What do you think should be done so that natural disasters not kill people or do any damage to the country?
What do you think the president should do to avoid natural disasters to coast us billions of dollars?

Fatalities is the hard one. There will always be a percentage of the population that won't take basic precautions or waits until the last minute to do so.

Property on the other hand is relatively easy. Whenever a disaster destroys a significant portion of the area (i.e. Hurricanes Andrew, Katrina, & Harvey) the local building code needs to be revised.

Another option would be to change Federal flood insurance to be good for one unmodified rebuild. If they don't take steps to prevent damage from the next one, they don't get rebuilt again.

Don't build significant facilities in flood plains. Alter building codes to lessen the adverse impacts of development (permeable landscaping, etc)

Preparations begin with the individual and the family. They build up through the local community and the state, then the national level. This is common sense and it is encoded in law. The federal level can only act at the request of the governor of the state.

Planning and education are key. You can't avoid natural disasters, but you can mitigate the consequences. This is done most effectively at the lowest level possible, with the other levels contributing resources as needed, usually after the fact.

If the individual and the household are prepared, they are not in need of federal assistance, local rescue or humanitarian help. If well prepared they can help those around them, further lessening the need for outside assistance.

Individual and community preparation can also reduce the costs of recovery after a disaster. If you prepare your dwelling to the extent possible, the repair costs are reduced. If you do not live in a flood zone, you will not get flooded. Earthquakes and tornadoes are a bit more problematic as they are less predictable, but the effects of even these can be mitigated to an extent with proper construction in areas where these are a threat.

If you get you and your family out in time, you do not need to experience rescue or medical expenses, or funeral expenses for that matter.

Placing the onus of preparation on the president, any president (for they all have had to deal with these issues) is the wrong mindset.

Don't build in danger zones or change dangerzones in to safe zones.

The single biggest thing the government could do to mitigate storm damage would be to stop writing new National Flood Insurance Plan policies. People would stop being incented to build in places that are getting flooded.

Harvey and Irma got me thinking: why do people live in disaster-prone areas? Why aren't we preparing better? I read two articles that I thought were interesting, and I'm sharing them below, with the particularly relevant excerpts.

Why don't we prepare better? In short, voters care about relief, but not about preparedness, according to this article entitled "Disaster politics gets in the way of disaster preparedness":



https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/disaster-politics-can-get-in-the-way-of-disaster-preparedness/

The next piece is an op-ed ("Florida, a fragile kind of paradise" by Jeff Goodell).



http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/10/opinions/f...dell/index.html

Some might consider it a benefit that, if the infrastructure is rebuilt every thirty years or so, you won't have to bother with those troublesome historic preservationists trying to preserve all that old stuff and get it on the National Register of Historic Places...

For the record, I am one of those guys - let's hear it for old things!

My community takes the approach of preparing citizens for our most probable Big Deal Disaster(earthquakes) through training under the CERT umbrella. The fire captain who taught my course termed it "catch and release". Six weeks of training, a final practical exam, and a backpack of essentials. When the BDD strikes, takecare of yourself first, then your family, then start looking for situations where you can help. Your backpack and hard hat will indicate that you know something....

I have augmented the supplies and gear in the CERT pack and it is stored in a hopefully accessible spot, come the BDD. As we have seen in Houston, immediate assistance will be rendered by those closest at hand. Highly trained first responders can't be everywhere at once.

This is the top, #1 thing that has to happen. So long as people are allowed to build in flood plains and buy insurance for a pittance we will keep building in flood plains. We need to completely remove the incentive to do this by pegging their premium to the actual risk and losses. About 50% of the money paid out goes to about 3% of homes that are continually being rebuilt. I recall one home that's been completely destroyed and rebuilt by insurance 18 times! Stop building in foolish places!

Next we have to fortify coastal areas and improve building codes.

Lastly we have to put everything we have into efforts to curb anthropogenic climate change. It's going to keep getting worse and worse if we maintain the present course.

I forgot a pretty obvious and useful one- more community shelters. It would cost some money of course but there really should be enough elevated concrete shelters available for the entire population of a community, ideal distributed geographically to make them easily accessible to everyone including the elderly and those with no means of transportation besides hoofing it.

I doubt that loss of life and property in hurricanes or other disasters can ever be completely eliminated, losses could however be much reduced in a number of ways.

In areas prone to flooding, require that all new construction be of at least two floors.
In areas of extreme risk prohibit new construction entirely, unless it can be shown that the structure is flood proof. Require that all new construction in relevant areas be hurricane proof.

And whilst hurricanes are the present concern, let us not overlook other disasters.
In areas prone to wild fire, all new construction to be fire resistant.Tighten up building codes for earthquake resistance.

In areas were cold weather is a danger, require that all new homes have an off grid means of cooking and heating part of the home, such as a stove or fireplace.

