[Pendergast]

Apparently.

By Joel K. Bourne, Jr.
Photographs by Robert Caputo and Tyrone Turner

It was a broiling August afternoon in New Orleans, Louisiana, the Big Easy, the City That Care Forgot. Those who ventured outside moved as if they were swimming in tupelo honey. Those inside paid silent homage to the man who invented air-conditioning as they watched TV "storm teams" warn of a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico. Nothing surprising there: Hurricanes in August are as much a part of life in this town as hangovers on Ash Wednesday.

But the next day the storm gathered steam and drew a bead on the city. As the whirling maelstrom approached the coast, more than a million people evacuated to higher ground. Some 200,000 remained, however—the car-less, the homeless, the aged and infirm, and those die-hard New Orleanians who look for any excuse to throw a party.

The storm hit Breton Sound with the fury of a nuclear warhead, pushing a deadly storm surge into Lake Pontchartrain. The water crept to the top of the massive berm that holds back the lake and then spilled over. Nearly 80 percent of New Orleans lies below sea level—more than eight feet below in places—so the water poured in. A liquid brown wall washed over the brick ranch homes of Gentilly, over the clapboard houses of the Ninth Ward, over the white-columned porches of the Garden District, until it raced through the bars and strip joints on Bourbon Street like the pale rider of the Apocalypse. As it reached 25 feet (eight meters) over parts of the city, people climbed onto roofs to escape it.

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, up there with a large earthquake in California or a terrorist attack on New York City. Even the Red Cross no longer opens hurricane shelters in the city, claiming the risk to its workers is too great.

Extract from an article written in 2004, about a disaster that ha not yet happened.

Thoughts?

[von Wrangell]

Katrina itself was not preventable but the effects of both the hurricane itself and the events that follow(ed) were most definitely preventable to a large degree.

[Ω]

What I can not understand is that this event has been threatening for years. Where was the prevention? Where was the planning? I don't even live in the the US but from the reporting from previous years I knew that if a hurricane hit NO that the results could be devastating as it lies under sea level. Someone has to be held accountable for this failing.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

Katrina itself was not preventable but the effects of both the hurricane itself and the events that follow(ed) were most definitely preventable to a large degree.

I am using the word "Katrina" as the "whole situation from pre- to post-disaster stages".

[Millennium]

For the most part, not without foreknowledge of the future. We've heard all about projects whose budgets were cut in the past few days, but even their most dire predictions weren't even in Katrina's league. For that matter, people inside and outside FEMA forgot how it's supposed to work and this includes the author of the article in the original post, so it's little wonder that it wasn't as effective as expected.

However, if nothing else, the evacuation could have gone much better. The decision-makers there should go to jail for criminal negligence.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Ω

What I can not understand is that this event has been threatening for years. Where was the prevention? Where was the planning? I don't even live in the the US but from the reporting from previous years I knew that if a hurricane hit NO that the results could be devastating as it lies under sea level. Someone has to be held accountable for this failing.

This is the basic issue:

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.

In a telephone interview with reporters, corps officials said that although portions of the flood-protection levees remain incomplete, the levees near Lake Pontchartrain that gave way--inundating much of the city--were completed and in good condition before the hurricane.

However, they noted that the levees were designed for a Category 3 hurricane and couldn't handle the ferocious winds and raging waters from Hurricane Katrina, which was a Category 4 storm when it hit the coastline. The decision to build levees for a Category 3 hurricane was made decades ago based on a cost-benefit analysis.

Chicago Tribune (registration required)

The US is a contenent-sized country with a diverse cimate and set of natural threats. We have frequent hurrcianes, tornadoes, ice storms, blizzards, earthquakes, droughts, floods, pestilance, wildfires, landslides, and even the occasional volcano eruption. You cannot plan to meet every possible eventuality however remote otherwise the entire business of govenment would be spending trillions on natural threats that probably never happen. That's trillions that is also needed for education, defense, other infrastructure, and so forth.

What you do is conduct a cost-benefit analysis and plan for what is likely. Sometimes in hindsight you get bitten by the odds. Here, the planning was for a Category 3 hurricane. The storm of the century that came was Category 4. Everyone knew a Category 4 was possible, and that it could possibly randomly hit in just the wrong place. But the odds were considered low enough that it wasn't worth the cost to build up the levy that high.

If you want to indict people for lack of clairvoyance, then you are going to have to go back to the 1960s at least. And don't forget also to indict the taxpayers of Louisiana. It was primarily their decision to spend their money on other things that they considered at the time to be more immediately important. And of course, their decision to live below sea level.

This is the same reason why people still live in Naples, despite the fact that everyone knows sooner or later there will be another AD79 style eruption of Vesuvius. Why people still live in Los Angeles, even though everyone knows that an earthquake big enough to level the city is quite likely. It's also why the people of the Netherlands continue to live below sea level even though the dikes cannot defend their country against all possible storms. We all live with risks, and make a judgment about which risks are likely enough to spend how much to mitigate them. We weigh those costs against other things that are more pressing.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

You cannot plan to meet every possible eventuality however remote otherwise the entire business of govenment would be spending trillions on natural threats that probably never happen. That's trillions that is also needed for education, defense, other infrastructure, and so forth.

