posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 09:20 AM
Mods: Please move this if you think it would fit better somewhere else, but I wasn't sure where to put it.
In light of the earthquake jitters of the past few days, I found this interesting.
I happened to catch this on the news at my folks a couple days ago, and it's been in the back of my mind wondering how it got that way, especially as
I live out here.
The Pew Charitable Trusts recently released its data analysis showing that for every $1 of federal funds spent on protecting against flood and
tornado damage, Kansas avoided $6.81 in potential recovery costs. Researchers drew from a previous study of federal disaster mitigation grants between
1993 and 2016.
So basically, this is saying that whatever Kansas spends to mitigate flood and tornado damage, they are incredibly efficient at it because when those
disasters do happen, they can avoid a substantial cost in the recovery. Missouri is almost as good at it.
The data shows Missouri trailed close behind, with each federal dollar saving $6.72, the Kansas News Service reported.
So I guess the question might be why these two states are so good at it while others that have to also deal with disasters aren't as good? It's not
like coastal states don't have their share of trouble: hurricanes that bring flooding and tornadoes, for example. Other states like Oklahoma and
Texas arguably have more resources (at least Texas) and have more tornadoes (Texas gets hurricanes and lots of flooding too).
My original thought was that tornadoes and floods were more frequent allowing the state to rebuild with the latest mitigation technologies zoned into
place and a fairly regular basis, and the frequency kept those disasters fresh in everyone's mind so fewer people got complacent and would rather
play the odds as might happen in an earthquake or even hurricane zone.
But this is even deeper than just building things disaster resistant. This has to be tied into how a state reacts and mobilizes to react to a disaster
too. I mean the quicker you get people back on their feet, the less you have to mitigate damage because they're handling their own lives at that
point. So there has to be something tied into how your infrastructure management systems are coordinated and put together. Maybe being largely rural
states has something to do with it?
And maybe being largely rural states has something to do with it in another sense too -- farmers can't wait to let someone else put them back on
their feet. Many have livestock that depends on them no matter what state their own lives are in, so they have to state putting their crap together
right away or they lose it all. So many communities will start organizing independent of government just because they can't afford to do
I don't know. It's just been an interesting thought exercise.