Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

This is the general tropical discussion area. Anyone can take their shot at predicting a storms path.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Forum rules

The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K. For official information, please refer to products from the National Hurricane Center and National Weather Service.

Help Support Storm2K
Message
Author
User avatar
Kingarabian
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 15425
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 3:06 am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#21 Postby Kingarabian » Mon Sep 11, 2017 2:04 pm

Steve wrote:Conflicting information is still out as of now.

From today:
Mark Zandi from financial powerhouse Moody's (who does a lot of the bond ratings and credit ratings for countries, state and local governments, etc.) estimates that the aggregate cost of Irma and Harvey will be between $150-$200B. There could also be an additional 20-30B lost economic output, so they cut their 3rd Quarter GDP forecast to 2.5% (expects it to tick up in the 4Q due to construction and rebuilding).

Moody's estimates are as follows:

Harvey - $86-106B
Irma - $64-92B*

* I'm kind of shocked at the number they're throwing out for Irma. She'd be in the Top 5 all time if she wrought that kind of damage. After the non-destruction of Miami, I figured she would end up in the $10-20B range.

We'll have to see if the results hold up over time, but they're as good as anyone. For now, it's going to stay as follows until someone provides revised or better information:

1. Katrina
2. Harvey
3. Andrew

From August 30:

USA Today estimates Harvey will be the most expensive US Storm in history and cost about $190B. This was based on a preliminary report by Accuweather, and I don't think Accuweather is in the same class as Moody's. So we'll have to wait for more clarification in time:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/ ... 615708001/


Moody's is supposedly as good as it gets when it comes to financial evaluations.
1 likes   
RIP Kobe Bryant

User avatar
Steve
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 8604
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:41 pm
Location: Not a state-caster

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#22 Postby Steve » Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:04 pm

Yeah King. That's why when I saw the article I wanted to post it. When Weatherbell met Ryan Maue did that bogus $1 trillion dollar storm? tweet the other day, I called it out as preposterous. 1) there was no way it was going to be 6 x worse than Katrina (in today's dollars). 2) There was no way it was going to be 5-10 x worse than the damage from Harvey. (Some were suggesting Harvey might be around $200B which was where the 5 x estimate starts). Sounds like $200B is a high estimate if Moody's has it right. Despite being personally affected by Katrina, I have a non-biased interest in the damage totals for historical information and classification. If we got back to back Top 4 or Top 5 storms of all time, that's probably going to end up being a once in a lifetime occurrence. However, there is little chance Irma will end up overtaking Harvey and may not even overtake Andrew or Sandy for a place in the Top 5. I certainly hope not, but it deserves its credit for the records it shattered IMHO.
1 likes   

User avatar
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4235
Age: 74
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#23 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:53 pm

"Edit to add that I will always say despite the outcome, Katrina was only an average to slightly above average occurrence."


Let me get this straight: You're saying that a Cat 5 that had winds of 175 mph, and that even the NHC report said "may have been Cat 4 in initial landfall in Plaquemines" AND that devastated 90,000 square miles (The equal, in size of Great Britain"... was "only an average....to *slightly* above average occurance?"

I don't think you'll have a lot of folks agreeing with you on that one. Look, I feel for the folks in Texas... and Harvey was a horrible event --but I still don't get it that so many people (not saying you but I've had these kinds of discussions before) seem to have this morbid attraction to arguments about whose storm was worse--as if some "bragging right" came along with it. I just don't figure that kind of mentality. Katrina was anything BUT an "average" event!

A2K
0 likes   
Flossy 56, Audrey 57, Hilda 64*, Betsy 65*, Camille 69*, Edith 71, Carmen 74, Bob 79, Danny, 85, Elena 85, Juan 85, Florence 88, Andrew 92*, Opal 95, Danny 97, Georges 98*, Isidore 02, Lili 02, Ivan 04, Cindy 05*, Dennis 05, Katrina 05*, Gustav 08*, Isaac 12*, Nate 17, Barry 19, Cristobal 20, Marco, 20, Sally, 20, Zeta 20*, Claudette 21 IDA* 21

User avatar
Steve
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 8604
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:41 pm
Location: Not a state-caster

