No! There is a big difference between overtopping and a levee breach. Overtopping just floods, breaching sends a sudden cascade into the city! Don't be like Humpty-Dumpty; please use the definition used by the professionals who are out there trying to preserve lives and property.

More here: On the Levees of New Orleans, Update 14

That mayor has got to go. He is an idiot, MAN!!

Saying there is no difference between a "breach" and "over the top" is like saying there is no difference between over-filling a glass with milk until it spills, and shattering the glass on the ground.

How about : HUGE GAPING HOLE!

Not sure if that is a technical term, though.

I gotta say i disagree with you. I think an overflowing or 'overtopped' or overspilled levee is VERY different from a breeched levee. if it is just spillign over the top and you can find a place to pump it out to, if it is breached/broken you can pump all day long and it won't matter. when the reain stops it will keep coming in. with the overflow when the rain stops it will stop coming in.

Keep in mind that in reality NO ONE should be back in there. even the rescue/cleanup crews should be out ahead of this happening. There is not likely to be any NEW damage from this. I guess I just don't see the problem.

Sounds like the head of the Army Corp of Engineers is taking his cue from the Liar-in-Chief. Typical engineer. They think that whatever they design is perfect.

Overtopping just floods, breaching sends a sudden cascade into the city!

Solomon... Just a guess here- You don't a TV near you do you? "a sudden cascade" would be an understantement.

please use the definition used by the professionals who are out there trying to preserve lives and property.

They are not trying to preserve lives... They are tying to preserve their asses.

The Levee has not yet been breached. This is overtopping and there is a difference. If you know what to look for you can clearly see that the levee is still holding and this is water pouring over, and yes it has washed away some of the top repair. It has not been breached.

Saying there is no difference between a "breach" and "over the top" is like saying there is no difference between over-filling a glass with milk until it spills, and shattering the glass on the ground.

The big difference between the two is the aftermath. If the levee is overtopped, the water stops coming in once the water level in the canal drop below the top of the levee. If the levee is breached, then the water doesn't stop coming in until the water gets lower than the bottom of the breach. That can be quite a difference in levels.

Paul is correct that the pictures would seem to indicate that the levee has been breached. However, if the water level is completely over the top of the levee as the Corps claims, they may not be able to distinguish breachingom overtopping until the water level in the canal starts to go down. If you can't see the top of the levee, you can't tell for sure what is going on. You can take a good guess, but you just don't know for sure.

OK for those of you who want to play the name game...

What it "Breached" last week?

Did it heal itself in the mean time?

It is "still" breached?

Oh never mind.

Mamesh:

You're wrong. The shots I've been seeing show, quite clearly, that the levee has been breached in at least one location. It was obviously caused by overtopping, which washed out the back side of the levee, and there's a great big hole about 30 feet across and ten feet or so deep. That is a "breach."

Didn't they already do a study that said the levees failed during Katrina?
The forces were within what they were supposed to be able to handle and it was poor design or building that caused the breach... I will try to find a link.

So it seems like that cat is already out of the bag on this one.

Mamesh,

If you have been watching any of this on television you would see that while it may have started out as over topping, the levee on the Industrial canal is completely compromised now.

The non-breach is at least 15-20 feet deep.

While I do not know if anything could have been done to prevent this in the short time since Katrina -- the water is high enough to cause wave over topping along several levees -- this is not a time for CYA. The thousands of people that came back at Nagins urging need to have precise and correct information right now.

A wall of water is heading through town, they need to know exactly what areas will be hit he hardest so they can get out of the way.

Tragedy plus time yields comedy. I am beyond sorrow at this point. As a Green Wave who landed in New Orleans on the tailwinds of Hurricane Betsy, and with family in LA & TX, comic relief (battlefield or hospital humor, if you will) seems a reasonable escape at this point. I am called back to this movie and to this song:

Musical "Paint Your Wagon" soundtrack
The Gospel Of No Name City lyrics

You wanna see sin of the wickedest kind?
Here it is!
You wanna see virtue left behind?
Here it is!
Sodom was vice And visa-versa
You wanna say where the vice is worser?
Here it is! I mean, here it is!

You wanna live life in the rottenest city?
Here it is!
Women and whiskey, night and day?
Here it is!
You wanna embrace the golden calf?
Ankle, and thigh, and upper half?
Here it is! I mean, here it is!

