Thanks for the various comments. I didn't start this thread ... but I kinda' hijacked the topic to the discussion of possible disasters in West Coast cities in America.

If you look at the spread of options for risks - you can see why this is a difficult problem for FEMA. Taking Los Angeles as an example, an optimistic scenario might lead to casuatlies in the hundreds or low thousands (assuming that most buildings do have capabilities to meet seismic vibrations from a quake). A moderate-risk scenario might involve casualties in the tens of thousands. And a worst-case scenario (major firestorm) could involve casualties in the hundreds of thousands. How is FEMA supposed to cope with this kind of spread in risks?? That's a pretty tough assignment, and so is the plan for dealing with the after-effects.

Still, I think there are some things that could be done - that aren't necessarily being done right now. I will probably post these ideas in a separate thread soon.

Pete2