No #IkeDike, part 2

"Cadillac Desert": It's
description of the Army
Corps of Engineers is
yet another reason to keep
it from building any sort
of "Ike Dike."

Since my original piece opposing an Ike Dike, Brain's comment, and my piece about how maybe we have too many people living in Houston, and other disaster-prone areas, some further thoughts have come to my mind.

First, I stand by what I say about the Corps of Engineers. Especially having read "Cadillac Desert" five times, it's an anti-environmentalist, bloated, money-wasting bureaucracy. And one with too damned many Congressional constituents, as Jimmy Carter found out.

Second, per the mitigation by other cities plus the too damned many people post, I mention the Bay Area. Not mitigation, but post-earthquake rebuild. They used some federal money, but much of the funds to replace the Bay Bridge, and upgrade others in the greater Bay Area, were state, regional and local dollars, including increases in tolls.

For more on the funding of the Bay Bridge AND how it spiked sixfold from original estimates — partially due to fancy design upgrades but largely due to unforeseen engineering costs, go here.

So, if Houstonians DO want an Ike Dike, fine. Just don't ask the feds to fund most of it, first.

Next, besides a carbon tax as the one possible source of federal funding for any of it, there's another very needed source.

The Ike Dike would protect what from storm surge? The Houston Ship Channel, above all.

And what's there? Petrochemical plants.

Tax them, dun them, if they want protection. Besides, beyond a carbon tax, they should be assessed damages for their role in causing this.

Besides, getting back to being a good environmentalist, f we need to get away from fossil fuels, at least the plants that refine oil into gasoline and diesel, not the ones that make plastics, need to be getting LESS valuable by the day.

Another way of more cheaply addressing the problems, per my too damned many people post? Pay more people to move.