Welcome to Democratic Convention Watch

Donate to DCW


Follow DCW on Twitter
Follow DCW on Facebook
2012 Democratic Convention
2012 Republican Convention Charlotte Host Committee
DNCC
2010 Census

Follow DCW on Google+
DCW iPhone App Info
A Guide to DemConWatch
Tags
FAQ
2008 Democratic Primary Links
2008 Democratic National Convention Links
DemConWatch Archives '05-'08
DemConWatch Speeches
Inauguration Information
DCW Store

HOME
Mobile Version




Search


Advanced Search
Contributors:
MattOreo
DocJess

This site is not affiliated with the DNC, DNCC, or any campaign.

Email us at

Blog Roll
Frontloading HQ
The Field
MyDD
Swing State Project
DemNotes
DemRulz

DCW in the News
St. Louis Channel 2 News
AP
Politico
Wall Street Journal
The New York Times
NPR
Wired
US News & World Report

Assessing Irene

by: DocJess

Mon Aug 29, 2011 at 06:00:00 AM EDT


Cue the locusts: Mother Nature is angry.

With an area as large as was impacted by Irene, it's hard to really understand what happened for a number of days. The media send out their people to the most likely places to be impacted, and to major cities, but large disasters don't always hit exactly where they are forecast to do so. Then, the media go with what they have, and skip over the rest. You need to see the local news to have a sense, and that data doesn't always filter out for a while. 21 people are confirmed dead at this writing, hopefully that number will not rise, and thankfully the number is still in double-digits and not higher. So far: six in North Carolina, four in Virginia, four in Pennsylvania, two in New York, two in Florida and one each in Connecticut, Maryland and New Jersey.

Kudos to the locals, Feds and state officials who all worked together to get the warnings out, make proper preparations, and minimize loss of life. As someone who sustained major damage last year in a blizzard I'm here to tell you: "stuff" costs money to fix, it's a pain in the rear, and it's horrible. But you can always get more stuff: lives are irreplaceable. 

Here in PA, Tom Corbett put together a great team: state, local and Federal. People were staged not just in Philadelphia, but in other places. The governor was on the news every few hours letting people know what was going on. Mayor Nutter was the face of Southeastern PA. While the national news focused on Philadelphia only, which took damage, the 'burbs, which took more damage, were fundamentally ignored beyond the local media. It appears to be a similar situation in other states, too. 

From what I understand, all of us north of the Hampton Roads area were spared what could have been much worse because Irene basically stalled over North Carolina, disrupting the eye, and breaking down the ability of Irene to suck more water from the Atlantic. Thus, we all got the leading edge, but missed the winds that would have come had the storm been faster. 

New York City was spared, but the surrounding suburbs were not. Boston seems to have escaped major damage, but more inland areas in New England are in pretty bad shape. 

There will be a lot of talk over the next few days about whether the government and the media overreacted. Ron Paul has already said that there should be no FEMA, the locals can take care of everything. Eric Cantor (whose district includes the epicenter of last Tuesday's earthquake) says no money should be spent on disasters unless is comes from somewhere else (think: Social Security). Some will say that because it wasn't as bad as it could have been, the preparations were a waste of time and money.

But they're missing the point. Better this situation than what happened in the Gulf 6 years ago. Shelters were used, and people went home after. Workers were deployed, and lives were saved. There's a lot of damage, and a lot of cleanup left to do. Had Irene been a little quicker, or wobbled a little differently, it would have been far uglier. And then these same naysayers would be blaming all levels of government for not being in place quickly enough.

Kudos to the first responders, to the officials who planned. Government did what government was supposed to do: Irene could have made Katrina look like a minor inconvenience. Better to be prepared then to be the stadium in New Orleans.

By the way, Nick Kristoff tweeted this yesterday:

@ NickKristof: If only the century-long threat of climate change would arouse as much mobilization as the day-long threat of #Irene. 

We should think about that, too. 

DocJess :: Assessing Irene

Follow Democratic Convention Watch on Facebook and Twitter. Iphone/Android apps available.

Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Assessing Irene | 19 comments
The surrounding suburbs? (0.00 / 0)
As in, where I live? Or my friends on Long Island?

Lots of roads flooded, a few trees down, lots of power out. Much less bad than the storm from Spring of 2010, to name a recent example. Far from a hundred-year storm for the area, it was maybe a two-year storm.

Irene was never forecast to be particularly nasty up here, and she behaved roughly in accord with e forecasts, The bit that was unusual about Irene is that the path she took put lots and lots of land areas under rough conditions. The dollar damage and death toll will be pretty high for a tropical system in the northeast, but only because it covered so much ground, not because it was so bad in any one region.

The recipe, at least in New York, was: take a moderately serious storm, call it "historic," take some actions that are wise (evacuating zone A) and some for show (canceling bus service starting at noon the day before), and then pat yourself on the back for averting mega-catastrophe.

Rather than learn from Katrina, we copied some of the mistakes--remember the unused school busses, the lack of thought as to how the poor were supposed to obey evacuation orders, the lack of thought as to what to do with those who didn't do what they were told early on? All those elements were here. On Saturday night, Mayor Bloomberg held a press conference where he chided those who remanned behind for not listening to him, told them to shelter in place, and then said they were "on their own." This was before tropical storm force winds had even reached the area.

The response this weekend set the stage for a future catastrophe.  


There are other suburbs. (0.00 / 0)
Scott, I say this with great affection for you, as well as the perspective of a native New Yorker who believes that NYC is the center of the universe: THERE ARE OTHER SUBURBS!

Here around Philadelphia, the suburbs took damage. We have closed rail lines, new evacuations yesterday due to rising creeks and rivers, lots of houses and cars damaged by falling trees, power still out, etc.

And while not a suburb, Vermont seems to be especially hard hit as of the last news reports I saw.  


[ Parent ]
tv (0.00 / 0)
By the way, being in a hotel for part of a day had me watching the storm coverage on television.  (I e-cycled my television a year or two ago.)

Reporters and stations really are stupid - one had a reporter standing in about three feet of water and hanging onto the end of a fence to give his report.

And why the Internet is superior - I could have googled for storm surge or scanned written articles to find the current projected height and expected arrival time in my area (important in terms of at high or low tide.)  Instead to try to find that information I had to listen to idiots blathering "Here is Trevor in Tiverton.  Are you preparing for the storm, Trevor?"


I don't think it stalled (0.00 / 0)
I don't think it stalled, it did after all make it up the coast faster than they were initially predicting.  What I heard happened is that after Bermuda the eye was supposed to collapse and a new cat 3 eye was supposed to form in its place.  Essentially the new eye never formed so it hit North Carolina ~30mph weaker than expected and consequently was 30mph weaker all the way up the coast.

The storm was always weird (4.00 / 1)
I followed some hurricane blogs, and it was never a classic storm. It never held an eye for too long, and was very large. It had the pressure of a Cat 3, but the winds of a cat 1. The other thing is that storms coming up north act differently. At tropical latitudes, land breaks them up. At higher lats, the storms just spread out.

And as we learned today, northern NE, especially Vermont, got a 100-year storm.


[ Parent ]
Better Explanation (0.00 / 0)
n/t

[ Parent ]
Not weaker than expected (0.00 / 0)
Irene did not hit New York as a weaker-than-expected storm--not weaker than the National Hurricane Center was forecasting, anyway.

The wind probabilities from Friday morning, before the storm hit North Carolina, and just before the MTA decided to close down all mass transit, are here. According to that forecast, Irene had an 11% chance of being dissipated, a 17% chance of being a tropical depression, a 42% chance of being a tropical storm, and a 31% chance of being a hurricane at the expected time of reaching the latitude of New York. As it turns out, it had just been downgraded from a hurricane, which means the forecast was spot on.

So maybe I picked a time to late? Early on, was it forecast to be worse? No. Take, say, the forecast from Wednesday. It had a 31% chance of it being a hurricane at the time it would impact New York...exactly the same as the Friday forecast!

