An article published on Oct. 6, “Plans for port still in motion,” by Bill Lodge, described a new container port to be built south of Venice, in open water owned by the state. Looks like a nice idea, since it will be located at the very mouth of a waterway, the Mississippi River, that touches more states than any other port facility in America. It’s a great distribution route for the containers, and no other U.S. port can compete with the location.

However, in the same issue is an article by Bob Marshall, “Report grim for those outside levee system,” describing the problem of land loss in Louisiana, and the reality that there is no solution, and therefore people will lose their homeland.

No solution. Huh?

Here is the real problem. That container port will need lots of workers, none of whom will have a viable place to live within 100 miles of the workplace. Where will these people live? I am guessing it will be like offshore oil workers, doing a stretch offshore followed by seven days at home.

I wonder if we have forgotten that the Dutch had the same problem. And they solved the problem, as we have read in many reports since Hurricane Katrina. Instead of building levees in a fashion that zigzag to cover hundreds of miles of inland locations, they built a single, mileslong structure offshore and added land. Ships going into Rotterdam are not even slowed by the flood control gates. In storm conditions, the gates close automatically, with no human intervention. (And no politician can interfere with the operation).

Why is it that America seems to lack the will to tackle such a problem? Surely the Tulane researchers could have found some encouragement in the Dutch solution.

And state Sen. A.G. Crowe should easily see the connection between profits flowing from such a port and the need to spend important money for maintaining the very state whose waters are at jeopardy from subsidence and storms.

Robert Howell

retired sales engineer