Skip to main content

New Orleans - should they go back

One of the biggest questions to face the "Big Easy" is whether they should try to rebuild the city where it was.

New Orleans is below water level and protected by the levees (dams). With clear evidence that weather is more volatile there has to be a judgement as to when next it will flood.

If they are going to abandon the city for months the big question is whether it would be more efficient to build a "New New orleans" elsewhere (above sea level).

There always is a question as to how much man should fight nature. On the flood plains of the UK it is clear we should not be trying to beat the waters. Instead we should simply not build on the flood plains. On the East of the country the cliffs are being eternally worn away. We have to a great extent to live with that because if we protect one area of cliff another one wears away.

Worsening weather and greater scarcity of hydrocarbons are two issues nothing can be done about in the short term. Even if we stopped burning fossil fuels immediately the climate would continue to change.

The challenge for the US is to decide whether to build a new big easy or not.#

Comments

Peter Pigeon said…
I think the French quarter is above sea level, isn´t it? hard to see that being abandoned.

I wonder if insurance costs will start to have a big impact on rebuilding decisions in Louisiana and on location decisions elsewhere.
John Hemming said…
That's right. It is called such because it was built by the French because unusually it was not swampland.

I think you are right about the insurance up to a point.

I don't know that much about the local geography, however, and what may be done in the surrounding areas.