Then how can a small nation like Iceland plan and prepare for the various national disasters here? It's simply a lame excuse to say that it isn't possible. All that is needed is the will to do it.


ps. before you go on and say that Iceland is such a small nation it is important to remember that even if the population is small our country is relatively large compared to our population and where we live. We have a population density about 2-3cap/km2.

[art_director]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

Then how can a small nation like Iceland plan and prepare for the various national disasters here? It's simply a lame excuse to say that it isn't possible. All that is needed is the will to do it.


ps. before you go on and say that Iceland is such a small nation it is important to remember that even if the population is small our country is relatively large compared to our population and where we live. We have a population density about 2-3cap/km2.

Yes, it's a lame excuse.

Fact is the federal government failed people in the area. The DHS and FEMA operated like typical indolent government agencies immediately after this disaster. Only after they were blasted for their "efforts" did action step up.

[Sky Captain]

Good ****in God,
Some people have no clue whatsoever what it takes to mobilize a relief effort.
What it takes to organize men and materiale.
All some can do is bitch about what wasn't done and not what has been achieved.
Nad what a HINDERENCE some of the affected population has been to the effort.
Hell, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the left wasn't behind all of the violence against the relief workers just to further their cause against the federal government.

[Stegabot]

You are only looking for someone to blame which is natural,But tends to turn into a whine fest after a while.Even if FEMA and DHS as a whole are competent,it cannot by themselves resolved the mess down in New Orleans.Think for a moment,even if the latter agencies have contingency plans even the ones that involved worst case scenarios,they depend on the State and local governments to assist them to get the full resources of the whole country down to that stricken area.But let's assume that both the local and State governments are competent,what if the people they were serving were in denial and refused to be moved? What if important infracture like roads and communications were heavily damaged or destroyed.What if the people themselves decided to act uncivilized and willfully inhibit law and rescue services to perform their duties?
The government from local to federal cannot think for us individually,you,me and the people in danger areas like New Orleans,San Francisco,Miami and such must will fully educate themselves and prepare themselves for any contingencies such as natural disasters.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Stegabot

You are only looking for someone to blame which is natural,But tends to turn into a whine fest after a while.Even if FEMA and DHS as a whole are competent,it cannot by themselves resolved the mess down in New Orleans.Think for a moment,even if the latter agencies have contingency plans even the ones that involved worst case scenarios,they depend on the State and local governments to assist them to get the full resources of the whole country down to that stricken area.But let's assume that both the local and State governments are competent,what if the people they were serving were in denial and refused to be moved? What if important infracture like roads and communications were heavily damaged or destroyed.What if the people themselves decided to act uncivilized and willfully inhibit law and rescue services to perform their duties?
The government from local to federal cannot think for us individually,you,me and the people in danger areas like New Orleans,San Francisco,Miami and such must will fully educate themselves and prepare themselves for any contingencies such as natural disasters.

Individuals don't stand a chance when it comes to natural disasters.

This was a scenario people knew was possible. Because of that they should have been prepared for it. They weren't and in the end the innocent people on the ground suffer because of it.

[ghporter]

von Wrangell, Simey is far more connected with the scope of what's going on than you seem to be-read his post carefully. Further, Sky Captain's post is right on target-how long DOES it take to organize tens of thousands of people, millions of tons of supplies, thousands of vehicles and aircraft, and then get them into position together in the right order? From my experience in the US military, I think the relief efforts in this case are "a little slow" instead of what most people consider "criminally incompetent." For example, it takes at least 16 hours to get both a C-17 Globemaster and its crew AND the cargo that it will carry prepared for ONE flight. There have been a huge number of such flights already just to get equipment and supplies NEAR the area. And a C-17 can carry EITHER supplies OR trucks to move them, OR a poor compromise of the two. How do you decide what to send on each flight?

Further, what's the best route to take to get to affected areas? This is particularly important when you consider that at least for a while the primary airport in the New Orleans area was physically cut off from the rest of the city.

And von Wrangell, the non-glacier area of Iceland is approximately 21,630 square kilometers. The New Orleans metropolitan area ALONE is about 4,939 square kilometers. Doesn't the sheer size difference between Iceland and the US imply ANYTHING to you about logistic problems?

By the way, I invite everyone to check out this site for some very nice pictures of New Orleans in much better times. They focus mostly on the French Quarter, my favorite part of the city.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

Some people have no clue whatsoever what it takes to mobilize a relief effort.

If you only knew

[Sky Captain]

Meaning?

There's a WHOLE lotta talk here. And whole bunch of ignorant ********.

