Coastal protection
Team approach
Regarding “Ike Dike worth effort” (Editorial, Sunday): I disagree with the editorial. As the former senior grant officer for a large foundation that supports Rice University’s SSPEED Center, I believe its plan is a gift to the city and county. It has nothing to do with “egos getting in the way” and more to do with a team approach that includes years of scientific research by professionals from a variety of universities and institutions, generous support from several private foundations, and many public forums.
Rice’s Severe Storm Prediction, Education & Evacuation from Disasters Center has put forth a plan that does not preclude the Ike Dike but can expedite and initiate a component of the costly, larger, long-term plan for the Gulf Coast. The mid-bay barrier system plan is indeed less expensive and would protect Galveston Bay and our residents from the disastrous affects of a storm surge. At the same time, it would provide positive recreational opportunities to the region by building a 10,000 acre park-like area with dredge materials from the Ship Channel. How does this “sabotage” the Ike Dike?
Leaders at the SSPEED center, like all other individuals and institutions, have every right to express their opinions in news media and at the upcoming public hearings on the Army Corps of Engineers’ recommendation for the coastal region. These two plans are not mutually exclusive. However, citizens of the greater Houston region deserve to be protected from the devastating affects from massive chemical spills and flooding that will surely come as the climate changes and sea levels rise. Time is of the essence. Ann Hamilton, Houston
Critical thinking
The editorial states that the egos at Rice University’s SSPEED Center are perhaps the reason that they have criticized the recently released Coastal Spine plan. I would argue that it is actually their brains rather than their egos that drives those critics. The Army Corps of Engineer’s coastal spine plan has numerous flaws. Just a few of them are:
• It traps thousands of homes and businesses on the entire Bolivar Peninsula and on west Galveston Island between a 20 foot tall levee and the gulf beachfront.
• It fails to adequately protect the Port of Houston and the communities along the west side of Galveston Bay from a significant surge risk that would come from the waters within the bay system itself. The SSPEED plan protects those areas much better.
• It would cost over $30 billion rather than the less than $5 billion cost of the SSPEED Center’s brilliant mid-bay plan.
Coastal storm surge protection is all about localized solutions and not about building 70-mile-long levees that ruin our beautiful coastal communities. And the very first localized solution should be to ask Big Oil to use just a small portion of the $51 billion in profit that they made in the last quarter alone to simply build 10-15 foot-tall earthen levees around any of its facilities that are at risk of storm surge. That would be a great start in protecting the area from a potential environmental disaster in a large hurricane. Matt Pace, Houston
Inglorious deployment
Regarding “Troops deployed to the border stay on task,” (Front page, Monday): Thousands of federal troops are deployed to protect the Texas border from approaching Central American refugees. However, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs called this “a wasteful deployment of overstretched soldiers and Marines.” It’s not hard to conclude that these troops don’t have a lot to do.
Meanwhile, U.S. citizens made homeless by raging wildfires are now living in tents in Walmart parking lots. Wouldn’t it make more sense for the president to make a special disaster declaration to send our military to California to erect barracks for those displaced Americans? Aletha Evert, Houston