A Decent Example of Louisiana's Fading Coastline...

[skysummit]

While searching random imagery, I found this image from September of last year. It clearly shows where Louisiana's old coastline used to be, and how much has eaten away. I added the colored lines manually. I also put the approximate location of a proposed Category 5 Hurricane Protection Levee in green. The proposed levee pretty much follows the Intracoastal Waterway. This would leave many small towns to the south completely submerged by a storm surge. Also, if there were any levee breaks, towns such as Houma, Lockport, and Larose would be completely submerged...with only a few miles to get to New Orleans.

It would take years to build this levee, but unfortunately, I don't believe we have years left.

*Credit to LSU Earthlab for the original satellite image.

[TSmith274]

Skysummit, don't you think your original coastline is a little generous?

[mobilebay]

Skysummit, don't you think your original coastline is a little generous?

[CHRISTY]

incredible image there by the LSU EARTHLAB....I really do hope u guys get break this year!

[skysummit]

Skysummit, don't you think your original coastline is a little generous?

I'm not saying that's where it was prior to Katrina...but that's where it was probably when Betsy hit in 1965. Remember, we lost appx. 40 miles of coastline since the 60's.

[bvigal]

Wow, that is incredible photo, thanks for posting it!! So Skysummit, am I reading your lines correctly? Grand Isle and Fourchon no longer exist, but are now beyond the current coastline? That's really sobering...

[TSmith274]

Grand Isle and Port Fourchon are out there to fend for themselves, that's for sure. We must reverse this... the sooner the better. I hope it gets more attention.

[wxman57]

Just what is a "Category 5 Levee"?? There is no such thing. The SS scale is a peak sustained wind scale only, it doesn't have anything to do with storm surge. The SS scale "says" a Cat 3 would produce a 9-12 ft. storm surge. Of course, that's bogus. A Cat 3 can produce a 25-30 ft. storm surge in some cases (remember a hurricane named Katrina?).

Storm surge is mostly a funciton of the radius of maximum winds, offshore water depth, coastal topography, angle of impact on the coast, speed of movement, and, finally, average wind speed over a large area. We have to stop thinking of storm surge as being a function of SS category. It's just not the case. Peak wind speeds play only a small part in storm surge generation.

[Pearl River]

The media and the ACOE are the ones labeling the levee's as to the type of surge they are supposed to hold back.

[Rainband]

Indian rocks beach in pinellas county Florida lost 50 feet of beach from the 2005 season.

[Audrey2Katrina]

Grand Isle and Port Fourchon are out there to fend for themselves, that's for sure. We must reverse this... the sooner the better. I hope it gets more attention.

Roger that! I've been to Grand Isle many times, and hope to make many more... great fishing and LOVE the Tarpon Rodeo.

A2K

[TSmith274]

Just what is a "Category 5 Levee"?? There is no such thing. The SS scale is a peak sustained wind scale only, it doesn't have anything to do with storm surge. The SS scale "says" a Cat 3 would produce a 9-12 ft. storm surge. Of course, that's bogus. A Cat 3 can produce a 25-30 ft. storm surge in some cases (remember a hurricane named Katrina?).

If Louisiana gets its fair share of its oil and gas revenues, we'll find out. I'd guess it will be an earthen concrete reinforced levee of about 30-35 feet in height. Just enough to stop the surge, even with a few breaches. The current levees would serve as a 2nd and 3rd line of defense. Also planned is a seawall that would keep surges out of Lake Ponchartrain... the very thing that inundated New Orleans. It's amazing what people will build when their very existance is at stake.

[Audrey2Katrina]

It's amazing what people will build when their very existance is at stake.

I know... some folks get tired or seeing this; but it's true nonetheless--the Dutch have proven this very point--as have the wills of the people of Venice!

A2K

[MiamiensisWx]

Sorry if this sounds mean, but the REAL big factor for ultimate long-term safety and success would be the restoration, protection, resurrection, and build-up of coastal marshes. This could well be implemented to work with the levee system envisioned. This would be the ULTIMATE thing for long-term safety and success.

