<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Virtually Shocking &#187; Guest Posts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://virtuallyshocking.com/category/guest-posts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://virtuallyshocking.com</link>
	<description>Not actually all that shocking.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 14:51:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The relationship between bitcoin price and difficulty</title>
		<link>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2011/05/25/the-relationship-between-bitcoin-price-and-difficulty/</link>
		<comments>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2011/05/25/the-relationship-between-bitcoin-price-and-difficulty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 14:38:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nanotube</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bitcoin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Posts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://virtuallyshocking.com/?p=1603</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a guest post by nanotube of bitcoin-otc, the leading over-the-counter bitcoin exchange. &#8211;Brock One sees a lot of discussion about the relationship between bitcoin price and difficulty. It is often remarked on IRC and forums, when a difficulty jump is expected, that there&#8217;s an expected concomitant jump in the price forthcoming. In this [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>This is a guest post by nanotube of <a href="http://bitcoin-otc.com">bitcoin-otc</a>, the leading over-the-counter bitcoin exchange. &#8211;Brock</em></p>
<p>One  sees a lot of discussion about the relationship between bitcoin price  and <a href="https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty">difficulty</a>. It is often remarked on IRC and forums, when a  difficulty jump is expected, that there&#8217;s an expected concomitant jump  in the price forthcoming. In this post, we&#8217;ll dispel some  frequently-heard misconceptions.</p>
<p>There  is a long-run feedback cycle between difficulty and price. If price  goes up, that makes mining more lucrative, and people buy new hardware  to capitalize on that. As hashing power increases as a result, however,  there&#8217;s actually a temporary increase in the daily bitcoin production,  thereby causing an increase in the supply. This occurs because  difficulty only adjusts every 2016 blocks, so as mining power increases  it takes difficulty some time to catch up &#8211; and in the meantime, blocks  are produced more frequently than once per 10 minutes target rate. Thus,  unless new interest in bitcoin materializes in the form of more buyers,  it is in fact not unreasonable to expect a bit of a price decline, due  to the increasing supply. In the longer term, higher difficulty  increases the security of the network, causing more confidence and an  increase in demand, thereby causing increase in price, and we see the  cycle begin anew. The primary effect, however, is the high price drawing  new miners in, rather than new mining capacity drawing the buyers in.</p>
<p>This  is more clearly seen when we look at what must happen in order for  difficulty to decrease. If price declines far enough to make marginal  mining unprofitable, we may see a decrease in mining power as  marginally-profitable miners exit. The decrease in mining power may  cause the marginal investor to lose confidence in the security of the  bitcoin network and sell, thereby causing further mining power decrease,  etc., in a similar cycle as above, but going the other way. Note,  however, that <strong>until price declines to the point of making mining  unprofitable for a segment of marginally-profitable miners</strong>, mining  power will not exit the the network, since a rational miner will keep  mining as long as the revenue exceeds the costs. Here we can clearly see  that the first-order effect is the change in the price, rather than a  change in mining power, and that the feedback from mining power to price  is secondary.</p>
<p>Another  side point bears discussion, and that is the idea that events the  occurrence of which is known in advance, will be reflected in the price of the  affected goods, due to investors/speculators trading activity in  anticipation thereof. Specifically, consider the folly of people who  expect immediate price increases with a difficulty change upwards. The  fact that the difficulty will change, and a fairly accurate estimate of  future difficulty, is available for all to see, days in advance. Thus,  anyone who thinks that this should affect the price, would have  <strong>already</strong> made his bets on that happening, by buying some bitcoins on  the market, thus causing the price to increase. By the time the actual  change in difficulty occurs, everyone who was going to make that bet has  made it already, and thus there&#8217;s not going to be any <strong>new</strong> demand on  that very day due to that change.</p>
