Comments on: Critics Question "60 Minutes" Concerning "Sinking" New Orleans

[jbwilson81]

besides, the levees failed, not because of the sinking of New Orleans, but because of human error.

[jbwilson81]

Reguardless of the scientific issues involved, this story was in very bad taste. As thousands of people are working day and night to repair their homes, CBS comes out saying that they are all doing it for nothing and that their beloved city is a lost cause. As a geologist, I am fully aware of the difficulty in trying to deal with coastal erosion and subsidence. However, there are, as severaly people have posted before, remediation measures that can be implemented. To give up on New Orleans now would be a great tradgedy. Do we not owe it to the victims to give them the chance to rebuild their lives and their city? At least CBS owed it to them to have a second opinion on their broadcast.

[kellyhaggar]

Don't assume 60 Minutes got it wrong. See "www.coastalenv.com/Publications/CEI-2003-001.pdf" or "=002.pdf." If you want to read the whole report itself check out "http://www.coastalenv.com/Publicati ons/Active%20Geological%20Faults%20and% 20Land%20Change%20in%20SE%20LA.pdf"

[web10b0n]

Mr. Kursky comment is right on the money, "its a pretty big financial Issue"! When one considers he is suggesting the abandonment a strategic economic, military, political, social point on the north american continent. Does he realy expect people to stand around in arkansas , watching furtivly while geologic time bears him out. This isn't just wrong thinking, its unproductive, distructive, .....silly.

[parochus]

By the logic of the "scientist" in the 60 Minutes piece, we shouldn't rebuild Sn Francisco, because it's in an earthquake zone. And we shouldn't rebuild any of the damage in Iowa because it's in a tornado zone. And the Twin Towers in New York? A terrorist zone. Bringing the logic to its ultimate completion: don't rebuild the offices of 60 Minutes. It's an idiot zone.

[coolrod2]

CBS and 60 Minutes have done a grave disservice to the people of New Olreans and Louisiana and may caused irrepreble damage to our recovery, rebuilding, and congressional efforts. CBS consulted the views of only one scientist. Dr. Kusky does not even specialize in the field he is commenting on. His facts are erronius and can be easily debunked (check out nola.com to find out what several genuinely qualified experts in the field have to say). It is apparent that CBS has done grave damage to a great city's rebuiding efforts at a time of unpreciented emergency. And if it is true that CBS used flimsy information and false exaggerations, then this could put the network and Viacom in a historically liable situation. I think that attorneys for the City of New Orleans and the State of Louisiana may be onto one of the biggest lawsuits ever filed if CBS doesn't do a big, I mean big, 180 degree turn right away. I would advise to the national media and congress to undestand that residents of New Olreans and Louisana (whether they are still at home or are still in exile)are fuming mad and demand legislation on our most critical projects that will determine our future. Whatever polictical fortunes are to be won in Louisiana will be determined by a very definited set of isuues that all of our residents are in agrrement on.

[coolrod2]

You cannot just move the location of a conatainer cargo port to somerwhere other than New Orleans. It would not be possible to move a major seaport container cargo area any further upstream than it already is. New Orleans is as far up the river as is possible to have a viable seaport outlet with modern super-container cargo ships. And even for lighter seafaring vessels, it would be too inconvenient(and expenxive)to stop anywhere further up the river (if they are dropping off cargo to rail hubs on their way to other sea destinations). Large crude oil tankers and seafaring cargo vessels are too enormous to navigate safely any further up the river. In fact some of the Port of New Orleans' cagro facilities for large tankers are actually situated situated downstream closer to the Gulf for ease of navigation. Building a major port facility is very expensive and time-consuming endeavor. It tood years to just do renovations on the Napoleon Ave. and Nashville Ave. facilities alone. These are some of the largest and most state of the art facilities in the world. It would be more expensive and time consuming to "move" all the Port of New Orleans facilities to a fancnciful dream location that does not exist, than to simply improve the levee systems to Category 5 and rebuild the wetlands like Louisiana has been asking for all these years. In fact the Port of New Orleans is now back up and running and will probable soon reach full capacity in the near future.

