Hurricane Katrina and Its Effects Essay

Introduction

Hurricanes are among the most devastating natural phenomena. Whenever they occur, livelihoods are destroyed, lives lost, populations displaced, and the general economy broken. Nonetheless, the effects of the hurricanes depend on the effectiveness of early warning systems and response strategies used. Ordinarily, the recovery process from a large scale hurricane takes a longer time, thus posing critical social and economic challenges. Just like any other hurricanes of high magnitude, Hurricane Katrina, which made landfall on the Gulf Coast of the USA on August 29th 20o5 devastated the social life and economy of affected areas.

The Onset of Hurricane Katrina

Hurricane Katrina was a category five hurricane and was occasioned by high-velocity winds moving at a speed of between one hundred and one hundred and forty miles per hour. When it made landfall, its effects affected an area of more than four hundred miles. Katrina was the 6th strongest Atlantic to hurricane to have been recorded and the 3rd strongest ever to make landfall in the United States (Vigdor, 2008). This reality indicates the magnitude of effects it had, especially on the vulnerable populations. Based on the surveillance on the behavior of the hurricane before its eventual landfall, the meteorologists were able to warn the Gulf Coast states of an impending major storm. As the storm formed over the Bahamas and moving towards the Gulf States of the USA, it was clear that it would land (Vigdor, 2008). This occasioned a concerted effort to evacuate the people across the region. Nonetheless, these early warning and preparations conducted did not prevent devastations, loss of life, and damage to property, especially in New Orleans.

The Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina

The Hurricane had widespread effects in several parts of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. However, there were disproportionate effects in New Orleans, which is highly attributed to the economic disadvantages among the residents, which made preparedness and priority for evacuation difficult. In New Orleans, the hurricane devastated the already impoverished people in the city (Sastry, 2009). Their weak livelihoods were broken, and they had to largely depend on donations from state agencies, thus leaving them even more vulnerable than they were before the onset of the storm. In these affected areas, the hurricane caused floodwaters into homes, thus destroying the property, farmlands, grounding of infrastructure and other social amenities such as hospitals. The storm surge destroyed structures along the coastline including levees and port facilities along the coast of Mississippi. In the Inland, the stormwater flooded and submerged homes to depths of 15 feet in New Orleans (Vigdor, 2008). New Orleans experienced the brunt of the flood water due to its lying below the sea level and failure of pump stations to operate as a result of the storm. As a result, the water flooded the city for a long time even after the storm had subsided, thus causing more prolonged frustration of the population.

The death toll resulting from Hurricane Katrina is approximated to be nearly two thousand deaths with more fatalities arising due to indirect effects of the storm, such as waterborne diseases. Hundreds of thousands of people were displaced from their rural homes either as evacuees or casualties who survived the impact of the storm (Sastry, 2009). Over one million residents of the Gulf Coast region were displaced, making becoming homeless. In the areas of New Orleans where evacuation was not successful, people were entrapped in their houses and the roofs as the rising floodwater surged. Due to the flooding and extensive damage caused by the storm, rescue operations delayed.

Hurricane Katrina had critical adverse impacts on the economy of the affected areas. Due to the damage to the industrial sector, there was increased unemployment. In New Orleans, the storm reduced the number of operating firms and consequently the number of workers in the city. For instance, the second quarter of 2005 recorded a decline in the number of employees in New Orleans who filed wage and salary reports. This trend continued even two years later (Vigdor, 2008). On the other hand, the cost of rebuilding from the hurricane cost the USA over one hundred million dollars, which had a critical effect on the general economy. The economic losses were also associated with the storms in U.S oil production (Godoy, 2007). At least 19% of the oil production in the country was destroyed. This caused an increase in oil and gas prices. The government had to release oil from its strategic petroleum reserves to meet the shortfall. The historically high prices of oil products in the US is partly attributed to Katrina.

Apart from the property damage, deaths, and displacement resulting from hurricane Katrina, it also has long term psychological effects on the victims. For instance, studies have shown that the evacuees of the storm located in Austin, Texas experienced increased mental problems such as acute stress disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, and contemplation of suicide.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Hurricane Katrina was one of the strongest storms to hit the Gulf Coast of the United States, resulting in mass displacements, destruction of poverty, and damage of livelihoods. It also led to the loss of employment, psychological distress, and economic effects due to the high cost of reconstruction.

References

Godoy, L. A. (2007). Performance of storage tanks in oil facilities damaged by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Journal of performance of constructed facilities, 21(6), 441-449. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.919.8643&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Sastry, N. (2009). Tracing the effects of Hurricane Katrina on the population of New Orleans: The displaced New Orleans Residents pilot study. Sociological methods & research, 38(1), 171-196. Doi: 10.1177/0049124109339370.

Vigdor, J. (2008). The economic aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(4), 135-54. https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.22.4.135