How many times should we rebuild southern Louisiana?
Guy on MSNBC:
The grid is broke.
The electrical grid is broke.
The water system is broke.
The telecommunication grid is broke.
(btw, the guy sounds very knowledgeable - oh it's General Russel L. Honoré )
Sounds like Puerto Rico. It must be a pretty scary place to live over the past few years.
Here's a little overview regarding sea level rise in Louisiana:
Hmm. A few days later and and circumstances have put this question in a different light.
PVW said:
Hmm. A few days later and and circumstances have put this question in a different light.
Not really. This would be a rare occasion whereas in NOLA, it's every few years.
who knows now? Within ten years we've had Sandy and now Ida. We were tremendously lucky that Ida wasn't much of a windstorm.
drummerboy said:
who knows now? Within ten years we've had Sandy and now Ida. We were tremendously lucky that Ida wasn't much of a windstorm.
We had Irene, sandy and Ida… and Floyd was 1999…
In 22 years!
Since this is the politics section... I'll point out that our warming climate has made these severe weather events more common and more severe. Louisiana is a hub of petroleum refining. NJ was a long time industrial hub and is today very much an automobile-centered state. While it's poorer regions, countries, and populations that are, and will be, hardest hit by the changes in climate we've caused, we can see that even prosperous regions like the NY metro will be paying a steep price. The negative externalities of our carbon-burning lifestyle turn out not be fully offloadable onto distant, poorer people. I have the sense that we're approaching a tipping point where climate change is finally, truly taken seriously -- I hope that sense is true.
PVW said:
Since this is the politics section... I'll point out that our warming climate has made these severe weather events more common and more severe. Louisiana is a hub of petroleum refining. NJ was a long time industrial hub and is today very much an automobile-centered state. While it's poorer regions, countries, and populations that are, and will be, hardest hit by the changes in climate we've caused, we can see that even prosperous regions like the NY metro will be paying a steep price. The negative externalities of our carbon-burning lifestyle turn out not be fully offloadable onto distant, poorer people. I have the sense that we're approaching a tipping point where climate change is finally, truly taken seriously -- I hope that sense is true.
I hope so too. But I was just reading about China and their obsession with coal burning for energy. They’re building new coal plants! We blame ourselves a lot, but China is probably the largest contributor to global warming and the destruction of the environment.
Jaytee said:
I hope so too. But I was just reading about China and their obsession with coal burning for energy. They’re building new coal plants! We blame ourselves a lot, but China is probably the largest contributor to global warming and the destruction of the environment.
That's true in absolute terms -- China is currently responsible for about 27% of emissions, the US for about 15%. But I'd note a few things. First, 15% is still a significant portion! If we can significantly reduce the amount the US emits, that's a real decrease.
Second, the US far outstrips China in per-capita emissions. In many ways China, and other countries outside of Europe and the US, are simply following the path we ourselves have taken. As their economy (and other rapidly developing economies) grow, keeping per-capita emissions low is vital. If we in the US can manage to dramatically drive down our per-capita emissions, that bodes well for China and others. We can't point to China's absolute GHG emissions without looking at our own per capita emissions -- solving our own emissions challenges will also help China solve theirs.
China-US GHG charts: https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/china?country=CHN~USA
mtierney said:
until we get it right.
I don't know what this means. What does "getting it right" look like?
Two points. FEMA should stop providing flood insurance for second homes. We don't need to help folks with their shore houses. Second, China is way ahead of us in pushing molten salt reactors, which I have been advocating for for years. They are on the verge of a real energy transformation. Meanwhile we are stopped almost cold by corporate greed and politics
DanDietrich said:
Two points. FEMA should stop providing flood insurance for second homes. We don't need to help folks with their shore houses. Second, China is way ahead of us in pushing molten salt reactors, which I have been advocating for for years. They are on the verge of a real energy transformation. Meanwhile we are stopped almost cold by corporate greed and politics
Have never heard of a molten salt reactor - you’re not advocating hard enough. ;-)
Educate us!
DanDietrich said:
Two points. FEMA should stop providing flood insurance for second homes. We don't need to help folks with their shore houses. Second, China is way ahead of us in pushing molten salt reactors, which I have been advocating for for years. They are on the verge of a real energy transformation. Meanwhile we are stopped almost cold by corporate greed and politics
nuclear (fission) power is dead in this country. we'll never see another fission plant built here.
however, there has been a recent, dramatic advance in fusion technology
molten salt reactors work at atmospheric pressure because salt stays in liquid form to extremely high temperatures. No big cooling towers, easier plumbing. They self regulate because the fission reaction takes place in the salt mixture. As it heats it expands, which slows the reaction, allowing it to cool. In a regular pressurized water reactor, the type drummer boy is referring to, 97% of the fuel is not burned and becomes radioactive waste. In a MSR the ratio is reversed, and the 3% waste has a much shorter half life, making it easier to store. The reactors can be built in shipyards and transported easily by barge. They are walkaway safe, in that if they are left unattended in an emergency and pumps fail, etc, they pop a salt cork and drain into a holding tank to cool down. Check out thorcon industries .
Jaytee said:
We had Irene, sandy and Ida… and Floyd was 1999…
In 22 years!
Dennis_Seelbach said:
PVW said:
mtierney said:
until we get it right.
I don't know what this means. What does "getting it right" look like?
I think she meant "until we get it white".
Seriously?
DanDietrich said:
Two points. FEMA should stop providing flood insurance for second homes. We don't need to help folks with their shore houses. Second, China is way ahead of us in pushing molten salt reactors, which I have been advocating for for years. They are on the verge of a real energy transformation. Meanwhile we are stopped almost cold by corporate greed and politics
Why in the world would FEMA punish folks who own second homes on the Jersey shore in the event of catastrophic property loss? Insurance companies already raise insurance rates to confiscatory levels for beach property as it is.
