Less than 10 days after Hurricane Helene made landfall in Florida, the state is bracing for another potentially devastating blow from a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico, this one a potential Category 3 storm.
Saw an article yesterday interviewing a couple who says they’ll now have to rebuild their beachfront house for the third time, and that their second rebuild wasn’t even finished when Helene sent their house surfing down the street. That their insurance won’t cover it.
I’m flabbergasted that anyone would even consider rebuilding there. You’re lucky to even have insurance – most insurance companies have been fleeing the state.
Here’s a radical idea: don’t rebuild there. This is only going to get worse.
Or more to the point. If you have the money to build a beachfront house, why are you not building it to be virtually indestructible? Like one of those indestructible monolithic dome homes.
We can build concrete structures that will laugh at hurricanes. We can build them with their living areas raised well above the ground so water can simply flow underneath and around them. Sure, it’s more expensive to build this way, but it can be done. And really, I would argue that if you can’t afford to build such a home, you simply cannot afford to live right on the beach.
I always wonder what’s going on in the heads of Americans when they go to an area notorious for being hit by hurricanes or tornadoes and then decide they should build their house out of basically toothpicks with some plaster. Here in Switzerland, pretty much everything except for maybe a garden shed is poured concrete, and I guarantee that if the folks in Florida or Oklahoma did the same the “devastation” would be comparatively tiny.
Huston is one of the most populated cities in the US and it’s built on a swamp. Everyone acts super surprised when it floods semi-annually, like it’s some kind of tragedy as opposed to basic physics.
Next thing you know Arizona will start complaining that they’ve run out of water. I mean, yes? You’re in the desert. Your choices were to fix the climate, move, or die. Instead you’ve built a gigantic parking lot of a city.
There should be no aid whatsoever for natural disasters that strike predictably on a regular basis. Human beings aren’t dumb animals. We can communicate. Also Florida, Louisiana, and Texas literally voted for global warming. They got what they voted for so what is the issue?
Actions have consequences. We failed to act for a century. That’s how long we’ve known with absolute certainty that the climate was fucked. We put people on the moon, and we went to war with Iraq, but heaven forbid people stop eating meat, driving their precious cars, or taking pleasure cruises. Zero. Pity.
The best way to prepare yourself psychologically for the next fifty years of ecological catastrophe is to cling to this fact and save your pity for people who matter.
Yeah, I don’t get it, except the couple I saw (maybe you saw the same interview, there seem to be several of these) acted like this is just a bad year for weather and they ‘don’t want to think’ about climate change. They at least seem the type who don’t think it’s real.
I feel for rescue units who can’t leave, and who will likely be rescuing these stubborn cunts when the next massive storm of the year hits them.
I don’t know if this is the case for that couple, but a lot of insurance requires that you rebuild on the same location. We need to change laws so that this isn’t the case anymore. It is a massive problem.
At least don’t fucking rebuild it the same way, with the same materials, as the last half dozen times.
Sink some footings down deep, cast the walls out of concrete (you can still put fancy shit up on the concrete to make it look nice, but the concrete will be a fuckton stronger against wind/water/etc)
I mean, you can probably build a house that can reliably survive the conditions there. It’s just gonna be really expensive and may not look all that pretty.
It’s gonna have to handle water up to a certain height and wind-blown debris smashing into it.
Like, think of a lighthouse or flak tower or something.
Sometimes a lighthouse needs to be constructed in the water itself. Wave-washed lighthouses are masonry structures constructed to withstand water impact, such as Eddystone Lighthouse in Britain and the St. George Reef Light of California. In shallower bays, Screw-pile lighthouse ironwork structures are screwed into the seabed and a low wooden structure is placed above the open framework, such as Thomas Point Shoal Lighthouse. As screw piles can be disrupted by ice, steel caisson lighthouses such as Orient Point Light are used in cold climates. Orient Long Beach Bar Light (Bug Light) is a blend of a screw pile light that was converted to a caisson light because of the threat of ice damage. Skeletal iron towers with screw-pile foundations were built on the Florida Reef along the Florida Keys, beginning with the Carysfort Reef Light in 1852.
With concrete walls up to 3.5 m (11 ft) thick, their designers considered the towers to be invulnerable to attack by the standard ordnance carried by RAF heavy bombers at the time of their construction.
The Soviets, in their assault on Berlin, found it difficult to inflict significant damage on the flak towers, even with some of the largest Soviet guns, such as the 203 mm M1931 howitzers.
After the war, the demolition of the towers was often considered not feasible and many remain to this day, with some having been converted for alternative use.
I mean a flak tower could be pretty badass to live in. If shit ever hit the fan you’d already be fortified. It would probably look good to an insurer too.
So listen, those flak guns don’t aim below the horizon, so you’re going to need to modify those. Don’t want you going in blind. Like as blind as you would quickly be shooting flak at close range.
I know some people from Clearwater and I think they’d just say “this is our community and our home”. It doesn’t make logical sense, but I’d say a lot about the town a person decides to live in is emotional over practical (unless you move somewhere for a job).