[shaggy]

Grand Isle and Port Fourchon are out there to fend for themselves, that's for sure. We must reverse this... the sooner the better. I hope it gets more attention.

no we shouldn't reverse this this is what mother nature decided to do with this piece of land and if we reverse it then what are we going to start cutting down forest to prevent forest fires?I live in a coastal area and i see the million dollar houses on the beach but why should the average joe that cant afford that continue to pay for them to be knocked down by hurricanes?

[Audrey2Katrina]

Grand Isle and Port Fourchon are out there to fend for themselves, that's for sure. We must reverse this... the sooner the better. I hope it gets more attention.

no we shouldn't reverse this this is what mother nature decided to do with this piece of land and if we reverse it then what are we going to start cutting down forest to prevent forest fires?I live in a coastal area and i see the million dollar houses on the beach but why should the average joe that cant afford that continue to pay for them to be knocked down by hurricanes?

Yes we should. Mother nature decides a LOT of things WE decide to reverse... such as disease. This was brought about not so much by Mother Nature anyway; but by man's efforts to control the path of the Mississippi, and the channeling in of countless waterways to accomodate marine industry to the area--if anything, Mother Nature was "building UP" this coastline before we entered the picture. We SHOULD reverse it!

why should the average joe that cant afford that continue to pay for them to be knocked down by hurricanes?

We shouldn't... insurance companies and the OWNERS should...

A2K

[shaggy]

Grand Isle and Port Fourchon are out there to fend for themselves, that's for sure. We must reverse this... the sooner the better. I hope it gets more attention.

no we shouldn't reverse this this is what mother nature decided to do with this piece of land and if we reverse it then what are we going to start cutting down forest to prevent forest fires?I live in a coastal area and i see the million dollar houses on the beach but why should the average joe that cant afford that continue to pay for them to be knocked down by hurricanes?

Yes we should. Mother nature decides a LOT of things WE decide to reverse... such as disease. This was brought about not so much by Mother Nature anyway; but by man's efforts to control the path of the Mississippi, and the channeling in of countless waterways to accomodate marine industry to the area--if anything, Mother Nature was "building UP" this coastline before we entered the picture. We SHOULD reverse it!

why should the average joe that cant afford that continue to pay for them to be knocked down by hurricanes?

We shouldn't... insurance companies and the OWNERS should...

A2K

well as to the first point controlling the miss. river is a big mistake that we made but to build huge levees along the gulf coast to control the storm surge problem is where we can make another mistake.If it HAS to be controlled find another way like replenishing the marshes or some other means but by building "seawalls" and levees is just to costly and leaves people with a false sense of "control".Just look at what happened in New orleans with katrina.The biggest down fall for that city was complacency.To build a levee system that may force the water into another area thats not protected and further from landfall where people may not evacuate causing worse damage and higher lose of life.

As for the 2nd your right the insurance does have to pay for them but they pay for it by raising everyones premiums.Trust me if you think part of your premiums do not go to rebuilding homes along destroyed coastline then thats a niave way of seeing it!

[Audrey2Katrina]

As for the 2nd your right the insurance does have to pay for them but they pay for it by raising everyones premiums.Trust me if you think part of your premiums do not go to rebuilding homes along destroyed coastline then thats a niave way of seeing it!

I'm a lot of things, my friend, but naive isn't one of them. The same could be said for increasing medical insurance consequent to those who smoke, those who indulge in high fat diets, and those who live in earthquake and tornado zones... I assure you, these things when all factored in amount to a far greater influence on our expenses than a hurricane--all said and done, and anyone not facing that reality is IMHO naive. We can't police EVERYTHING people choose to do.

but to build huge levees along the gulf coast to control the storm surge problem is where we can make another mistake.

We could; but among the many proposals there are those which include sluice gates that would make them quite environmentally safe and friendly. And they would add a much greater safety barrier for the nation's overall largest port system.

another way like replenishing the marshes

This is already being reviewed and planned. (See Popular Science "Five ways to make New Orleans...." They have rapid growing grasses to help hold land in place, and encourage a slow but steady rebuilding of the marshlands...this is a needed and very good idea.

but by building "seawalls" and levees is just to costly and leaves people with a false sense of "control".Just look at what happened in New orleans

First: It's not along the line of the "seawalls" such as those constructed at the Netherlands... but large sea-"gates" which would impeded any rushing in of surge into dangerous lakes like Pontchartrain. Had the proposed gates been put in place before being stopped by a silly federal judge around 1979, it's QUITE possible the price of Katrina would be 50-80 Billion LESS, and those much touted insurance premiums far less affected. Their cost would have been FAR LESS than what this storm has cost us, and they are entirely DO-able.

