Comments on: US Out of …

By: Alan K. Henderson

Alan K. Henderson — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 05:30:40 +0000

Oh, and... 3. Navy and Coast Guard ships were on the scene for rescue and relief sooner than generally reported.

By: Alan K. Henderson

Alan K. Henderson — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 04:40:33 +0000

[Y]et four-fifths of the population of the affected area escaped entirely, and in all likelihood well over 99% of those who did not escape nonetheless survived the disaster. The worst day in this country is better than the best day in a lot of other places. Your homework assignment on this anniversary is to think of reasons why.

Considering that the main survival concern is food and water, I offer this explanation:

1. Most people are not complete idiots. Some survivors had a supply of food and water already, while others managed to put together a stash at the last minute as the levee broke – it’s not like the city was completely overwhelmed by water in a manner of seconds. (Maybe afterward a few dived underwater to get extra stuff out of the cupboard – not improbable where the flood level was lower than first-story ceiling level.)

2. The private sector was more prompt at delivering food and water to the immersed city than news accounts suggest.

(Trivia: I used to live in Metairie, from grades K-3.)

By: Jim Miller

Jim Miller — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 15:07:07 +0000

Jay – Fascinating post, wherever you rambled. And I fear you may be right about the “disappointment”, as I said in this post.

In your comment, you said that the likellihood of Cat 3 hurricane hitting New Orleans in any given year is 0.5 percent. Do you have a reference for that?

By: Jay Manifold

Jay Manifold — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:36:29 +0000

But the hurricane’s path pushed more water into Lake Ponchartrain from the east than would otherwise have been the case. So the wind damage was less, but the later flooding may have been worse.

One thing that doesn’t make managing these risks any easier is that in any given year, the likelihood of a cat-3 or above hurricane hitting New Orleans is 0.5%. And it is arguable that this was a miss, sort of. But the topic of whether/what to rebuild is one for a separate post.

By: Ken

Ken — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 19:28:36 +0000

Because the hurricane missed.

If the city were flooded by rushing water at the same time as the maximum winds were blasting the city and demolishing most of its homes, the rescue effort would have been much smaller.