|
Edited on Wed Aug-31-05 09:04 PM by necso
a program on PBS (or perhaps more than one -- it is the useful information that I try to remember -- not the packaging) that discussed the vulnerability of NO to flooding, because it is below sealevel and is protected by levees from both the river and the lake -- both of which are higher. (Levees, BTW, can be natural or man-made, or somewhere in between. Some rivers tend to create natural levees, and reinforcing these can be useful.)
Of course, expecting Americans to know the geography of their own country (or even that water flows naturally to lower elevations (relative to sea level), when presented with the opportunity) would be asking a bit much. (The pumps in NO that the media keeps mentioning, however, should furnish some clue as to the vulnerability there. My community, for instance, has no such pumps, since we don't have to pump water out of our community -- and have no reasonable expectation of needing to do so.)
Any worthwhile disaster response plan should have considered this extreme vulnerability (and somewhat unusual one -- that is, having a (an American) town largely below sealevel and surrounded by higher bodies of water) and either ruled out the practicality of dealing with levee breaks -- or created plans (preferably tested and refined plans) and positioned resources for dealing with levee breaks. (Levee breaks are something like enemy breakthroughs (of your defensive lines). In both cases you attempt to seal them off while they are still small -- and in both cases you should plan to have the resources available to do so.)
(One would also expect disaster response plans to include provisions to completely evacuate the city -- including the many poor, elderly, disabled and ill -- and to make available and distribute (prepositioning is best -- but even with this, supplying additional should be planned for) necessarily supplies of all kinds to the stranded, restore and maintain order, etc.)
And, of course, widening and raising the levees has been discussed for years. But this was never done -- and if there were practical, instantiated plans to seal levee breaches, then I am seeing no evidence of them.
But you could hardly expect a gaggle of (today's) bottom-line-fixated clowns in the services part of the federal government to get serious about disaster planning -- these are avoidable costs in the short term. And you don't get ahead in today's (American, at least) business culture (and climate -- which now more or less includes the government) by pushing for such things.
|