Re: My Hurricane Katrina Predictions

Robert J. Kolker wrote:
> VoiceOfReason wrote:
> > Folks, this is not good.
> >
> > The Federal Emergency Management Agency has long considered the
> > scenario of New Orleans with a Cat 5 storm as having the greatest
> > likelihood of massive loss of life than any other forseeable natural
> > disaster in the US.
>
> A magnitude 8 or 9 earthquake with epicenter in downtown LA would be
> worse. The conditions for such a disaster exist derived from the fault
> structure is is beneath LA. Who in their right minds would build such a
> big city where there is not enough water on top of a geological fault?

No, VoR has it right. Under the proper circumstances, that sort of
storm could conceivably travel straight up the Mississippi, using the
warm water to stay strong. It would devastate several major cities
along the route. It could conceivably (although this is unlikely)
follow the Ohio River Valley to Pittsburgh, and migrate to the East
Coast- possibly hitting everything from Washington to Boston.

What are the chances of this? When I read about it, the NWS termed it a
"thousand-year storm", meaning it might happen once in that time span.
But it could lay waste to a fair portion of the USA if it came to be.

As bad as a mag 9 quake in LA or San Francisco would be, the damage
would still be relatively confined. I would be more worried about a
tsunami from that undersea shelf off the Azores, to be honest.

Chris



>
>
>
> > With Katrina as a Cat 5 storm making a beeline for
> > the Mississippi Delta, this is "The Perfect Storm" revisited. The only
> > difference is that this one will be in a highly populated area that is
> > very susceptible to even moderate flooding.
>
> The potential for catastrophe is there. We will know just how bad, bad
> is in a day or two.
>
> Bob Kolker

.

Relevant Pages
Loading