Hurricane Ian - the Aftermath

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Jamolay

Unfortunately, slow growth and creep make it hard to make major environmental development plans. Sure we think somewhat about it for individual projects now, but not in the “grand scheme”.

True and holds true for fast growth also, but neither is really an excuse to not implement such plans
Here is very simple but largely ignored "grand scheme" action that I have been advocating over 30 years. REQUIRE all new residential construction in the northern half of the country to be oriented for southerly exposure of most of the glass in the structure to take advantage of passive solar ( which will save 30% to 60+ % on heating energy used) and will reduce green house effect ........................................
Conversely reverse it to northerly exposure for most of glass in the southern half of the country to make air conditioning more efficient

We Americans also don’t like others telling us what to do, even if they are right.

I think you mean even if we are right ? And the other side to that is we Americans do not like being told what to do
But the reality is we need to get over this outdated frontier mentality and realize that if we and our children are to have any chance to escape a Mad Max future we need to implement needed Environmental policies regardless of who's individual feathers might be ruffled, or corporate geed might be impacted... We do in fact already have many "regulations for the common good, like seatbelt regulations .. Just because some individual feels their personal freedom is being reduced by "having to wear a seatbelt" is not a reason to ignore the sound logic of having those regs. in place

I don’t know how to undo this now. We would have to forcibly relocate tens of millions of people and spend trillions on coastline remediation. Not likely in this country even though it would be the “right” thing, it isn’t really feasible.

Likely true but is not a reason to not look to the future and "do the right thing "

[catndahats]

Happy Sunday AGF'ers.
Mak, I so agree after following this thread regarding lack of empathy.
May all those uncaring judgmental folks living in utopia please share with us unfortunates where that perfect place is so we can all relocate there and overcrowd and overstress all your resources.

The original post was about the cost / burden on the insurance companies, so trying to keep that in mind, property insurance companies remain profitably in business playing the odds. Like a casino, the odds are always in their favor. Simple as that. Natural disasters happen randomly and in different locations and while coastal dwellers and flood plain residents assume those risks and higher premiums, so do the insurance companies at a price. Low risk generally pays lower premiums. In this case, waterfront properties are the most expensive and are surely paying a premium for coverage. I don't worry as much about them as I do the working person that lives 5 miles off the beach but still in a flood prone area being insured properly.

Lenders require the insurance to protect their investment more than to provide protection for the borrower. The insured pays into the pool for years and most never have a claim, and with hope IF/WHEN they do have a claim that the insurer will keep their end of the deal and pay out. It does not always work out that way however, with the one paying the premiums usually ending up on the short end. That's the bottom line.

Back to the lack of empathy and finger pointers; I'm old enough to realize not everyone thinks the same. I'm of the environmental/save the planet generation as well. Shaming and saying people should not be allowed to live in a certain geographic area because of natural events is very shallow minded in my opinion. Some thrive on the coast, the desert, mountains, cold/hot environments. Others choose densely populated urban living. People live and migrate to areas that provide food, jobs, and personal opportunities-some stay and others move away--always have and probably always will unless manipulated or forced to do otherwise. Try telling the farmers that live in the fertile flood plains and commercial fisherman that it is a good idea to abandon their homes and livelihood. Think of the cost to your own life---but then you probably won't miss fresh fish or crops grown on fertile flood plain soil---think rice.

Those arguments based on insurance rates or "climate" are ridiculous and have many unintended consequences. Like saying people should not be allowed to live in big cities because density, crime and violence, pollution are too high--maybe property insurance too high too. My conclusion is people just don't care UNLESS it effects them personally.

I came to see if FLRon had resurfaced with updates. Still hope he and all the Florida folks are safe and recovering.
Ps--I wish things were better between folks.

Pss---Kevwind I so agree on the architectural aspects. I always find it appealing and interesting how buildings are constructed in different regions to work with nature and to overcome obstacles.

Originally Posted by Mak2525

For the record, I am a native Floridian - Born and raised in Tampa, so I have 63 years of history here. The lack of empathy from some people is rather disheartening. Would you say the same thing about people in California who live on an earthquake fault line, or the people in the mid west living in Tornado Alley?