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#24 Postby Steve » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:32 am

I'm talking US impacts. The levees broke because they were faulty. We'd seen a weakening major run the basic route in the Gulf before 40 years prior with Betsy and 36 years before had a similar North Gulf track but stronger storm with Camille. There have been other NE hooking storms weakening coming into landfall along the NC/NE Gulf. It wasn't even atypical for its year as a Cat 5 as there were several others. We will see similar storms in the future. We most likely won't see a situation similar to Harvey again. I didn't believe Harvey will break the record and still don't. But I think his situation is unique. I'm glad you recognized I'm not one trying to claim a storm. I lost everything in Katrina. What I'd say was most unique about it was that it carried a Cat 5 surge although it was a Cat 3. That's something particularly interesting about it to me. But the landfall and track in the Gulf were nothing special. Neither were most of the effects here in New Orleans. Gusts to 100, several inches of rain, bent power poles and downed trees, etc. The MS Gulf Coast took the brunt of the surge there which was devastating. But again, I don't see it as a unique storm. We had other Cat 5's in the Gulf that year, with Rita being abnormally large and getting far west later in the year followed by Wilma which was the lowest pressure ever.
0 likes   

znel52
Tropical Storm
Tropical Storm
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:51 pm
Location: Newport, NC

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#25 Postby znel52 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:07 am

Steve wrote:I'm talking US impacts. The levees broke because they were faulty. We'd seen a weakening major run the basic route in the Gulf before 40 years prior with Betsy and 36 years before had a similar North Gulf track but stronger storm with Camille. There have been other NE hooking storms weakening coming into landfall along the NC/NE Gulf. It wasn't even atypical for its year as a Cat 5 as there were several others. We will see similar storms in the future. We most likely won't see a situation similar to Harvey again. I didn't believe Harvey will break the record and still don't. But I think his situation is unique. I'm glad you recognized I'm not one trying to claim a storm. I lost everything in Katrina. What I'd say was most unique about it was that it carried a Cat 5 surge although it was a Cat 3. That's something particularly interesting about it to me. But the landfall and track in the Gulf were nothing special. Neither were most of the effects here in New Orleans. Gusts to 100, several inches of rain, bent power poles and downed trees, etc. The MS Gulf Coast took the brunt of the surge there which was devastating. But again, I don't see it as a unique storm. We had other Cat 5's in the Gulf that year, with Rita being abnormally large and getting far west later in the year followed by Wilma which was the lowest pressure ever.


I don't know what you are talking about but 28' of storm surge is not a regular occurrence. Katrina's impact went way past the levees.
1 likes   
'96 Bertha/'96 Fran/'98 Bonnie/'99 Floyd/'03 Isabel/'04 Alex/'05 Ophelia/'11 Irene/'14 Arthur/'16 Matthew

The posts in this forum are NOT official forecast and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data.

tolakram
Admin
Admin
Posts: 19138
Age: 60
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:23 pm
Location: Florence, KY (name is Mark)

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#26 Postby tolakram » Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:18 am

Audrey2Katrina wrote:Katrina was anything BUT an "average" event!

A2K


I understand what Steve is saying. Katrina hit at just the right place and the combination of an ERC and weakening broadened the windfield and brought catastrophic surge to a wide area. As a weather event it was as unusual as a cat 5 hurricane in the gulf is. Average is offensive to many people who experienced Katrina, I totally get that, but I think it's important to consider that this could easily happen again and probably will. We need to plan for it.
2 likes   
M a r k
- - - - -
Join us in chat: Storm2K Chatroom Invite. Android and IOS apps also available.

The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. Posts are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K.org. For official information and forecasts, please refer to NHC and NWS products.

