[extropy-chat] Fill it in a pave it over

Tue Sep 6 00:37:18 UTC 2005

At 08:23 PM 9/5/2005 -0400, Dan C wrote:
>What would the logistics be to just fill New Orleans in with gravel and 
>build on top? Get the level higher than the maximum level of Lake 
>Ponchartrain. Gravel would ship by barge from the entire Mississippi basin.

Cf. David Brin's blog suggestions (sorry for the code tags):

===============

On my "Modernism" blog http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/
we're discussing this.  Here's an excerpt.

How best to rebuild after a long-awaited disaster...
part I

Last time I wrote: What is the most practical and
beneficial way to help the people and the great city
of New Orleans? ... What should be done with a
below-sea-level isthmus of soggy, termite-ridden
ground that lies between a Gulf bay called Lake
Pontchartrain and a river that's become its worst
enemy? As at 9/11 Ground Zero, this needs some
pondering of alternatives.

And yet... how can we not rebuild a city that
was so grand and wonderful and fun...

.
Well, first off, something must happen, and
fast, for our fellow citizens. All of the displaced
residents must receive generous help from their
countrymen, to rebuild their lives and livelihoods.
And to enter decent homes. To rebuild jobs and
savings. Moreover, the cultural gift that was New
Orleans should be saved for us all.

And then? The city itself?

<b>Suggestion #1:  Use the same zone to rebuild a
smaller urban center.</b>

Certain parts of NoLA can be restored for historical
cultural and tourist reasons.  With new INTERNAL dike
systems to protect what's rebuilt.  Some other areas
can be raised, as they did with Galveston after a
similar disaster.  But much could also be turned into
low-lying parkland.  As for the dispossessed, remake
whole neighborhoods in more suitable areas above flood
level.  Do it well.  Really well. So well that they'll
be happy.

<b>Suggestion #2:   Listen to Nature and accept her
adamant plan.</b>

Read EARTH, where I describe how desperately the
Mississippi wants to change its course.  Every year,
it strains harder against the Army Corps of Engineers'
magnificent - but someday doomed - Achafalaya Control
Dam.

Look at a map and ponder.  Is it possible that NOW may
be the right time to let the river go?

Think.  There have always been benefits and drawbacks
to this idea, with the political balance deciding to
leave things as they were, spending hundreds of
millions to keep forcing Ol' Miss down its old
channel, which continues silting and rising.  (Today,
the river's BOTTOM now lies above the second floor of
some NoLa buildings.)

This obstinacy has had huge, expensive and destructive
effects.  For example, artificially lengthening the
one official channel, hampering shipping and robbing
the barrier islands and swamps of silt, until
Louisiana's delta is almost gone... the old natural
hurricane barrier that might have saved the city from
Katrina.

Benefits of opening the gates: a new, straight
and fast channel to the Gulf - especially if it were
prepared and then water-scoured - would require little
in the way of ongoing dredging or levees. Carried
swiftly to the Gulf, silt would spread wide,
rebuilding wetlands and islands, recreating the
natural storm barriers. After an adjustment period,
river commerce should be more efficient. And finally,
the prospect may partly be paid off by nongovernmental
money, attracted to an entirely new rivermouth zone.

Drawbacks: This would require finally buying
out a chain of farms - and some villages - that have
long known the river would someday come
a-calling. Some will kick and scream while others
will relish new riverfront views.

  But the real opposition has come from NoLa itself,
which took pride and identity from being America's
greatest River City.  Only now it may be ready to
accept a different role.

Please, I am not offering this suggestion in order to
kick New Orleans while it's down.  Indeed, this may be
a very good idea, helping make it possible to rebuild
ALL of this great town... and more. For example, if
the Mississipi moves away, NoLa will remain a GULF
city, with Pontchartrain right next door.  Its port
could stay valuable, though much traffic would be
diverted to new trans-shipment facilities at the new
Achafalaya outlet.  In any event, this would cut in
HALF the number of dikes that New New Orleans will
have to maintain.  That savings, alone, might pay for
the diversion.

And picture this. Today's riverbed would then become
this lovely raised plateau, winding through
town. A perfect place to build view-rich housing for
many of the displaced, so high that even a future
break in the Ponchartrain dikes would never touch
them. And the sogginess that rots every beam and
timber... presumably that would decline, as well.

Indeed, this may be the one way to ensure that even
old neighborhoods can be rebuilt, without the nation
worrying that it's all for nothing.

Seriously, with a year's warning, the Achafalaya
valley could be warned and a new path for the
Mississippi prepared (the one it wants to take and
WILL take, sooner or later). If done carefully, the
new river will be healthier, better for commerce, and
the whole region ecologically improved. What's more,
it's probably much cheaper than any other plan,
as well.

The alternative?  Spend billions restoring then
maintaining an impossible situation... and keep
chaining up an adamant river that pushes harder every
year against the artificial bonds that enslave it to
our shortsighted will... until the Dam eventually does
give way, releasing ther Father of Waters to come
sweeping down upon unprepared farms and villages...

...leaving NoLa high and dry anyway.

.
PS. Again here's my standard warning. Especially for
any angry riverfolk. I am paid to be interesting.
I am not paid to be right.