U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which City is most Likely to be Destroyed by Natural Disaster, or Man-made Disaster
New York 14 12.73%
Los Angeles 43 39.09%
Chicago 2 1.82%
Houston 7 6.36%
Philadelphia 1 0.91%
Phoenix 6 5.45%
San Antonio 1 0.91%
San Diego 3 2.73%
Dallas 0 0%
San Jose 3 2.73%
Boston 0 0%
Fresno 2 1.82%
Oklahoma City 21 19.09%
Minneapolis 2 1.82%
New Orleans 34 30.91%
Tyler, Tx 3 2.73%
Denver 1 0.91%
San Francisco 32 29.09%
Las Vegas 3 2.73%
Hawaii 9 8.18%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 110. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-23-2014, 08:35 AM
 
1,981 posts, read 3,038,122 times
Reputation: 1564

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RadicalAtheist View Post
In this thread some weirdo thinks a decade and a half is a significant measurement of time in regards to the topic.
Yes, like those lying climate "scientists" and their fraudulent hockey stick predicting doom by 2008.....

The same climate "scientists" who ignore millions of years of geologic climate data.....


Who's the weirdo? You are no atheist if you believe in the religion of global warming.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-23-2014, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Houston TX
107 posts, read 111,241 times
Reputation: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkSide View Post
I'm curious to know Statistically,
and by Personal Opinion, which city is most likely to have
a Catastrophic Disaster.

Or which is most likely to have the MOST disasters;
common disasters would include, but not be limited to :

Gas Explosion(s), Earth Quake, Typhoon or Hurricane,
Tornado, RIOTS, Flood, Nuclear Reactor Meltdown,
Volcano Eruption, Nuclear Strike, Dam Breaking,
Insect Attack, Martian Invasion, Tidal Wave/Sunami,
Lightning Bolts, FIRE!, or simply ... GOD striking it down.


Other factors would include Geographical situation of the city,
and its resources.

What is your opinion, and which City is at most risk?

If your city is not on here, just state that city and give
your reason it is the most Dangerous and at-risk.
I'm sure this had probably already been said but you forget to include Miami. I know we all remember Hurricane Andrew.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 11:16 PM
 
44,543 posts, read 43,091,728 times
Reputation: 14373
No one has mentioned Charleston,SC.

-Earthquakes(Charleston had a severe one a long time ago)
-Hurricanes(Hurricane Hugo)
-Lightning(fires get started that way)
-Flooding(low-lying areas)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 11:31 PM
 
Location: Dublin, CA
19 posts, read 20,603 times
Reputation: 15
San Francisco and Los Angeles are prone to natural disasters, such as earthquakes. However, the area of Los Angeles is severely affected if there will be an el nino this year, along with the strong Santa Ana winds it has. New Orleans may subject natural disasters due to hurricanes, but more importantly, global warming. With sea levels on the rise and the elevation of many buildings so low, New Orleans faces a very high risk of being submerged under the sea within the next few decades.

Cities like Oklahoma City face severe tornado warnings in the spring-summer time, and is in the path of destruction during tornado season. Perhaps this is not a very good place to live if you wish to live a quiet life.

Perhaps New York City is well-suited for a man-made disaster, such as a terrorist attack or any other type of accident. With New York's center for America's economy and the vast number of skyscrapers in NYC, any disaster would be catastrophic, especially if it was in Midtown or Lower Manhattan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 11:38 PM
 
Location: Houston
6,846 posts, read 12,392,242 times
Reputation: 5771
Quote:
Originally Posted by RocketSci View Post
You have me confused with someone you are feuding with. I am truly trying to give a valid response to the poll.

Regarding "disaster" cities, I exclude most tornado cities as the damages tend to be more localized, I exclude earthquake cities as although they can be large and disruptive, the most prone areas are the most prepared and therefore the potential loss of life is minimized. Other disasters (man-made, etc) are random, so I consider the effects contained and low (relative to an entire community). The most likely disaster scenarios are the result of flooding, either due to rainfall, tropical systems, system failures (dams, levees), or all of the above.

