disasters redux
Complementing my recent review of great US natural disasters of the past, Wired has an interesting list of what it considers the top 10 disasters waiting to happen here, with brief analysis of their likelihood and impact.
Wired's list comprises the following:
America's Next Top Disasters
Ranking determined by likelihood and potential impact
1. Levee Failure in the Sacramento Delta
2. Flooding in the Upper Mississippi
3. Indian Point Meltdown
4. Earthquake in Missouri
5. Eruption at Yellowstone
6. Tornadoes in Dallas
7. Landslide at Mount Rainier
8. Tsunami on the Eastern Seaboard
9. Massive Power Failure in Boston
10. Rupture in the Alaska Oil Pipeline
Wired subheaded its piece "Ten trouble spots you aren't already worried about." Obviously they underestimate my capacity for worry; I have plenty to go around, and at least some of these have been on my radar for some time.
Their criteria, obviously, are a bit broader than just epic loss of life, which is what I focused on: their numbers 9 and 10, while causing huge economic disruption, probably wouldn't kill too many people.
Also, Wired is including manmade as well as natural disasters: an Indian Point accident is more likely to be due to humans, one way or another, than to nature.
Still it's an interesting list. The big 3 natural disasters (the Yellowstone eruption, Missouri earthquake, and East Coast tsunami), along with an SF or LA earthquake (omitted, I guess because they're too obvious), would certainly be cataclysmic events.
I went to a talk at the New York Public Library a few weeks ago by Simon Winchester, author of a great book about Krakatoa [Amazon], and a new one on the 1906 SF earthquake that sounds totally worth reading. His rather contentious view is basically that Americans build cities in kind of dumb places because as a young country we're not really mature enough to know better. I'd say it's less to do with immaturity than incurable optimism. Which still doesn't mean its sensible.
Final note, the East Coast tsunami scenario came to my attention last summer, I think. I did some reading about it, and basically there's no certainty whatsoever just how big a tsunami would be generated if La Palma did collapse. It could be as little as 10 feet or so by the time it reaches our shores. But then again, the Yellowstone eruption could just be a pretty light show, too.
Wired's list comprises the following:
America's Next Top Disasters
Ranking determined by likelihood and potential impact
1. Levee Failure in the Sacramento Delta
2. Flooding in the Upper Mississippi
3. Indian Point Meltdown
4. Earthquake in Missouri
5. Eruption at Yellowstone
6. Tornadoes in Dallas
7. Landslide at Mount Rainier
8. Tsunami on the Eastern Seaboard
9. Massive Power Failure in Boston
10. Rupture in the Alaska Oil Pipeline
Wired subheaded its piece "Ten trouble spots you aren't already worried about." Obviously they underestimate my capacity for worry; I have plenty to go around, and at least some of these have been on my radar for some time.
Their criteria, obviously, are a bit broader than just epic loss of life, which is what I focused on: their numbers 9 and 10, while causing huge economic disruption, probably wouldn't kill too many people.
Also, Wired is including manmade as well as natural disasters: an Indian Point accident is more likely to be due to humans, one way or another, than to nature.
Still it's an interesting list. The big 3 natural disasters (the Yellowstone eruption, Missouri earthquake, and East Coast tsunami), along with an SF or LA earthquake (omitted, I guess because they're too obvious), would certainly be cataclysmic events.
I went to a talk at the New York Public Library a few weeks ago by Simon Winchester, author of a great book about Krakatoa [Amazon], and a new one on the 1906 SF earthquake that sounds totally worth reading. His rather contentious view is basically that Americans build cities in kind of dumb places because as a young country we're not really mature enough to know better. I'd say it's less to do with immaturity than incurable optimism. Which still doesn't mean its sensible.
Final note, the East Coast tsunami scenario came to my attention last summer, I think. I did some reading about it, and basically there's no certainty whatsoever just how big a tsunami would be generated if La Palma did collapse. It could be as little as 10 feet or so by the time it reaches our shores. But then again, the Yellowstone eruption could just be a pretty light show, too.
