Safest state(s) as far as natural disasters (tornado, earthquake)

[IShootNikon]

I heard/read a report a few years back that the Pacific NW was the safest state to live in if you don't want to die from natural disasters. That big mudslide not withstanding they really don't get natural disasters.

Not much lightning, mudslides, hurricanes, tornadoes, HEAVY rain, snow, earthquakes, high heat, hail. You get the drift.

In Colorado hail and lightning are the two biggest threats

[Bobloblawslawblog]

I live in the PNW. We have earthquakes, though not as frequently as California or Alaska... and we also have these sleeping monsters called "volcanoes". Large-scale eruptions are rare, but when they happen, it's pretty disastrous. I'm 50 years old, so I have vivid memories of the big 1980 Mt. St. Helens eruption. It covered the city of Spokane in a foot of ash.

We may not have natural disasters here as frequently as other parts of the country, but we DO have them.

[DubbleT]

Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed
Somewhere or other I believe there is also a map the gov't put together as the safest place to keep information and it includes the likelihood of man made disasters too. if I'm not mistaken.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Well, I never hear of natural disasters happening in Idaho. Or Utah. I guess people could get snowed in or freeze to death. Hmmmmm...

New Mexico? Not too hot, not too cold?

Any place will have some weather. Where people could freeze to death or get over-heated. I think your list of disasters is too broad, if you're going to include rain and heat, for instance. And mudslides aren't a regional thing, although you kind of have to have hills at least. But, take a hill, and alot of rain, and poor land management = mudslide. That can happen anywhere there is a hill and some rain and some bad land management (like clear cutting trees).

Then there are flash floods that can happen in many areas...

If you just include real disasters like earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunamis, that kind of thing, your list of options of safe places will be longer.

[IShootNikon]

Originally Posted by DubbleT

Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed
Somewhere or other I believe there is also a map the gov't put together as the safest place to keep information and it includes the likelihood of man made disasters too. if I'm not mistaken.

Well that link supports my claim. Top places are in PNW with Grand Junction CO sandwiched in between

[Bobloblawslawblog]

Originally Posted by IShootNikon

Well that link supports my claim. Top places are in PNW with Grand Junction CO sandwiched in between

Notice how in that chart, the range of earthquake risk runs right up the West coast into Oregon and Washington? Not too long ago, there was a 6-point quake in the city of Seattle, and they're expecting bigger ones than that in the near future. Then there's the volcano factor I mentioned earlier. Imagine an entire metropolitan area buried under a foot of ash. That happened in my lifetime, and there's a good chance it could happen again in my lifetime. Even worse if Mount Rainier blows it's top. St. Helens isn't the only active volcano up here.

We also get the occasional tsunami on the coast, but very few people live on the actual Pacific coast up here, so it doesn't get much news coverage.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

I followed the link to the original article which has a better explanation of the colors, etc.:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...safe.html?_r=0

Unfortunately, the places with the lowest risk for natural disasters, also have the highest risk for depression due to terrible weather.

[Bobloblawslawblog]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

I followed the link to the original article which has a better explanation of the colors, etc.:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...safe.html?_r=0

Unfortunately, the places with the lowest risk for natural disasters, also have the highest risk for depression due to terrible weather.

I consider tornadoes, hurricanes, severe supercell thunderstorms, dust storms, blazing heat and humidity to be FAR more "terrible" weather than a few months of grey drizzle, but that's me. I'll take this so-called "depressing" weather over panic-inducing, extreme anxiety weather so many other parts of the country get.

[ohhwanderlust]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

I followed the link to the original article which has a better explanation of the colors, etc.:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...safe.html?_r=0

Unfortunately, the places with the lowest risk for natural disasters, also have the highest risk for depression due to terrible weather.

Lol yeah. I think overall, the US has a relatively volatile, harsh climate compared to other countries. The US seems prone to just about every natural disaster I can think of, and every form of extreme weather, with the exception of monsoons.

[cpg35223]

Hah. I live in Birmingham, Alabama, which is #8 on the List Of Doom.

I'm pretty certain that has a lot to do with the number of tornados that come rumbling through, but in my section of town, we never had had them. So there should be a sliding scale of disaster severity. After all, a Cat 5 hurricane has far more widespread damage than even a Cat 5 twister. Should they have the same weight in the rankings?

And while there's nary a tornado to be seen in LA or San Francisco, I'll gladly deal with tornadoes than the possibility of the Big One or a volcano blowing its top. There's ample evidence, for example, that Puget has experienced major seismic shocks prior to being settled. Meanwhile, if you just pay attention to the weather forecast, you know when a tornado is coming.