If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Turns out no one knows why Manhattan's tunnels have not been protected from easily predicted waves. And it seems protection from floods is pretty easy too, and many other cities have done so   (nytimes.com) divider line 66
    More: Stupid, flood controls, Manhattan, catastrophic failure, floods, Hurricane Irene, engineering research  
•       •       •

7017 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Nov 2012 at 8:24 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



66 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-10 08:03:57 AM  
Because the water was higher than any time in recorded history?
 
2012-11-10 08:14:04 AM  
Flood protection is for flyover states.
 
2012-11-10 08:15:04 AM  
Because America needs more aircraft carriers!
 
2012-11-10 08:30:47 AM  
Sure you create a fire department after the first fire, but my plans for an inexpensive $3 Trillion laser shield against alien monster attacks before they happen was laughed at everywhere but the New York Times.
 
2012-11-10 08:31:21 AM  
Because everyone in Manhattan is too busy lining their ownn pockets to pay for public improvements for the common good.

Remember folks: greed is good.
 
2012-11-10 08:32:25 AM  
Because f*ck you, they're New York, they don't need no f*ckin' flood protection. If them f*ckin' waves even THINK about flooding New York, BADA BING! Sleepin' with the fishes.
 
2012-11-10 08:32:34 AM  
4.bp.blogspot.com

Might have the answer.

/is that whistling I hear in the background?
 
2012-11-10 08:33:21 AM  

Dick Gozinya: Because everyone

politician in Manhattan is too busy lining their ownn pockets to pay for public improvements for the common good.

Remember folks: greed is good.

FTFY
 
2012-11-10 08:35:41 AM  
You know you're doing it wrong when Alabama laughs at you.

www.southalabama.edu
 
2012-11-10 08:38:49 AM  
Maybe mayor Billionberg could pry open his wallet and install some diesel powered flood pumps in the tunnels. Instead, you wait until after they're flooded then haul in the portable pumps to empty them. I gotta believe it's gonna be cheaper in the long run to keep the tunnels from flooding in the first place (especially considering it's saltwater that's gonna fark up pretty much anything it touches).
 
2012-11-10 08:39:02 AM  
Because it's more important to monitor and control the size of the citizens SuperGulps....
 
2012-11-10 08:41:36 AM  
The Times does have a point. If you've every passed a paperboy on his bicycle in the Tunnel you'd see their only concern is for the welfare of their own. Now they have to swim the cold waters, dodging boats, with the papers on their back to deliver your news to you.
 
2012-11-10 08:41:49 AM  
The US has 3rd world infrastructure which is held together by luck, magical thinking and unicorn farts. Nothing new here.
 
2012-11-10 08:43:06 AM  
Article says it bled off 100 million gallons of flood water from Brooklyn and Battery Park. I wonder how much that helped above ground.

My office building on Water Street will be closed for months and likely condemned.
 
2012-11-10 08:49:42 AM  
Turns out no one knows? Did subby read the article?

"They just didn't want to spend the money."
 
2012-11-10 08:51:21 AM  

foo monkey: Article says it bled off 100 million gallons of flood water from Brooklyn and Battery Park. I wonder how much that helped above ground.

My office building on Water Street will be closed for months and likely condemned.


If only there had been some sort of sign...
 
2012-11-10 08:51:35 AM  

foo monkey: Article says it bled off 100 million gallons of flood water from Brooklyn and Battery Park. I wonder how much that helped above ground.

My office building on Water Street will be closed for months and likely condemned.


At least the street is honestly named now.

/I'm sure you've heard that way too many times in the past week
 
2012-11-10 08:51:47 AM  

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: Because America needs more aircraft carriers!


Yes, because everybody knows New York lacks the ability to raise its own revenue (which it would never waste) to protect its own tunnels. The Feds must fund and therefore control everything.
 
2012-11-10 09:00:32 AM  

hasty ambush: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: Because America needs more aircraft carriers!

Yes, because everybody knows New York lacks the ability to raise its own revenue (which it would never waste) to protect its own tunnels. The Feds must fund and therefore control everything.


It's not just a New York problem. Infrastructure in this nation has been neglected for decades. The levees in Louisiana, the I-35W bridge, we like to let these problems bite us in the ass. The only thing America actually seems to get proactive on is scaring off other country's far-lesser might. If only Northrop-Grumman would get into the domestic peacetime needs biz.
 