As to complacency... you have that everywhere--especially in areas that haven't seen a hit in a long time. I shudder to think what will happen to those much touted insurance rates should a major slam into NYC with a massive surge...absolutely frightening to think about--and entirely possible. Perhaps then they'll talk about complacency in that region, and/or ways to protect Gotham, but you can bet they won't be talking about just abandoning NYC.

What Katrina did to New Orleans AND the Mississippi/Alabama Gulf Coast, I might add, had little to do with "massive sea gates and well-constructed levees"... quite the contrary. Had these been in place, much of this discussion in all likelihood wouldn't even be taking place.

A2K

[shaggy]

As for the 2nd your right the insurance does have to pay for them but they pay for it by raising everyones premiums.Trust me if you think part of your premiums do not go to rebuilding homes along destroyed coastline then thats a niave way of seeing it!

I'm a lot of things, my friend, but naive isn't one of them. The same could be said for increasing medical insurance consequent to those who smoke, those who indulge in high fat diets, and those who live in earthquake and tornado zones... I assure you, these things when all factored in amount to a far greater influence on our expenses than a hurricane--all said and done, and anyone not facing that reality is IMHO naive. We can't police EVERYTHING people choose to do.

but to build huge levees along the gulf coast to control the storm surge problem is where we can make another mistake.

We could; but among the many proposals there are those which include sluice gates that would make them quite environmentally safe and friendly. And they would add a much greater safety barrier for the nation's overall largest port system.

another way like replenishing the marshes

This is already being reviewed and planned. (See Popular Science "Five ways to make New Orleans...." They have rapid growing grasses to help hold land in place, and encourage a slow but steady rebuilding of the marshlands...this is a needed and very good idea.

but by building "seawalls" and levees is just to costly and leaves people with a false sense of "control".Just look at what happened in New orleans

First: It's not along the line of the "seawalls" such as those constructed at the Netherlands... but large sea-"gates" which would impeded any rushing in of surge into dangerous lakes like Pontchartrain. Had the proposed gates been put in place before being stopped by a silly federal judge around 1979, it's QUITE possible the price of Katrina would be 50-80 Billion LESS, and those much touted insurance premiums far less affected. Their cost would have been FAR LESS than what this storm has cost us, and they are entirely DO-able.

As to complacency... you have that everywhere--especially in areas that haven't seen a hit in a long time. I shudder to think what will happen to those much touted insurance rates should a major slam into NYC with a massive surge...absolutely frightening to think about--and entirely possible. Perhaps then they'll talk about complacency in that region, and/or ways to protect Gotham, but you can bet they won't be talking about just abandoning NYC.

What Katrina did to New Orleans AND the Mississippi/Alabama Gulf Coast, I might add, had little to do with "massive sea gates and well-constructed levees"... quite the contrary. Had these been in place, much of this discussion in all likelihood wouldn't even be taking place.

A2K

Ok your 100% correct on the rising health care cost and things but comapring tornadoes to hurricanes certainly stretches the boundary of the problem.Tornadoes are small and localized events that may at worst be a mile wide and last for 20-50 miles in a worse case scenario.Most of tornado ally is rural and catastrophic damage is rarein large scales.However building multi-million dollar houses on a strip of land thats only a mile wide (thats generous for here in NC most are only 1/2 mile at best) barrier islands in high strike density zones where the systems can be hundreds of miles wide is just not good common sense.

Thank you for the info on where to find some of the proposed solutions as this will help me see the full grasp of the potential plans they are going to look at.IMHO New orleans has been and will always be a disaster waiting to happen.Its a major city built below sea level nothing good can come from that if mother nature chooses to flex her most powerful muscles.

[skysummit]

bvigal....Grand Isle and Fourchon still exists with Port Fourchon booming like never before. There's just a tiny bit of land with La Hwy 1 on it and that's about it. All the surroundings are marshes, but mostly water. A helicopter ride is very frightening over that area.

...and wxman57, you're exactly right. Just what is a Cat 5 levee? I dunno, but that's what they're calling it.