then there's the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, which carries 11% of the oil the US consumes into the interior.

So, abandon town? No oil coming in, no agricultural materials getting out? Sign that $50 billion check, fools. The ball was already dropped with levee protection, thus making a $10billion bill into a $50 billion. Want to go for $250 billion? Want to try running a big-ass greedy country full of people with no skills beyond the MS Office suite and an affected moral superiority over people swiping diapers out of Walgreens without PNOLA and the LOOP? Good luck, you stupid, stupid sons of retarded bitches. Four buck a gallon gas sound expensive, dunnit? Yeah, it's even more expensive when your craptastic Wal-Mart t-shirt goes up to $12 and a loaf of bread is $5.75 at the same time. And wait till you see your electric bill, Mr. Mrs. "Oh I Just Have To Run A Dryer Because My HOA Has Banned Clotheslines" America.

Oh, and NOLA residents? Here's something for your Christmas list to Santa. Moveable storm surge walls. Yeah, they're not pretty like those little fire escapes, but they'll keep your ankles dry. Enjoy your new skyline!



Maybe if you're all very nice to the Dutch (you know, the below-sea-level people who are gaining rather than losing land) maybe they'll build some for you.

And as IQs have dropped sharply, I can only anticipate next week's editorial saying something along the lines of "Okay, rebuild the ports, but not the cities!" to which I can only point the reader to the remarks about the leprechaun-based economy I made moments ago.


Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

(Post a new comment)


[info]jlundberg
2005-09-01 03:08 pm UTC (link)
Sing it, bro.

(Reply to this)


[info]matociquala
2005-09-01 03:21 pm UTC (link)
Loud and sustained applause.

(Reply to this)


[info]loligo
2005-09-01 03:31 pm UTC (link)
You ranting about socio-political stupidity is even more satisfying than you ranting about self-publishing. (I do wish the world would stop providing you with such great raw material, though....)

(Reply to this)


[info]almeda
2005-09-01 03:34 pm UTC (link)
An official from a national Dutch public-works department had an interesting suggestion for re-engineering the problem when NOLA is rebuilt: put locks/gates between Ponchartrain and the sea, as WELL as levees between Ponchartrain and the city, to keep the Gulf from draining into the lake before you try to keep the lake from draining into the city.

(Reply to this)


[info]matociquala
2005-09-01 03:40 pm UTC (link)
As an aside, I wonder what this twit thinks New London--hell, New London and Fairfield Counties--would look like after taking a storm of that magnitude in the teeth.

(Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

Here's my guess!
[info]nihilistic_kid
2005-09-01 03:59 pm UTC (link)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - [info]fenris_lorsrai, 2005-09-01 06:40 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]matociquala, 2005-09-01 06:54 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]nihilistic_kid, 2005-09-01 07:08 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]fenris_lorsrai, 2005-09-01 07:28 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]matociquala, 2005-09-01 07:48 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]lady_melinda, 2005-09-02 02:10 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]fenris_lorsrai, 2005-09-02 03:25 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]geofizz, 2005-09-02 12:48 am UTC (Expand)

[info]oblomova
2005-09-01 03:43 pm UTC (link)
Best. Nick. Post. Ever.

(Reply to this)


[info]mariacotto
2005-09-01 03:48 pm UTC (link)
I didn't like how the "we won't get much foreign help because we haven't asked for it" presidential response bodes for precisely that kind of engineering knowledge and experience sorely needed to prevent this from happening again.

(Reply to this)


[info]horrorofitall
2005-09-01 03:50 pm UTC (link)
Of course it is the port. However the Port of South Louisana is the largest port not the Port of New Orleans.


THe Port of NOLA services about 83 million tons of cargo. This could easily be absorbed by other ports.

However, PortSL would need to be rebuilt because no way would the close to 200 million tons of cargo be able to be absorbed.

But would fixing PortSL be contingent on rebuilding NOLA? If NOLA has it's own port then I suspect workes and such that work PortSL live in that 54 mile stretch between NOLA and Baton ROuge. Those that work NOLA would presumably live in NOLA exclusively.

So could not rebuilding NOLA affect PortSL?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]nihilistic_kid
2005-09-01 04:07 pm UTC (link)
The 54 mile stretch of PoSL includes NOLA, which is the largest element of PortSL. As in:

The Port of New Orleans handles about 145 million short tons (132 million tonnes) of cargo a year and is the largest faction of the Port of South Louisiana, the latter being the largest and busiest shipping port in the western hemisphere and the 4th busiest in the world.

Not only would NOLA the city need rebuilding for PortSL, so would the Port of New Orleans in the first place, as it is part of tht 200 million tons you mention.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]horrorofitall, 2005-09-01 04:59 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]nihilistic_kid, 2005-09-01 05:05 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]normanrafferty
2005-09-01 03:57 pm UTC (link)
Testify!