<p>I hope this gives the reader a better idea of the price-difficulty relationship in the bitcoin system.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2011/05/25/the-relationship-between-bitcoin-price-and-difficulty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Protecting wetlands that protect oil revenues</title>
		<link>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/03/05/protecting-wetlands-that-protect-oil-revenues/</link>
		<comments>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/03/05/protecting-wetlands-that-protect-oil-revenues/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Mar 2006 16:08:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kodjo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Guest Posts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Katrina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/03/05/protecting-wetlands-that-protect-oil-revenues/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Washington crowd cannot even get this right. &#8220;in the last two years [2004-2005], we have spent more to rebuild Iraq&#8217;s wetlands than Louisiana&#8217;s&#8221; (for those who aren&#8217;t sure, a large amount of oil is regularly pulled out of the gulf of Louisiana&#8217;s shoreline, shipped through New Orleans&#8217; port system, and processed locally along Mississippi [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Washington crowd cannot even get this right.</p>
<p>&#8220;in the last two years [2004-2005], we have spent more to rebuild Iraq&#8217;s wetlands than Louisiana&#8217;s&#8221; (for those who aren&#8217;t sure, a large amount of oil is regularly pulled out of the gulf of Louisiana&#8217;s shoreline, shipped through New Orleans&#8217; port system, and processed locally along Mississippi between the sea and Baton Rouge).</p>
<p>Quote is from John Barry and Newt Gingrich, Time magazine, 6 March 2006, reproduced <a href="http://www.newt.org/backpage.asp?art=2761">here</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/03/05/protecting-wetlands-that-protect-oil-revenues/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>C&#8217;est levee</title>
		<link>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/02/18/cest-levee/</link>
		<comments>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/02/18/cest-levee/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Feb 2006 05:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kodjo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Guest Posts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Katrina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/02/18/cest-levee/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Who should pay for recovering from Katrina? Many think the US government should not go too far in subsidising private choices to live below the height of the sea. My own view is that the federal government is responsible for the enormous damage sustained by the New Orleans area. The Army Corps of Engineers was [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who should pay for recovering from Katrina?</p>
<p>Many think the<br />
US government should not go too far in subsidising private choices to<br />
live below the height of the sea.</p>
<p>My own view is that the<br />
federal government is responsible for the enormous damage sustained by<br />
the New Orleans area. The Army Corps of Engineers was grossly<br />
negligent in designing levees it was required to build and warranted<br />
would protect New Orleans from a storm just like Katrina.<a name="fnr1"></a><sup><a href="#fn1">[1]</a></sup> As a result of that<br />
negligence, several hundred thousand people suffered very substantial<br />
harm.<a name="fnr2"></a><sup><a href="#fn2">[2]</a></sup><br />
(Disclosure: This is my 12th year in New Orleans. While our property<br />
is not in the flood plain, it was flooded, though being raised, our<br />
home was not.)</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the Federal government will not<br />
compensate residents of New Orleans beyond a fraction of the costs<br />
caused by the levee breaches.<a name="fnr3"></a><sup><a href="#fn3">[3]</a></sup></p>
<p>For decades, over half a million people<a name="fnr4"></a><sup><a href="#fn4">[4]</a></sup><br />
