An attempt to divert lava

[NanawaleJulie]

Bob, there is no reason why the government couldn't look into methods of saving land and buildings. Your tone is not very aloha to the people who live there and have to use that road to commute to work everyday. If you ask the experts, the lava zones are by no means an exact science. In addition, there is a feeling that the government in this area in general doesn't care or respond to the needs of the people, so this is just the cherry on top of the cake for them.

I will further argue that there is no state that doesn't have some form of natural hazard. How about tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, etc.? Just where are people supposed to live? The government's job is to work for the people. This is a big deal. It is just like Katrina. They knew it would happen, yet underreacted. People will always be forced to live near danger-as it is a constantly evolving planet.

Glen-Maui still has an "active" volcano too-maybe Kauai?

[Greg]

Bob Orts makes perfect sense. Besides, lava diversion isn't practical or possible on the rift of a "shield" volcano. It would be like trying to divert water through a sponge. The lava is going to go where it wants. I guarantee you that Lava diversion would be a waste of time on Hawaii. Look at the maps and notice where the lava has gone in the last hundred years. What makes you think anything different is going to happen in the next century? If you live in lava zone 1, you should be prepared for this possibility. There's no lack of aloha here. If anything, living here and not understanding the dynamics of a shield volcano or the Hawaiian culture shows a lack of aloha. We can all learn from the example the Hawaiians have given us for the last thousand years: Build modular and modestly, and get out of the way when she come. (Zone 1=lava come, eventually)

[NanawaleJulie]

"living here and not understanding the dynamics of a shield volcano or the Hawaiian culture shows a lack of aloha."

Are you kidding me? Could you be any more off point/rude?
Did I state that the method you are describing was the right or only method? I stated there is no reason why the government couldn't look into methods of saving land and buildings.

If the 130 is cut off-it isn't just going to be lava zone 1 people affected. You are acting like "oh, well, they deserve it". There is nothing wrong with looking into ways of trying to help a community- which was my point.

[missydog1]

you can't put a moratorium on building permits. When people buy land that is already zoned such that a home is allowed, they have the right to build it.

I have a hard time understanding a suggestion that people should lose the value of their land just because the volcano MIGHT in the future come that way. At least wait until Pele takes the value away.

If "they" knew how to safely trigger small quakes in California that would avert "the Big One" in Los Angeles' future, I have little doubt they would try. I don't doubt people are researching the idea.

I think the goverment here would do anything it could to save Hilo ... and not just because it's the seat of the government, but the size of the town, its history, its port. It's a mindset about Hilo as a fixture on the landscape vs Puna as a less settled area always on the edge. Same with saving Kailua-Kona but letting HOVE go and focusing on evacuation and protecting lives. If K-K were in peril they would very likely try to do something, whether or no it would succeed.

I just got back from North Kohala where the powers that be let a whole district go without drinking water from Friday afternoon -- and due to Discoverer's Day they are not expected to get it until Tuesday. It really sucked.

If Hilo's water supply had gone dry, or the Kohala resorts, they would have done SOMETHING to bring the part or parts in that they need, holiday or not. But it's a rural district -- so folks can fill jugs and rough it for a few days. Priorities. <disgusted>

[Kelena]

Government is just a tool to express the will of the governed. If, like those in the Netherlands, the people wish to spend billions to protect the country from the sea, they can do it, even if a minority disagrees on the expenditure. No massive sea walls, dikes, levees and engineering projects, no Amsterdam.

Here, we have spent billions to imprison the Mississipi River because one puts permanenent structures in one of the biggest historical flood plains at their peril. So, the Army Corp of Engineers trussed up the Mississippi (to the disadvantage of Louisiana, which no longer benefits from the silt that used to provide a buffer against hurricanes).

And, so government often encourages or at least does not stand in the way of building a hazardous areas: San Francisco (more dangerous than New Orleans in my view), New Orleans (which has been populated for hundreds of years ---well before the cities where smug people now say "They should never live in a hurricane zone. Serves 'em right!!".), Chicago (but for a very complex system of providing fuel to homes, you would die of both heat and cold)....I could go on. My point is people go where they wish and, if we all agree, we will provide some protection from the consequences of their choice and may take extraordinary measures to spare them those consequences.

