products   company   all

Industrial Equipment Noise

Midwestern Floods: Mother Nature or Bad Engineering?

By Mark Devlin, IEN Staff

May 26, 2008 -- It started in early June, in Indiana, with initial floods around Bloomington on June 4. More rain on the 7th brought more floodwaters. Nearly 11 inches of rain fell on the town of Edinburgh in only seven hours. Ten inches of rain fell put the town of Paragon underwater in just a few hours. On June 11th, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich deemed several of the state’s counties disaster areas. The Mississippi River also threatened to spill into the town of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, prompting mandatory evacuations of the downtown area. All bridges over the Cedar River, in downtown Cedar Rapids, were closed at 8:00 pm Central on June 11th. The next day, floodwaters swept away a railroad bridge owned by the Cedar Rapids and Iowa City Railway, along with loaded railway cars. Ten thousand people over 100 city blocks were evacuated. In Waterloo, Iowa, floodwaters took with them another railway bridge, this one used to transport tractors from a John Deere factory to Cedar Rapids. Just upstream from Cedar Rapids, the home of Iowa’s only nuclear power plant, Palo, was evacuated. The town remained under water through at least the next day.

Concurrently, Michigan’s flood-related woes began on June 7th, with tornadoes and thunderstorms. In the days ramping up to the State of Emergency there, 8-11 inches of rain had fallen on several counties. Damage to public utilities in the city of Ludington left many without drinking water due to flood-related contamination. Tornadoes in Wisconsin created problems for that state starting on June 7th, with 6-12 inches of rainfall from a string of thunderstorms. Things got tough for Missouri on June 10th due to severe storms.

Highways closed, cities evacuated, drinking water made toxic, gas lines and other engineered structures compromised, homes up to their roofs in floodwaters, families displaced yet still struggling to help neighbors—and, so far, an estimated 5 million acres of prime, fertile U.S. Midwest farmland that won’t produce a crop this year.

Why? How could this possibly happen?

The ravages of Mother Nature, inadequate engineering, ineffective government and planning? Or, all of the above?

One thing’s for certain. Article after article after article mentions that term that we remember so well from Hurricane Katrina: levee.

Man has been trying to control rivers and lakes and streams since the beginning of humankind. According to most sources, the first levees were built only a couple of hundred years ago.

Who’s built levees in modern times? Well, that’s a point of debate. In one article referencing a piece in the Des Moines Register, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) spokesman, Ronald F. Fournier, in the context of levee inspection, said “The [USACE] inspects only levees that it designed and built, or that it has certified as meeting standards...Many Iowa levees, typically built by farmers or local agencies after flooding of the 1960s, are rows of sandbags covered with dirt. Because they don’t meet Corps standards, they aren’t inspected regularly and don’t qualify for federal repair or replacement projects.” That same article states “Levees are owned by the towns and states where they are located. But, by federal mandate, as is the case in New Orleans, the USACE controls them.”

That article (see “Floods: Army Corps Says PR Turns Babblers into Spokespersons”, in References below) continues with comments from H.J. Bosworth Jr. PE, a licensed civil engineer since 1986, who holds a degree from Louisiana State University. “The flooding of the Midwest is a failure of the civil engineering profession. Levee overtopping and levee failure is predictable and controllable. Civil engineers have the knowledge and the tools to properly build levees that will do their job. Every levee was designed by a civil engineer and hopefully built to specifications. They were not designed by ‘bubbas with bulldozers.’”

Politics, of course, comes into play. From that same article, “Sandy Rosenthal, founder of the advocacy and watchdog group Levees.org in New Orleans was not surprised when asked to take a look at the lobbyists connected with the USACE. ‘The Corps controls many billions of dollars worth of project every single year. With that kind of money comes power. Further, contractors working with the Corps are immune from liability and don’t have to be licensed in the states where they work. This supreme power is the reason that the civil engineering community does not holler with outrage when federally funded projects fail. To do so would bite the hand that feeds them. This silence happened in New Orleans right after Katrina and it is happening right now in the Midwest.’” The plot thickens beyond all that, but in an effort to try to keep things somewhat fair, what’s the USACE all about?

I wrote a piece for Industrial Market Trends in the aftermath of Katrina that was very positive about the USACE. Readers commented thankfully for recognizing the efforts of the Corp. (See “Just What Exactly Is the Army Corps of Engineers?” in References, below.) Here are a couple of current clips from the USACE website...