Saw an article yesterday interviewing a couple who says they’ll now have to rebuild their beachfront house for the third time, and that their second rebuild wasn’t even finished when Helene sent their house surfing down the street. That their insurance won’t cover it.
I’m flabbergasted that anyone would even consider rebuilding there. You’re lucky to even have insurance – most insurance companies have been fleeing the state.
Here’s a radical idea: don’t rebuild there. This is only going to get worse.
Or more to the point. If you have the money to build a beachfront house, why are you not building it to be virtually indestructible? Like one of those indestructible monolithic dome homes.
We can build concrete structures that will laugh at hurricanes. We can build them with their living areas raised well above the ground so water can simply flow underneath and around them. Sure, it’s more expensive to build this way, but it can be done. And really, I would argue that if you can’t afford to build such a home, you simply cannot afford to live right on the beach.
I always wonder what’s going on in the heads of Americans when they go to an area notorious for being hit by hurricanes or tornadoes and then decide they should build their house out of basically toothpicks with some plaster. Here in Switzerland, pretty much everything except for maybe a garden shed is poured concrete, and I guarantee that if the folks in Florida or Oklahoma did the same the “devastation” would be comparatively tiny.
I built it all the same! Just to show em!
It sank into the swamp…
So, I built a second one! That sank into the swamp…
So I built a third one! That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp!
But the fourth one stayed up!
Same mentality…
Huston is one of the most populated cities in the US and it’s built on a swamp. Everyone acts super surprised when it floods semi-annually, like it’s some kind of tragedy as opposed to basic physics.
Next thing you know Arizona will start complaining that they’ve run out of water. I mean, yes? You’re in the desert. Your choices were to fix the climate, move, or die. Instead you’ve built a gigantic parking lot of a city.
There should be no aid whatsoever for natural disasters that strike predictably on a regular basis. Human beings aren’t dumb animals. We can communicate. Also Florida, Louisiana, and Texas literally voted for global warming. They got what they voted for so what is the issue?
Actions have consequences. We failed to act for a century. That’s how long we’ve known with absolute certainty that the climate was fucked. We put people on the moon, and we went to war with Iraq, but heaven forbid people stop eating meat, driving their precious cars, or taking pleasure cruises. Zero. Pity.
literal sunk cost fallacy
They also had sunk all their savings into that rebuild. How do you think about trying a third time when you have nothing to even work with?
this might be a shock, but: in florida there are a lot of stupid people with a lot of money but don’t know what the fuck they’re doing with money
these people likely also bought spray painted gold sneakers not too long ago
The best way to prepare yourself psychologically for the next fifty years of ecological catastrophe is to cling to this fact and save your pity for people who matter.
Yeah, I don’t get it, except the couple I saw (maybe you saw the same interview, there seem to be several of these) acted like this is just a bad year for weather and they ‘don’t want to think’ about climate change. They at least seem the type who don’t think it’s real.
I feel for rescue units who can’t leave, and who will likely be rescuing these stubborn cunts when the next massive storm of the year hits them.
Honestly this is great news because then I don’t have to feel bad about them. Kinda uplifting actually.
Get more people to donate to your GoFundMe campaign, I guess?
I don’t know if this is the case for that couple, but a lot of insurance requires that you rebuild on the same location. We need to change laws so that this isn’t the case anymore. It is a massive problem.
At least don’t fucking rebuild it the same way, with the same materials, as the last half dozen times.
Sink some footings down deep, cast the walls out of concrete (you can still put fancy shit up on the concrete to make it look nice, but the concrete will be a fuckton stronger against wind/water/etc)
I mean, you can probably build a house that can reliably survive the conditions there. It’s just gonna be really expensive and may not look all that pretty.
It’s gonna have to handle water up to a certain height and wind-blown debris smashing into it.
Like, think of a lighthouse or flak tower or something.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lighthouse
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flak_tower
You mean a house that looks like a cybertruck?
I mean a flak tower could be pretty badass to live in. If shit ever hit the fan you’d already be fortified. It would probably look good to an insurer too.
I think I had seen this on lemmy first, that they turned one of the flak towers into a hotel.
Buy me a flak tower in Berlin daddy. Rescue me… and my wife and cats.
only if it comes with the original flak guns and a good supply of ammo.
Need something to keep those damn kids off my grass.
So listen, those flak guns don’t aim below the horizon, so you’re going to need to modify those. Don’t want you going in blind. Like as blind as you would quickly be shooting flak at close range.
Living in a lighthouse sounds great. If you open windows at the top it’ll pull air up through the whole structure for cooling.
It would be cool, but you would also have to contend with the rest of Florinda.
Good point, thanks!
I know some people from Clearwater and I think they’d just say “this is our community and our home”. It doesn’t make logical sense, but I’d say a lot about the town a person decides to live in is emotional over practical (unless you move somewhere for a job).
Well it might be where you live but there ain’t gonna be any home or community there much longer