User avatar
Steve
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 8604
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:41 pm
Location: Not a state-caster

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#27 Postby Steve » Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:42 am

znel52 wrote:
Steve wrote:I'm talking US impacts. The levees broke because they were faulty. We'd seen a weakening major run the basic route in the Gulf before 40 years prior with Betsy and 36 years before had a similar North Gulf track but stronger storm with Camille. There have been other NE hooking storms weakening coming into landfall along the NC/NE Gulf. It wasn't even atypical for its year as a Cat 5 as there were several others. We will see similar storms in the future. We most likely won't see a situation similar to Harvey again. I didn't believe Harvey will break the record and still don't. But I think his situation is unique. I'm glad you recognized I'm not one trying to claim a storm. I lost everything in Katrina. What I'd say was most unique about it was that it carried a Cat 5 surge although it was a Cat 3. That's something particularly interesting about it to me. But the landfall and track in the Gulf were nothing special. Neither were most of the effects here in New Orleans. Gusts to 100, several inches of rain, bent power poles and downed trees, etc. The MS Gulf Coast took the brunt of the surge there which was devastating. But again, I don't see it as a unique storm. We had other Cat 5's in the Gulf that year, with Rita being abnormally large and getting far west later in the year followed by Wilma which was the lowest pressure ever.


I don't know what you are talking about but 28' of storm surge is not a regular occurrence. Katrina's impact went way past the levees.


Its impacts east of New Orleans and along the MS Gulf Coast mirrored a lot of what Camille did 36 years prior. The surge was stronger because Katrina was much bigger. And though weaker at landfall than Camille, it still carried a larger dome of water having been a Cat 5 and even still intensifying at the loop current. For the 175 winds or whatever, we saw gusts to 100 here as it had fallen off substantially once it got to the other side of that heat content. Strong and damaging, yes. Unheard of or unique, no. The surge in New Orleans was not all that brutal. It was backside water after the storm passed to the north. Remember, the levees and I-Walls or T walls or whatever they were breaking that Monday afternoon and then Tuesday morning which was after the hurricane was Northeast of here by a good way. Besty 40 years earlier (a similar Cat 3 storm with a similar track to Katrina) was worse in New Orleans for hurricane effects. The day after, the backside flow puts the water back toward the South Shore of Lake Pontchartrain and outflow of the piled in water through Lake Borgne. Same thing happened as water backed up through the drainage systems and flooded many areas of the city. We were higher then, and there were more wetlands south of the city.

Regardless, Katrina is the most costly which is the point of this thread. See title, "Harvey may supplant Katrina as the costliest ever." I didn't see that happening and still don't think it will top Katrina's costs in today's value of dollars. But #2 all time isn't bad. And my specific comment crosses into other threads that were being discussed where I called Harvey's combination of punch, location and effects "unique." There have been similar South Texas rainfall events and landfalls. But there hasn't been the combination of the storm sitting in South Texas and raining out SE Texas over a prolonged period of time. Again, unique. Katrina, again, a fading NE and weakening Cat 3. I'm not dissing Katrina. I lost more than a lot of people including my house, everything I owned but my cars and even my 3 kids for a year. I'm not belittling the casualties, cost, disruption at all and don't take offense to myself saying that or anyone else who would say it. I know what it was - a once in a generation or two event with smaller examples much more frequent on its track and landfall. It was NOT in any way a unique occurrence from a macro standpoint. There were at least 2 if not 3 other Category 5's in the Gulf of Mexico that very year. I'm stating this very matter-of-factly and not with emotional attachments since the thread is about Dollars/Costs and not individualized impacts with emotional attachment. I hope that helps clear up the point I was making about the uniqueness of Harvey vs. Katrina.
0 likes   

User avatar
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4235
Age: 74
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#28 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:03 pm

Steve wrote:I'm talking US impacts. The levees broke because they were faulty. We'd seen a weakening major run the basic route in the Gulf before 40 years prior with Betsy and 36 years before had a similar North Gulf track but stronger storm with Camille. There have been other NE hooking storms weakening coming into landfall along the NC/NE Gulf. It wasn't even atypical for its year as a Cat 5 as there were several others. We will see similar storms in the future. We most likely won't see a situation similar to Harvey again. I didn't believe Harvey will break the record and still don't. But I think his situation is unique. I'm glad you recognized I'm not one trying to claim a storm. I lost everything in Katrina. What I'd say was most unique about it was that it carried a Cat 5 surge although it was a Cat 3. That's something particularly interesting about it to me. But the landfall and track in the Gulf were nothing special. Neither were most of the effects here in New Orleans. Gusts to 100, several inches of rain, bent power poles and downed trees, etc. The MS Gulf Coast took the brunt of the surge there which was devastating. But again, I don't see it as a unique storm. We had other Cat 5's in the Gulf that year, with Rita being abnormally large and getting far west later in the year followed by Wilma which was the lowest pressure ever.