The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is made up of approximately 34,600 Civilian and 650 military members. Our military and civilian engineers, scientists and other specialists work hand in hand as leaders in engineering and environmental matters. Our diverse workforce of biologists, engineers, geologists, hydrologists, natural resource managers and other professionals meets the demands of changing times and requirements as a vital part of America's Army. 

 Our mission is to provide quality, responsive engineering services to the nation including: 

  • Planning, designing, building and operating water resources and other civil works projects (Navigation, Flood Control, Environmental Protection, Disaster Response, etc.)
  • Designing and managing the construction of military facilities for the Army and Air Force. (Military Construction)
  • Providing design and construction management support for other Defense and federal agencies. (Interagency and International Services)

Today, as always, we stand ready... engineers, scientists, real estate specialists and administrators alike to meet national security, emergency and other national requirements. 

Since not long after Katrina, sentiment about the USACE shifted, and I'm wondering about my own piece in '05. New Orleans is still trying to recover, and many articles highlighting inadequacies in USACE designs, maintenance, policies and procedures, and politics don’t paint a positive picture today.

Not only is the story of the 2008 Midwest Flooding still being written in history, but work on this chapter will continue at least next week when the Mississippi is expected to crest in certain areas. That’s if there’s no more rain for awhile. Also keep in mind that all of that water is headed to New Orleans.

Levees in the New Orleans area—even with their failures—did their jobs, according to many articles. Their jobs being, of course, what they were designed to withstand. Katrina raised the bar, however, and failures weren’t surprising from an engineering perspective. Interestingly, the same claims are now being made in the Midwest, with officials saying that the levees simply weren’t designed to handle this much water.

For example, one article states “A total of 35 levees have overtopped during the Midwest flooding, and seven of them had been federally designed and constructed, said Ed Heckler, chief of the Office of Homeland Security for the USACE. He said the nation’s levee system wasn’t designed to hold back such extraordinarily high flood waters, particularly in rural communities such as Lincon County. ‘The system pretty much performed as it was designed,’ Heckler said.

Excuse me? This is the system working?

Just as a start, we’ve got the great Mississippi floods of 1927 and 1993 which, presumably, would have given everyone involved the experience and foresight to build stronger, better levees that would withstand this much water and more.

Even with the tornadoes and severe storms, some levees weren’t breached or threatened by storms. No, it’s much more tenuous than that. In one example, the effectiveness of a levee was threatened by pigs that escaped a flooded farm. They swam to safety on a sandbag levee in Iowa. Since their hooves would puncture plastic and thus compromise the integrity of that levee, the hogs were shot by officials. In Missouri, one levee was threatened by a disturbance as minor as a passing boat. “A 2-inch wake could be the difference between saving the levee and catastrophic failure,” said Andy Binder, Lincoln County Emergency Management spokesman. Also in Missouri, “A single muskrat recently created a geyser of river water by digging into the berm” of the Pin Oak levee—the only earthen berm in Lincoln county that hasn’t failed” as of yesterday, June 25th.

Scary thing? I’m not making this stuff up. Really. Those are off-the-wall and extremely rare examples, to be sure. But the fact that such examples exist at all doesn’t point to Mother Nature. It points to insanity.

It’s clear that the technology exists to prevent such disasters. But here we are now with the nightmares described above and billions of dollars being allotted for relief and rebuilding (it’s too soon to know the actual numbers)—after the fact. Again.

We haven’t learned from 1927 or 1993. We haven’t learned from Katrina. Will we learn by the time this one is over, or by this hurricane season in the Gulf?

When will we learn—and what do we need to learn?

 

REFERENCES

General

Mississippi River threatens more Midwest levees
(CNN)

Mississippi River floods could be worst in 15 years
(CNN)

Mississippi River Levees Break, More at Risk
(PlanetArk.com)

Mississippi River Levee Bursts in Western Illinois
(FoxNews.com)

Mississippi River levee breaks
(Reuters UK)

Floods: Army Corps Says PR Turns Babblers into Spokespersons
(OpEdNews.com)

Mississippi River Levees Burst North of St. Louis, AP Reports
(Bloomberg.com)

2 More Mississippi River Levees Burst, Bush and McCain Visit Flood-Soaked Region
(FoxNews.com)

Mississippi River Levee Breaks, Prompting Rescue
(CBS Chicago)

Stranded Pigs Shot to Save Iowa Levees
(CBS News)