have invested their lives and livelihoods in the New Orleans<br />
area. They did so in no small part based on the assurance provided by<br />
the levee system mandated by Congress and designed, built and overseen<br />
by the Army Corps of Engineers.<a name="fnr5"></a><sup><a href="#fn5">[5]</a></sup></p>
<p>The levees of New Orleans were breached<a name="fnr6"></a><sup><a href="#fn6">[6]</a></sup><br />
by waters the Congressional standard, and the Army Corps of Engineers&#8217;<br />
own standards, should have contained. In the case of the 17th Street<br />
and London Street canals, Katrina generated a storm surge well within<br />
their design specifications.<a name="fnr7"></a><sup><a href="#fn7">[7]</a></sup><br />
However, both these canals suffered catastrophic breaks, flooding the<br />
bulk of the &#8220;crescent&#8221; of the Orleans Parish (the land between its<br />
western boundary and the Industrial Canal)<a name="fnr8"></a><sup><a href="#fn8">[8]</a></sup><br />
and a large swathe of neighboring Metairie (<a href="http://members.cox.net/%7Eekonomicsllc/20051209TP%20FloodGraphic.pdf">flood<br />
map</a> from the Times-Picayune, 9 December 2005). The breaches were<br />
not caused by water over-topping the levees, but by egregious design<br />
flaws.<a name="fnr9"></a><sup><a href="#fn9">[9]</a></sup><br />
The foundation soils of the levees were not properly accounted for,<a name="fnr10"></a><sup><a href="#fn10">[10]</a></sup><br />
a conclusion supported by a study from the Army Corps of Engineers.<a name="fnr11"></a><sup><a href="#fn11">[11]</a></sup></p>
<p><span id="more-476"></span></p>
<p>The Industrial canal failed in three places. Two of these breaches<br />
and a large number of other levee breaks along the Intracoastal<br />
Waterway, which feeds into the Industrial Canal, and the Mississippi<br />
River Gulf Outlet (MR-GO) essentially wiped out East New Orleans, the<br />
Lower 9th Ward, and St Bernard Parish. The third breach in the<br />
Industrial Canal caused flooding on its west side (<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/02/18/national/20060219_DIRT_GRAPHIC.html">map</a>).</p>
<p>The storm surges along the Industrial Canal and the Intracoastal<br />
Waterways were substantially higher than their levees were designed to<br />
contain. But this was a design flaw. It has been well-known that these<br />
levees would be over-topped or breached by the storm surge from a<br />
level two or fast moving level three storm. This is because these<br />
levees were built without properly accounting for the effects of<br />
MR-GO. MR-GO is an Army Corps of Engineers&#8217; 1962 white elephant and<br />
environmental disaster that also funnels the gulf into the<br />
Intracoastal Waterway and Industrial Canal when a hurricane follows a<br />
course like that of Katrina.<a name="fnr12"></a><sup><a href="#fn12">[12]</a></sup></p>
<p>The flooding of New Orleans was an Army Corps of Engineering<br />
disaster. The crescent region of New Orleans was flooded because<br />
canals breached under pressure from storm surge well within their<br />
design tolerance. These breaches probably represent the most expensive<br />
engineering mistake in US history. East New Orleans and the lower 9th<br />
ward were flooded because levees were built to withstand a much weaker<br />
storm surge than was forecast to occur for the hurricanes these levees<br />
were supposed to provide protection against.</p>
<p><strong>Notes</strong></p>
<p>An earlier version of this appeared<br />
<a href="http://badanalysis.com/catallaxy/?p=1415#more-1415">here</a>.<br />
&#8220;C&#8217;est levee&#8221; stolen from Krewe de Vieux.</p>
<p><a name="fn1"></a><sup><a href="#fnr1">[1]</a></sup><br />
&#8220;The levees were designed by congressional mandate to fend off<br />
floodwater heights &#8212; up to about 11 or 13 feet, depending on location<br />
&#8211; that Category 1 or 2, and some Category 3 storms would kick up.&#8221;<br />
(<a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1134028141231650.xml">John<br />
McQuaid, Bob Marshall and Mark Schleifstein, Evidence points to<br />
man-made disaster, Human mistakes led to N.O. levee breaches,<br />
Times-Picayune, Thursday, December 08, 2005</a>). The levees on the<br />
17th St and London were designed, by the Army Corps of Engineers&#8217; own<br />
rules, to hold a surge of 14 feet. <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1139209587211190.xml">Bob<br />
Marshall, Overtopping claim won&#8217;t hold water, experts say Floodwall<br />
standards set in corps manual, Monday, February 06, 2006</a></p>