(Reply to this)


[info]bajatierra
2005-09-01 03:59 pm UTC (link)
Now why would a city that links the Gulf of Mexico to the Mississippi River be an important port again?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]nihilistic_kid
2005-09-01 04:08 pm UTC (link)
Beats me, all I know is that I go to work in Hartford, sell car insurance, and when I come home, there's a big-ass Korean-made tv in my living room.

MAGIC!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]carneggy, 2005-09-01 04:40 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]postrodent
2005-09-01 04:18 pm UTC (link)
Word on all that. However, when they rebuild NOLA, maybe it would be a good idea to see about setting up some storm-absorbing wetlands between the city and the Gulf itself, to not let greedy-ass real estate developers build thousands of ticky-tacky homes in extremely vulnerable places way below sea level, to generally try and figure out a way for the city to exist that isn't so completely at odds with nature, because nature just can't be controlled to the extent that the previously-existing NOLA required.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]fenris_lorsrai
2005-09-01 06:52 pm UTC (link)
Wetlands, definitely a good plan, since that would have absorbed a lot of teh flooding.

When they do get to rebuilding, it would be a good idea if they city cracked down and made sure everything they build is up to building code. It's an old town, a lot of the buildings that have been totalled probably didn't meet the current building codes anyway.

Obviously requiring them to all build for the hundred year flood would be a bit much (since all the buildings would be in stilts then), but saying "hey, if you're rebuilding, you're going to put an extra tall slab foundation on to get you a foot above street level" that might not be such a bad plan. Won't help with stuff of this magnitude, but will work against the smaller floods. Combine with stuff like the movable barrier versus storm surge, and bringing up the foundations a few feet might be enough to save the city froma similar disater..

They put the mausaleums up on high foundations to keep the dead dry, why not bring the buildings the living are in up even higher?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]madwriter, 2005-09-02 12:36 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]joannemerriam, 2005-09-02 01:25 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]fenris_lorsrai, 2005-09-02 03:40 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]neotoma, 2005-09-02 07:44 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]fidelioscabinet
2005-09-01 04:44 pm UTC (link)
Posted like the son of a dockworker. You da man.

Mobile, which should be repairable fairly quickly, can take up some slack, and because of its Tenn-Tom Waterway (never did I think that boondoggle would actually be useful) will provide an outlet for the Middle West, even though Mississippi River => Ohio River => Tennessee River =>Tenn-Tom is pretty roundabout. It's not going to be able to take up all of the slack, though. Houston will take some, but doesn't have the inland water connections Mobile does. Neither can begin to make for the loss, nor will the west Florida ports. Miami and Charleston can take some stuff coming through the Panama Canal and up from Latin America; the added distance will add cost. In all cases the rail connections will be seriously overtaxed. Yes, there are highways. Forget that; the railroad is THE most fuel-efficient land transport we have. If gas is $5/gallon, diesel fuel will not be far behind. Land transport to and from the ports will rely on the railroads first, and trucks second.

Why aren't we teaching geography any more? Is it too reality-based a subject.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]mfree
2005-09-01 04:55 pm UTC (link)
Diesel and Jet-A will actually price bounce *after* the gas pipelines are restored because the refineries will be full-tilt-boogie with the light volatiles to restore all the point reserves.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]scott_lynch
2005-09-01 04:51 pm UTC (link)
Fucking bleeding-heart pansies! We can just move the Mississippi!

(Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)


[info]groundbyground
2005-09-01 06:02 pm UTC (link)
HA!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - [info]oblomova, 2005-09-01 06:04 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]scyllacat, 2005-09-02 09:23 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]drhoz, 2005-09-02 11:12 am UTC (Expand)

[info]katyakoshka
2005-09-01 05:17 pm UTC (link)
Werd.

I just don't understand how people don't understand why the city's there. Ghaa. What makes it vulnerable to hurricanes is the reason for its existence: The Gulf and the Delta.

So much stupidity, so much wasted oxygen.

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2005-09-01 05:40 pm UTC (link)
Amen. From a recent Slate article: "Geographers refer to this as the difference between a city's "situation"—the advantages its location offers relative to other cities—and its "site"—the actual real estate it occupies. New Orleans has a near-perfect situation and an almost unimaginably bad site. It's because of the former that people have worked endlessly to overcome the hazards of the latter."

--J.D.

(Reply to this)


[info]shadownyc
2005-09-01 05:45 pm UTC (link)
I am from CT, and for the record I've always thought that The Waterbury Republican-American should only be used for the floor of birdcages. I think that makes my position clear. *winks*

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]nihilistic_kid
2005-09-01 06:03 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, the Courant is the only decent CT paper in my book, and decent doesn't mean "good".

