Sunday, September 29, 2013

Case Study: New Orleans and the Causes of Environmental Disaster

Josh Popielarczyk
Ethics and Environment project #1


Introduction:


New Orleans would certainly be classified as a taker civilization.  Theses statistics highlight New Orleans production of natural resources, as well as the revenue they create.  Ishmael would certainly look down upon new Orleans money makers considering they harvest 11% of us petroleum, are second in production of the nations natural gas, and are second in total energy consumption as pertains to industry use.


The destruction of swampland to get these resources contributed to the damage caused from Katrina.   However, Ishmael would look to New Orleans immense port and trade system as a solution. 





More than 6,000 vessels move through New Orleans annually.  This makes them the busiest waterway to the countries economic stability.  Rather than continue to wreck the environment in search for oil and gases, New Orleans could focus on their plethora of trade options to provide revenue and goods.  Furthermore, their rich culture and Mardi Gras celebration attracts tourist, opening up another option for revenue rather than destroying the environment. 
On August 2005 New Orleans was hit by Hurricane Katrina, an estimated 1,500 people perished and thousands others were left wounded and homeless. 
Most of those who weren’t fortunate enough to evacuate before the storm were directed to the cities domed football stadium, which was pelted by Katrina and rendered useless.  Once again the victim were forced to move; this time to Houston’s superdome.



The disaster caused 125 billion dollars in economic impact. 
New Orleans has had a history of Hurricane destruction spanning back all the way to 1779.  In the last decade alone, New Orleans has been hit by over 5 notable hurricanes some causing over billions of dollars in damage.  However Katrina’s levels of devastation were record high. 
Since the Time of settlement in Louisiana, the threats of floods and the solutions to them had been relevant.  Levees (a dike or embankment) about 4ft high were built on top of the natural one formed by the river, building a barrier against river floods while at the same time raising their levels increasingly higher.   
Furthermore, the government got on board, passing the Swamp Lands Acts, which allowed the state to sell federal land for money to construct levees. 





As more settlers came, more structures were built eventually taking up the high ground near the river.  Thus the obvious direction was to expand into the swamps toward the lake. 
This meant large swamp areas had to be cleared and a drainage system had to be implemented.  Steam driven water wheels were installed to lift water into the canals used to get the water out.  Subsequently drainage lowered the water table and ground level which left the canals higher above the city. 
New electric pumps were put in that provided more efficient drainage and levees were built to keep the water in the canals.  Development of swamp areas continued which eventually lead to more canals and pump systems.  This created intertwining canals.  One theses waterways, with their levees intersect and meet, they create a funnel leading directly toward civilization.  This sets a disaster scenario when hurricanes hit. 
As industrialization grew, more and more canals were built throughout Louisianans swamps to provide access for things such as Oil platforms.
These canals allowed salt water to flow into the wetlands, which killed trees and other vegetation while simultaneously corroding land away. 
Meanwhile, the oil and gas industry was expanding to Louisianans wetlands, creating the need for oil platforms.  Thus, more canals were built through the wetlands for access.  A canal named MR-GO lead directly from the gulf of Mexico to the heart of new Orleans, with provided a channel for oil tankers to come in.  However, this also provided a funnel for hurricane surges, which is exactly what happened during Katrina.  Some engineers saw this and planed to build gates that could be closed in a storm, but this was shut down because of the cost and some environmental objections. 
Even more troubling is that Katrina was far from unpredictable, FEMA (Federal emergency management agency) simulated a category 3 hurricane, named Pam.  The estimated damage and citizen’s effected was almost exact to the destruction caused by Katrina. 


Hurricane Katrina destroyed thousands of homes during it downpour on the city, subsequently causes thousands to relocate.  The population is now 343,829 compared to 484,674 in 2000.  This issue creates more need for resources involved in constructing new housing arrangements.  Ishmael would most likely suggest communal housing systems to implement the most effective use of space and resources.  However, relating to the idea of Takers being captive to society the compels them to destroy the environment, citizens have created an artificial standard of living through mother cultures constant insistence on comfortability  and self gain.  Therefore numerous non-profits have stepped up to help these people, but at the cost of more tarnish to the environment. 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_Hurricane_Katrina_in_New_Orleans#Levee_failures

The idea behind levees seems innocent.  There was a need to protect the people from the clear threat of floods and storms.  But where did this idea stem from?
In order to rationally kill life around us, we must believe that there is a superior cause for doing so.   Ishmael explains how the peacekeeping law keeps all organisms on an even playing scale, taking only what they need to survive.  Rather, in order to protect ourselves, we destroyed swampland, placing the value or our lives over all others who inhabit it. 
However, the premise for building the canals changed once oil and resources were involved.  As population grew, swamps were cleared for expansion.  Canals built to access these swamps needed to be filled with water, thus pumps were implemented.  The pumps lowered the water table and ground levels leavings the canals higher above the city.  A perfect scenario for a disaster, should it flood. 


I find this expansion all to relatable to taker culture, as soon as takers found a way to capitalize on the resources of the land, they immediately began re-shaping the natural environment to compliment oil drilling.  The exact canals used to access this oil were a very real part of the damage Katrina caused.   The canals used to access the oil flooded and spilled over the much lower land.
The breaches of the 17th street canal levee, the London avenue canal, and the industrial canal, left approximately 80% of the city flooded.

Ishmael would certainly find mother culture responsible for advocating personal gain and expansion, thus leading to manipulation of the environment. 
Especially in the U.S., self gain, the ability to move up in the world, and business is advocated.  Mother culture tells us to protect our fellow humans, to create (really destroy) anything that keeps us safe from harm.  Yet in this circumstance, the exact thing built to keep us safe destroyed the natural protection provided by the swamp and added to damage.

From just a protection standpoint, the levees built to keep new Orleans safe, were hardly effective. 


That left me to question alterative reasons as to why the canals were built.  The simple answer is the resources in the swamp.  The oil and gas deposits beneath the surface fueled the expansion into more and more of the swampland. 

So were these levees built to protect humans, or to create an easier system to access oil and gas? 




QUESTION ONE:
What is the primary influence that causes taker culture to exponentially destroy nature? (In ishmael terms)   What are ways we can stop this?
QUESTION TWO:
Is the protection and “self gain” of human life worth the destruction is causes on the environment?  and,
How would Ishmael respond to those who say “yes”
How would Ishmael respond to those who say “No”


I think the misconception lies in the fine print.  We focus on continuing the life of the individual.  Rather, we need to focus on continuing the life of our species.  Individually we consume so much, in the name of living a “happier” longer, and even healthier life.  But what’s really more important, taking as much as we can to only better one life, or taking as little as we can to survive as a species? 

No comments:

Post a Comment