Came across an interesting June 2003 article about the New Orleans' levee system in that glossy sexy rag, Civil Engineering Magazine. It describes the problem New Orleans faced as a city below sea level surrounded by multiple bodies of water. The article notes that Louisiana is being reclaimed by the sea and as a result, "A century ago any hurricane heading toward New Orleans would have had to traverse a 50 mile buffer of marshland. Today that marsh area is only half as broad and the hurricane would be striking a city that itself sinks lower every day." The article notes that studies were being conducted to determine if the system of levees, even if improved, "could provide the level of protection for which they were designed." Bush and the local pols seem to deserve all sorts of blame for the slow response to the hurricane devastation but it's possible that nothing could have been done, at least not in a short five-year time period, to make the city safe from such devastation. The article notes that the levee system begun in the 60s to withstand category 3 hurricanes is still not complete after 40 years of work and visions begun in the 1990s to make the system stronger would take another 30 years and it's possible the design itself and the environmental changes in the region mean no such system could work.

That the city's defense systems clearly were not adequate means authorities--local, state and federal--should have been better prepared to evacuate the citizens of New Orleans. As one Corp of Engineers official puts it in the article, "You don't want to give people a false sense of security by saying that this is a refuge unless you have a place for them to go."

Over the last 100 years we have tried to constrain the Mississippi to protect New Orleans and other developments--the result has been new sediment is not reaching the marshlands between New Orleans and the sea and the buffer grows smaller and smaller. A geology professor in the article says, "Coastal Louisiana is sinking under its own weight. The ground in Louisiana is ultimately going to go under."

There is not much evidence, as some environmental advocates have been saying in the wake of Katrina, that global warming is contributing to more hurricanes. Even if it were, it's pretty nonsensical to say Bush's not signing the Kyoto Treaty would have prevented Katrina and this disaster. However, it is true that trying to tame the Mississippi to save New Orleans has had unintended consequences that assisted in its destruction. So, the question is, if a levee system can't be constructed that would protect the city, and if the constraining of the Mississippi leads to environmental changes that leave New Orleans more vulnerable to hurricanes, even if category 3,4 and 5 hurricanes hitting fairly close to New Orleans are an infrequent occurrence, should we rebuild such a city?