LSU AgCenter Research Enables Better Flood Protection for Homes

Ten years of LSU research has created stronger national standards for construction that will radically change how communities in Louisiana and across the United States can protect homes and buildings from flooding.

Jul 1, 2025

4 min

Carol Friedland

The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) recently released its new standard for flood-resistant design and construction, ASCE/SEI 24-24, which provides new minimum requirements that can be adopted for all structures subject to building codes and floodplain management regulations. The new elevation standard was directly supported by LSU research and should help reduce flood risk and make flood insurance more affordable.


“Without the research by the LSU AgCenter, the advancements made to the elevation requirements would not have been possible,” said Manny Perotin, co-chair of the Association of State Floodplain Managers’ Nonstructural Floodproofing Committee, who helped update the standard. “Dr. Carol Friedland’s research shows there are better ways to protect communities from flooding than adding one foot of additional freeboard.”


The research team, led by Friedland, an engineer, professor, and director of LSU AgCenter’s LaHouse, showed how previous standards were failing to protect some homeowners. They mapped the impact of moving from a standard based on a fixed freeboard amount to being based on real risk in every census tract in the U.S. In response to these findings, they developed a free online tool to help builders, planners, managers, and engineers calculate the elevation required under the new standards.


“Many on the committee said it would be too hard to do these complex calculations,” said Adam Reeder, principal at the engineering and construction firm CDMSmith, who helped lead the elevation working group for the new ASCE 24 elevation standards. “But the LSU AgCenter’s years of research in this area and the development of the tool makes calculations and implementation simple. This allowed the new elevation standard to get passed.”


Flooding, the biggest risk to homes in Louisiana, continues to threaten investments and opportunities to build generational wealth. On top of flood losses, residents see insurance premiums increase without resources to help them make informed decisions and potentially lower costs. In response to this problem, Friedland is working on developing a whole suite of tools together with more than 130 partners as part of a statewide Disaster Resilience Initiative.


When presenting to policy makers and various organizations, Friedland often starts by asking what percentage of buildings they want to flood in their community in the next 50 years.


“Of course, we all want this number to be zero,” Friedland said. “But we have been building and designing so 40% will flood. People have a hard time believing this, but it’s the reality of how past standards did not adequately address flood risk.”


Designing to the 100-year elevation means a building has a 0.99 chance of not flooding in any given year. But when you run that probability over a period of 50 years (0.99 x 0.99 x 0.99… 50 times, or 0.99 ^ 50), the number you end up with is a 60.5% chance of not flooding in 50 years. This means a 39.5% chance of flooding at least once.


“We’ve been building to the 100-year elevation while wanting the protection of building to the 500-year elevation, which is a 10% chance of flooding in 50 years,” Friedland said. “Now, with the higher ASCE standard, we can finally get to 10% instead of 40%.”


As the AgCenter’s research led to guidelines, then to this new standard, Friedland has also been providing testimony to the International Code Council to turn the stronger standard into code.


In May, Friedland helped lead a workshop at the Association of State Floodplain Managers’ national conference, held in New Orleans. There, she educated floodplain managers about the new standard while demonstrating LSU’s web-based calculation tool, which was designed for professionals, while her team also develops personalized decision-making tools such as Flood Safe Home for residents. At the conference, Friedland received the 2025 John R. Sheaffer Award for Excellence in Floodproofing.


More than two-thirds of the cost of natural hazards in Louisiana comes from flooding, according to LSU AgCenter research in partnership with the Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness for the State Hazard Mitigation Plan. That cost was recently estimated to rise to $3.6 billion by 2050.


“Historically, we have lived with almost a 40% chance of flooding over 50 years, which in most people’s opinion is too high—and the number could be even higher,” Reeder said. “Most building owners don’t understand the risk they are living with, and it only becomes apparent after a flood. The work done by the LSU AgCenter is critical in improving resilience in communities that can’t afford to be devastated by flooding.”


“This may be the most significant upgrade in the nation’s flood loss reduction standards since the creation of the National Flood Insurance Program minimums in 1973, and it could not come at a better time as annual flood losses in the country now average more than $45 billion per year,” said Chad Berginnis, executive director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers.


In addition to LaHouse’s work to prevent flooding, Friedland’s team is also working to increase energy efficiency in homes to help residents save money on utility bills. Their HEROES program, an acronym for home energy resilience outreach, education, and support, is funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and has already reached 140,000 people in Louisiana.


Article originally posted here.

Connect with:
Carol Friedland

Carol Friedland

Director of LaHouse Research & Education Center and Professor

Dr. Friedland bridges research and real-world solutions for Louisiana homes.

Construction ManagementHazard-Resistant ConstructionHurricane, Wind and Flood InteractionsNatural Hazards Data Collection
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Louisiana State University

AI In Action Symposium featured image

1 min

AI In Action Symposium

The AI In Action Symposium, hosted by the LSU E. J. Ourso College of Business, brings together expert voices at the heart of the AI revolution to explore how they have successfully navigated this evolving landscape. The 2026 symposium focuses on the practical implications of AI in business, including hiring AI-ready talent, ensuring responsible and ethical use, and exploring the challenges of implementing AI across both large enterprises and small startups. Speakers Attendees will hear from Louisiana leaders and national AI experts, including… Secretary Bruce Greenstein of the Louisiana Department of Health April Wiley, Senior Vice President at Community Coffee Robert Veit and Julian Tandler from Scale Team Six, a San Francisco-based business accelerator Dr. Tonya Jagneaux, who leads medical analytics at the Franciscan Missionaries of Our Lady Health System (FMOLHS) Hunter Thevis, president and co-founder of Lafayette-based S1 Technology …and many more! Details March 20, 2026, 8:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. Registration deadline is March 15. Held on the LSU A&M Campus, in the LSU Student Union Register at lsu.edu/business/ai-symposium Discount available for LSU System employees

