Thanks, Nadine.
While these things can change, last time I looked a flood surge exceeding Katrina's was expected, especially in the West Bank - not that West Bank, our West Bank - which was not flooded during K. If so, we will have another disaster.
I litigated a case for years involving the governmental entity in charge of the West Bank levees. They are a joke. Unless things have changed radically, which I doubt given the extent of the work necessary, a 15 ft., plus, surge, which is predicted, will easily overwhelm existing protection.
The WB is a substantial part of our metro area. However, it is separated by the River from what most folks consider to be NO. If the East Bank's levees also fail with the enormous surge that is expected, as they did during K., we will have a much, much larger disaster.
Since the East Bank's levees are also not up to snuff - though they are far stronger than the West Bank's - we are realistically looking at a disaster larger than the previous one.
The only thing that will remove the risk is a weakening of the storm or a radical shift to the West in its direction. If it makes landfall 30-75 miles west of NO, we will get the worst part of the storm which generally can be found in the Northeast quadrant.
The governmental response has been measurably better. It is fortunate that the hyper-competent Bobby Jindal is in charge. Even so, if levees break on both sides of the River, there is little anyone will be able to do. |