2012-11-10 09:07:07 AM  

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: It's not just a New York problem. Infrastructure in this nation has been neglected for decades. The levees in Louisiana, the I-35W bridge, we like to let these problems bite us in the ass. The only thing America actually seems to get proactive on is scaring off other country's far-lesser might. If only Northrop-Grumman would get into the domestic peacetime needs biz.


If your local infrastructure is getting run down, nothing is stopping you from pulling up your boot straps and fixing it yourself. Big government bad.
 
2012-11-10 09:12:02 AM  

H31N0US: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: It's not just a New York problem. Infrastructure in this nation has been neglected for decades. The levees in Louisiana, the I-35W bridge, we like to let these problems bite us in the ass. The only thing America actually seems to get proactive on is scaring off other country's far-lesser might. If only Northrop-Grumman would get into the domestic peacetime needs biz.

If your local infrastructure is getting run down, nothing is stopping you from pulling up your boot straps and fixing it yourself. Big government bad.


upload.wikimedia.orgx11
Big enough government for ya?
 
2012-11-10 09:15:18 AM  

foo monkey: Article says it bled off 100 million gallons of flood water from Brooklyn and Battery Park. I wonder how much that helped above ground.

My office building on Water Street will be closed for months and likely condemned.


Only one architect in the universe has imagined what a structure elevated above the ground might look like. As you can see, all the utility wires are still on sticks above ground so they can blow over.

www.woohome.com 

Oh, wait. Here's a fancy Queenslander from Australia, so common it's named after the state.   The ground floor is just storage for all the alpine mountain climbing gear and yodeling trophies.

i563.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-10 09:18:21 AM  
Because politicians and union employees can make more money fixing a flooded tunnel than preventing it from getting flooded in the first place.
 
2012-11-10 09:18:26 AM  

PC LOAD LETTER: Because the water was higher than any time in recorded history?


Over in one. Probably the same reason they don't shield the subway from volcano damage. It took nearly a century for this to become an issue. The water pumps they had installed worked fine, but were installed before anybody on Fark was born.
 
2012-11-10 09:19:52 AM  

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: Because America needs more aircraft carriers!


It's not America's job to stop flooding in New York's tunnels, it's New York's job.
 
2012-11-10 09:24:55 AM  
Are because funds were diverted to diversity training programs.
 
2012-11-10 09:33:55 AM  
Sometimes when you pass over the smart white guy who scored 99 on the civil engineering exam in favor of the minority who scored a 60 you end up with flooded tunnels.
 
2012-11-10 09:36:25 AM  
It is cheaper to ask the feds for disaster relief, federal money, than actually build infrastructure for protection from disasters, state money. By funding disaster relief nearly 100%, the state governments are encouraged not to prepare.
 
2012-11-10 09:36:49 AM  
Hey, instead of going UNDER the water, how about you use this new-fangled invention called a BRIDGE.

pelfind.com
/What a bridge may look like
 
2012-11-10 09:38:23 AM  

H31N0US: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: It's not just a New York problem. Infrastructure in this nation has been neglected for decades. The levees in Louisiana, the I-35W bridge, we like to let these problems bite us in the ass. The only thing America actually seems to get proactive on is scaring off other country's far-lesser might. If only Northrop-Grumman would get into the domestic peacetime needs biz.

If your local infrastructure is getting run down, nothing is stopping you from pulling up your boot straps and fixing it yourself. Big government bad.


He would totally be mystified at the concept of municipal bonds. Mind blown.
 
2012-11-10 09:43:30 AM  
Because NYC has emphasized bridges over tunnels ever since Robert Moses first became Works Commissioner? The East Side tunnel they're building now is the first new underground train line since the Woodrow Wilson administration. I think you can infer Metro neglect in other ways from this. Job Creators drive; only proles use mass transit. Unfortunately, cities need both types of people, and even if everyone commuting to Manhattan was rich, they still couldn't physically accommodate all the cars.
 
2012-11-10 09:44:51 AM  

MBZ321: Hey, instead of going UNDER the water, how about you use this new-fangled invention called a BRIDGE.

[pelfind.com image 300x224]
/What a bridge may look like


Floodwater fills a tunnel, but can be removed.