There is a lot that national and local government can do to prohibit building that is unsuited to the risks of the area, whether the risks be fire, flood, cold, or other.

However individuals also need to do more in the way of personal preps. Look at the crowds, some of them panicking, seeking to buy water at the least minute. It would be more sensible to always keep a stock of water, food, fuel, batteries and so on, rather than to panic buy at the least minute.
If you choose to live in a low lying area, buy a boat.
If you choose to live in an area of high fire risk, make your home as fire resistant as possible.

Very true! Life will always have risks and dangers. Until we come up with the 'weather dissipation grid' from Star Trek TNG there will always be tornados, blizzards, etc. Common sense and proper building types can mitigate a lot of dangers but probably not eliminate them entirely.

Apropos of nothing, life would be a lot safer if most homes were monolithic concrete domes. They are virtually fireproof and supposedly can withstand a direct hit by an F4/F5 tornado. If homes were built this way about the only risk would be flooding.

Don't build in flood plains.
Don't build where there are earthquakes.
Don't build where there are wild fires.
Don't build where there are targets for terrorists.
Don't build near giant caldera's like yellowstone.
Don't build where droughts and heat extremes are common.
Don't build near blizzard country.
Stay away from places where ticks and mosquitos carry disease.
Avoid rural areas where medical care is distant.
Avoid urban areas where crime is high.

And certainly don't pay for other people's mistake to do so.

Oh, and in case you think the midwest might be okay, don't forget tornados.

"And certainly don't pay for other people's mistake to do so."

yes, exactly right. that's the crunch - right there.

America has been unable to return to sensible policies based on common sense,. We can't get there until the country stops the Federal handouts and the massive insurance payouts.

If you look back at previous generations .e.g. the Americans who lived during the years 1900-1950, they were a very practical and highly resourceful people. Because they HAD to be. There was no other option. Therefore, that old economy was based on real work, and sensible outcomes for people who avoided risks.

America is having enormous problems because of greed - a failure to return to this COMMON SENSE SIMPLE option. The country will literally go bankrupt if we don't.

ONE PRACTICAL OPTION
that would move us in the right direction - if Fed funds only pay for part of the damages. For example, if Federal funds only cover 30% of losses, then home owners and businesses must pick up the difference. That would put an end to the "financial racket" very quickly.

I'm not sure if this is sincere or meant as a joke and certainly not all of the suggestions are plausible. Some are not even possible; for instance as Earth warms there probably won't be any places to live where there aren't droughts and high temps, that will just be the new normal. Nor are all of the listed items particularly dangerous. For example blizzards can occur almost everywhere in the US and Canada so not living there is problematic unless we abandon North America. And while blizzards can and do result in deaths nearly all of those could be prevented by proper preparation. Lastly you can't control what a terrorist decides to target so that doesn't even make logical sense.

Of course some of the list is pretty spot-on. It's not wise to build on an active volcano. It's not smart to build on a site where there have been 18 floods bad enough to destroy your home in 50 years. Wildfires- that's an interesting one. I think that proper forestry management can mitigate the risk of the kind of out-of-control fires we see now, but certainly climate change is making the task more difficult. It might be wise to have some regulations concerning how and where to build and what steps must be taken (eg clear cut zones around residential areas, etc).

So, where exactly do we build? The west coast is on the Ring of Fire, the east coast and gulf coasts are prone to hurricanes, and everything in between is subject to blizzards, heat waves, flooding, or tornadoes.

You can build to a 50 year storm, good until you get hit with a 200 year storm. You can build to a 200 year storm, but good luck finding enough people who can afford to live in an area with a 200 year infrastructure.

If it gets knocked down, you build it better. You update the building codes, and make sure they're enforced (Northridge and Ismit quakes). And, you make sure the insured pool is large enough to tolerate regional disasters.

Don't forget meteors. Don't live somewhere a meteor might hit.

Everywhere on planet Earth there are potential hazards, either natural or man made. Learn them and prepare/take precautions, which is what we are attempting to accomplish on ETS. The more knowledgeable you are concerning the hazard profile of your surroundings, the better you can prepare for problems.

I must say that I am glad for all the first aid/emergency services training I have received over the years. I have been able to apply it to perfect strangers, good friends, members of my immediate family, and myself. That goes as well for all the safety training I have endured - it actually did cause me to behave in ways that were better. I took risks from time to time, but I was usually aware of the costs and rewards involved.

This being the 11th of September, we all realize that trouble can rear its head even in what one would consider to be very safe environments. The best one can do is prepare for life's little glitches, and endeavor to act honorably and appropriately when the bell rings

In other words, stay away from Mona Island.

Jeanette Isabelle

At some point, one has to realize that there are very bad things that can happen that you can control and/or prepare for, and very bad things that can happen that you can't control and/or prepare for. At the end of the day, prepare for what you can, and those things you can't control and prepare for---simply stop worrying, as it is a useless waste of energy and will make your life miserable. Wisdom is knowing the difference between the two.