[Stegabot]

Von Wrangell
Individuals don't stand a chance against natural disasters which is true,but a prepared and knowlegable individual has a much better chance of surviving one than the one who is unprepared especially on the aftermath.
Scenarios are nice on paper and on a computer screen when there is nothing on the line,but nothing beats a nice scenario than a real disaster in your hands.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by ghporter

von Wrangell, Simey is far more connected with the scope of what's going on than you seem to be-read his post carefully. Further, Sky Captain's post is right on target-how long DOES it take to organize tens of thousands of people, millions of tons of supplies, thousands of vehicles and aircraft, and then get them into position together in the right order? From my experience in the US military, I think the relief efforts in this case are "a little slow" instead of what most people consider "criminally incompetent." For example, it takes at least 16 hours to get both a C-17 Globemaster and its crew AND the cargo that it will carry prepared for ONE flight. There have been a huge number of such flights already just to get equipment and supplies NEAR the area. And a C-17 can carry EITHER supplies OR trucks to move them, OR a poor compromise of the two. How do you decide what to send on each flight?

This is why you plan for events like this. One of the most dangerous things when it comes to high winds is debris. That's why you build your houses so they can withstand high winds. NO is below sea level. That's why you should have drawn up different scenarios of what area will be under water and what not. In every scenario you can expect a lot of people stuck in different areas and that's why you draw up plans for that. This storm and the effect it had seems to have completely taken your rescue services by surprise. That's unacceptable. You plan for the foreseeable events. That makes all the difference in how many will end up dead. And your emergency services seem to have completely ignored that fact.

Further, what's the best route to take to get to affected areas? This is particularly important when you consider that at least for a while the primary airport in the New Orleans area was physically cut off from the rest of the city.

Helicopters. Boats. All this should have been prepared when the storm was expected to hit. Everything should have been mobilised before the storm hit and not after the fact. And again, plans should have been in place for what each unit should do. For instance secure the high density areas.

And von Wrangell, the non-glacier area of Iceland is approximately 21,630 square kilometers. The New Orleans metropolitan area ALONE is about 4,939 square kilometers. Doesn't the sheer size difference between Iceland and the US imply ANYTHING to you about logistic problems?

Where did you get that number from? Could it be it should be square miles instead of kilometers? Because the total area of Iceland is about 103.000 square km and of that 10% is under glacier. And again, it really doesn't matter. We are only 270k here. Spread out all over this place. Which means that while you can call in tens, if not hundreds of helicopters, we rely on two (except under certain circumstances we are able to call in two more from the US airforce/navy). Which means that while we can call in two Coast Guard vessels (our complete fleet) you are able to call in tens if not hundreds of vessels. Which means that while you are able to use probably hundreds if not thousands of buses for evacuation we can call on perhaps tens of buses. All these logistics problems you claim exist are mute because we suffer from them as well. Most of our possible disasters happen in low density areas that are almost impossible to access, NO is a high density area that is possible to access through different ways (air, land and sea). And we've got plans for most possible events. For instance during avalanches in some of the worst weather that has hit us for some time we were able to get in the first response after 3.5 hours and complete rescue service within 24 hours. This was when roads were closed, and no air traffic was possible and sustained wind of above 60m/s. Quite frankly the logistics of that operation would have made any rescue attempt impossible unless plans were in place for how to respond to such events. As soon as we knew what kind of storm was about to hit us the rescue service started preparing for the worst. They didn't wait until after the fact. The end result meant lives were saved that wouldn't have been saved. Every single town or village here has a plan for complete and partial evacuation during the worst possible scenarios. And every single town has a plan for first responses following the possible worst case scenario. It's very obvious that this is were your rescue services failed.


ps. and no, I don't care if it's the federal government or the state or Santa Claus people want to blame. This could have been largely prevented.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Stegabot

Von Wrangell
Individuals don't stand a chance against natural disasters which is true,but a prepared and knowlegable individual has a much better chance of surviving one than the one who is unprepared especially on the aftermath.
Scenarios are nice on paper and on a computer screen when there is nothing on the line,but nothing beats a nice scenario than a real disaster in your hands.

I know that fully well and that is also why I, personally, know how important full preparedness is.

[Sky Captain]

But have you ever been involved in organizing a massive relief effort?

I do know. I havebeen involved.
Remember I was a USAF Captain of an Airlift Wing.
I had a missions in Africa.
And Miami Florida.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

But have you ever been involved in organizing a massive relief effort?

I do know. I havebeen involved.
Remember I was a USAF Captain of an Airlift Wing.
I had a missions in Africa.
And Miami Florida.

Bosnia.

[christ]

Nice post Simey, but:

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

What you do is conduct a cost-benefit analysis and plan for what is likely. Sometimes in hindsight you get bitten by the odds.

The trick is buried in who does the CBA, and who gets bitten by the odds. These tend to be two different groups of people.

When Washington does the CBA, and decides what is reasonable, it is hardly fair to blame the poor residents of NO when they "get bitten by the odds". Of course, if the residents of NO do the CBA, and still decide to reside there, then it is equally unfair to blame Washington. On disaster prevention of this scale, my guess (only my guess, and not based on research - but I think a fair guess) is that the Feds were more involved than the locals, thus indicting the Feds.

