natural and man made disasters

Don Quixote

Don Quixote

cancer survivor
Contributor
today we have examples of natural and man made disasters

a train collision in LA killing at least 10 and likely 20 people - man made

a hurricane hitting the gulf of mexico coast - natural

flooding and wind damage - mad made and natural

ike is not just a hurricane, but a huge hurricane causing damage as far a way from ground zero as La

storm surge and rain are covering most of galveston and low lying areas of texas

areas that used to be tidelands and wetlands were cleared and built on - these areas used to buffer the effects of wind and rain

while ike is officially at category 2 hurricane, it has category 4 winds at 800 feet - high rises in huston are higher than 800 feet and it is expected that their windows will blow out

i think the appropriate word is hubris and money - we are paying about $10 billion for each category hurricane - why do we not build with an eye to natural disasters - fire - flood - wind - earthquakes

fyi, kansas was the site of the the worse earthquake in us history

i guess that we would rather rebuild and bury than prepare:(
 
Mankind seldom has the foresight and memory to plan very far ahead.
Even when "100 year" storms/floods happen ever 25 years...
 
Ike was a huge storm. The storm surge was expected to be 25 feet.

If you look at the topographical maps of the coastline, you will see that it is often miles inland before the natural terrain comes up 25 feet consistently.

The storm surge would have flooded inland for miles without the manmade barriers. In fact, the seawall at Galveston is 17 feet, which took care of over half of that.

These storms happen. We rebuild and go on. To build on the coast and make them safe for storms of this magnitude would be almost impossible.
 
If you want to know what annoys me is the refusal to evacuate.

140,000 people ignored the warnings and mandatory evacuation orders and now they have to be rescued.
 
Should all of be made to pay for the rebuilding in these high risk areas ? Is this another form of socialism ?
 
uscitizen said:
Should all of be made to pay for the rebuilding in these high risk areas ? Is this another form of socialism ?
Click to expand...

You pay your taxes so that FEMA is there for any area. If its not a hurricane it will be an earthquake, a flood, or tornados.

I paid for all the people who built along the shores of the Mississippi and other major rivers.

I paid for the people who lost stuff in the wildfires out west.

I paid to rebuild after Mt ST Helens blew.



Its the nature of the game.
 
Well now I do think MT St Helens is a once in several lifetimes event.

But building in a floodplain or below sea level in a hurricane prone ares is stupid.
the Fema emergency humanitarian relief is fine, but to pay to rebuild back in the same place....
 
uscitizen said:
Well now I do think MT St Helens is a once in several lifetimes event.

But building in a floodplain or below sea level in a hurricane prone ares is stupid.
the Fema emergency humanitarian relief is fine, but to pay to rebuild back in the same place....
Click to expand...

Eh, its what we do. I think there are a lot bigger wastes of our tax dollars.
 
uscitizen said:
Yeah I mostly agree but there hundreds of billions more stuff to be torn up along the hurricane coast than just 10 years ago.
Click to expand...

Thats because there are billions of dollars more things on the coast.

Also, the property taxes on the more valuable properties pay for a lot of state's stuff.

And a lot of the waterfront property owners pay out that wazoo in insurance, which covers lots of other people's losses.
 
Solitary said:
Thats because there are billions of dollars more things on the coast.

Also, the property taxes on the more valuable properties pay for a lot of state's stuff.

And a lot of the waterfront property owners pay out that wazoo in insurance, which covers lots of other people's losses.
Click to expand...

Yeah in the state. But lots of other states money comes forward thru federal money.
 
Solitary said:
Ike was a huge storm. The storm surge was expected to be 25 feet.

If you look at the topographical maps of the coastline, you will see that it is often miles inland before the natural terrain comes up 25 feet consistently.

The storm surge would have flooded inland for miles without the manmade barriers. In fact, the seawall at Galveston is 17 feet, which took care of over half of that.

These storms happen. We rebuild and go on. To build on the coast and make them safe for storms of this magnitude would be almost impossible.
Click to expand...

while it was a huge storm (in diameter) it was a category 2 hurricane and the insured damage estimate is 18 billion dollars

why do we build where we cannot or will not protect - fyi, the storm surge was a maximum of 11 feet
 
DonQuixote said:
while it was a huge storm (in diameter) it was a category 2 hurricane and the insured damage estimate is 18 billion dollars

why do we build where we cannot or will not protect - fyi, the storm surge was a maximum of 11 feet
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw that the storm surge was much lower than expected.


Question for you and USC, where should we build? Where should we relocate the coastal populations of Texas, Louisianna, Mississippi, Alabama, and the entire population of Florida?

Actually, considering the difficulties in CA, I guess we need to relocate them as well.

And everyone living within 75 miles of the Mississippi River?



Where will we relocate the millions of people to?

Is everybody gonna go to Ohio? Kansas?
 
Solitary said:
Yeah, I saw that the storm surge was much lower than expected.


Question for you and USC, where should we build? Where should we relocate the coastal populations of Texas, Louisianna, Mississippi, Alabama, and the entire population of Florida?

Actually, considering the difficulties in CA, I guess we need to relocate them as well.

And everyone living within 75 miles of the Mississippi River?



Where will we relocate the millions of people to?

Is everybody gonna go to Ohio? Kansas?
Click to expand...

it would have been best not to build there in the first place, but since you asked, everyone that had a home destroyed by flooding should not be allowed to rebuild where they were unless they can do so so as not be flooded again - they should be relocated inland

hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, fires and earthquakes happen

first my home turf - we build to codes designed to survive earthquakes

most wild fires occur in low population areas (national and state parks)

levies - if you are going to build behind a levy, make sure it is sufficient to withstand major storms

tornadoes - basements are a good thing

hurricanes - do not build in unprotected low lying areas and build to codes to withstand wind loading

we can do better

maybe natural disasters are just nature's way of telling us to do better

please note that the train wreck in LA killed more people than ike did
 
More geodesic domes houses would help. I'm planning to build one. The rest is up to everyone else.
 
Solitary said:
Yeah, I saw that the storm surge was much lower than expected.


Question for you and USC, where should we build? Where should we relocate the coastal populations of Texas, Louisianna, Mississippi, Alabama, and the entire population of Florida?

Actually, considering the difficulties in CA, I guess we need to relocate them as well.

And everyone living within 75 miles of the Mississippi River?



Where will we relocate the millions of people to?

Is everybody gonna go to Ohio? Kansas?
Click to expand...



Now that is pushing it a bit to the extremes.

The first thing is good building codes for hurricanes.

Another thing is risk area assesment. For insurance purposes. Build wherever you want but pay insurance based on areas of similar risk.

ie someone in Gainsville should not pay the same insurance rates as someone in Key West.

My attitude is if you want to live in a high Risk area for hurricanes. Have at it, just do not expect me to pay for your choice.
You want to live on a riverbank that floods every few years ? Same thing.
 
Some of the disastor relief is always going to be coming from the feds. Its the way our society has built itself. We look to the Great Nanny in DC.

I agree that it should be more of a private and state thing.




Having mentioned the Geodesic dome houses, I think there should be tax incentives (until we pass the Fair Tax Act) for people who build dome houses. They are much more energy efficient. They are one of the strongest structures known to man. And they take less material to build. Its an ideal way to live.
 
Geodesic dome homes ?

Check into that closely Sol. A friend of mine had one built. he never could get it to stop leaking.
 
uscitizen said:
Geodesic dome homes ?

Check into that closely Sol. A friend of mine had one built. he never could get it to stop leaking.
Click to expand...

Like any house you duild, it depends on the materials and the builders.

If anything, the lack of hard angles will make it easier to waterproof.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top