As Hikermor said, the purpose of this forum is preparation. In any area or situation you can understand the threat and mitigate it by being prepared. Whether it is through choice of where to construct a house, how to construct it, what to store in it, how to get out of it, preparing is possible and advisable for all situation. Except major asteroid impact, that one is a doozy.

Why not prepare for a meteor?

Jeanette Isabelle

Well said, sir.

Preppers are at their best when they are reaching out to help other, less prepared people. Developing policy to reduce the impact of natural disasters is beyond the scope of this forum, and the policy makers are doing a pretty good job already: more people die of suicide in one year than have been killed in natural disasters in the past century:
Suicides
Natural disasters

We have lots of agencies working to mitigate disasters, generating lots of unintended consequences. Our role is to be the person who has the FAK and the energy bar when someone else is hurt and hungry.

Jeanette

NASA has been very conscientious in looking for large meteorites - the kind shown in the Bruce Willis movie Armageddon. There are no space rocks close to Earth that are likely to surprise us in this way .. .real planet killers. Hopefully if one is discovered, there will be enough time to find a way to destroy it i.e. put out a call for real Bruce Willis volunteers :-) This type of scenario is not something that could happen "next week" or "next year". There would be a lot of time before the impact.

Smaller space rocks are a threat. It's just a game of rolling the dice. I studied this in detail about 10-15 years ago. We do not have a good map of all the smaller rocks. I am talking about rocks that are about the size of 50-100% of the length of a football field. These rocks will not destroy Earth, but they could "nuke" a whole city. However, since planet Earth is 70% water, the chances are pretty good they will hit the ocean. That will create a whopping big tidal wave for any country near the impact point. You can bet, though, that the military would try to destroy an approaching space meterorite with rocket - and the chances are probably good for some reduction in risk (not perfect).

So ... really we just worry about the disasters near us.
I thought that Floridians handled Irma really well. I hope that Californians (or Oregonions) will handle the next major quake just as calmly ... although I have some doubts about some people in L.A. :-) Anyway, we can only worry about our own neighborhood.

GEEZER IN CHIEF said ...
"This being the 11th of September, we all realize that trouble can rear its head even in what one would consider to be very safe environments. The best one can do is prepare for life's little glitches, and endeavor to act honorably and appropriately when the bell rings."

Amen to that!

You can not prepare for a direct hit by a meteor, except by living in a deep shelter all the time.
A near miss is of little consequence for a small meteor, one landed in Russia relatively recently without any very serious consequences.
As for a large meteor or an asteroid, impact by such could have widespread results in terms of damage to infrastructure and utilities. I am not aware of any SPECIFIC preps for such an event, but general disaster preps would be helpful.

Likewise aside from general preps there's no way to predict months and years ahead of time where an metorite/astroid could strike, especially a small one that may not even have been detected. For example there was no advance warning of the Russian impact captured on so many dash cams. It simply wasn't seen, perhaps not large enough to detect, until it began to burn in the atmosphere.

Well I would build a home or business in most of those locations,provided that the structure was designed for the foreseeable hazards of the area.

Flood plain----yes provided that the structure was elevated above the worst foreseeable flood level.
Earthquake area-----certainly provided that the building exceeded building code requirements for earthquake resistance.
Wild fire risk area-----maybe if of fire resisting construction and with fire fighting equipment to hand.
Terrorist attack risk-----probably unless the risk was IMO extreme, terrorists could strike almost anywhere.
In or near a caldera such as Yellowstone------Avoid as no reliable defence against that sort of thing.
Drought or heatwave risk area-----possibly with proper precautions such as designing for water storage and minimising the need for cooling. However I dislike the heat and prefer cold conditions to hot.
Blizzard risk area----yes with suitable construction to resist wind and snow loading, and off grid heating, cooking and lighting arrangements.
Tick and mosquito risk----probably avoid, defence is harder than it sounds.
Rural areas---fine despite being remote from healthcare etc, learn first aid, keep a stock of medical supplies, seek telephone or radio advice in an emergency.
Urban areas----Avoid, but NOT due to "everyday crime" more a fear that cities could quickly become killing zones in any major TEOTWAWKI situation.

As well as general preps, I would of course keep large stocks of supplies specific to the local risks, fuel, blankets and warm clothing in cold places for example.

A meteor landing on or near Mona Island will trigger a 200' to 400' tsunami and a 12 earthquake. General preps will work.


On or near Mona Island. I don't know when.

Jeanette Isabelle

Being Dutch; we had a major flooding in 1953. Decide we didn't want or accept that. Build up the water defenses. There was a flood danger in 1995, but nothing failed. Upgrade the system, to make it even better.

Did decide to buy an apartment on the 3rd and 4th flood, instead of on the ground level. Just in case. Failure rating of the sea defense around me was 1 in 100.000 years. (they change the rating system to something else now)