Disaster Response and Appointment of a Recovery Czar: The Executive Branch’s Response to the Floor of 1927 (PDF)
(Fas.org)

June 2008 Midwest floods
(Wikipedia)

Great Mississippi Flood of 1927
(Wikipedia)

Great Flood of 1993
(Wikipedia)

 

USACE-Related

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: A Brief History
(USACE)

Levee Definition
(USACE)

Corps responds to Midwest flooding
(USACE)

Army Reorganizes its Command and Headquarters Structure
(Association of the United States Army)

Corps of Engineers protects NOLA with duct tape, rope, and rusty pipes
(Dailykos.com)

Corps of Engineers’ policies criticized
(Levees.org)

Corps of Engineers’ PR in high gear on Midwest Flooding
(Levees.org)

The US Flood Epidemic: Nature or failing infrastructure?
(Levees.org)

Corps of Engineers addressing repairs made during rapid-response phase
(Nola.com)

Just What Exactly Is the Army Corps of Engineers?
(Industrial Market Trends)

 

Mississippi River

The Mississippi River
(Gatewayno.com)

The Mighty Mississippi
(Center for Global Environmental Education)

About the Upper Mississippi River System
(U.S. Geological Survey)

 

Add a Comment

 
 

Comments

  • Dave on Jun 30 2008 12:50:20:000PM

    You lost my attention after stating "The Mississippi river threatens Cedar Rapids" Cedar Rapids is 90 miles from the Mississippi river. Facts will make changes and each flooded area will have it's own facts. Like renovating a 100 year city downtown area in a known flood plain. Based on using existing 100 year flooding worst case scenerio and receiving a 500 year flood. Bad Luck or Just not having enough "facts" to determine how to protect life and property.

  • Mike Buccieri on Jun 27 2008 10:12:20:000AM

    I have read with great interest many articles recently about the various natural disasters and their aftermath. Many of the articles seek to find out why and place blame. Floods happen because water falls from the sky and water flows downhill. Until you can address both of those root causes, every other solution is only temporary. I am all in favor of continuous improvement, however the underlying theme in most of the articles appears to be that we (humans) can somehow accurately predict the future and compensate for any natural occurrence. I am an engineer and every design I have worked on will do exactly what I designed it to do, sometimes a little more. If subjected to conditions that I did not predict, there is a good chance that the design will not survive. It doesn't mean that my design was faulty, it only points out that I could not predict all possible conditions in the future. To my knowledge, it is not possible to predict the future with any certainty. I hope that the lessons we learn from these events are to be as prepared as we know how to be and be resilient in our efforts to rebuild. I hope that we do not go forward assuming that we can master the environment or guarantee that future failures will not happen.

  • Chris Bell on Jun 26 2008 12:30:12:000PM

    I have about a hundred thoughts on this, but I'll start with a question. Who exactly do you blame for this? I have an answer. Almost all of us. Starting with those in a position of responsibility or influence who opposes the maintenance and upgrading of our nations infrastructure. This includes elected officials and probably to a much larger extent any of the "Friends of X Area" groups who cannot stand to see anything done within their little protected world. They oppose those things necessary for the greater good in favor of their own petty desires. They use petty tactics and methods to delay even projects that have been approved often costing taxpayers (maybe the most endangered species today)millions and billions of dollars for absolutely nothing. It includes elected officials who divert dedicated funding from caring for our investment in our infrastructure, to the individuals, businesses, etc. who encourage them or do not oppose them in doing this. There was a sign on a speed shop wall “Speed Costs Money, How Fast do You Want to Go?” Levees cost money, how much water do you want to keep out? We have voted on this with our pocketbooks and have bought what we are willing to pay for as a whole nation. Some have opted to go beyond on a local or personal basis, but we have what we are willing to pay for. So what’s the gripe? We want better levees? Is the answer that elusive? Surely we as a group aren’t too stupid to understand the answer. Or are we? If you’ve attempted to block a road, a dam, an airport or any number of other such projects, just look at those flooded homes, you helped to flood them. (If it was preventable.) If you’ve opposed spending for infrastructure maintenance, you helped flood them. If you just stood by silently and let somebody else succeed in opposition to the support of our infrastructure, you helped flood them. We are not changing the oil in our car and then blaming someone else when it breaks down, plain and simple. If we want it to last, we’ve got to take care of it. If we want it to do more, we’ve got to upgrade it. If we’re satisfied, then we’ll keep seeing the same results. We as a nation are doing just like most of us as individuals, we’re buying some of what we want, even some of what we need, and blowing a lot on stupidity. Not all of our investment is money, some of it is compromise in our selfish desires to allow the betterment for others. We have paid for a lot of things that we need, but do not see them because we only paid for them in the fixing of our errors. So, what are we buying next?