<p><a name="fn2"></a><sup><a href="#fnr2">[2]</a></sup><br />
Katrina was a relatively small storm when it hit New Orleans with<br />
maximum wind gusts of 100 mph (see the bottom of this<a href="http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2005/katrina.html"><br />
NOAA summary</a>), or at most a low-end Category Two hurricane on the<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saffir-Simpson">Simpson-Saffir<br />
scale</a> (which requires sustained winds over 96 mph). There was, of<br />
course, wind damage in the broad area, but this was relatively minor<br />
and would not have prevented the vast bulk of the population from<br />
returning within a few days of the hurricane passing.</p>
<p><a name="fn3"></a><sup><a href="#fnr3">[3]</a></sup><br />
The extent of damage due to the flooding of Orleans Parish and<br />
Metairie is extraordinary. Nearly four months after the initial<br />
flooding, about one third of the pre-levee breach population have<br />
returned to Orleans, 15 per cent of its schools are open<a name="fnr13"></a><sup><a href="#fn13">[13]</a></sup>,<br />
and only one emergency ward (a second, Tulane Hospital, is scheduled<br />
to open on February 15th). Brookings also estimates 750,000 households<br />
remain displaced over the entire gulf coast.</p>
<p>It would not be<br />
hard to demonstrate that the total expenditure of the federal<br />
government on Katrina recovery can only amount to a fraction of the<br />
costs that the residents of the Orleans, St Bernard, and flooded<br />
sections of the Jefferson, Parishes have and continue to bear.</p>
<p><a name="fn4"></a><sup><a href="#fnr4">[4]</a></sup><br />
Pre-Katrina the population of Orleans Parish was just under <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Orleans#Demographics">500,000</a>. Immediately<br />
to the west, Metairie, of Jefferson Parish had a population of about<br />
<a href="http://metairie.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm">146,000</a>. While<br />
Metairie has largely grown over its history, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Orleans#Demographics">the<br />
population of the city of New Orleans</a> reached the half a million<br />
mark in the early 1940s and peaked at around 700,000 in the<br />
mid-1960s.</p>
<p><a name="fn5"></a><sup><a href="#fnr5">[5]</a></sup><br />
The Army Corps of Engineering have essentially had this responsibility<br />
since <a href="http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/history/brief2.htm">1937</a>, and<br />
was authorized by Congress to build the current levee system in 1965<br />
(for a clear and concise history see <a href="http://www.house.gov/transportation/water/10-20-05/10-20-05memo.html#PURPOSE">The<br />
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, Hearing on Expert<br />
Views On Hurricane And Flood Protection And Water Resources Planning<br />
For A Rebuilt Gulf Coast</a>), but &#8220;[t]he levee system&#8217;s design dates<br />
to the 1950s.&#8221; (<a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1134028141231650.xml">John<br />
McQuaid, Bob Marshall and Mark Schleifstein, Evidence points to<br />
man-made disaster, Human mistakes led to N.O. levee breaches,<br />
Times-Picayune, Thursday, December 08, 2005</a>). For some sense of<br />
the bloody-minded bureaucratic squabbles and politics of levee design<br />
and maintenance since the early 1980s see Stephen Braun and Ralph<br />
Vartabedian, The politics of flood control: Levees Weakened as New<br />
Orleans Board, Federal Engineers Feuded, available in the archives of<br />
the <a href="https://www.latimes.com">Los Angeles Times</a>, December<br />
25, 2005. For a longer history see <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-5/11385777893340.xml">Bob<br />
Marshall, John McQuaid and Mark Schleifstein, For centuries canals<br />
kept New Orleans dry. Most people never dreamed they would become<br />
Mother Nature&#8217;s instrument of destruction, Times-Picayune, Sunday,<br />
January 29, 2006</a></p>
<p><a name="fn6"></a><sup><a href="#fnr6">[6]</a></sup><br />
Hurricane Katrina resulted in 58 catastrophic levee failures in the<br />
area around New Orleans. One was on the 17th Street Canal, two were on<br />
the London Street Canal, and three on the Industrial Canal. The rest<br />
occurred largely on levees that lie south and east of the Industrial<br />
Canal, notably on the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MR-GO) <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1134634212141790.xml">Mark<br />
Schleifstein, LSU expert defends piling tests, Corps&#8217; findings no<br />