Floodwater takes bridges miles downstream.
 
2012-11-10 09:50:05 AM  

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: hasty ambush: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: Because America needs more aircraft carriers!

Yes, because everybody knows New York lacks the ability to raise its own revenue (which it would never waste) to protect its own tunnels. The Feds must fund and therefore control everything.

It's not just a New York problem. Infrastructure in this nation has been neglected for decades. The levees in Louisiana, the I-35W bridge, we like to let these problems bite us in the ass. The only thing America actually seems to get proactive on is scaring off other country's far-lesser might. If only Northrop-Grumman would get into the domestic peacetime needs biz.


And as I posted the state where much of this infrastructure is located have the means to raise revenue to fix them. The feds are not and should not be the primary source of revenue for these things By the states doing it would already be more cost effective as you eliminate one layer of bureaucracy that would siphon off funds for administration and regulation.. You might make a case for the interstate highway system or even the Levees as they involve interstate commerce.

But even then a lot of Louisiana levee money was diverted for political reasons to other pork projects, (not building aircraft carriers.) . From 2001-2005 Louisiana received $1.9 billion for Army Corps of Engineers civil projects; California was second with less than $1.4 billion, Much of that Louisiana money was spent to try to keep low-lying New Orleans dry. But hundreds of millions of dollars went to unrelated water projects demanded by the state's congressional delegation. Link


A lot of so called transportation dollars are used for non-transportation purposes such as museums and "enhancements"


I would also point to a $800 billion economic stimulus package that was supposed to about infrastructure and "shovel ready jobs" but instead was used to fund things like socially aware puppet shows and heated swimming pools.

Obama called the bill "the largest new investment in our nation's infrastructure since Eisenhower built an interstate highway system in the 1950s." . Only $64 billion, or 8% of the total, went to roads, public transport, rail, bridges, aviation and wastewater systems.

IIRC A democrat came up with a much better plan. It was ,cheaper ($150 Billion)and really focused only on infrastructure but of course nobody listened .

But I repeat NY city and State have the means to raise the revenue to fix their own tunnels. I would even go so far as to suggest that they do not need to raise additional taxes but to spend the money they already take in more wisely. New York state takes in about $90 billion a year in revenue plus another $40-$50 billion in money from the feds. New York City takes in about $43 billion a year in revenue not counting federal money they might get..
 
2012-11-10 09:52:09 AM  
BitwiseShift: The ground floor is just storage for all the alpine mountain climbing gear and yodeling trophies.

God DAMN that was funny. Full point.
 
2012-11-10 10:26:46 AM  
What pisses me off about this is that the idea of "recovery" has taken a backseat to defense. No-one thinks about just rebuilding, repairing, or fixing things anymore. Some things just aren't cost-effective to defend against!

Accept the fact that the tunnels may flood. Make them easy to pump out and clean afterward -- it's a lot cheaper and easier from an engineering standpoint. For the once in a hundred years event, close the tunnels for the event, repair them as needed, and open them again.

As a side-benefit, if another kind of leak happens in the tunnel -- chemical spill, fuel spill, broken pipe, etc.. -- you're already prepared.
 
2012-11-10 10:33:00 AM  

BitwiseShift: Only one architect in the universe has imagined what a structure elevated above the ground might look like.


Wonder how well those little spindles hold up when flood waters carry a large, massive object like a car into them?

As you can see, all the utility wires are still on sticks above ground so they can blow overbe accessed more easily when repairs are needed.

/ftfy
 
2012-11-10 10:45:00 AM  
Although this has not been a large problem in the past, the Mayor of New York is a HUGE believer in Global Climate Change, which means that he believes that the water levels will rise to catastrophic stages AND that these types of storms will be more common. Doesn't it seem to make sense that he would impliment changes to BE PREPARED?!?

Why is it that all of the climate change prophets concentrate on how to stop it and not on how to mitigate the damage that they KNOW will come?

For the record, I believe that climate change is occurring, but also believe that as human beings we should be able to adapt to the change rather than scream about how terrible it all is.
 
2012-11-10 10:48:28 AM  

MBZ321: Hey, instead of going UNDER the water, how about you use this new-fangled invention called a BRIDGE.

[pelfind.com image 300x224]
/What a bridge may look like


Too true, there are no bridges in NYC.
 