I understand what Bob is saying about "Coming to the nuisance". We probably shouldn't be encouraging people to do that. But once government does encourage us, through zoning, to live on an active Volcano (Hilo!), my idea of government is that it will do its level best to protect our interests if adversity strikes.

There are limits to what government can do to protect us, and stopping 100 football fields full of lava is probably one of them, but there should be no theoretical reason why we cannot ask government to try.

I would hope that if people in Florida faced hurricanes, San Francisco faced earthquakes, if Mt. St Helens threw ash on Portland, or if a drought struck Dallas, that Americans would want the Government to help those people.

I understand that there are those who think Government should NOT help those people and I respect that view. We are all friends here and are sort of building our community as we go. We just have a different point of view on things.

My philosophy of government is very simple, and is rooted in the Bible. Cain rose up and struck his brother Abel, killing him (the first murder). And God said to Cain, "Where is your brother". Cain shrugged and said "How the hell should I know? Am I my brother's keeper?"

The Christian religion is founded on the answer to that question: Well, yes you ARE your brother's keeper. In my view, our system of government is also founded on the notion that we have mutual responsibilities toward one another.

Others are free to disagree.

But they risk being accused of bearing the mark of Cain. : )

Just kidding. Thank you for joining me on this Sunday morning.





Edited by - glen on 10/09/2007 06:02:50

[oink]

I find myself forced to agree with Glen's well stated opinion on this.

Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.

[Greg]

Julie, Sorry if you find my comments rude (off point?). I'm just using the forum to express my opinion. But I can state a couple of reasons the Government won't try and divert lava: 1). It's disrespectful to the hawaiian culture and religion. 2). They don't understand the can of worms it would open. A "shield " type volcano is different than Iceland or Mt St. Helens. As studied as Kilauea is, we haven't a clue as to the fractured magma system underneath. If diverted, where is it going to go or pop up next? I live in Kalapana. Is my home less valuable or important to me than yours? Are you (the county) going to buy me a nice new place because you diverted the lava in my direction? Are the rights of the many more important than the rights of the few? Did you know that you were moving onto an active volcano?



The county does have a responsibility to keep people safe, but not to change nature. We have lifeguards at the beach, but there's no pressure for the government to stop deadly wave action. It's true; Many more people are killed by waves than lava. Should we be building artificial reefs to flatten the surf, or just try and make people aware of the danger? Aside from the cultural ramifications, diverting lava would rank in terms of human folly, right up there with the introduction of the mongoose.

[mella l]

In addition to the Sarong, Glen wears his collar back wards! Amen, brother Glen!

Here is the Sacramento Valley we are building like there is no tomorrow in historical flood planes! Big Mansions on the faltering levy systems, up and down the highway for miles and miles. Ticky Tacky just MO.

But people need a place to live and so be it, however were we to have a large flood season, not unheard of, I would hope the government would help. That said, anyone who buys a home in a historical flood plane should have mandatory flood insurance, mandated by the state, or mandated by the mortgage companies financing these homes.

Shameful, well California's farm lands are being covered in asphalt and concrete. In the future food and water will be harsh issues. I wish we were more understanding and encouraging of building in the foothills and mountains and leave the growing fields for the farmers.

mella l

[Kapohocat]

my 2 cents - what about people taking some personal responsibility for their choices? I choose to live on an active volcano. Do I think the county or state should be responsible for me because I made a choice to live not only on an active volcano but in a tsunami zone? No, I dont.

If I choose not to wear my sealt belt when driving a car, whose risk is it? I am a lot more likely to get hit by a car driving down 130 than have lava cover 130. it is an acceptable risk to me - both driving down 130 and living on an active volcano.

[Hotzcatz]

The lava already covered the road. Remember when Chain of Craters went from Pahoa to Hawaii Volcanoes National Park?

Is it the responsibility of the government to make sure individual members of the governed body don't have to take responsibility for their choices? (If so, then somehow the Feds are gonna have to figure out how to rescue all those folks from idiotic mortgage arrangements they accepted.) Personally, I think the government is for tasks which cannot be done by one person and for finding ways for groups of folks to live peaceably.

If someone chooses to build a house in a lava zone and the lava shows up, they can hire a truck to move their house like folks did last time the lava came through the houses. Some thing the government could do is to encourage folks when building houses in lava zones to build small houses on post and pier foundations so they can be moved out of danger if necessary.