[Sky Captain]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

Bosnia.

Iceland was in Bosnia?
I'm glad I missed out on that cluster****.

At least you understand what it takes to move supplies and how long it takes to aquire them in quantity.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

Iceland was in Bosnia?
I'm glad I missed out on that cluster****.

Sweden. And later Iceland. And it was a lot more successful than most of you Americans seem to think.

[Stegabot]

Von Wrangell
You have forgotten something,if New Orleans is located in the Atlantic seaboard,then the full might of the US military can be used to help their countrymen,but New Orleans was located near the Gulf of Mexico which would mean that the Atlantic fleet would have to enter the Gulf Of Mexico just to be of any use.Also,have you forgotten that roads and bridges leading to New Orleans were either damaged,destroyed or flooded,How can Trucks fully loaded with supplies as well as troops cross that.Even if they use combat engineers to build pontoon bridges,they still had to worry about rising water levels.And how about supplying the trapped citizens by air? Where would the C-130 and the Globemaster land to deliver their precious cargo and even if they can land,how much can the Chinooks,PaveLows and BlackHawks carry to the hundred and twenty thousand citizens scattered over New Orleans and how can they land on flooded streets?

[Sky Captain]

I had friends that flew there.
Everyone was shooting at everyone.
You couldn't tell who was against whom.
They'd shoot up the relief planes just to keep the "other side" from getting anything.
Cluster****.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

At least you understand what it takes to move supplies and how long it takes to aquire them in quantity.

Yes, I do. And that is why I'm saying that you need to be a hell of a lot more prepared than the rescue services were in NO.

And just to reiterate. I'm not blaming any specific party or group. This is a systemwide f*ckup that probably goes back several years if not decades.

[Sky Captain]

I don't think it's the Feds job to evacuate a city.
NOLA was given an evacuation warning.
Few heeded it. Even in Mississippi, few heeded it.
If I recieve a order to bug out, I'm gone,

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Stegabot

Von Wrangell
You have forgotten something,if New Orleans is located in the Atlantic seaboard,then the full might of the US military can be used to help their countrymen,but New Orleans was located near the Gulf of Mexico which would mean that the Atlantic fleet would have to enter the Gulf Of Mexico just to be of any use.Also,have you forgotten that roads and bridges leading to New Orleans were either damaged,destroyed or flooded,How can Trucks fully loaded with supplies as well as troops cross that.Even if they use combat engineers to build pontoon bridges,they still had to worry about rising water levels.And how about supplying the trapped citizens by air? Where would the C-130 and the Globemaster land to deliver their precious cargo and even if they can land,how much can the Chinooks,PaveLows and BlackHawks carry to the hundred and twenty thousand citizens scattered over New Orleans and how can they land on flooded streets?

1. How many days before it hit did the warnings start?
2. Like I said, prepare for the event. Prepare where the big planes can land during different scenarios. Prepare were helicopters and smaller planes can land during different scenarios. And so on and so on. I'm not saying it would be easy, but it could and should have been a hell of a lot faster and better response than what we saw.
3. A Chinook can lift up to 8 tons IIRC. Black Hawk up to four tons IIRC. I'm going by memory here but it should be close to correct. That's one hell of a lot of supplies for each plane.

But I have a question for you guys as well. Were the helicopters used both ways or just on way (meaning did the take refugees back on each and single flight)?

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

I had friends that flew there.
Everyone was shooting at everyone.
You couldn't tell who was against whom.
They'd shoot up the relief planes just to keep the "other side" from getting anything.
Cluster****.

.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

I don't think it's the Feds job to evacuate a city.
NOLA was given an evacuation warning.
Few heeded it. Even in Mississippi, few heeded it.
If I recieve a order to bug out, I'm gone,

Like many have mentioned before, many of those who were left couldn't leave.

[Ron Goodman]

Perhaps choosing a head of FEMA who had some type of emergency/disaster experience instead of a political appointee whose last job was heading an organization devoted to Arabian horses might have helped.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Ron Goodman

Perhaps choosing a head of FEMA who had some time of emergency/disaster experience instead of a political appointee whose last job was heading an organization devoted to Arabian horses might have helped.

[SimeyTheLimey]

First of all, I took it that this thread was about the preventability of the disaster, given that that what actually happened had appeared as the worst case scenario in simulations. There are several threads blaming all and sundry (mostly according to the political party involved with respect to those attacking people). I see no point in yet another thread on the same subject. But a thread on whether the levees and advance planning were adequate covers new ground, so that is what I answered.

Now, the point people seem to be studiously ignoring is that FEMA etc. doesn't just plan for one potential disaster in one city. It has a whole continent to worry about, with all the climactic and geophysical variations involved with such a large area. Do our European friends have the first clue how big this country is? The answer is increasingly obviously no.