2012-11-10 10:48:38 AM  

ArcadianRefugee: BitwiseShift: Only one architect in the universe has imagined what a structure elevated above the ground might look like.

Wonder how well those little spindles hold up when flood waters carry a large, massive object like a car into them?

As you can see, all the utility wires are still on sticks above ground so they can blow overbe accessed more easily when repairs are needed.

/ftfy


I would also add "And not get utterly boned by salt water requiring a more or less complete rebuild when it floods" to that second
 
2012-11-10 10:50:37 AM  

tweet69_06: Doesn't it seem to make sense that he would impliment changes to BE PREPARED?!?


He did and was.
 
2012-11-10 11:02:19 AM  
Because the impotent fascist who runs the city is a shortsighted buffoon.
 
2012-11-10 11:09:16 AM  

tweet69_06: For the record, I believe that climate change is occurring, but also believe that as human beings we should be able to adapt to the change rather than scream about how terrible it all is.


Deep thought. Did you wonder why folks are screaming about it?

Five years ago, the possibility of a 2 degree C rise in temperature caused thousands of scientists to scream about it, because they realize that "adapting to it" means catastrophic changes for the planet's varied ecosystems. Many of those ecosystems won't survive the change - what took thousands of years to adapt to is now changing dramatically over the course of a century or so - and that cascade effect will not require adaptation, but death. That's how the old adage goes - "adapt or die."

Politicians and those with their brains in their wallets figured talking about it would legislate it away. The UK has already been told, flat out, by its own scientists that "carbon trading" and other schemes are a waste of time, because it's simply too little, too late. The real question now is whether we can adapt to it as quickly as it's happening, and the answer is, most likely, "no."

The real question now isn't "how do we slow it", or "how do we stop it", or "how do we adapt to it", but merely "how do we mitigate the damage?" Be grateful - you live in a country with enough wealth to offset the worst of the damage. Food, water, power, fuel, all will grow more expensive, but we can typically accomodate it, because we live in a civilized country with a solid, if aging, infrastructure.

Others won't be so lucky. Births will slow, or even stop, and deaths will rise, as a combination of factors impede even what the desperately poor consider a "normal life." They won't have the luxury of adaptation, because the change is too rapid and they can't mitigate it with wealth. They will just die.
 
2012-11-10 11:09:33 AM  
Wasn't Wall Street named Wall St for the wall that separated the wet side from the dry side?
Maybe I just hallucinated that memory?
 
2012-11-10 11:22:04 AM  
(scratching head)

Doors, for $300, Alex?
 
2012-11-10 11:29:27 AM  

MutinousDoug: Wasn't Wall Street named Wall St for the wall that separated the wet side from the dry side?
Maybe I just hallucinated that memory?


Or to keep out Indians. Nobody knows anymore. The wall was real. The reason for the wall is lost in antiquity.
 
2012-11-10 11:45:51 AM  

foo monkey: Article says it bled off 100 million gallons of flood water from Brooklyn and Battery Park. I wonder how much that helped above ground.


Negligibly, I expect, what with there being an effectively infinite supply of water supplying the flood. Incidentally, 100m US gallons spread over Manhattan Island would give a layer just over 4mm thick.
 
2012-11-10 11:55:44 AM  
Um...

After a close call during Hurricane Katrina, Mobile, Ala., rejiggered the ventilation system of a major tunnel

I always thought that was a racist slur. Even if it's not, that's a very unprofessional way to say it. Did the editor fall asleep?
 
2012-11-10 11:56:57 AM  
I've lived in fairly small towns my whole life, but I've always imagined these things would have some kind of bulkhead ala Fallout's Vaults that would keep water out in case of something like this.
 
2012-11-10 12:07:21 PM  

The Irresponsible Captain: After a close call during Hurricane Katrina, Mobile, Ala., rejiggered the ventilation system of a major tunnel

I always thought that was a racist slur. Even if it's not, that's a very unprofessional way to say it. Did the editor fall asleep?


The word is "rejigged" (from rejig), surely? To be jiggered is to be surprise or astounded: "Well, I'm jiggered".
 
2012-11-10 12:25:48 PM  
I love all of the armchair engineers in this thread. Yeah, guys, I'm sure you know exactly what should have been done.
 
Displayed 50 of 66 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report