absolution, he says, Times-Picayune, Thursday, December 15,<br />
2005</a>.</p>
<p><a name="fn7"></a><sup><a href="#fnr7">[7]</a></sup><br />
&#8220;Observational data and computer modeling indicate that storm surge<br />
entering the canals from the lake reached heights ranging from 9 to 11<br />
feet in the 17th Street Canal and 11 to 12 feet in the London Avenue<br />
Canal. The walls were 13.5 feet high or higher along much of the two<br />
canals and were designed to withstand water rising to 11.5 feet.&#8221; <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1134028141231650.xml">John<br />
McQuaid, Bob Marshall and Mark Schleifstein, Evidence points to<br />
man-made disaster, Human mistakes led to N.O. levee breaches,<br />
Times-Picayune, Thursday, December 08, 2005</a>. As is standard<br />
engineering practice and the Army Corps of Engineers&#8217; own manual (see<br />
<a name="fnr1"></a><sup><a href="#fn1">[1]</a></sup>),<br />
all levees or dams built with walls of a given height must be capable<br />
of supporting water that fills to that height.</p>
<p><a name="fn8"></a><sup><a href="#fnr8">[8]</a></sup><br />
Westward breaches of the Industrial Canal significantly contributed to<br />
flooding in the lower southeast segment of the city between Esplanade<br />
Street and the Industrial Canal. East New Orleans and the lower 9th<br />
Ward lie on the east side of the canal and were flooded by even more<br />
disastrous collapses of the east side of the Industrial Canal, and<br />
numerous other levee breaches in that region. The breaches in the<br />
Industrial Canal were also due to design failures as discussed later<br />
in the main body of this piece.</p>
<p><a name="fn9"></a><sup><a href="#fnr9">[9]</a></sup><br />
On the 17th Street canal: &#8220;&#8221;Our geotechnical engineers, when they did<br />
their safety calculations, used both sheet pilings to minus 10 and<br />
minus 17, and in both cases they indicated that the sheet piles would<br />
have failed as the water level in the canal approached 11 feet above<br />
sea level, which is exactly what happened in Katrina,&#8221; van Heerden [a<br />
leader of a state team investigating New Orleans area levee failures]<br />
said.&#8221; <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1134634212141790.xml">Mark<br />
Schleifstein, LSU expert defends piling tests, Corps&#8217; findings no<br />
absolution, he says, Times-Picayune, Thursday, December 15,<br />
2005</a></p>
<p>&#8220;The floodwall on the 17th Street Canal levee was<br />
destined to fail long before it reached its maximum design load of 14<br />
feet of water because the Army Corps of Engineers underestimated the<br />
weak soil layers 10 to 25 feet below the levee, the state&#8217;s forensic<br />
levee investigation team concluded in a report to be released this<br />
week.&#8221; <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1133336859287360.xml"><br />
Bob Marshall, 17th Street Canal levee was doomed, Report blames corps:<br />
Soil could never hold, Times-Picayune, Wednesday, November 30,<br />
2005</a></p>
<p>&#8220;After a 1980 flood caused a stretch of the city&#8217;s<br />
London Avenue canal levee to collapse, the Army Corps of Engineers<br />
proposed replacing it with a fortified design called a T-wall, with<br />
sheet pile foundations driven 26 feet deep. And in 1981, a study by<br />
Metairie design firm Modjeski &amp; Masters found that proposed higher<br />
levees along New Orleans&#8217; 17th Street Canal likely would fail in high<br />
water because they were built on &#8216;very soft clays with minimal<br />
cohesion.&#8217;</p>
<p>&#8220;Yet when levee designs were finalized, the London<br />
Avenue Canal wall ended up with a significantly weaker design and the<br />
17th Street walls with shallower foundations. Both canals breached<br />
when foundation soil slipped from underneath them as Hurricane<br />
Katrina&#8217;s storm surge rose on Aug. 29, flooding much of central New<br />
Orleans&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8216;There does appear to be a systemic failure along<br />
the drainage canals because the failure occurred at two places<br />
simultaneously,&#8217; said David Rogers, a geotechnical engineer at the<br />
University of Missouri-Rolla who is on a National Science Foundation<br />
team studying the breaches. &#8216;There&#8217;s got to be something big that&#8217;s<br />
causing that. . . . This is a very bad failure mark. It&#8217;s telling you<br />
they missed the mark by a country mile on the design.&#8217;&#8221; <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1134891378304510.xml"><br />