That being said, a lot of people commenting on this thread really don't seem to understand Florida geography, and more important, the geology of the state. The billions of dollars in damage from this storm will not be just because of the coastal front buildings - 75% of the state is flat and barely above sea level - it's basically one giant swamp.
There is devastation and flooding all the way across the state from this storm! The news feeds and the media just show the ocean front stuff because it's the most dramatic footage.

My house is 2 miles from Tampa Bay, but I am in the most extreme flood zone (AE) and am only 2.2' above flood level. If this storm had come up Tampa Bay, my house would have seen a storm surge of 15 feet!

Florida is over-populated besides being flat as a pancake. Other than a few hills in central and north Florida, most of the state is flood prone. Our aquifer is very shallow, and there is a vast maze of spring fed limestone waterways under much of the state. Add multiple rivers, lakes, retention ponds, the Everglades, and the giant Lake Okeechobee, which also retain water. Plus, the continental shelf is very shallow around the state, which causes water to be pushed on shore that much easier. If the aquifer is full and the ground is saturated, like now, from an extremely busy rainy season, there is really no where for the water to go except up and inland. Then, it takes days / weeks to recede.

So, let's say we stop building on the coast line - we will still have flooding and devastation to a great extent! Florida has 22 million residents, so unless you are going to relocate about 5 - 10 million somewhere else, the problem will still be here, albeit to a slightly lesser degree.

As far as insurance, here's a news flash for you guys: the National Flood Insurance program was put in place to alleviate the lack of private flood insurance. Florida pays over 30% of the annual NFIP premiums ($975 million this year) while only receiving 7.6% of the loss payouts since 1978! Louisiana (28.7%), Texas (23.3%), New Jersey (8.8%), and New York (7.9%) are all more costly to the program, yet don't pay in even 1/3 the amount Florida does! So, you see friends, there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye!

Now, who wants to talk about guitars?

[SprintBob]

Originally Posted by Murphy Slaw

Empathy is one thing.

Expecting other people to pay for poor planning is another.

I used to live in Louisiana, but I left.

IMO this is not seeing the big picture.

Florida is a getaway tourist destination for a LOT of people in this country and it takes people and housing infrastructure to support the resorts, hotels/motels, bars, restaurants, souvenir shops, outlet malls, and all the service infrastructure to support that just so others can come and stay a short while and then leave. While there are a lot of retirees, I would guess you would find that proportion is relatively small to those still working actively and raising families.

Most of the entire upper gulf coast from Pensacola to Corpus Christi supports a HUGE portion of the needs of this country for sea freight, gas and oil production, chemicals, petrochemicals, grain imports/exports, etc. that all support the products and services that people in other areas of the country might take for granted. That requires people living there.

The same can be said for a lot of the east coast.

All of the above will be impacted by storms at times.

It’s easy if your profession does not require you to be there to move somewhere else with lower risk from natural events. I would keep that in mind the next time you fill your car up with gas or you play your guitar that was built in Asia and shipped in a container that was handled in Houston, New Orleans, Mobile, Jacksonville, Miami, etc.

[buddyhu]

Originally Posted by catndahats

Happy Sunday AGF'ers.
Mak, I so agree after following this thread regarding lack of empathy.
May all those uncaring judgmental folks living in utopia please share with us unfortunates where that perfect place is so we can all relocate there and overcrowd and overstress all your resources.

The original post was about the cost / burden on the insurance companies, so trying to keep that in mind, property insurance companies remain profitably in business playing the odds. Like a casino, the odds are always in their favor. Simple as that. Natural disasters happen randomly and in different locations and while coastal dwellers and flood plain residents assume those risks and higher premiums, so do the insurance companies at a price. Low risk generally pays lower premiums. In this case, waterfront properties are the most expensive and are surely paying a premium for coverage. I don't worry as much about them as I do the working person that lives 5 miles off the beach but still in a flood prone area being insured properly.

Lenders require the insurance to protect their investment more than to provide protection for the borrower. The insured pays into the pool for years and most never have a claim, and with hope IF/WHEN they do have a claim that the insurer will keep their end of the deal and pay out. It does not always work out that way however, with the one paying the premiums usually ending up on the short end. That's the bottom line.