[alphaa10-2009]

To legal-aaron-- Many doctorates have been issued to partisans, so congratulations on yours. As for "outside agitators", I also live in this country and my tax dollars should not go for what threatens to be one of the more expensive boondoggles in a lamentably rich history. While some in Louisiana are content to snipe at dubious federal spending elsewhere (including the Big Dig), you do not mind a porkfest in your backyard. Do your part to control it, instead of claiming myopically that no disaster would have occurred had the levees been better-constructed. How do you know, if the survival of a city rests on ***** of unknown construction quality, that the same thing will not happen again? No one knows that, but what we do know is we need a better, safer proposition, not more business as usual. Levees are for a day, but subsidence is forever.

[alphaa10-2009]

gssevryn and coolrod2 claim New Orleans is irreplaceable because it handles a huge volume of vital commodities, including oil. But creating a new container terminal or oil distribution hub-- and in a better location-- is a far better proposition and much less complex and expensive than guaranteeing another century to New Orleans. Katrina is a strong example for our future development, and counsels realistic, long-range planning for all our coastal areas. It was not New Orleans "fault" that Katrina wiped it off the map (just as experts had predicted would happen) but it will be the fault of everybody involved if they let sentimentality obstruct sound and practical measures. Remember, this is a bigger problem than just New Orleans-- our various oil producing facilities around the Gulf were also casualties, and were simply shut down for weeks by a single hurricane in a busy season, throwing the nation into semi-panic about pricing and availability of oil supplies. For exactly the same reasons, vulnerable refinery complexes also may need to be moved inland. We ought to learn our lessons now, so we do not have to repeat them.

[legal-aaron]

I am angry at the ignorant comments of people from outside of the state who read one report and decide they know more than someone who completed a doctorate on the subject. I would like to state some ACTUAL facts. As in, they are true and ascertainable, unlike the "facts" aired on 60 minutes. New Orleans is the 4th largest port in the world, and the busiest port in the Western Hemisphere, and is so because it is one of the ONLY ports anywhere that is deep water, north-south and east-west axis's. It is indispensable to the United States. The flooding which took place during Katrina was NOT due to New Orleans being ill-situated, but because the corps of engineers did NOT follow the design specifications in building the levee walls. According to independent experts who testified before Congress under oath, they found cypress stumps and other NON-pounded ground under the Orleans side of the 17th Street canal, responsible for most of New Orleans flooding. The experts stated that had the levee system been built correctly to design, the city of New Orleans would not have flooded. See my sources at the following: for the port use of New Orleans - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_orleans. For the expert testimony in Washington D.C. - http://www.asce.org/pressroom/publicpolicy/inside_congtest.cfm by the American Society of Civil Engineers. As for my anger, these misinformed idiots who make broad assertions as to New Orleans' negative on the U.S. are doing real harm.Stop

[gssevryn]

Let New Orleans sink or become a ghost town ? Then, dissolve FEMA and Red Cross Disaster Assistance for every other Natural or Terrorist disaster that strikes the US... If Texas, Oklahoma, California recieve up to 50% of the oil/gas revenues that the Federal Government recieves, why not Louisiana ? The oil companies have ravaged the coastal wetlands of Louisiana for the past 50 years in their effort to get there faster and cheaper.....Coastal Louisiana needs to be repaid and restored. Where will the Mississippi River be diverted to handle the export of midwest agricultural and manufactured products ? Memphis to Mobile...what would it cost to dig that canal? Maybe Louisiana should secede from the US and become a CAFTA member!

[coolrod2]

New Orleans is one of the most strategically loacted cities in the Western Hemisphere. It is located at the mouth of the the world's most important river of commerce, the Mississippi. It is one of the only only cities that has a tri-navigational port. By that I mean it not only has a seaport (the Gulf of Mexico/Atlantic), but also a north-south riverport (the Mississippi River), as well as an east-west river port (the Intracoastal Waterway, which stretches all the way from Brownsville, TX to New York City. New Orleans and South Louisana is the largest oil producing region in the United States. Don't forget that when you fill up the tank. New Orleans been crucial to the United States' development into a superpower and plays a crucial role helping our country maintain that status. When Jefferson bought the Louisiana territory from France, his main objective was to secure the port of New Orleans at the mouth North America's mightiest river. The Louisiana Purchase was the key event that made possible the westward expansion of our country. The port of New Orleans has allowed America's Farmers to trade with the nations of the world, greatly enriching our entire country. America cannot afford to lose New Orleans. Its location is too strategially important, and no other city can replace it.

