Hurricane Simulation Predicted 61,290 Dead

[boise1]

By RON FOURNIER and TED BRIDIS

-WASHINGTON - As Katrina roared into the Gulf of Mexico, emergency planners pored over maps and charts of a hurricane simulation that projected 61,290 dead and 384,257 injured or sick in a catastrophic flood that would leave swaths of southeast Louisiana uninhabitable for more than a year.

These planners were not involved in the frantic preparations for Katrina. By coincidence, they were working on a yearlong project to prepare federal and state officials for a Category 3 hurricane striking New Orleans.

Their fictitious storm eerily foreshadowed the havoc wrought by Category 4 Katrina a few days later, raising questions about whether government leaders did everything possible — as early as possible — to protect New Orleans residents from a well-documented threat.

After watching many of their predictions prove grimly accurate, "Hurricane Pam" planners now hope they were wrong about one detail — the death toll. The 61,290 estimate is six times what New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin has warned people to expect.

-- But,'nobody saw this coming'??

[northamericancitizen]

1. Recommended nt

[leQ]

2. cbs did a segment on this last nite

i think cbs has finally seen the light that having this president is not good for the country. they even caught the 'go fuck yourself mr cheney' clip.

but wow, 62 thousand. America is going to be horrified.

[AX10]

5. I saw that too.

[Igel]

3. You assume that "this" came.

Wait for the death count. I think Nagin's number's high, and the estimates are off by an order of magnitude.

But for now, everybody's guessing.

[truedelphi]

4. Explain why you think that Nagin's estimate is high?

It makes sense, doesn't it?

Half million people in the city. 80% evacuate. That leaves one hundred thousand behind.

Thirty-five thousand have gotten out since the end of the storm.
That leaves sixty-one thousand unaccounted for.

I keep hearing from radical friends that they will bulldoze entire neighborhoods - before the count. So we will never know.

Carol

[barb162]

7. The problem starts with the 80%. No one really knows if that's

right. I never understood where the mayor came up with that. Maybe number of vehicles in the city or number of driver licenses? But there are still a lot of cars in the city under water. Also no one knows how many people, families actually went in one car, etc.

I hope they check the attics of the houses in the flood areas before (if) they bulldoze.

For various reasons, I think the final body count will be way less than 10,000 although a week ago I thought it would be way over that.

[daleo]

19. There have been surveys done on intentions regarding evacuation

Although intentions don't always translate to reality, the simple fact that 20%+ of the population was too poor to own cars guarentees that substantial numbers of people didn't leave.

Cars have to be licenced, so it isn't hard to have an accurate count of that.

[boise1]

6. The 'this' was referencing a cat-3 or higher hurricane,

not the total fatalities. Chertoff, or Brownie, or both, said nobody saw it coming.

[BillZBubb]

8. Did that simulation have the storm surge directly hit NO?

The high death toll would occur if a large storm surge hit NO from the Mississippi River side during the actual storm. The death count would be too large to comprehend.

But, Katrina did it's flood damage after the storm with breaks in levees on the Ponchatrain side. That means the high water in most parts of the city took some time to arrive and wasn't rising too rapidly. Able bodied people, for the most part, would be able to escape except in the most low lying areas.

It would be interesting to know how many homes were flooded above their roof tops. Those would be the houses where the most people didn't survive.

Anyway, my guess is that the death toll is far, far less than 61,000. I would suspect (and really hope) that it is far less than the 10,000 estimate from Mayor Nagin.

But, you are right in the main point--everybody but the Crawford Cretin saw it coming.

[liberalpragmatist]

18. 10,000 seems realistic to me

Although I certainly hope it's much lower and based on the very preliminal reports that have been coming in, maybe it is.

But yeah, that's where the "worst-case" v. "second-worst case" scenarios thing comes in. Had the storm not weakened to a Category 4 but stayed a Category 5 and hit New Orleans head-on, even the French Quarter would have been flooded and the storm surge would have been VERY rapid. The death toll would have been far more catastrophic and people trying to escape the raging waters would have no where else to go - rushing to rooftop wasn't an option when they were in the middle of a hurricane.

What DID happen was that waters rose much more gradually and it was no longer raining - in fact it was very hot and humid when the levees broke. Most people were able to escape. Still, the death toll will be far too much to bear, and will probably top 3000. I still think that 10,000 doesn't seem an unlikely number when you include deaths in the aftermath - elderly and sick persons dying from lack of water, medicine, or exposure to chemicals and disease. Considering that about 50,000 to 100,000 remained, I tend to think there will be 5 to 10,000 dead, especially when they count the dead in the poorest and lowest-lying areas.

The army forces in the city, along with homeland security officials and local officials have said they haven't found as many bodies as expected, which is a hopeful sign. However, Brian Williams and other reporters said there were bodies everywhere. And that isn't accounting for the fact that many - perhaps most of those who died - probably died in their homes, or drowned in their attics. Their bodies are less likely to be floating in the water outside.

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. ...wrong about one detail — the death toll

That's because local authorities, Mayor Nagin in particular, evacuated 80% of the population before the storm hit, instead of the 60% that "Hurrican Pam" projections saw to be the likely maximum.

[katinmn]

10. what a coincidence, huh?

[mom cat]

11. Does anyone hav a link to the whole study?

[soda]

12. remember this too

Thousands drowned in the murky brew that was soon contaminated by sewage and industrial waste. Thousands more who survived the flood later perished from dehydration and disease as they waited to be rescued. It took two months to pump the city dry, and by then the Big Easy was buried under a blanket of putrid sediment, a million people were homeless, and 50,000 were dead. It was the worst natural disaster in the history of the United States.

When did this calamity happen? It hasn't—yet. But the doomsday scenario is not far-fetched. The Federal Emergency Management Agency lists a hurricane strike on New Orleans as one of the most dire threats to the nation
http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0410/feature5/

[boise1]

13. I found only a summary from FEMA:

http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=13051

[fshrink]

14. Damage control.

Lies, spin, reframing, leaks, media pressure. Business as usual.

[indepat]

15. Noone could anticipate they would use airplanes as missiles to strike

buildings.

[Deja Q]

16. It's a computer. Properly programmed, it could also say that

Katrina baked 61,290 triple layer chocolate fudge birthday cakes for all we know.

Let's let the HUMANS do the work for once.

BTW: Why do those meteorologists get paid $250,000/yr to stand in front of a camera and babble what's spoon-fed to them from a teleprompter; the documentation on it compiled by folks making rather less (probably because their accuracy is as regarded as Britney Spears' talent when away from the voice modulated microphone she always seems to wear...)

[struggle4progress]

17. kick