I don't see how any country, no matter how rich, could build the physical infrastructure to withstand the worst that mother nature can throw at it in any eventuality anywhere in a continent. There just isn't enough money in the world for that. So what everyone everywhere in the world does is conduct cost/benfit analysis. You spend as much as seems prudent, and hope for the best for the rest. If anyone thinks that their little country does any different, they are hopelessly naive.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

Where did you get that number from? Could it be it should be square miles instead of kilometers? Because the total area of Iceland is about 103.000 square km and of that 10% is under glacier.

According to the US State Department, (second paragraph under Geography), "About 79% of Iceland's land area, which is of recent volcanic origin, consists of glaciers, lakes, a mountainous lava desert (highest elevation 2,000 meters--6,590 ft.--above sea level), and other wasteland. " That leaves 21% of 103,000 sq km or 21,630 sq km. This does not take into account grazing lands and farms, which are supposedly about 29% of the land area.

The point was that, though there is a large amount of land in Iceland, not all of it needs the same form of attention when disaster looms. Contrast that to the US, where there are many times the land area of your country, AND a much wider vairety of geographies and other conditions to work with.

FEMA DID have plans set up and supplies prepositioned. But the storm both did significantly more severe damage than had been anticipated, and it did its thing in the worst possible place. The course of a hurricane something that CANNOT be predicted more than an hour or so in advance and then only in broad terms. This was the difference between for example, a major storm moving northward and striking square between Keflavik and Reykjavik, and a similar storm striking just a few km farther east, and whacking the islands of Vestmannaeyjar and Surtsey then going inland at Hafnarfjördhur. Wouldn't the affects be rather different if such a storm hit those two different areas? Wouldn't the differing geography and built-up areas in the two different places mean that very different things would happen?

Now let's look at what might have happened if Katrina went farther west before landfall. Instead of striking just east of New Orleans, and ravaging the Mississippi and Alabama Gulf Coasts, the storm could easily have traveled 50km farther west, causing a lot of rain in NO, and then struck the much less populated areas in Terrebonne and St Mary Parishes, which, by the way are much better drained than areas closer to the Mississippi River outlet. There would be flooding and potential loss of life, but the exposed population would be much, much smaller. Katrina's turn to the north just before landfall is what kept it from completely DESTROYING New Orleans in the first place-instead it destroyed southern Mississippi and Alabama.

I agree that it took much longer than it should have to get relief to the affected areas, and that the levee system should have been more robust. But Katrina was very odd and in this case the levee system failed from the north, on the Lake Ponchatrain side, where the levees were built to withstand gradually rising waters instead of storm surges-the Mississippi River side weathered the storm rather well. But preventing this particular combination of circumstances without real precognition was simply impossible.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

Now, the point people seem to be studiously ignoring is that FEMA etc. doesn't just plan for one potential disaster in one city. It has a whole continent to worry about, with all the climactic and geophysical variations involved with such a large area. Do our European friends have the first clue how big this country is? The answer is increasingly obviously no.

It doesn't matter how big your country is. You have an average population density of 32/km2. You have a population soon reaching 300m. That your country is big is no excuse.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

This is the basic issue:



Chicago Tribune (registration required)

Good point.

The US is a contenent-sized country

Actually a third of a continent.

with a diverse cimate and set of natural threats. We have frequent hurrcianes, tornadoes, ice storms, blizzards, earthquakes, droughts, floods, pestilance, wildfires, landslides, and even the occasional volcano eruption.

Occasional over 2000 years. Those are well documented and far enough from populated areas to guarantee a quck evacuation (hopefully some have learned some stuff from Mt St-Helens).

You cannot plan to meet every possible eventuality however remote otherwise the entire business of govenment would be spending trillions on natural threats that probably never happen. That's trillions that is also needed for education, defense, other infrastructure, and so forth.

I agree. On the other hand, simulations and scenarios abound for the military in case of attacks towards the U.S., another type of disaster, yet not so natural. Food for thought. That is without counting the billions invested in simulations for nuclear weapons.

I know for a fact that Natural Disasters are the least studied events in terms of prevention planning, everywhere in the world.

What you do is conduct a cost-benefit analysis and plan for what is likely. Sometimes in hindsight you get bitten by the odds. Here, the planning was for a Category 3 hurricane. The storm of the century that came was Category 4. Everyone knew a Category 4 was possible, and that it could possibly randomly hit in just the wrong place. But the odds were considered low enough that it wasn't worth the cost to build up the levy that high.

Nevrtheless, there are alternatives that can be studied for those cases. That is the point I am leaning at.

If you want to indict people for lack of clairvoyance, then you are going to have to go back to the 1960s at least. And don't forget also to indict the taxpayers of Louisiana. It was primarily their decision to spend their money on other things that they considered at the time to be more immediately important. And of course, their decision to live below sea level.

I don't see why people should be indicted; people make choices in a attempt to balance a budget. There is so much that can be done. Also, I don't see why people of the '60's should be blamed for something no one had any ideas about then; that hurricanes mught become stronger with time.