[iggy72-2009]

Tried to post this once...read more about why this is just another bad 60 mins piece. http://www.nola.com/newslogs/breakingtp/ index.ssf?/mtlogs/nola_Times- Picayune/archives/2005_11_21.html#095385

[iggy72-2009]

Another creepy one-side sensationalized story from a once respectable news outlet. Go to hell Pelley and read the link below. And remember at some point in time the earth will be burned to dust by the sun...should we abandon ship. http://www.nola.com/newslogs/breakingtp/index.ssf?/mtlogs/nola_Times-Picayune/archives/2005_11_21.html#095385

[alphaa10-2009]

Apologies for the double post. Your server chugged for five minutes with response, and this small text is simply not that big a deal. Please boost your capacity, and you will have fewer people whose small messages jam your system.

[coolrod2]

I think it is preposterous for anyone to say that New Orelans is wasting the country's money. The coast of New Orleans and South Louisiana has the largest oil reserve in the United States. The United States uses more oil from Louisiana than from any other source, including Suadi Arabia (and also, for that matter, Texas). Yet, most of the profits (from what we produce) go to companies headqurtered in Houston, and most of the revenue goes to Washington, but does not come back for vital projects that we need. For years Louisana has not been allowed by the Federal government to extract the same percentage of oil revenues that certain other states get. We only recive about 10% whereas some other states can recieve as much as 50%. Is this fair? Whose treasury has been "assulted?" This lost revenue could have been used to build up our levee system to acceptable levels and rebuild our wetlands by now. Or, at least congres could have compensated for this glaring deficancy by helping us achive these important projects with adequate aid. Our congressional delegation has been asking for these thigs for years, but who has been listening? And now in this time of greatest need, there are voices advocating abandoning New Orleans. We have given so much to this country. If America can't help save New Orleans, then how will it be able to save itself on judgmet day?

[alphaa10-2009]

New Orleans was built before we knew anything measurable about subsidance around the delta, and after this bad news was confirmed, New Orleans city fathers habitually relegated subsidence to SEWAT-- Something Else to Worry About Tomorrow. But when water already laps around the city and a consensus of science says New Orleans is a historic dot on a massive geological process, isn't it appropriate to spend the billions the people of New Orleans need for long-term, lasting recovery measures? What will we do when Miami or another coastal city cannot keep its vital areas above water? This sets a bad precedent for future public policy. New Orleans, after all, is people and their culture-- not a place. Half of these people do not expect ever to return. So, let's help the people of New Orleans find new, safer locations and get on with their lives. That is taxpayer money well-spent. It goes almost without saying certain global engineering firms active in the Bush administration budget would love to throw money at an engineering Mission Impossible. But Einstein famously defined folly as expectation of different results from doing the same thing, all over again.

[coolrod2]

Rebuilding New Orleans is niether a waste of money, nor a lost cause. Quite the contrary. It is not only achievable, but worth every dime that goes into it. In fact it is necessary to the well being of the United States and would pay enormous future dividends to our whole country. The challenges we face with levees, coastal erosion, and subsidance are considerable, but not insurmountable as Dr. Kusky would like you to believe. With the necessary local, state, and federal committment we can build a levee/flood protection system capible of holding back the worst category 5 tidal surge. We can effectively rebuild the coastal wetlands and barrier islands that protect us. If it is true that these measures would cost no more than the dubious "Big Dig," the there can be no excuse for not undertaking them as soon as possible, particularly if it means saving the life of a great historical and strategically located port city at the mouth of the largest river of commerce in the world, sitting right next to America's largest oil and natural gas reserves in the Gulf. In fact, techonolgies have already been proposed of developing ways to stop land subsidance in New Orleans. One way is to divert river water into the natural water table that lies under the city, thus pushing upward. Another is to divert river water on top the land to deposit silt once or twice a year (creating 6 inch to 1 foot "mini floods").

[wintermute1-2009]

Amen, brother. I am often cold-bloodedly rational, like Mr. Spock, and on August 30 I wrote: http://dailydocket.blogspot.com/2005/08/ re-think-rebuilding-new-orleans.html If you look at this 1798 map of New Orleans, http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historica l/new_orleans_1798.jpg you see a small core town surrounded by cypress swamps. I watched the whole piece last night and thought it was a fair counterpoint to the assault on the federal treasury by New Orleanians that has been amply reported elsewhere. Contrast Haley Barbour's performance through all this.