  • Paul on Jun 26 2008 11:52:47:000AM

    It is easy to say that our levee systems are poorly designed or maintained. How much money would it cost to actually improve the levee system such that it would not fail during these extrodinary weather events? Do we design for the 100 year flood, the 500 year flood or the 1000 year flood?? I am afraid we cannot afford to protect for every eventuality. In any case, I haven't seen anyone offer and estimate of the cost of protection vs. the cost of failure. Any offers from a knowledgeable Civil Engineer?

  • Mark on Jun 26 2008 1:52:37:000PM

    Chris and Paul: Thanks very much for taking the time to comment. Love the Speed Costs Money quote; one of my favorites, and you’re right, it applies here. On one hand, there’s no single place to put the blame here. As is often the case (especially today), though, it’s not nearly so much a matter of blame as it is for someone (individuals, groups, whatever) accepting at least some of the responsibility and saying, “You know what? We screwed up, and here’s how it can be fixed.” In none of my research for that article did I find anyone or even any group taking such a position. Rather, just the opposite in the form of deflections. Same thing with the oil crisis, and other issues that the country faces. Even the Presidential candidates, for instance, have all toured the stricken areas, and—thankfully—President Bush is already throwing over a billion at the relief effort as a start. But the loss of millions of acres of farmland (while also facing related fuel and Ethanol matters) and the vast loss and disruption barely get a shrug and certainly don’t rate as a campaign issue. Weather’s getting more severe, seemingly everywhere. Is that part of a natural weather pattern that’s explainable over a thousand years (for which we have data for only a relatively small part), or is it related to global warming? If it’s the latter, and people one helluva lot smarter than I need to determine that, then the whole matter of 100- or 500-year flood references could become null and void—and thus create a completely new set of circumstances for engineers, politicians and, yes, even the average person. What was formerly a 100-year flood could shift to a 10-year pattern, for instance. You’re right again: if we want these things stronger, it’s going to cost—so don’t complain down the road when more is coming out of our pockets at tax time. (Yes, eliminate the pork projects and taxes could remain stable. But what are the chances of that happening?) One could easily turn left on this one and say, for instance, that human life and safety should be primary. That’s not fiscally or politically realistic, however. Perhaps a starting point could be comparing what’s going to be spent on relief and rebuilding to what could be invested up-front such that the relief/rebuilding isn’t required later on. (Like that old car-related commercial: "You can pay me now, or you can pay me later.") That same starting point could be used in the matter of decaying infrastructure, of course. Bottom line, and I hesitate to make even a loose reference to Ross Perot, it’s got to be a top-down approach. That means someone at or near the top has to say, “This is important” and treat it as such.

  • Mark on Jul 7 2008 9:43:09:000AM

    Dave: Here's a quote from msnbc.com..."In Cedar Rapids — where flooding had forced the evacuation of about 24,000 people from their homes — residents waited hours to get their first up-close look since flooding hammered most of the city earlier this week." An article in the NY Daily News displays an image of the flooding, with the caption "Downtown Cedar Rapids, Iowa, looks more like Venice as floodwaters engulf the state's second-largest city." One over on Yahoo News says "In Cedar Rapids, the engorged river flowed freely through downtown. At least 438 city blocks were under water, and in some neighborhoods the water was 8 feet high." Was the flooding directly caused by the Mississippi? No. It was the Cedar River which, according to Britannica.com, is a "nonnavigable stream in the north-central United States, flowing from southeastern Minnesota southeasterly across Iowa and joining the Iowa River about 20 miles (32 km) from the Mississippi River. Over the river’s 329-mile (529-kilometre) course, it descends 740 feet (226 m). The Cedar River’s 7,819-square-mile (20,251-square-kilometre) drainage basin is mostly fertile farmland. There are several small hydroelectric dams on the river." Apparently, it connects to the Mississippi via the Iowa River. Admittedly, I'm not from the area and don't know the tributaries so I'd appreciate it if someone could confirm or deny this. You're right. All the rules are changing re: 100- and 500-year floods; new flood models have to be made and accounted for in terms of flood management.

view allRelated Blogs