Hurricanes and Tropical storms are the greatest periodic natural risks for causing flooding, so in looking at all of the cities along the Gulf and East Coast, Florida, Texas, and Louisiana cities all vie for the most likely. I could have picked New Orleans due to its location below sea level, but the population growth and distribution of people represents a threat from both storm surge in the Southeast sections up thru the Ship Channel and rainfall upstream. A single system can cause both. SE Texas and Louisiana are subject to similar topography and weather conditions, but the population is in the Houston area.

In the years I have lived in Houston, in different parts of town: my place of business has had its roof peeled back like a sardine can (NW Houston), stayed at friend's apartment where water rose into living room (SW Houston), and I had no electricity for a week (Alicia); I had water up to my weep holes at my home and had to dig a hasty drainage ditch to drain my yard but lucked out before home flooded (Clear Lake) (Chantal); had a car flooded out on my own street (Clear Lake)(unnamed tropical system); had friends' homes flooded twice in one week (Friendswood) (Allison); had backyard tree uprooted, fences down, electricity out, some home damage (Montrose), one co-worker's home in literally swept away (Bolivar), another co-worker's home gutted by surge and waves (Shore Acres) (Ike); and evacuated my family at least 2 or 3 times from home (Gilbert, Rita, others I don't remember).

Yet I would still rather live in Houston than Dallas. Maybe I should have used the possibility of disaster in my calculations, but I have about as much fondness for Dallas as Mrs. Kennedy, but I at least now no longer live in a flood or storm surge zone.
All this tells me is that you have very bad luck. I've lived in Houston over 25 years and haven't experienced any damage from any storms. I lost electricity for a few days following Ike. But that's it.

I have a feeling that no matter what city you live in you would be a victim.

Also that business you worked at in NW Houston must have the worst quality building material being used. How the heck has it had it's roof peeled off twice? Is the roof made of cardboard?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 11:49 PM
 
1,462 posts, read 1,504,095 times
Reputation: 1019
As a property claims adjuster at the time working in Houston / Galveston during Ike, despite its anticipated force being significantly reduced prior to landfall, I saw quite a bit of damage and terribly sad stories

IMO hurricanes (and water related events) are more of a threat than earthquakes, in the US.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2014, 01:33 AM
 
Location: Aurora, Colorado
5,371 posts, read 7,657,321 times
Reputation: 4324
I don't know why LA has more votes than SF. Isn't SF more in danger of earthquakes and closer to the fault line?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2014, 01:43 AM
 
1,462 posts, read 1,504,095 times
Reputation: 1019
List of earthquakes in California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2014, 01:49 AM
 
Location: West Hollywood
2,201 posts, read 4,000,343 times
Reputation: 1704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mezter View Post
I don't know why LA has more votes than SF. Isn't SF more in danger of earthquakes and closer to the fault line?
I believe SoCal is more at risk for a "big one" than Nor Cal is.....

You'd be surprised how inadequate much of the housing built from the 60s - 80s in LA is for a quake.... so many apartments are built on thin little pillars to allow for parking below.

The best buildings in LA are surprisingly the much older ones, from the late 1800s to the 1950s, and then of course from the late 90s to now - built after the devastating 1994 quake.

Nobody really knows the extent of the damage that will occur during the next "Big One". It's one of the most terrifying aspects of earthquakes. Simply waiting and having no control over what happens.

LA needs to input a Mexico City like early earthquake warning system.

That said, Oklahoma City, LA, San Francisco, New Orleans, and Miami are almost all neck and neck in my book for disasters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2014, 07:28 AM
 
44,543 posts, read 43,091,728 times
Reputation: 14373
Anchorage, Alaska is a big one to look at.
-A severe earthquake has already happened there, and could happen again.
-With the earthquakes, chances for a tsunami
-Risks for flooding
-
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top