John McQuaid, Breaches lay bare flaws in design process. Stability<br />
concerns date back decades, Times-Picayune, Sunday, December 18,<br />
2005</a></p>
<p>The same article provides evidence that the Army Corps<br />
of Engineers knew of weaknesses in the London St. Canal, and that the<br />
implemented levee design was inadequate.</p>
<p>See also <a href="#f11">[11]</a>.</p>
<p><a name="fn10"></a><sup><a href="#fnr10">[10]</a></sup><br />
<a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1139036535112900.xml">Bob<br />
Marshall, Clerical error may have doomed levee. Map maker confuses<br />
soil descriptions, Times-Picayune, Saturday, February 04,<br />
2006</a>.</p>
<p><a name="fn11"></a><sup><a href="#fnr11">[11]</a></sup><br />
&#8220;An internal review by the Army Corps of Engineers supports most of<br />
the criticisms leveled against the New Orleans area levee system by an<br />
independent team of engineers, including questions about soil<br />
strength, levee maintenance and whether the system was built as<br />
designed&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8220;The [Army Corps of Engineers'] task force<br />
concurred with the independent engineers from the American Society of<br />
Civil Engineers and the National Science Foundation that the failure<br />
of levee walls at the 17th Street and London Avenue canals were likely<br />
caused by failures in the foundation soils beneath them. The engineers<br />
also have noted that sheet piling beneath the walls was too short to<br />
properly support the walls.&#8221;<a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/113419784186760.xml">Mark<br />
Schleifstein, Corps&#8217; own study backs critics of levee engineering,<br />
Report calls for rebuilding system to do what it was supposed to do,<br />
Times-Picayune, Saturday, December 10, 2005</a></p>
<p>A range of<br />
other factors, including inappropriate dredging may have contributed<br />
to the levee breaches (<a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1134113373319820.xml">Bob<br />
Marshall and Sheila Grissett, Dredging led to deep trouble, experts<br />
say Levee &#8216;blowout&#8217; was a concern before project began in 1980s,<br />
Times-Picayune, Friday, December 09, 2005</a>). In the case of the<br />
17th Street Canal, the Army Corps of Engineers currently believes that<br />
at the breach, the canal was built to its (grossly under-engineered)<br />
specifications, that is, the breach was not due due to fraudulent<br />
construction practice <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1134545976245240.xml">Mark<br />
Schleifstein and Bob Marshall, Corps finds pilings at designed<br />
depth. Probe shifts to original plans, Times-Picayune, Wednesday,<br />
December 14, 2005</a>. However, there is some evidence of contractor<br />
fraud elsewhere <a href="http://www.nola.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-0/113463421931310.xml?nola"><br />
Mark Schleifstein, LSU expert defends piling tests. Corps&#8217; findings no<br />
absolution, he says, Times-Picayune, Thursday, December 15,<br />
2005</a>.</p>
<p><a name="fn12"></a><sup><a href="#fnr12">[12]</a></sup><br />
The problems of MR-GO were known even before it was started in<br />
1962. Hurricane Betsy demonstrated the funneling effect in 1965. (<a href="http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/113670456489340.xml"><br />
Matthew Brown, MR-GO goes from hero to villain, Some want channel to<br />
stay open, still, Times-Picayune, Sunday, January 08, 2006</a>).</p>
<p>&#8220;Three months before Katrina, Hassan Mashriqui, a storm surge<br />
expert at Louisiana State University&#8217;s Hurricane Center, called MR-GO<br />
a &#8216;critical and fundamental flaw&#8217; in the Corps&#8217; hurricane defenses, a<br />
&#8216;Trojan Horse&#8217; that could amplify storm surges 20 to 40<br />
percent. Following the storm, an engineering investigation and<br />
computer modelling showed that the outlet intensified the initial<br />
surge by 20 percent, raised the height of the wall of water about<br />
three feet, and increased the velocity of the surge from 3 feet per<br />
second to 8 feet per second in the funnel. Mashriqui believes this<br />
contributed to the scouring that undermined the levees and floodwalls<br />
along the outlet and Industrial Canal. &#8216;Without MRGO, the flooding<br />
would have been much less,&#8217; he said. &#8216;The levees might have<br />
overtopped, but they wouldn&#8217;t have been washed away.&#8217; &#8221; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi_River_Gulf_Outlet">Mississippi<br />
