Slashdot Mirror


Louisiana's Governor Declares State Of Emergency Over Disappearing Coastline (npr.org)

Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards has declared a state of emergency over the state's rapidly eroding coastline. From a report on NPR: It's an effort to bring nationwide attention to the issue and speed up the federal permitting process for coastal restoration projects. "Decades of saltwater intrusion, subsidence and rising sea levels have made the Louisiana coast the nation's most rapidly deteriorating shoreline," WWNO's Travis Lux tells our Newscast unit. "It loses the equivalent of one football field of land every hour." More than half of the state's population lives on the coast, the declaration states. It adds that the pace of erosion is getting faster: "more than 1,800 square miles of land between 1932 and 2010, including 300 square miles of marshland between 2004 and 2008 alone."

30 of 307 comments (clear)

  1. Its pretty important... by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Informative
    This area of LA....a large percentage of the US's seafood comes from here, and, a large portion of the US's domestic oil comes from the Gulf into LA, and processed here.

    Oil from all over the place is processed here.

    The people that work these jobs, live on the coast and the sealife that supports these folks and provides a good amount of seafood to the US will disappear if this coastal erosion is allowed to continue.

    This isn't just for the people of Louisiana, but for the great resources it provides the rest of the US.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    1. Re:Its pretty important... by Major+Blud · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's a shame more people don't realize this, as evidenced by the multiple posts on here suggesting that people need to relocate. I've lived all over the country, but I've spent the majority of my life here in Louisiana and I'd like to stay here.

      The majority of the folks affected by this live in areas such as Plaquemines, Terrebone, and Lafourche parishes aren't rich by any means.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      They were born here; to suggest that they just pack up and move is pretty short-sighted and somewhat insulting.

      The other part of this that's frustrating is that there isn't a simple engineering solution to fix this. The levee system, while keeping urban areas from flooding, prevents sediment build-up that would restore some of the coast line. Even nutria rats are partially responsible for the eroding coast.

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    2. Re:Its pretty important... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >They were born here; to suggest that they just pack up and move is pretty short-sighted and somewhat insulting.

      The White House no longer recognizes man's effect on climate, which means there's little hope of policy directed at mitigating man's effects on climate - and still probably none even if they acknowledge the climate is changing and are merely ignoring man's role.

      Beyond that, the White House already had very little control over other nations that are or likely will significantly affect climate going forward.

      So... we're not going to fix the problem any time soon. The ocean doesn't care where you were born, it doesn't decide where its rising levels will flood land.

      To suggest people pack up and move isn't insulting, it's unfortunately common sense given the circumstances.

    3. Re:Its pretty important... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The denial of man's role is part of denying the change at all, because they're happy with the status quo. For some it's economics - they profit under the current system and alterations to reduce or fight the effects of climate change will reduce those profits, for some it's pure denial that the world could ever change.

      When the water's up around their ankles, they're scream bloody murder for levees, but that's about it. If it's somebody else up to their ankles they'll come up with some way to rationalize how it was always a risk and the climate hasn't actually changed, and how it's the fault of those who chose to live there.

    4. Re:Its pretty important... by Orgasmatron · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This has nothing to do with climate. It has nothing to do with "rising sea levels". It has everything to do with 150 years of engineering the Mississippi river. That river flows an ungodly amount of water, and that water picks stuff up and drops it off. Every geographical feature in that area was (mostly) the result of a dynamic equilibrium between sediment deposits and erosion. We've changed the river, and now the land is adjusting to a new equilibrium.

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
    5. Re:Its pretty important... by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For the same reason part of the country pays to bring water to cities in a desert, or pays to have people live in Tornado Alley.

      I'm fascinated by this notion that some have that societies should be fundamentally sociopathic... unless of course it's your own backyard, and then suddenly no amount of public funds is too much.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    6. Re:Its pretty important... by JudgeFurious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. No it won't. The people who work these jobs live on the coast and since the Gulf of Mexico has a rather long coast that stretches from, well "Mexico" all the way to the tip of Florida I'm sure somebody in this world is going to work these jobs and continue to live on the coast. For that matter if the coast moves inland how is that supposed to prevent people from living near the coast (You don't actually think all of these people live on the beach do you?). Yes, the existing coastline changes. It continues to change and will keep changing. Nothing is going to stop that from happening entirely but lots of people live near the coast in Louisiana and will never be affected by this to any great degree. Seafood doesn't even factor into this. "More" ocean is supposed to translate into less seafood? Seriously?

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    7. Re:Its pretty important... by Luthair · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Beyond that, the White House already had very little control over other nations that are or likely will significantly affect climate going forward.

      Well, they could have supported a number of international accords aimed at reducing emissions.

    8. Re:Its pretty important... by Luthair · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why should the rest of the country pay to relocate people who chose to be near the ocean? That isn't a federal issue, that's for the state or local governments to figure out.

      Maybe because the issue has been caused in no small part by 300-million Americans driving SUVs, trucks, and burning coal. This is where the funds from a carbon tax should go.