No name city. No name city.
The Lord don't like it here!
No name city. No name city.
Your reckoning day is near!
No name city. No name city.
Here's what He's gonna do:
Gobble up this town,
And swallow it down,
And goodbye to you!

Will you go to heaven?Will you go to hell?
GO TO HELL! (chorus)
Either repent, or fare thee well!
FARE THEE WELL! (chorus)

God will take care of no name city!
Comes the end, and it won't be pretty!

Here it is! I mean, here it is!

Here it is! I mean, here it is!
Here it is! I mean, here it is!
Amen!

Can someone please get Paul some sedatives or maybe keep him from posting until this all passes? I mean, I like Paul, but his "live as it happens" ranting is a bit much. Let's save it until after all is said and done, shall we?

Look at the clear constancy of rapids along the entire length of the submerged levee. Please explain how that can be if there was any significant breach.

Paul,

I wonder if you would pose this "coming lawsuit" to your community of readers, many of whom are lawyers.

IANAL, but my sense of this is that "acts of God" such as floods, are not actionable.

Mamesh,

What are you watching?

The breach goes right through about fifty feet of a temporary levee that is several hundred feet long.

BIG GAPING HOLE!

I'll put this out there as a legitimate question to Paul, although I'm sure many will answer as well.

Are you only upset that the Army Corps of Engineers said that the levee will hold? Do you truly believe that they would lie about this and risk the lives of so many people because of politics or lawsuits? And how do people sue over an act of God anyway? Maybe I just think that no one out there is that calaculating and cold. One thing is certain, you can always say you are prepared until Mother Nature shows you your weaknesses.

And if most of the people listening are doing so by radio, what does it matter what someone is saying on Foxnews? I've read multiple stories from St. Bernard's Parish representatives stating that the flooding is bad and that people should leave immediately. I imagine that is the info they are getting by radio, not the stuff from Foxnews.

Not everyone is as sinister as you seem inclined to believe they are.

>I wonder if you would pose this "coming lawsuit" to your community of readers, many of whom are lawyers.

>but my sense of this is that "acts of God" such as floods, are not actionable.

Clearly you ain't one. No, you can not sue God.

But if the levee did not perform up to the specifications then OBVIOUSLY the construction company who built it is liable.

If it was designed wrong than the design engineers will be sued.

Just because it was "an act of God" does not give everyone a legal pass on their responsibilities.

I'm really not trying to slam you. (no really) but dude, quit arguing for arguments sake and think your comments thru.

This is semantic insanity.

The latest AP update via Yahoo! news describes the situation as a 100-foot-wide waterfall that "poured over and through" the Industrial Canal levee.

I'm no engineer, but for water to pour through the levee, that would indicate to me that it has to be breached or broken.

If it is breached in an area where it was repaired, then common sense says that the repair failed, water is coming in, and that anyone in that area is in immediate danger. Period.

Every news account I am seeing indicates that it was a repaired section of the Industrial Canal levee where the water is coming in. And the Yahoo/AP account I refer to above specifically quotes a Georgia National Guardsman as saying that there are three "significant breaches" in the levee.

I've never been to, nor do I know a damn thing about New Orleans, but between the written accounts and the photos and video coming out of the city today, it's pretty obvious: the levee failed. If it didn't, the 9th Ward would be dry.

That the ACOE seems to be splitting rhetorical hairs about it is very frustrating.

I'm really not trying to slam you. (no really) but dude, quit arguing for arguments sake and think your comments thru.

In all sincerity, might I suggest you do the same.

"...think your comments thru."

Good advice, Paul.

Okay, let's go back to post one, question one:

"...now that you've dismissed the entire US Army Corps of Engineers as "morons" and "idiots" who are "stupid", I must assume you possess sufficient expertise in the field of hydro engineering to make that assessment. So, I ask you; what exactly, and with detailed specificity, is your solution for keeping an area that is below sea level from flooding, both now, after a catastrophic Category 4 hurricane, and in the future?"

Care to field this now, or should I just "fuck off" and expect this post to be shut down as well?

Here's a simplistic analogy.

You build a wall to keep an enemy out. In this case you call the wall a levee and the enemy is water.