War in Iran: Impact on Oil Prices featured image

2 min

War in Iran: Impact on Oil Prices

As global markets respond to escalating tensions in Iran, energy prices are once again at the center of international concern. For insight into what this conflict could mean for oil markets, consumers and the broader economy, media can turn to Greg Upton, executive director and associate research professor at the LSU Center for Energy Studies. An expert at the intersection of energy and environmental economics, Upton studies how geopolitical disruptions, supply constraints and policy decisions influence oil prices and downstream economic impacts. As instability in the Middle East threatens global supply chains, he can provide context on potential price volatility, implications for Louisiana’s energy sector and what higher crude prices may mean for gasoline costs and inflation in the United States. Upton has contributed to more than 40 academic publications and has presented his research to over 200 industry, government and academic audiences. He has testified before committees in both chambers of the Louisiana Legislature and a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives. A frequent voice in national and local media, Upton has been quoted or cited more than 250 times, including by the The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, USA Today and NPR. In addition to his research, Upton teaches in LSU’s MBA program and in the Department of Economics and Environmental Sciences, helping prepare the next generation of leaders to navigate complex energy and environmental challenges. For timely, data-driven analysis on the impact of oil price fluctuations amid the ongoing conflict in Iran, Dr. Greg Upton is available for interviews and expert commentary.

Op-Ed: Crypto innovation needs stability, not shortcuts featured image

3 min

Op-Ed: Crypto innovation needs stability, not shortcuts

After months of bipartisan negotiations, Congress continues to debate crypto market structure legislation, though questions remain whether common sense investor protections will be included in a new federal framework for digital assets. These proposals address fundamental questions aimed at providing needed clarity for digital asset markets, including around agency jurisdiction, and trust and confidence for mainstream adoption of modern markets. At times, the negotiations fractured over stablecoin yields, while provisions addressing decentralized finance and developer liability and the importance of investor safeguards have proven similarly divisive. The GENIUS Act prohibits stablecoin issuers from paying interest, recognizing such payments transform digital tokens into bank deposits requiring regulatory oversight. Platforms opposing restrictions on stablecoin yields prioritize business models generating revenue by offering deposit-like products without deposit-like regulation – an unfair regulatory arbitrage that disadvantages prudentially supervised banks, drains funding from local lending and introduces systemic risk without corresponding accountability. While these complex issues require careful calibration, there is no substitute for keeping investor-first reforms at the center of market structure legislation and prioritizing clear rules and robust investor safeguards that ensure digital assets benefit everyday investors and that America strengthens its economic competitiveness and leads the next era of financial innovation. Such impasses reflect a pattern where narrow interests prevail over broader economic considerations. Platforms opposing restrictions on stablecoin yields prioritize business models generating revenue by offering deposit-like products without deposit-like regulation. Banking institutions recognize that unregulated competition operating under lower-cost structures will drain funding from local lending. Both positions are economically rational for the parties involved. Neither serves the public interest in financial stability. Likewise, opponents argue that regulation stifles innovation, especially in decentralized finance. But this conflates innovation with regulatory arbitrage. Genuine technological progress creates value by improving efficiency or reducing costs. Regulatory arbitrage extracts value by exploiting gaps between economically equivalent activities subject to different rules. The alternative claim – that existing securities laws suffice – ignores that those frameworks were designed for different market structures. Securities laws assume centralized issuers. Commodity regulations assume physical delivery. Digital assets often fit neither category cleanly, creating uncertainty that inhibits legitimate activity while failing to prevent abuse. The choice is not between perfect legislation and the status quo but between establishing clear rules now or waiting for the next crisis. Financial regulation written in crisis tends toward overcorrection that stifles markets for years. Regulation developed deliberately better balances stability with innovation. Both House and Senate committee versions share core elements providing needed clarity on agency jurisdiction, registration requirements and disclosure standards. International considerations reinforce urgency. The European Union's Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation provides comprehensive frameworks for issuers and service providers. Continued U.S. regulatory ambiguity cedes leadership to jurisdictions that may not share American economic interests. More immediately, delay allows risks to accumulate as digital assets become interconnected with traditional finance through retirement plans and institutional portfolios. Recent market failures demonstrate why regulatory clarity and investor safeguards matter. The 2022 collapse of crypto exchange FTX revealed an $8 billion dollar deficit in customer accounts, spreading losses to pension funds and individual retirement accounts. Investigators identified conflicts of interest and leverage that standard regulation would have prevented. When Silicon Valley Bank failed, one major stablecoin had 8% of reserves tied to that institution. The crisis resolved only because uninsured depositors received public support. These episodes reveal a pattern where institutions operating outside prudential supervision accumulate risks requiring public intervention. Markets function best when rules are clear, consistently enforced and apply equally to all participants. This principle applies whether the market involves energy commodities, agricultural credit or digital assets. Louisiana's economy depends on community banks that understand local conditions and maintain lending relationships through economic cycles. When regulatory gaps allow deposit flight to lightly supervised alternatives, these institutions lose capacity to serve small businesses and agricultural operations. Congress has made meaningful progress on consensus-driven legislation. Completing that work would provide clarity allowing legitimate innovation while preventing regulatory arbitrage that creates systemic risk. The alternative is waiting for the next crisis to demonstrate why such frameworks were necessary.

View all posts