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]shadownyc, 2005-09-01 09:30 pm UTC (Expand)

(Anonymous)
2005-09-01 06:00 pm UTC (link)
Preach it.

I hate stupid people. Stupid complacent middle-class people who think that the TV Fairy puts their stuff in the stores are worse.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]elorie
2005-09-01 06:01 pm UTC (link)
oop, that was me. I keep forgetting to log back in....

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]brand_of_amber
2005-09-01 06:26 pm UTC (link)
People should not build along the Gulf Coast, as it is in danger of hurricanes and errosion. This is common sense. We shouldn't help people who were dumb rebuild their homes and lives.

Similarly, people should not build in California. Already there has been massive damage from earthquakes and mudslides, and it is only a matter of time until the whole state falls into the ocean. We should stop supporting California, we shouldn't help people who were dumb rebuild their homes and lives.

In the same vein, people should not build in the Midwest. Already there have been whole towns and parts of cities destroyed by tornadoes. The area is even known as tornado alley. Anyone stupid enough to build their home in the convention center for tordandos should expect it to be blown over. We shouldn't help people who were dumb rebuild their homes and lives.

People should not build in the American north or in Canada. Every year there are thousands of dollars of damage, deaths, and power failures that cost the world massive amounts to repair due to icestorms and blizzards. If you build in a place where you know ice will come from the sky, you have been a fool. We shouldn't help people who were dumb rebuild their homes and lives.

So, once you take out the coast (hurricanes and/or earthquakes), the middle (tornadoes), the north (ice storms and blizzards), and the other places where it is stupid to build because a natural disaster can wipe out your whole life you are left with....

Well, you're left without most of the world. And you're specifically left without the areas of the world where most poeple live and where most of bussiness and industry is based.

Not to mention that picking up and starting over again when you've been knocked on your ass is pretty much essential to the human condition.

(Reply to this)


[info]scanner_darkly
2005-09-01 06:44 pm UTC (link)
Exactly! The Mississippi river is still, in many ways, the lifeline of the heartland. WIthout a working port, or even a port in shambles, the effects are going to be seen up the Miss. and all the tributaries, and every city that does business on it. This is a big deal and it has nothing to do with Girls Who May Or May Not Have Gone Wild.

(Reply to this)


[info]beeblism
2005-09-01 06:45 pm UTC (link)
bravo, old chap!

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]nihilistic_kid
2005-09-01 06:51 pm UTC (link)
Waiiit a minute, you HATE industrial technology!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]beeblism, 2005-09-01 06:56 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]gadarene
2005-09-01 07:02 pm UTC (link)
Let me know when you stop tangling with issues and proponents that are beneath debate.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jenlight
2005-09-02 01:20 am UTC (link)
Beneath debate?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]gadarene, 2005-09-02 01:26 am UTC (Expand)
You da Man.
[info]faithhopetricks
2005-09-01 07:59 pm UTC (link)
((applauds madly))

(Reply to this)

The port has created its own set of problems
(Anonymous)
2005-09-01 09:06 pm UTC (link)
This flood is the direct result of the levees on the Mississippi, and no one wants to admit to the mistake or learn from it. Before they built the levees, the river flooded every year and dropped copius amounts of silt along the way, raising the elevation of New Orleans above sea level and laying the ground for the biodiversity of the Mississippi delta. But the levees directed all the silt into the gulf, and New Orleans sank beneath the sea, and the delta died, and a hurricane came and smacked their dumb-asses.

People told the city managers for more than a decade that the whole town would flood if a big hurricane hit. There was a Nova special predicting exactly what happened about two years ago. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

(Reply to this)


[info]madwriter
2005-09-02 12:34 am UTC (link)
I am utterly confoozled as to how the Republicans could remind us that 25% of the nation's oil is refined or comes through New Orleans, and then in the next minute say maybe we ought to write the city off.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]joannemerriam
2005-09-02 01:29 am UTC (link)
When the entire Middle East is an American teritory, we won't need those French bastards down in Louisiana.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

"And when NASA would say 'Launch!', all 'dose Cajun engineers would go eat" - [info]madwriter, 2005-09-02 01:41 am UTC (Expand)

[info]scyllacat
2005-09-02 09:19 am UTC (link)
Thanks for not making me have to do it.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]scyllacat
2005-09-02 09:21 am UTC (link)
P.s. And the FURY resulting from reading or hearingf "Well, they CHOSE to live in a dangerous area"... you mean that dangerous area that has survived ebb and flow for almost 300 years that their slave forefathers bequeathed them?

I could have an aneurism just thinking about it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…