Where I come from (and live) we call that a faulty analogy. Betsy passed to the WEST of New Orleans, not the East which is what Katrina did... it was NOT the "basic route" and we had much more land (roughly the size of the state of Connecticut) between us and the Gulf back then. Camille was stronger but MUCH smaller--check the data, I'm sure you'll be able to verify that--it's hurricane wind radius was about 25 miles while Katrina's was well over 100 miles... again.. bad analogy. Size isn't all that relevant either, Rita and Katrina were about the same size, and intensity wise, the difference was 7 hPa...not a whole lot... or, if you think so, then Katrina, which was 12 hPa lower than Irma was WAY more intense! Rita also made landfall as a weakening Cat 3 and yet in her own way, she, too was unique.-- Remember, New Orleans runs out all the way to N.O. east and I assure you they had more than 100 mph "gusts" because I had a friend who rode the storm out in one of those buildings near the MRGO. -- they recorded sustained winds over 100 mph. How long did Harvey maintain winds of 100 mph+? Does it matter? NO, because Harvey was a cataclysmic RAIN maker--just as Katrina was a cataclysmic surge producer. As far as the flooding...yeah, it was a result of some faulty levees, it was also a case of others being overtopped... I have film of the MRGO clearly being overtopped. Not that it matters because without the storm, you don't have the surge... without the surge you don't have the flood-- bottom line is the storm precipitated everything that followed. In their own way EVERY hurricane is "unique" -- but I maintain that Katrina was and will always be quite unique, for as you pointed out, her surge alone was a record breaker--surpassing cat 5 landfalling Camille... and by a LOT. There are good reasons they keep records on all these record-breaking storms--and it's called their uniqueness, Katrina was no ordinary storm--the death toll of 1800 (approx) alone is the highest since the Okeechobee storm nearly three-quarters of a century earlier. You can grasp at straws by saying those were caused mostly by flooding which, in full context is completely non-sequitur. By no stretch of the imagination was Katrina "ordinary".

A2K
Last edited by Audrey2Katrina on Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
1 likes   
Flossy 56, Audrey 57, Hilda 64*, Betsy 65*, Camille 69*, Edith 71, Carmen 74, Bob 79, Danny, 85, Elena 85, Juan 85, Florence 88, Andrew 92*, Opal 95, Danny 97, Georges 98*, Isidore 02, Lili 02, Ivan 04, Cindy 05*, Dennis 05, Katrina 05*, Gustav 08*, Isaac 12*, Nate 17, Barry 19, Cristobal 20, Marco, 20, Sally, 20, Zeta 20*, Claudette 21 IDA* 21

User avatar
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4235
Age: 74
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#29 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:31 pm

Steve wrote: Its impacts east of New Orleans and along the MS Gulf Coast mirrored a lot of what Camille did 36 years prior. The surge was stronger because Katrina was much bigger. And though weaker at landfall than Camille, it still carried a larger dome of water having been a Cat 5 and even still intensifying at the loop current. For the 175 winds or whatever, we saw gusts to 100 here as it had fallen off substantially once it got to the other side of that heat content. Strong and damaging, yes. Unheard of or unique, no. --- I hope that helps clear up the point I was making about the uniqueness of Harvey vs. Katrina.