If the people who are building McMansions on every available lot, or tearing down all the little cottages and Gramma’s two-bedrooms in Barnegat in Ocean County, are able to spend lots of money, hire construction workers, landscapers, buy stuff, and eat in all the restaurants which survived the lockdown,, that’s a good thing. I personally might think aesthetics need to be more of a concerns, but that’s another issue.
The last couple of storms hit the entire state, including Maplewood, South Orange and Millburn. How many millions of dollars would be lost to the State of New Jersey’s economy, if we “write-off” this major retirement destination? A better challenge would be to insure zoning laws are followed in each town and construction comply with codes. So many who drowned were living in death traps.You have your “corporate greed and politics” right there.
mtierney said:
Why in the world would FEMA punish folks who own second homes on the Jersey shore in the event of catastrophic property loss? Insurance companies already raise insurance rates to confiscatory levels for beach property as it is.
If the people who are building McMansions on every available lot, or tearing down all the little cottages and Gramma’s two-bedrooms in Barnegat in Ocean County, are able to spend lots of money, hire construction workers, landscapers, buy stuff, and eat in all the restaurants which survived the lockdown,, that’s a good thing. I personally might think aesthetics need to be more of a concerns, but that’s another issue.
The last couple of storms hit the entire state, including Maplewood, South Orange and Millburn. How many millions of dollars would be lost to the State of New Jersey’s economy, if we “write-off” this major retirement destination? A better challenge would be to insure zoning laws are followed in each town and construction comply with codes. So many who drowned were living in death traps.You have your “corporate greed and politics” right there.
It’s only socialism for the little people.
mtierney said:
DanDietrich said:
Two points. FEMA should stop providing flood insurance for second homes. We don't need to help folks with their shore houses. Second, China is way ahead of us in pushing molten salt reactors, which I have been advocating for for years. They are on the verge of a real energy transformation. Meanwhile we are stopped almost cold by corporate greed and politics
Why in the world would FEMA punish folks who own second homes on the Jersey shore in the event of catastrophic property loss? Insurance companies already raise insurance rates to confiscatory levels for beach property as it is.
If the people who are building McMansions on every available lot, or tearing down all the little cottages and Gramma’s two-bedrooms in Barnegat in Ocean County, are able to spend lots of money, hire construction workers, landscapers, buy stuff, and eat in all the restaurants which survived the lockdown,, that’s a good thing. I personally might think aesthetics need to be more of a concerns, but that’s another issue.
The last couple of storms hit the entire state, including Maplewood, South Orange and Millburn. How many millions of dollars would be lost to the State of New Jersey’s economy, if we “write-off” this major retirement destination? A better challenge would be to insure zoning laws are followed in each town and construction comply with codes. So many who drowned were living in death traps.You have your “corporate greed and politics” right there.
If they can afford that they don't need my taxes subsidizing them. A second home is not a necessity.
mtierney said:
...
A better challenge would be to insure zoning laws are followed in each town and construction comply with codes. So many who drowned were living in death traps.You have your “corporate greed and politics” right there.
that's brilliant. comparing illegal basement apartments in Queens to multi-million dollar beach houses that get Federal assistance to help them exist.
Well, I still have no idea what mtierney means by rebuilding it "right," but it does look like some lessons have been learned since Katrina:
(Popular Science)
tl;dr: better levees with a focus on keeping the central city dry worked, a large-scale restoration of coastal marshland is ongoing, building codes are updating to require permeable surfaces. DanDietrich said:
mtierney said:
DanDietrich said:
Two points. FEMA should stop providing flood insurance for second homes. We don't need to help folks with their shore houses.
If they can afford that they don't need my taxes subsidizing them. A second home is not a necessity.
I would say that “a second home” proved to be brilliant and a necessity during the pandemic and lockdown for many displaced workers and their children kept at home. These folks also pay high income taxes, obscene Essex County property taxes, and contribute to the economy in multiple ways. Maintaining two homes is not for the timid.
Tell me Mtierney, in what Christian world, where many people are struggling to meet basic needs, is a 2nd home a necessity?
mtierney said:
I would say that “a second home” proved to be brilliant and a necessity during the pandemic and lockdown for many displaced workers and their children kept at home. These folks also pay high income taxes, obscene Essex County property taxes, and contribute to the economy in multiple ways. Maintaining two homes is not for the timid.
Nor is defending the indefensible.
Dennis_Seelbach said:
mtierney said:
I would say that “a second home” proved to be brilliant and a necessity during the pandemic and lockdown for many displaced workers and their children kept at home. These folks also pay high income taxes, obscene Essex County property taxes, and contribute to the economy in multiple ways. Maintaining two homes is not for the timid.
Nor is defending the indefensible.
the first sentence doesn't even make any sense. shore homes were a necessity during the pandemic because of what now?
As I understand it, the reason that flood insurance is subsidized is so that people can have a place to live. The subsidy doesn't just allow for rebuilding, it also makes it possible to afford the insurance needed for the mortgage on the home.
There are different reasons involved if the house is not a primary residence.
Maybe flood insurance for places that flood repeatedly could stand rethinking though. Here in Wis, one whole (not large) town, and part of another, moved a few years back to be a little farther from river(s).
(In Milwaukee, which is split by 3 rivers, early 20th century planners established several large (and beautiful) county parks along the rivers. I think it may have been in the time of the socialists, aka "sewer socialists," who were in charge here for a while.)
For Sale
Garage Sales
-
Multi Family Garage Sale Sale Date: Apr 20, 2024
More info
Free Items
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Just asking.