    9. Re:Its pretty important... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 3, Informative

      So ironically, transporting the oil and gas out of the region is putting oil and gas production in jeopardy.

      That would seem to be yet another reason to transition this country away from fossil fuels altogether. That would address both the erosion issue and the fossil fuel dependence at the same time.

      As far as seafood goes, there's going to be a coastline somewhere, no matter how far it moves into the current state of Louisiana. The seafood will still come from wherever that is.

    10. Re:Its pretty important... by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd have a lot more sympathy for people from LA, if their representatives didn't vote against aid for people affected by Hurricaine Sandy. That would be Reps. Steve Scalise, John Flemming and Sen. Bill Cassidy. See: http://www.latimes.com/busines... for example. And I'd be more sympathetic if Sen. Cassidy wasn't a climate change skeptic. If the oil companies want to buy a themselves a LA senator, they can pay for protecting the state from climate change too.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
  2. Yeah, Climate Change isn't real /sarcasm by Linsaran · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And the Republicans insist climate change isn't real . . . well maybe when half the red leaning states are under water they'll open their eyes. Probably be way too late by that point though.

    --
    In a bit of shameless internet panhandling, I accept Litecoin Donations at Lbd2oH9QsthD1GfuUXPyka12YxvWJYnBVf
    1. Re:Yeah, Climate Change isn't real /sarcasm by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And Republicans will insist that the federal government pick up the tab for fixing the problems that they made.

    2. Re:Yeah, Climate Change isn't real /sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem that the Democratic government of Louisiana made over the last 50 years? That one?

      What problems would that be? Not throwing out the users of one of America's most active seaports? Not shutting down the petroleum extraction companies? Not forcing people to move elsewhere?

      The fact is, not only have Democrats tried to foster coastal restoration for the past 50 years(check out the legislative history), it has been Republicans refusing to fund the efforts and combined it with hand-wringing denials of any problems. This has been a national problem, ever since Reagan and his anti-government agenda took over.

      The saddest thing, is if the Russians could be blamed on the problem, it'd have already been solved. He'd have spared no expense on that. Well, ok, he'd probably have messed that up too, such is the way of things.

      The greatest irony, of course, is that the partisan shifting has now given Republicans responsibility for the people's anger and rage at the very thing the GOP could have acted to prevent.

      Much like they now own the racist bigots who want to secede. It is terribly funny in a way.

    3. Re:Yeah, Climate Change isn't real /sarcasm by nucrash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      http://northiowatoday.com/2012...

      Tom Vilsack was a Democrat. Still, I recall how many conservative farmers would complain about poor people taking from the government and yet they were first in line when this money was handed out.

      --
      Place something witty here
    4. Re:Yeah, Climate Change isn't real /sarcasm by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      http://www.latimes.com/busines... When Louisana floods, they want money. When NJ floods, they vote against it. Hypocrisy.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
  3. Re:Louisiana is one big sinkhole by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Large parts of the state are below sea level.

    No, it's pretty much just New Orleans that sits below sea level.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  4. "one football field of land every hour" by beowulfcluster · · Score: 4, Funny

    But how many libraries of congress of land every hour is that?

  5. Reasons by Pollux · · Score: 4, Informative

    Decades of saltwater intrusion, subsidence and rising sea levels

    No, that's not why the delta's disappearing. Here are the reasons why:

    1) Levees and flood protections prevent silt from the Mississippi from depositing into the delta to maintain it, and
    2) Oil drilling required dredging up the delta to permit pipelines and shipping lanes, destroying wetlands that help capture and build-up the silt.

    1. Re:Reasons by Elfich47 · · Score: 4, Informative

      If I can add to this:

      The delta used to shift and move the river bed quite often. With the canals and leeves in place the natural tendency of the river to move is being fought against. It is the reason why the river breaks out at odd places just up stream or downstream of existing leeves. Part of this is a result of the silt deposits that used to be carried downstream by the Mississippi.

      With the wetlands being destroyed the ocean barrier that helped protect against storms is being destroyed. Which exposed larger areas of the coast line to damage.

      --
      Architectural plans are like computer source code with a couple of differences: You only compile once.
    2. Re:Reasons by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 4, Informative

      From your link:

      "So we're fighting this massive loss of surface land [and] we're also subsiding because we're not replenishing these wetlands," Marshall says. "On top of that, here comes global warming and sea level rise." According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, southern Louisiana has "the highest rate of relative sea level rise of any place in the country, and one of the highest rates anywhere on the planet."

  6. The problem with your explanation by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with your explanation is that it's fact-based, and stands on good science. This is the post-truth era. Thus, the counter to your argument will be:

    • Evidence for a human cause of erosion is thin and controversial, and is being pushed by loony liberals.
    • We need those oil and shipping jobs, and jobs building and maintaining levees, not more regulation that stifles them!
    • Cause and effect is not a real thing, except for one cause, God is behind everything.
    • This is part of God's plan for us. The end time is coming, and when the Rapture arrives it will not matter that Louisiana's coast has eroded. Cease your pursuit of unholy science and pray to save your soul!
    1. Re:The problem with your explanation by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Query: Why would those arguments even exist, considering that the vast majority of the levees, dams, and canals we have today were built during the Great Depression as jobs programs, viz the WPA. Last I checked, these programs was spawned by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and LA's governor at the time (who happily agreed) was the infamous Huey Long... neither of whom were members of the party you seek to demonize.