Back to the lack of empathy and finger pointers; I'm old enough to realize not everyone thinks the same. I'm of the environmental/save the planet generation as well. Shaming and saying people should not be allowed to live in a certain geographic area because of natural events is very shallow minded in my opinion. Some thrive on the coast, the desert, mountains, cold/hot environments. Others choose densely populated urban living. People live and migrate to areas that provide food, jobs, and personal opportunities-some stay and others move away--always have and probably always will unless manipulated or forced to do otherwise. Try telling the farmers that live in the fertile flood plains and commercial fisherman that it is a good idea to abandon their homes and livelihood. Think of the cost to your own life---but then you probably won't miss fresh fish or crops grown on fertile flood plain soil---think rice.

Those arguments based on insurance rates or "climate" are ridiculous and have many unintended consequences. Like saying people should not be allowed to live in big cities because density, crime and violence, pollution are too high--maybe property insurance too high too. My conclusion is people just don't care UNLESS it effects them personally.

I came to see if FLRon had resurfaced with updates. Still hope he and all the Florida folks are safe and recovering.
Ps--I wish things were better between folks.

Pss---Kevwind I so agree on the architectural aspects. I always find it appealing and interesting how buildings are constructed in different regions to work with nature and to overcome obstacles.

Well, most of the posts here are not advocating anyone be forced to do anything. So, no need to talk about that at all.

Insurance redistributes risk, presumably because that creates the greatest good for the greatest number of people. I see people in this thread questioning whether the current structure of various homeowners, flood, and other insurance is creating the greatest good. Which seems pretty reasonable to me.

Much of the thread has not focused on the human tragedy of hurricane Ian. But I wouldn’t necessarily mean that there is no empathy for those who are suffering from the effects of the hurricane. You might be right, that there is a lack of empathy. But you might be wrong.

[catndahats]

Thanks, Buddy.
I respectfully agree to disagree.


We

Originally Posted by buddyhu

Well, most of the posts here are not advocating anyone be forced to do anything. So, no need to talk about that at all.

Insurance redistributes risk, presumably because that creates the greatest good for the greatest number of people. I see people in this thread questioning whether the current structure of various homeowners, flood, and other insurance is creating the greatest good. Which seems pretty reasonable to me.

Much of the thread has not focused on the human tragedy of hurricane Ian. But I wouldn’t necessarily mean that there is no empathy for those who are suffering from the effects of the hurricane. You might be right, that there is a lack of empathy. But you might be wrong.
Y

[Murphy Slaw]

I'm sorry if my posts were misunderstood.

I have tons of empathy for people who've lost lives and property due to this tragic event. Like I said, I lived in Lake Charles, La. for years, and still have friends and family down there.

My (late) mother-in-law had extreme damage from hurricane Rita, which was right after Katrina, and we drove down and helped her rebuild as soon as the power was back up. With her money.

The insurance companies should pay any and all claims they owe. It's their duty and responsibility.

My point was about paying taxes and giving it to people to rebuild over and over in areas prone to this type of thing every single year. It's just doesn't make sense.

You can live wherever you want, and buy your own insurance, and rebuild every year if you want. Just don't subsidize it.

[Cypress Knee]

No matter where an individual chooses to live there is some risk.

I went through Betsy and Camille when I lived in Louisana. Those coastal Cajuns know when to leave when the weather report talks about a hurricane.

I lived in Kansas and Oklahoma when the weather report indicted tornado activity.

I lived through blizzards, whiteouts, and tornados in Wisconsin.

I went through hurricanes, derechos, tornados, and blizzards in Baltimore, Maryland.

I currently live in Southern California where the risk of the Big One is everyday, yet the larger concern is the risk of wildfire.

It seems that anywhere one chooses to live in the good old USA poses some type of natural risk.

The best thing to do is to insure your guitars and prepare to ride out the inevitable weather risk coming to your neighborhood soon.

[ewalling]

When in doubt, go get an insurance policy, right?

Anyone remember that scene in Once Upon a Time in America in which one gangster lamented the absence of insurance for one part of his anatomy in case it no longer performed its duties. It was a superb parody!

[Mr. Jelly]

Things will change when insurance companies refuse to issue insurance. Then banks won't issue loans.

Personally, we are coming to a point where our insurance is pricing us out of our coverage with low deductibles. That will eventually force us to change our coverage.