This is the same reason why people still live in Naples, despite the fact that everyone knows sooner or later there will be another AD79 style eruption of Vesuvius. Why people still live in Los Angeles, even though everyone knows that an earthquake big enough to level the city is quite likely. It's also why the people of the Netherlands continue to live below sea level even though the dikes cannot defend their country against all possible storms. We all live with risks, and make a judgment about which risks are likely enough to spend how much to mitigate them. We weigh those costs against other things that are more pressing.

There is also an issue of denial and an impression of invulnarability. All studies related to populations living in areas where they get accustomed to the stress of signals precluding catastrophic events are the same everywhere; this home, this is where my job is, ant if the **** hits the fan, I am sure I can run quickly enough.

Ther rationalisations you make over cost vs benefits is a factor, but not the only ones, because I am not sure everyone wants to take a chance on their lives over something they cannot control. They stay because they have an illusion of control and because the odds seem to be in favor of their survival. But the human psyche is not always rational, while checkbooks have to be balanced according to the needs of the moment.

In the case of New Orleans, the case is good for better planning of emergency services. Building dams would not have been a solution, and knowing that part, Ermergency Services can adapt their plans. But it is true that nothing can be covered completely unless we put money into it, like strategic planning.

[Stegabot]

The mayor of New Orleans as well as the governor of Louisiana were told by the President of the United States to mandatory evacuate New Orleans 48 hours before the Hurricane striked.Now if the President has a good reason to tell your constituents to bug out ,you as an elected State or local official should screw politics and see if his suggestion had merit.Unfortunately,the Governor and the Mayor of N.O. thought of politics first before their citizens.
About your suggestion of preparation,guess what,there was a plan for that,unfortunately the Governor of Louisiana was dumb enough not to follow it through and the mayor of New Orleans compounded it with his incompetence and stupidity.If the Governor just told the President before the hurricane hit that we might have a problem here and we might need Federal help,the President through FEMA might have release Federal resources including the military much faster than what it was.
A chinnok might had lifted x amount of tons,but guess what,the x amount of stuff is worth nothing if those receiving it descended into lawlessness.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by Stegabot

You are only looking for someone to blame which is natural,But tends to turn into a whine fest after a while.

I agree. Laying blame is different than constructive criticism. What can we learn from this experience? How can we used we we learned to improve for the future?

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by ghporter

According to the US State Department, (second paragraph under Geography), "About 79% of Iceland's land area, which is of recent volcanic origin, consists of glaciers, lakes, a mountainous lava desert (highest elevation 2,000 meters--6,590 ft.--above sea level), and other wasteland. " That leaves 21% of 103,000 sq km or 21,630 sq km. This does not take into account grazing lands and farms, which are supposedly about 29% of the land area.

The point was that, though there is a large amount of land in Iceland, not all of it needs the same form of attention when disaster looms. Contrast that to the US, where there are many times the land area of your country, AND a much wider vairety of geographies and other conditions to work with.

Ah, k. I understand what you meant now. But might be confusing for foreigners to realise what that means. We almost only live by the ocean. So that 22sq km's are spread around the whole country. The whole circle. And each area has it's different dangers.

FEMA DID have plans set up and supplies prepositioned. But the storm both did significantly more severe damage than had been anticipated, and it did its thing in the worst possible place. The course of a hurricane something that CANNOT be predicted more than an hour or so in advance and then only in broad terms. This was the difference between for example, a major storm moving northward and striking square between Keflavik and Reykjavik, and a similar storm striking just a few km farther east, and whacking the islands of Vestmannaeyjar and Surtsey then going inland at Hafnarfjördhur. Wouldn't the affects be rather different if such a storm hit those two different areas? Wouldn't the differing geography and built-up areas in the two different places mean that very different things would happen?

The effect would be different but the response would be ready for each scenario. Our rescue services are prepared for any scenario they might encounter. Some might focus on certain missions but overall our rescue service is built to be able to deal with any foreseeable event.

I agree that it took much longer than it should have to get relief to the affected areas, and that the levee system should have been more robust. But Katrina was very odd and in this case the levee system failed from the north, on the Lake Ponchatrain side, where the levees were built to withstand gradually rising waters instead of storm surges-the Mississippi River side weathered the storm rather well. But preventing this particular combination of circumstances without real precognition was simply impossible.

The effect of Katrina would have been different depending on the path it would take. I agree. But exactly because of that and because it was known what could happen in NO if it hit, compared to let's say Florida, and the dramatic destruction a hurricane could cause there the preventive measures should have been much more and the preparations and planning for a possible rescue mission should have been much better. That's all I'm saying.

Yes, natural disasters always throw us something unexpected. But exactly because of that you need to be very well prepared for the expected scenario because that makes you more flexible when it comes to adapting. If you need to make up the rescue mission from scratch, as seems to have been the case here, you will end up with more suffering and casualties than if you would have prepared. That's all I'm trying to say.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

It doesn't matter how big your country is. You have an average population density of 32/km2. You have a population soon reaching 300m. That your country is big is no excuse.