      Maybe it would benefit you to realize that the problems in TFA were caused by misguided engineering efforts held throughout the first half of the 20th century?

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  7. Re: Louisiana is one big sinkhole by joerdie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Might have had?" Your ignorance is showing.

  8. Re: Louisiana is one big sinkhole by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The whole point of carbon taxes is to set a price for CO2 emissions, with the baseline assumption that the market will produce solutions based on creating a sort of "artificial scarcity". If you're a free market advocate, carbon taxes are the way to go, because they are far easier to administer than regulatory regimes, carbon credits, and other regulation-style structures. Upping the price of carbon means alternatives become more attractive, and isn't that the name of the game?

    Unless, of course, you don't believe in free markets.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  9. Meh. What is science but a guess by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    CNN has a similar article about disappearing Louisiana coastline. One of the people interviewed has been shrimping for 54 years. His best comment, "It doesn't concern me.What is science? Science is an educated guess," Dotson says defiantly. "What if they guess wrong? There's just as much chance as them to be wrong as there is for them to be right."

    Mind you, Louisiana is the top most uneducated state in the nation and this particular area of Louisiana, Cameron county, has the highest percentage of people who do not believe climate change has an effect on plants or animals. Not man-made climate change, but any climate change.

    Another person in the article says he likes his AC and gas at reasonable prices so therefore, why, based on a prediction alone, should humans try to limit CO2 production?

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  10. Re: Louisiana is one big sinkhole by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, the government will have to set the price, so it won't be a truly free market. But seeing as leaving it to the market to actually set the price means oil is obscenely cheap and it's use continues, until costs in other parts of the economy hit damaging levels (ie. how much do you want to spend on house insurance, flood remediation, and rising food costs, etc.) I did say "artificial scarcity".

    The fact is that CO2 emissions are trapping more heat in the lower atmosphere, the oceans and the surface of the planet. If you have some alternative solution, explain how it will solve this problem without creating an extremely intrusive regulatory regime, which everyone is going to hate a helluva lot more than simply setting a price on CO2 emissions.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  11. Old news: New Orleans is artificial and a mistake by knorthern+knight · · Score: 5, Informative

    From a 2005 post https://pesn.com/archive/2005/...

    Summary... the City of New Orleans is sinking, and sliding off the continental shelf. It's doomed even if sea levels did *NOT* rise.

    > The river is moving away from the city. The city is sinking because of its
    > weight, because no upbuilding by new muck for many decades, because of
    > being cut off from the fresh water, because it is sliding off a cliff (the Continental Shelf),
    > and because the Oil and Gas Industry is extracting oil out from under it.
    > It is a city that for all intents and purposes is now Sea domain.

    And, oh yeah, the very fact that ships can navigate from the Gulf of Mexico, up the Mississippi River is an anthropogenic artifact.

    > To understand the City of New Orleans one must first understand the
    > massive Mississippi River delta. New Orleans was built at the site of the old
    > "French Quarter" on the high ground adjacent to the Mississippi river.
    > This location was picked because the Mississippi River didn't have a mouth
    > into the ocean. The river simply went into the "Black Swamp" and disappeared.
    > This was where ships headed down river had to stop and unload their
    > goods to be transshipped across Lake Pontchartrain to the sea. This was
    > done by unloading the goods at the docks and then hauling them to the
    > lake where shallow draft boats would take the goods to the seagoing ships.
    >
    > By using some ingenious methods, Henry Shreve -- after whom
    > Shreveport, La., is named -- forced the river to dig its own channel out to
    > the sea where it now goes. This allowed the ocean-going boats access to
    > the enormous Mississippi river. This, together with the work of the US Army
    > Corps of Engineers, produced what is functionally the largest ocean port on earth.

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
  12. Re: Louisiana is one big sinkhole by Khyber · · Score: 4, Informative

    "What is the ground composed of and what does the water table underneath look like?"

    That entire area is in the Mississippi Delta Floodplains. Everything from Memphis to the Gulf of Mexico is practically FLOATING on a giant aquifer. All it takes is for New Madrid to go 7.5 or higher to put most of everything from Memphis down to Hattiesburg underwater. A large influx of water on the floodplains further south would probably cause a quicksand effect (and in fact there's tons of that in Louisiana) and simply wash everything away or drag much of it under the ground (as we witnessed with Katrina and New Orleans.)

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  13. Re: Louisiana is one big sinkhole by silentcoder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Companies do not own the atmosphere. Citizens do. If they want to put things in our property we have every right to charge them rent by means of a tax.

    --
    Unicode killed the ASCII-art *