In a way, yes it does... we're talking semantics! What YOU say is "unique" is NOT what *I* say is "unique". To each his or her own. But just another remark then I'm done with this because I think it's become a rhetorical disagreement over what constitutes "unique" and neither side will budge--and neither has any higher claim to being correct! By what *I* call unique, a storm that comes barreling in with near 140 mph winds, creating a 28-30 foot surge of water, that destroys 90,000 sq. miles of devastation and directly or indirectly (however you want to spin it) causes (in today's $) over 160 BILLION in damages, is sort'a "unique". If you're going to qualify unique as restricted to path it took... neither of those two is unique... (and no, Betsy did NOT take remotely the same path--I went through both of them and remember Betsy quite well). As for winds... you keep mentioning "gusts of 100 mph" as if that were her top winds--I beg to differ. Even in Mississippi the NHC acknowledges that Katrina had sustained winds of over 120 mph-- which is pretty strong---and she maintained those hurricane sustained winds till late that NIGHT as it moved well inland to central Mississippi! (Not many storms--not even Harvey-- managed to do that) ...In fact NOAA'S own page acknowledges that Grand Isle might well have experienced sustained winds of over 140 mph but since there is no full verification they downgraded what was quite possibly a landfalling 4 to a 3-- a very solid 3 that remained a 3 across 2 other landfalls (Buras--and again at the Miss/La state line). If you're going to talk a lot of rain... heck Tropical storm Allison, I believe held all records for a while at over 36 inches of rain so a storm bringing in torrential rains is not "unique"... rare, but not 'unique". I really don't like doing this because it smacks of what I pointed out earlier--and neither of these storms will ever be forgotten...for their damage, the tragedies they caused, and the impact on the areas they decimated... hence they're both, in their own way "unique". But to say by MY standards it's not unique... well one could just as easily set up a criteria of their choosing and say "by MY standards Harvey wasn't all that unique".... frankly... by *MY* standards--both would be wrong. Terribly wrong.

A2K
Last edited by Audrey2Katrina on Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
1 likes   
Flossy 56, Audrey 57, Hilda 64*, Betsy 65*, Camille 69*, Edith 71, Carmen 74, Bob 79, Danny, 85, Elena 85, Juan 85, Florence 88, Andrew 92*, Opal 95, Danny 97, Georges 98*, Isidore 02, Lili 02, Ivan 04, Cindy 05*, Dennis 05, Katrina 05*, Gustav 08*, Isaac 12*, Nate 17, Barry 19, Cristobal 20, Marco, 20, Sally, 20, Zeta 20*, Claudette 21 IDA* 21

User avatar
Steve
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 8604
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:41 pm
Location: Not a state-caster

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#30 Postby Steve » Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:13 pm

The 100mph wind was clocked in Kenner, and specifically a gust at the Airport that wxman57 posted when he said he thought maybe Cat 2 conditions in New Orleans, possibly Cat 1 (notice I said "here" behind the 100 in that post because here is New Orleans where I am). Which was the reference. I would have gone into a longer discussion about the points, but I think you understand what I'm talking about. I never said that every fading Cat 3 system coming up from the SE was exactly the same. I'm not talking about micro-level storm differences. Every storm is unique. Every 1" rainfall event is unique. Hell, every rain drop is unique just like every snowflake is. That in no way is or was my point or the level I was discussing in the other thread where it was first brought up. So yeah, sure there were unique aspects of Katrina just as there are unique aspects of every storm at specific levels. Some of them were the surge, the fact that an entire major US City was 90% evacuated, debris in some places in MS washed to the I-10, etc.

My point is exactly what Tolakram understood because he's not looking at it from a micro-level or getting carried away with personal involvement or investment of a storm. We know we've seen similar storms and will again that hooked, faded and somewhat weakened. I'd include Georges in the discussion too. 25-50-100-125 miles east or west of here is similar from a macro-level on the northern Gulf Coast. I'm sure you would acknowledge that. The Betsy Comparison was because it was the last Cat 3 to hit the City and had more wind damage but different water damage. The fact that MRGO was overtopped is irrelevant to my point. It's a specific issue for Chalmette, the Rigolets, near-the-lake Slidell and maybe Bayou Bienvenue.

The thread is about the costs. And I will reiterate my point since you realize the difference in semantics as you said is really just on the level of the threat we're discussing. This is the cost thread. And yes, Katrina is the costliest hurricane in US History and is likely to remain that way until something comes along and destroys 80-90% of homes in a US City that's bigger and/or has higher real estate values. Complete destruction of Houston in Harvey would have qualified it to be there. Complete destruction of Miami in Irma would have qualified her as probably the costliest storm ever along with being the strongest ever.