River-Gulf Outlet Canal, Wikipedia</a>. For an alternative source see<br />
the <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/channel/mech-tech/mg18825244.000.html">New<br />
Scientist</a>.</p>
<p><a name="fn13"></a><sup><a href="#fnr13">[13]</a></sup><br />
The Brookings Institute provides <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/metro/pubs/200512_katrinaindex.htm">statistics</a><br />
on post-levee breach developments in New Orleans.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/02/18/cest-levee/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>White House secrecy</title>
		<link>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/01/25/white-house-secrecy/</link>
		<comments>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/01/25/white-house-secrecy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:51:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kodjo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Guest Posts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Katrina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/01/25/white-house-secrecy/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The Bush administration, citing the confidentiality of executive branch communications, said Tuesday that it did not plan to turn over certain documents about Hurricane Katrina or make senior White House officials available for sworn testimony before two Congressional committees investigating the storm response.&#8221; Eric Lipton, White House Declines to Provide Storm Papers, New York Times, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The Bush administration, citing the confidentiality of executive branch communications, said Tuesday that it did not plan to turn over certain documents about Hurricane Katrina or make senior White House officials available for sworn testimony before two Congressional committees investigating the storm response.&#8221; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/25/politics/25katrina.html?hp&amp;ex=1138251600&amp;en=8d29a3cd95560931&amp;ei=5094&amp;partner=homepage">Eric Lipton, White House Declines to Provide Storm Papers, New York Times, 25 January 2006</a></p>
<p>What is with these guys that everything is some kind of state secret? </p>
<p>(This posting from Kodjo also appeared on <a href="http://www.badanalysis.com/catallaxy/">Catallaxy</a>)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/01/25/white-house-secrecy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bush &amp; the truth</title>
		<link>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/01/13/bush-the-truth/</link>
		<comments>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/01/13/bush-the-truth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:44:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kodjo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Guest Posts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/01/13/bush-the-truth/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;It may be hard for you to see, but from when I first came here to today, New Orleans is reminding me of the city I used to come to visit.&#8221; New York Times, 13 January 2006 Apparently King George on his motorcade trip down the freeway learned more about it than we do living [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;It may be hard for you to see, but from when I first came here to today, New Orleans is reminding me of the city I used to come to visit.&#8221; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/13/politics/13bush.html">New York Times, 13 January 2006</a></p>
<p>Apparently King George on his motorcade trip down the freeway learned more about it than we do living in it, but then he is a greater man than mere subjects like us.</p>
<p>Just to give a picture: Most stores are closed here at 6. The postal service delivers every other day, but only to 20% of the city. The bulk of the city does not have electricity or gas. The city&#8217;s population is no more than 25% of what it was. Garbage collection is erratic. Even in the 20% of the city that did not flood I estimate over 1/3 of the stop lights still do not work. The Army Corpses of Ingénues has now admitted the levees won&#8217;t be built back to the standards that were supposed to be in place, but were not, until well after the hurricane seasons begins.</p>
<p>I could go on, but perhaps I should defer to our great wartime leader.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://virtuallyshocking.com/2006/01/13/bush-the-truth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