Irene was a serious storm. It killed people, and did a whole lot of damage. There's power out, and property damage. But many people seem to be puzzling over what "saved" us from the even more catastrophic storm we were "supposed" to get. That sense stems entirely from unjustified hype.


Hurricanes are unpredictable (0.00 / 0)
That is what I learned by having been through many. Including one that was bearing down on us as a Cat 5 but collapsed as it came near shore and was only a Cat 3 as it went by. Then there was the Tropical Storm that came over us and just when we thought it was gone, it backed up and sat on top of us for over 24 hours. My point, Hurricanes ARE Unpredictable.

I was glad to see the Federal/State/& Local Government officials get in front of this one and get the warnings and evacuations out. They no doubt saved more lives by doing so.

But I'm most glad to see that many that I know on this forum that were touched by the storm, didn't have to experience the severity that could have hit.

Another positive spin - this will create a lot of jobs for the north east for many years in rebuilding washed out roads and bridges, fixing and replacing homes, etc.    


jobs, but offset (0.00 / 0)
by the financial hit to homeowners, tenants who lost their belongings, farmers who lost their crops, taxpayers, and town budgets.

[ Parent ]
And... (0.00 / 0)
...all the money that was lost by shutting down mass transit for much longer than was necessary.

Here's a sense of the chain reaction that caused.

From Saturday at noon to Monday morning, all mass transit in the New York region was shut down.

This caused the airports to close. They would not have closed for anything like that period from the weather itself--the Port Authority specifically indicated they were closing because of the mass transit.

That happened to be opening weekend for Sarah Lawrence, where I work. Approximately one quarter of our students were not able to make it in until perhaps yesterday or today. Many of our international students are not arriving until today.

If international flights ended up getting backed up for six days, that implies a tremendous hit to the economy.

To put it another way, the economic interruption was only slightly less than that experience in New York after September 11th, 2001.

Lots of businesses closed that wouldn't have otherwise closed for as long. Family-run businesses stayed open, but larger places had to close because their employees take a bus to get to and from work.

Mayor Bloomberg revoked all permits for street fairs and the like--for Saturday afternoon, which was well before the storm could possibly have arrived. Those fairs benefit primarily small, local businesses.

I'd like to emphasize that I think some measures were good to take, even if they didn't end up proving necessary. Evacuating Zone A was a smart move. A brief period of shut-down for the subway, perhaps starting at 6 pm Saturday, might have made some sense, allowing for a quicker start up after the storm passed. A complete mass transit shutdown from, say, midnight Saturday to noon Sunday might even have made some sense.

But there was no scenario--none--that would have made the extended complete shut-down the correct choice. It made things more dangerous, in fact, as people had to guess whether to evacuate further in advance, and most people under mandatory evacuation guessed that they shouldn't. If the storm had been worse than forecast, we would have lost lives. The idea of using cabs to make up for the lack of busses is just inane--a cab is no safer than a bus, even with zone pricing is more expensive, and don't have the capacity to move all those people.

* * *

Summary: I think preparations and evacuation orders were justified. I think preparing for worse than expected conditions is smart. But the particular actions taken did not make things safer, hurt the economy needlessly, and will decrease compliance next time around. Bad, bad, bad.


[ Parent ]
you can't shut down mass transit in 2 minutes (0.00 / 0)
They started shutting down mass transit at noon.  They didn't finish shutting it down til 11pm.

[ Parent ]
Not bad, bad, bad. Right, right, right. (0.00 / 0)
If they hadn't shut the system down, and the hurricane came in with 100-110 miles/hour, major damage could have occurred, including deaths due to flooding or trains being blown off of elevated tracks. Not to mention, it might have taken days to get the system back up if they were still running during the storm.

Brief shutdowns are not logistically possible. They made the right decision.

And for what it's worth, the % of people taking mass transit to the NYC airports is very low compared to most other airports. There's no subway service to LGA, slow service to JFK, and Newark isn't on the NYC system at all.


[ Parent ]
OK, I saw the Port Authority statement (0.00 / 0)
But it makes no sense. They would have shut the airports even if mass transit to the airports had kept going.

