I can add a little personal perspective to the The New York Times article entitled "Full Flood Safety in New Orleans Could Take Billions and Decades" that points out the scope of the problem in any plan to "protect" whatever becomes of the rump New Orleans.
If you click on the photos that accompany the "Multimedia" link on the left a window opens showing photos of damage. The second shows an obscure location, Fort Pike.
Going to Fort Pike was the last touristy thing I did before moving out of New Orleans (my 18 month old had a blast). Fort Pike is a brick fort from the Third System of pre-Civil War coastal fortifications. The fort is the structure on the right of the photo.
The perspective that I'd like to share is that those of you contemplating the problems of New Orleans without much practical understanding of the problem need to recognize that the water was 25-30 feet deep for several hours when Katrina passed the point in this photo. That fort was completely under water by no less than 10 feet at its highest point!
And ... the prospective plans they are discussing in the article call for putting a flood wall with gates across the estuary in the background of the picture. To put some perspective on that, the flood wall would need to be about the size of the two World Trade Center towers laid end to end (and anchored 100+ feet down, and towering 50+ feet over the water). Of course, keep in mind that in order for that to be effective they'd have to continue that flood wall around a much larger perimeter - say something like the length of a thousand or so World Trade Centers laid end to end.
I find it really scary how little serious discussion there is of whether this is a worthwhile way to spend money.