I normally keep you on ignore. It's to stop me pointing out things like the fact that your country doesn't have an armed forces. The Iceland Defense Force is American. How dare you claim their expertise as your own!

Iceland Defense Force (IDF), Keflavik, Iceland, is a subordinate unified command of U.S. Joint Forces Command and is composed of Army, Navy and Air Force personnel as well as local Icelandic civilians. The commander and his staff are responsible for actions taken in compliance with inter-governmental agreements and for conducting all joint planning matters affecting the defense of Iceland.

IDF was created in 1951 when, at the request of NATO, the United States signed an agreement to provide for the defense of Iceland and the North Atlantic. Today, it provides a dynamic and challenging work environment with the overall responsibility for all military operations in Iceland resting with the IDF commander, a Navy rear admiral. The IDF commander is also Commander Fleet Air Keflavik and Commander Iceland Sector Anti-Submarine Warfare Group.

Commander Fleet Air Keflavik is responsible for coordinating the maritime patrol operations of deployed P-3 Orion aircraft. It is also responsible for the operational readiness of Navy units assigned. These crucial roles give Keflavik the distinction of being the ASW capital of the world.

The 85th Group is the Air Force component in Iceland. The group is responsible for deterring aggression in the North Atlantic and protecting Iceland's airspace. It also supports contingency operations through surveillance, air superiority and rescue forces.

The ground defense of Iceland is the responsibility of U.S. Army Iceland (ARICE), the Army component of the Iceland Defense Force, consisting entirely of reserve components from the United States. ARICE would deploy, if required, augmenting base defense personnel who come from Marine, Navy and Air Force security units.

There are more than 25 different commands of various sizes attached to Iceland Defense Force, with people from all branches of the U.S. Armed Services. The command is also the home of the Iceland Defense Force Joint Reserve Unit. Approximately 1800 U.S. military personnel, 100 DoD civilians, and 850 Icelandic civilians as well as military members from the Netherlands, Norway, Canada and Denmark work on NAS Keflavik.

Link

Your country can't even provide rescue forces for your own territory. You have no room to point fingers here.

Any intelligent, non-trollish posters will be entertained with responses because the thread asked a legitimate question.

But you are not worth the time. Back on ignore with you.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

Good ****in God,
Some people have no clue whatsoever what it takes to mobilize a relief effort.
What it takes to organize men and materiale.
All some can do is bitch about what wasn't done and not what has been achieved.
Nad what a HINDERENCE some of the affected population has been to the effort.

You are totally right. The effort requires a lot of preparation in terms of training and equipment and simulations. Challenges abound and there are situations like the reaction of some people from the population that are difficult to predict (although those happened in the past but we tend to forget them). I have a lot of respect for the people who work in that field because there is rarely success; just limited control of the worst.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the left wasn't behind all of the violence against the relief workers just to further their cause against the federal government.

That is the dumb part of your post.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by Ron Goodman

Perhaps choosing a head of FEMA who had some type of emergency/disaster experience instead of a political appointee whose last job was heading an organization devoted to Arabian horses might have helped.

If true, this is scary.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

I don't see why people should be indicted; people make choices in a attempt to balance a budget. There is so much that can be done. Also, I don't see why people of the '60's should be blamed for something no one had any ideas about then; that hurricanes mught become stronger with time.

My understanding is that they have not become stronger over time. There is a natural cycle of hurricanes and we are on an upswing. Those up and downswings have been observed for decades. There have been category 4 hurricanes before in the United States. It's not a new thing, they just aren't very common.

The reason why the 1960s is relevant is because it was in the mid 60s that the decision was made to build levees able to withstand a category 3 hurricane, but not a category 4. It seems to be unfair to blame people in the 60s for failing to predict an event that didn't happen for 40 years, and equally unfair to try to blame people 40 years later for a decision made in 1965.

Maybe now with the benefit of hindsight we'll upgrade the levees to cope with a category 4 hurricane. We probably also should consider whether to allow development on all of the land that has been developed. The oldest parts of New Orleans are the parts that fared the best -- because those are built on relatively high ground. The newer developments are the ones on the lowest ground. For example, my Aunt's house was right next to a levee in Violet, LA (a suburb just to the south west of the city). That's probably not a very sensible place to build.

On the other hand, it's also not very sensible to live on the Outer Banks of North Carolina, but people do. People also live in Venice (which floods regularly), the Netherlands (which almost completely flooded in 1952), in Los Angeles (regular earthquakes, with The Big One predicted any time now), and Naples (frequent eruptions, and The Big One predicted there too). It's human nature not to want to give in to such natural threats.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

I normally keep you on ignore. It's to stop me pointing out things like the fact that your country doesn't have an armed forces. The Iceland Defense Force is American. How dare you claim their expertise as your own!

Link

Your country can't even provide rescue forces for your own territory. You have no room to point fingers here.