[ Parent ]
For a briefer time (0.00 / 0)
Jet Blue, for instance, clearly didn't expect the Saturday afternoon shut down. They allowed passengers to switch for free from Sunday to Saturday afternoon. That's a pretty clear indication the Port Authority thought the airports would be open and operating fairly normally on Saturday afternoon, but not necessarily on Sunday.

Similarly the Jets and Giants were planning to go ahead with their Saturday afternoon game, until they realized there would be no mass transit to take people home from the game. (And yes, Newark Airport and the Meadowlands are both outside the MTA system. But they both connect to them, and plenty of people use the MTA for part of their trip to and from those places.)


[ Parent ]
Crunching the numbers (0.00 / 0)
I started to right a long analytical post as to what worst-case scenarios justified, and in so doing I think I see where the timing of the shut-down came from:

50 mph sustained winds occur periodically in New York, without shutting down the bus system, and without bus-havoc. So that means the real shut-down threshold must be above that. The National Hurricane Center forecasts wind speeds for locations in 12 hour blocks. At the time the MTA made the decision, the forecast was for a 0% chance of sustained winds above 57 mph before 8 pm Saturday. And while hurricanes have a certain amount of unpredictability, and sometimes do things different from the official forecast, I defy you to find a case where wind speeds the NHC gives a 0% chance to occur. We can't forecast hurricanes perfectly, but we do understand the uncertainties in our forecasts!

From 8 pm Saturday to 8 am Sunday, the NHC gave a 14% chance of sustained winds above 57 mph in New York. Context makes it clear those would occur late in the period, but public planning officials aren't going to try to mind-read the NHC. So that gives them a shut-down time of 8 pm.

It certainly does not take 8 hours to shut down the bus system, no way. (Pretzaltz: I never claimed 2 minutes!) It takes 8 hours to shut down Metro-North completely, yes. But not the busses.

But the MTA decided it was less confusing, I guess, to do a simultaneous shut down. Thus 8 pm less 8 hours for the shut down gives noon.

That's probably how they arrived at the shut down time.

And that was courting disaster! With no real plan for getting people out who didn't evacuate by noon, a worst-case scenario would have been very bad indeed. And a non-worst case scenario did unnecessary economic damage and will lower the compliance rate next time. It would have made a world of difference if busses kept running until, say, 10 pm, with no significant reduction to safety or equipment risk.

But at least I can see how they got to the number they did. Given that, I'd bet dollars to donuts that the disaster response wonks realize they made a mistake, dodged a bullet, and won't repeat it again.


[ Parent ]
They could/should have done a staggered shutdown (4.00 / 1)
Different services have different issues all the time. They could have easily said:
Commuter trains shut at Noon
Subway at 4.
Busses at 6. Or at 10.

Now, they also might have had concerns about the bus drivers getting home, or whatever. So shut the subway and buses together at 4, or 6. I will agree that a 12 Noon shutdown did seem a bit early when it was first announced.


[ Parent ]
One other thing (0.00 / 0)
While we've been discussing this from a non-partisan perspective, one thing just struck me as odd.

What Bloomberg did was essentially privatize the evacuation, asking people to pay for cabs to get themselves out, while removing the public system. Even if you think the system as a whole should have gotten shut down as early as it was, doesn't it strike any of you as odd that Bloomberg didn't then use the busses to provide free evacuation from Zone A throughout the afternoon?

Privatizing hurricane evacuation is reprehensible to me.


I live in a flood zone (0.00 / 0)
No one has ever offered to pay my transportation expenses to evacuate.  Is there some place where the government does that?

[ Parent ]
Yes, sort of (0.00 / 0)
The Tampa Bay area, for instance, provides free busses, although they want you to consider them a "last resort" for people who "have no other options." But that's pretty much where many many people were on Saturday afternoon in New York.

[ Parent ]
Assessing Irene | 19 comments


Menu


Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

Make a New Account


Currently 0 user(s) logged on.



Subscribe to Posts

DemConWatch on Twitter
DemConWatch on Facebook


View blog authority

Add to Technorati Favorites

Wikio - Top Blogs - Politics

Who links to my website?

Sign the Petition (A)
Powered by: SoapBlox