If you want to start a comparison and contrast thread on the finer points of northern Gulf hurricanes, we can all argue and discuss them. I'm down with that. There are enough nuances that we'd never run out of things to compare and contrast. But the final point is we have seen similar storms to Katrina in the past, and in my mind, we will likely see them again before we see the Harvey setup, track and rainout.
0 likes   

User avatar
srainhoutx
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 6919
Age: 66
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:34 am
Location: Haywood County, NC
Contact:

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#31 Postby srainhoutx » Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:45 pm

I would be very careful with these early estimates regarding Harvey. After being in the flooded areas for almost 3 weeks, I can attest that the losses from Flood Insured Properties are being maxed out by FEMA and adjusters. Areas W of Houston along Buffalo Bayou that flooded from the releases from Barker and Addicks Reservoirs just gained access back to their homes late last week. Some of the losses may exceed $500,000.00 per single family dewling. That doesn't include multi family apartment units, Town Homes and Condominiums as well as Commercial losses. That 2 Billion predicted losses may be very conservative.
0 likes   
Carla/Alicia/Jerry(In The Eye)/Michelle/Charley/Ivan/Dennis/Katrina/Rita/Wilma/Ike/Harvey

Member: National Weather Association
Wx Infinity Forums
http://wxinfinity.com/index.php

Facebook.com/WeatherInfinity
Twitter @WeatherInfinity

User avatar
Steve
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 8604
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:41 pm
Location: Not a state-caster

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#32 Postby Steve » Tue Sep 12, 2017 5:59 pm

srainhoutx wrote:I would be very careful with these early estimates regarding Harvey. After being in the flooded areas for almost 3 weeks, I can attest that the losses from Flood Insured Properties are being maxed out by FEMA and adjusters. Areas W of Houston along Buffalo Bayou that flooded from the releases from Barker and Addicks Reservoirs just gained access back to their homes late last week. Some of the losses may exceed $500,000.00 per single family dewling. That doesn't include multi family apartment units, Town Homes and Condominiums as well as Commercial losses. That 2 Billion predicted losses may be very conservative.


srain,

The dispute was $200 billion though not 2B. It was from Accuweather who I don't trust any more than I trusted Maue's potential $1T storm with Irma. It was hype. I don't dispute that Harvey damage could end up very high. Moody's has it between $86-106B, and as kingarabian noted, they are supposed to be one of the best in the business. I'm holding out for revisions and updated numbers and will report whatever I run across that makes a valid point about cost comparison
0 likes   

User avatar
storm_in_a_teacup
Category 1
Category 1
Posts: 346
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:01 pm
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
Contact:

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#33 Postby storm_in_a_teacup » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:34 pm

The way I see it, Katrina and Harvey both set records for a specific physical phenomenon. In Katrina's case, that was surge. In Harvey's case, that was rainfall. Their other physical properties were more severe than average, but not exactly world-shattering.

However, in both cases, the specific circumstances of the storm's path is what made these records possible. Katrina hit along a part of the Gulf Coast that enhances surge a lot. I don't think Katrina's surge would have been as dramatic had she hit an area with more steeply sloping continental shelf. And similarly, Harvey basically was trapped in one spot for several days. Had he kept moving the rainfall totals wouldn't have been as hi.

Furthermore, neither of these records would have been more than an academic curiosity if they had not stricken a major population center.

It reminds me a lot of the Great Galveston Hurricane of 1900 in a way. That storm was nowhere close to being the most powerful, or largest in size, but it became the deadliest in U.S. history because of where it hit. There is no such thing as a "natural" "disaster", in my opinion. Only natural processes, and people unfortunate enough to be in harm's way. If it's purely natural, it's not a disaster, and if it's a disaster, it's no longer natural.
0 likes   
I know I can't straddle the atmosphere...just a tiny storm in your teacup, girl.

User avatar
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4235
Age: 74
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#34 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:15 am

Steve wrote:The fact that MRGO was overtopped is irrelevant to my point. It's a specific issue for Chalmette, the Rigolets, near-the-lake Slidell and maybe Bayou Bienvenue.
The thread is about the costs.