Any intelligent, non-trollish posters will be entertained with responses because the thread asked a legitimate question.

But you are not worth the time. Back on ignore with you.

The US military is not our rescue service. They are asked to help during certain missions that are simply out of our scope. So calm down please.

Our rescue service is controlled by this organisation: http://www.almannavarnir.is/default.asp?cat_id=131

Our rescue teams are working under this organisation: http://www.icesar.com/

What these teams can't handle (which is very little) the US helps us with by offering their helicopters (a grand total of 4 helicopters). We are very grateful for the help we have received through the years. But it is very seldom our highly trained rescue teams aren't able to handle the situation on their own (which is shown by our rescue teams being called upon in situations abroad).

So the next time you start a rant like the above, please have the facts straight. OK?


ps. you can click through these links to see the basic vehicles each team has. http://www.landsbjorg.is/Samskipti48...eitir?openPage

On top of that you can add two Coast guard vessels and two helicopters (of which one is a Super Puma).

Just in case you want to learn more about our rescue service instead of doing what you did above.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

If true, this is scary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Brown

Before joining DHS/FEMA, Brown was Judges and Stewards Commissioner for the International Arabian Horse Association from 1999-2001......

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Brown

His background in state and local government also includes serving as an assistant city manager with emergency services oversight and as a city councilman, although most of his career was spent in private practice.

They don't say how long at all...

[finboy]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

Then how can a small nation like Iceland plan and prepare for the various national disasters here? It's simply a lame excuse to say that it isn't possible. All that is needed is the will to do it.


ps. before you go on and say that Iceland is such a small nation it is important to remember that even if the population is small our country is relatively large compared to our population and where we live. We have a population density about 2-3cap/km2.

1) What kind of natural disasters are Iceland routinely exposed to? How much of the preparation is the responsibility of individual citizens, and how much is done by local governments/committees?

2) If one of these is volcanic activity, what plans have been made to a) prevent eruption, and b) evacuate the citizens?

Are there any ways that Iceland doesn't represent the pinnacle of mankind's progress on Earth?

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by finboy

1) What kind of natural disasters are Iceland routinely exposed to? How much of the preparation is the responsibility of individual citizens, and how much is done by local governments/committees?

Storms (hurricane strength) and what follows (every autumn and winter). Avalanches (every year). Earthquakes (>6 on Richter every 50 years and >5 perhaps every 5-10 years). Volcanoes (every other year). Glacier runs (last one 1996 - next one will be any time now and will be a spectacle to watch if you are not in it's way).

You can read about the latter part in the link in my response to Simey above. Just ask if there is anything you'd like to get a better answer to.

2) If one of these is volcanic activity, what plans have been made to a) prevent eruption, and b) evacuate the citizens?

Preventing eruption is impossible like you probably know. But we were the first to successfully cool the lava to save large parts of a town that was in danger as well as it's harbour. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldfell...ing_operations

Plans for every town likely to be in danger are in place. (basically use every vehicle possible, cars and boats most likely, to get away as soon as possible).

Are there any ways that Iceland doesn't represent the pinnacle of mankind's progress on Earth?

I'll have to get back to you on that one.

I'm not saying we are perfect. If you think that you are misunderstanding me. The thing is that we work towards being perfect when it comes to responses to natural disasters and we prioritise lives in front of possible cost. As shown when the government bought large parts of some villages and paid for building them in safer places.

Again, we are not perfect but we have shown that if you prioritise the life of the citizens above the possible cost you can significantly reduce the damage natural disasters do.

[Sky Captain]

China had millions die from flooding.
I think we've done pretty good so far.

[AKcrab]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

Helicopters. Boats. All this should have been prepared when the storm was expected to hit. Everything should have been mobilised before the storm hit and not after the fact. And again, plans should have been in place for what each unit should do. For instance secure the high density areas.

ps. and no, I don't care if it's the federal government or the state or Santa Claus people want to blame. This could have been largely prevented.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Nine stockpiles of fire-and-rescue equipment strategically placed around the country to be used in the event of a catastrophe still have not been pressed into service in New Orleans, five days after Hurricane Katrina, CNN has learned.

The gear -- including generators, radios, breathing apparatus, cots and other items -- is stockpiled by DHS in nine locations. The three closest to New Orleans are College Station, Texas; Columbia, S.C.; and Clearwater, Fla. The gear is intended to replenish or sustain up to 150 first responders.

Contractors who maintain the gear are required to transport it to a disaster site no later than 12 hours after the initial request is made by local authorities and approved by DHS.

"The concept was basically, if you had a major incident, this equipment could be brought into the city and reconstitute the local first responders. So they get fresh bunking gear, breathing apparatus," Beaumont said.

Each stockpile consists of a tractor-trailer filled with $2.2 million in gear, he said. Contractors are on call 24 hours a day to move the gear.

Glad we had that all set up.

[AKcrab]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

Extract from an article written in 2004, about a disaster that ha not yet happened.

Thoughts?

Here's one from 2002
(Link also in another thread.)