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.
I also thought of St.Louis. This city has a history of violent tornadoes, could you imagine one of those long track EF4s or EF5s making a direct hit on the city? Then we are squeezed between these rivers that showed what they can do in 1993 when we were flooded. The worst I fear would be a major earthquake from New Madrid, unlike people in California, Missourians wouldn't have a clue what to do and like the other poster stated, some of these buildings are over a hundred years old and nothing has been built with earthquakes in mind.
St. Louis has less of a damage risk from a new Madrid quake than Memphis. It has the same risk as Nashville, Louisville, and Little Rock. Missouri schools in the area have been teaching kids about earthquake safety for at least 20 years. Anything build in the last 20 years has had to meet earthquake standards and older structures have been reinforced.
That said, if another new Madrid quake hit of the magnitude of the 1811 quake, you will need to add the risk to a whole lot of cities. That one woke up people in New York City.
Quote:
could you imagine one of those long track EF4s or EF5s making a direct hit on the city?
don't need to image, look up St. Louis – East St. Louis tornado. Went straight down the core of the city, right over where the arch now stands (it wasn't there at the time), and then jumped to East St Louis. It is ranked as one of the worst tornado in US history.
I say Houston. As bad as it was, if Hurricane Ike's eye had hit 50 miles further west the storm surge would have gone up the Ship Channel and taken out downtown, the port, and all of the southeast quadrant of the city. Rainfall to the west of Houston, such as from a storm like Tropical Storm Alicia, would have overflowed the Addicks and Barker reservoirs and overflowed the entire Buffalo Bayou watershed - again including downtown and the Port. Throw in subsidence along the coast (always occurring) and rising sea levels. It's happened before, its going to happen again, but with more people and structures affected. The only question is when.
People with little knowledge of storms will quickly say New Orleans because of Katrina. New Orleans was just unprepared with a prehistoric levee system when Katrina hit and honestly New Orleans is not as prone to hurricanes as East Florida. Katrina was an average storm compared to Andrew. I don't understand how this thread was started without Florida being in the polls.
I say Houston. As bad as it was, if Hurricane Ike's eye had hit 50 miles further west the storm surge would have gone up the Ship Channel and taken out downtown, the port, and all of the southeast quadrant of the city. Rainfall to the west of Houston, such as from a storm like Tropical Storm Alicia, would have overflowed the Addicks and Barker reservoirs and overflowed the entire Buffalo Bayou watershed - again including downtown and the Port. Throw in subsidence along the coast (always occurring) and rising sea levels. It's happened before, its going to happen again, but with more people and structures affected. The only question is when.
I think you need to stick to Rocket Science because meteorology is not your forte. If hurricane Ike had hit 50 miles further west that would have put the eye on shore at Freeport. This would have been bad news for Freeport and Galveston Island which would then been on the dirty side of the storm, but to suggest that would have sent storm surge all the way into downtown Houston is ridicules. A 20 foot storm surge cannot climb a 55 foot grade. There are maps that show where the worse case storm surges would flood, if you are interested in finding out facts, instead of fantasy, go look them up sometime.
If we just look at hurricane risk both New Orleans and Miami (which of course the OP left off the list) are at much greater risk than Houston. Not only because of the chances of being hit by a major hurricane are much greater in both those locations than Houston , but also those locations are at lower elevation and closer to the coast.
I say Houston. As bad as it was, if Hurricane Ike's eye had hit 50 miles further west the storm surge would have gone up the Ship Channel and taken out downtown, the port, and all of the southeast quadrant of the city. ....
I agree. And with all that gasoline and oil, things could get ugly.
RocketSci[/b];34789652]I say Houston. As bad as it was, if Hurricane Ike's eye had hit 50 miles further west the storm surge would have gone up the Ship Channel and taken out downtown, the port, and all of the southeast quadrant of the city. Rainfall to the west of Houston, such as from a storm like Tropical Storm Alicia, would have overflowed the Addicks and Barker reservoirs and overflowed the entire Buffalo Bayou watershed - again including downtown and the Port. Throw in subsidence along the coast (always occurring) and rising sea levels. It's happened before, its going to happen again, but with more people and structures affected. The only question is when.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkSide
I agree. And with all that gasoline and oil, things could get ugly.
People with little knowledge of storms will quickly say New Orleans because of Katrina. New Orleans was just unprepared with a prehistoric levee system when Katrina hit and honestly New Orleans is not as prone to hurricanes as East Florida. Katrina was an average storm compared to Andrew. I don't understand how this thread was started without Florida being in the polls.
Thanks for speaking facts, I can tell you have knowledge reagrding this topic. I'm from New Orleans and since Katrina hit people will quickly say New Orleans is in the MOST danger, I'm suprised New Orleans is not winning this poll. But just as you have stated New Orleans was just flat out unprepared and those levees were in VERY bad shape. Now are we vulnerable sure we are but due to billions of dollars poured in for a GOOD levee system, pumping stations and flood gates/walls New Orleans is in MUCH better shape pre Katrina. Now the biggest task to further protect is to rebuild the coast which they say is losing a football field every hour. Amazing. Also as you stated how can a Florida city especially Miami not be on this list? Truth be told they are more at risk than New Orleans. Good post
It was a great idea building a city below sea level, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Are you being sarcastic?
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.
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.
Ike would have destroyed "beautiful West Houston"