If the enemy gets past that wall, it has breached your defense. It doesn't matter if it came under, through, or over.

>Are you only upset that the Army Corps of Engineers said that the levee will hold?

Not exclusively. I'm not pleased pols are talking about RASING taxes in LA, but for today's discussion, this is close enough. Well - other than they are lying to the public in the present tense.

>Do you truly believe that they would lie about this and risk the lives of so many people because of politics or lawsuits?

Ummmm. Yes. Why? Because it is happening! Quit arguing with me and open your ears. I'm not making these quotes up. Go turn on the TV and hear the tortured explanations.

>And how do people sue over an act of God anyway?

I'm sorry Mike, you have officially excused yourself from being considered rational. You DON'T think people will be suing my the thousands? It most be nice living in Candlyland, but I live in the real world.

>Maybe I just think that no one out there is that calaculating and cold.

Man, put on a raincoat because your bubble is going to burst- BIG TIME.

The real question is whether these repairs are getting washed away or not. If they're getting washed away then we're looking at Katrina, Part Deux in New Orleans without 100,000 unwilling extras this time. However, if this is just rising water pouring over the top of the repairs without tearing away the repaired dikes themselves then the water will stop coming in when the storm passes and pumping the water out can start pretty much right away.

I don't have access to a TV right now, and am not getting a clear picture on this situation from the internet right now. Does anyone know for a certainty whether the dike repairs are holding or not?

Cardinal, I answered you, go read.

I'm not going to debate this further. The water however is puring rapidly over and it is an awful scenario, it may pretty quickly come to the point that it does not matter. The only point at this time is that if it is breached the water will raise to a higher level than if it isn't.

Alex,

The sources you are citing are the same sources that pushed the "10,000 dead" meme. I'm in no position to say what they are reporting is wrong because I'm not standing on top of the levees right now (and neither is anyone else!), just that they are notorious for being prone to hyperbole. Right now it's a ratings race to be the "first with the worst" so they'll say just about anything to get the audience.

Cheers,

The Army Corps of Engineers probably has no exposure to monetary damages in this situation. 33 U.S.C. 702c :"No liability of any kind shall attach to or rest upon the United States for any damage from or by floods or flood waters at any place."

Courts have pretty uniformly construed this provision VERY broadly.

Stephen Macklin:

Bad analogy.

The real terminology (as people have used for a very long time):

If the water level goes over the levee without damaging it, that's just overtopping.

If the levee has an actual physical gap due to damage, that's a breach. There are several causes of breaches, including erosion (often caused by overtopping).

Breaches can also be caused by things like barges striking the levee, ground settling due to seismic events, or other things.

NOTE: Please Read (look at) Update 2 Before Posting Again

I'm sorry Mike, you have officially excused yourself from being considered rational. You DON'T think people will be suing my the thousands? It most be nice living in Candlyland, but I live in the real world.

Sorry, should have phrased it differently. I agree, I know people will be sueing by the thousands, but do they have footing? Do they have a case that merits consideration. I don't think they do. This is an act of God and the people bringing the case live in an area that Nature never intended to be developed. But you are right, people will sue. And I still don't believe that the Army Corps of Engineers would send someone onto Foxnews to intentionally play politics to head off future lawsuits while people are (and thus placing more people) in harm's way.

>the people bringing the case live in an area that Nature never intended to be developed.

Can you give me 3 places nature DID intend to be developed?

Saw the picture...but what I'm still trying to find is your detailed plan for keeping water out of an area that is below sea level, one that is feesible engineering-wise and better than the current ACoE plan.

I looked on the closed posts "New Orleans Already Flooding" and "New Orleans Officials: No Breach in Levee", but didn't find your plan. I've also read this one top to bottom, but can't find anything close to a plan. So, for the sake of expediency, since you say, "I answered you, go read" perhaps a quick cut-n-paste will help with my now-unending quest to get you to answer the question.

Ummmm. Yes. Why? Because it is happening! Quit arguing with me and open your ears. I'm not making these quotes up. Go turn on the TV and hear the tortured explanations.

Paul, the picture shows that the levee is breached. This article states that the sheriff and others have announced this already. So I'm sure that people who need to know are getting the information. There are more news outlets than Fox. I do not have access to TV at this point, but I would agree that if the guy is still saying there is no breach, than he is an idiot.