Flood Control, Water Supplies, Hydro Power, Political Earmarks
Read more articles on Science and Technology and Politics.June 8, 2009
Posted by neillevine
June 8, 2009
Posted by neillevine
395 Views
I have been checking news reports on flooding and believe the federal government can do better. Over the past so many days and weeks, beyond the obvious problems in Fargo, North Dakota and New Orleans, Louisiana, there have been serious reports of problems in Billings, Montana, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, West Virginia, Florida, the Gulf Coast and on and on.
So let me remind you that floods are dangerous, destructive and counterproductive. Assets, including homes, public infrastructure and businesses are damaged, interrupted and income lost, including reduced tax revenue so flood prevention, water distribution and improved water handling policy would appear to be a sound investment in the future by our very own government in Washington, the one that is so remote and unresponsive. Yes that one. A new and improved approach on the part of the powers that be in the Capitol would provide water for myriad uses, from agricultural, municipal, industrial and even regular home use and probably improve water quality and property protection and also offer safe, cheap and clean hydro power in place of polluting and climate damaging hydrocarbons. By this, I mean to say that it is not that much more expensive to add income from hydroelectric power, either dam or, yes, non dam, to the revenue stream for a water project, except for the fact that the American government collectively has its head in the sand on this issue and needs a big wake up call, to say the least. I might add, as former President Bush said in his State of the Union speech, hydrogen is easy to produce, transport, store and burn, along or as a supplement to natural gas.
Yet despite the common sense and intelligence behind these arguments, the responsible political operators from senior Congress people to high ranking bureaucrats in what can now euphemistically be called the new Obama Administration have been excruciatingly slow to come around to this what they consider revolutionary point of view even though politicians are often eager to dip into the public coffers and offer federal benefits, subsidies, services and the like because they operate on the philosophy the federal budget is a big candy store to be used for their political empowerment.
So why have the Congress and Administration been slow on the uptake? Is it a case of what you don’t know won’t hurt and playing to too many non payers?
Well, this is a more sophisticated area than most political arenas. Unlike the recent stimulus package, there is no ready made constituency. Not every neighborhood is going to receive a more than generous federal hand out. In any case, it takes a lot of thinking and understanding to get the gravamen of what is going on.
Now, I want to start with the, for me, simple observation that water can be blocked as a dam or seawall would do, diverted by a canal or pipe line, pumped away or even flushed down a sewer. In some ways, this is an extra expense. In other ways, there are benefits both economic and structural or even social that far outweigh whatever real or imagined detriments that can be raised.
I would like to point out that even though the levees in New Orleans have been repaired to the old level of safety, during Gustav, last year’s big hurricane, you could see the waves lapping at the top of the wall of protection and even crashing over. In Fargo, the Red River was at 22 feet over flood level. Except for the extra labor and expense of piling up sand bags for protection, this would be enough water to bury most single story homes, making it a very dangerous situation requiring evacuation, which was what was done in New Orleans. Now vacating one’s home is very inconvenient. It also costs money for temporary housing. How frequently and for how long can this be tolerated when there are viable alternatives that are not beyond the realm of affordable costs, except for a reluctance to look at reality remains to be seen. Along this line, I must state FEMA has become better at handing out money, an extra federal cost that could be reduced if adequate protection were provided.
I realize this is a strained yet simple to understand explanation of a complex situation that could easily be remedied except for a blind political spot in Washington.
However, as I have written previously, I have expertise in being politely persistent, have been responsible for some changes in policy and intend to keep on keeping on as anyone who has read any of my previous essays will quickly grasp. Right now, the politicians that I have contacted have been polite, but action is what is needed. The City of Houston has even gone so far as to propose a sea wall to reduce its risk for flooding, which is nice. However, this is an obvious sign that Washington is not doing its job and piece meal and patch work jobs in an sensitive area such as this can be dangerous in and of themselves as the experience with Katrina in New Orleans readily proves.
Remember the levees in New Orleans failed spectacularly and disastrously and fortunately for Washington politicians, the public cannot figure out who is responsible. But I am one of those people who can point an accusing finger at a total lack of leadership. Shame, shame, everybody knows their names.
Copyright © 2006
Terms & Conditions