Actually, an overtopping of the MRGO is specific for Chalmette, Arabi, the ENTIRE lower Ninth Ward -- and according to a NOVA PBS special on the storm and subsequent flood and incredible costs --the Intercoastal Gulf Waterway which "funnels" into MRGO also overtopped which brings into play the flooding of the entire New Orleans East area as well. Recall that Betsy caused massive flooding on BOTH sides of the Industrial Canal--and they didn't address faulty levees then--though I doubt they were built to the allegedly "superior" specifications of those Katrina overtopped--and later (further down the Industrial Canal and in several of the 'lake' canals like London Avenue, and 17th street) definitely faulty levees. This does not make MRGO "irrelevant" except--as we both pointed out in a "my standards" vs. "your standards" semantics. I'm not talking "micro" anything-- you brought that one into play. Now if you're going to speak of the path of the storm, and that it was a weakening storm (which I believe was a fairly strong 3 at impact-- sustained 120 mph as presented by NOAA recorded in MS at THIRD landfall is not a weak 3)--and yes, you did say "here" but "here" in "New Orleans" can mean anywhere from Jefferrson Parish practically to the Mississippi border. All that said, back to the point of the "thread" rather than an incessant dispute over what constitutes "uniqueness"... I will actually state that I fully expect Harvey to pass Katrina in all time costs. Frankly, I'm surprised the record has stood this long considering skyrocketing prices of materials and the fact that what New Orleans lost (in terms of material costs--NOBODY can put a price on a human life.) compared to what there is to lose in a Metro area with more people than the entire state of Louisiana-- yes, I fully expect Harvey to take the top spot eventually. I actually thought Sandy might have passed Katrina--but it didn't -- even though at landfall it was already downgraded to about a Cat 1 and extra-tropical. Sandy was, Cat 1 notwithstanding, quite a "unique" event and one that, while it may be repeated one day--it probably won't meet all those conditions again for a century or better. Before Katrina, the record holder was Andrew, a much smaller storm, originally called a cat 4, and later reclassified a cat 5-- totally devastating a small area, one can only imagine had it moved in directly over downtown Miami. Only time will tell, and yes, whoever that was, who called Irma the TRILLION dollar storm was, in my opinion guilty of shameless hype. People can never be TOO prepared for these killers and destroyers--but to instill such a magnitude of fear as to project apocalyptic scenario only heightens panic--and that only exacerbates matters.

A2K
1 likes   
Flossy 56, Audrey 57, Hilda 64*, Betsy 65*, Camille 69*, Edith 71, Carmen 74, Bob 79, Danny, 85, Elena 85, Juan 85, Florence 88, Andrew 92*, Opal 95, Danny 97, Georges 98*, Isidore 02, Lili 02, Ivan 04, Cindy 05*, Dennis 05, Katrina 05*, Gustav 08*, Isaac 12*, Nate 17, Barry 19, Cristobal 20, Marco, 20, Sally, 20, Zeta 20*, Claudette 21 IDA* 21

User avatar
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4235
Age: 74
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#35 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:18 am

Steve wrote:It was from Accuweather who I don't trust any more than I trusted Maue's potential $1T storm with Irma. It was hype.


Couldn't POSSIBLY agree more with you on that call!

A2K
1 likes   
Flossy 56, Audrey 57, Hilda 64*, Betsy 65*, Camille 69*, Edith 71, Carmen 74, Bob 79, Danny, 85, Elena 85, Juan 85, Florence 88, Andrew 92*, Opal 95, Danny 97, Georges 98*, Isidore 02, Lili 02, Ivan 04, Cindy 05*, Dennis 05, Katrina 05*, Gustav 08*, Isaac 12*, Nate 17, Barry 19, Cristobal 20, Marco, 20, Sally, 20, Zeta 20*, Claudette 21 IDA* 21

User avatar
Steve
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 8604
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:41 pm
Location: Not a state-caster

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#36 Postby Steve » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:44 am

For sure. I don't know if Harvey passes Katrina or not. And yeah, you can't put a price tag on lives. The number of drownings in Katrina probably puts it second to 9/11 for mass deaths in the 21st Century US. The way I understand MRGO was it acted as a funnel. I had some people over in Arabi back by the 40 Arpent that took the shot. And it's open all through Bayou Bienvenue, Hot Water Canal into NOLA East via St Bernard. Dual assault of the walls breaking the industrial canal concrete walls sealed the deal. My dads house in Kenilworth (Lakefront Airport area) had 8 1/2 feet in a house that never flooded. So yeah, that side of town was fd. We got it back by Met Playground due to the Lake surge in the 17th Street Canal and because they didn't damn the Metairie side as water filled up to the edges. I think maybe 3 blocks past our house had no flooding.

Fwiw, I don't have a strong opinion as to whether or not Harvey overtakes that 160B today's cost. I'm leaning toward thinking it's going to come in in the low 12 figures a bit under Katrina.
1 likes   

User avatar
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4235
Age: 74
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#37 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:20 am

You know I had heard that someone had said that Irma was going to be a Trillion dollar storm, (before I saw it referenced in this thread--but can't recall from where!) ... can anyone enlighten me on what purveyor of panic made such an apocalyptic prophecy?

A2K
0 likes   
Flossy 56, Audrey 57, Hilda 64*, Betsy 65*, Camille 69*, Edith 71, Carmen 74, Bob 79, Danny, 85, Elena 85, Juan 85, Florence 88, Andrew 92*, Opal 95, Danny 97, Georges 98*, Isidore 02, Lili 02, Ivan 04, Cindy 05*, Dennis 05, Katrina 05*, Gustav 08*, Isaac 12*, Nate 17, Barry 19, Cristobal 20, Marco, 20, Sally, 20, Zeta 20*, Claudette 21 IDA* 21

User avatar
Steve
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 8604
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:41 pm
Location: Not a state-caster

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#38 Postby Steve » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:12 am

Audrey2Katrina wrote:You know I had heard that someone had said that Irma was going to be a Trillion dollar storm, (before I saw it referenced in this thread--but can't recall from where!) ... can anyone enlighten me on what purveyor of panic made such an apocalyptic prophecy?

A2K


Ryan Maue of Weatherbell.

Local paper did an adjusted analysis they put out this morning that doesn't yet include Irma or Harvey. It goes Katrina, Sandy, Andrew, Ike, Ivan. http://www.nola.com/hurricane/index.ssf ... ncart_2box
1 likes   

stormlover2013
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:06 pm
Location: Lumberton, Texas

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#39 Postby stormlover2013 » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:21 am

One of my weather buddies who is really good and I trust, we have always talked about katrina which was a horrible thing that happened!! really was and I still pray for the lost ones and for the people that got affected by katrina, but if the levees never break this storm wouldn't have been as bad as it was....it was a bad storm don't get me wrong but Harvey in terms of overall what it did from corpus all the way up to SW la could very well be the costliest.
1 likes   

User avatar
wxman57
Moderator-Pro Met
Moderator-Pro Met
Posts: 22473
Age: 66
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:06 pm
Location: Houston, TX (southwest)

Re: Harvey could supplant Katrina as Costliest Hurricane

#40 Postby wxman57 » Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:11 pm

My mother lived near the Mississippi coast for Katrina. She "only" got 2 ft of water in her house. I saw the devastation on the MS coast first-hand. Houses completely gone for blocks inland, wiped out by the surge, which, by the way, was only a Cat 3 surge. A Cat 3 storm can only produce a Cat 3 surge. Surge is not a function of SS category (the absolute peak wind in a storm), it's a function of wind field size. A small Cat 3 produces a much lower surge than an average-sized Cat 3, and a very large Cat 3 (like Katrina) produces a surge similar to what an average Cat 5 might produce, but it's still a Cat 3 surge because Katrina was a Cat 3.

As for Harvey (living in Houston), I can tell you that the area affected by the flood was WAY larger than the area of homes destroyed by Katrina's storm surge (and levee failure). Lots of very expensive homes, too (not New Orleans 9th ward-type homes). It'll take a while to get the final damage tally, but I think Harvey will exceed Katrina in today's dollars. That's not to say Katrina was "nothing". Both were terrible disasters.
1 likes   


Return to “Talkin' Tropics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 57 guests