Tornado in Moore: The Dangers of Collective Amnesia
Published in L'Actualité
(Canada) on 21 May 2013
by Valérie Borde (link to original)
(Canada) on 21 May 2013
by Valérie Borde (link to original)
Translated from
by Teresa Sorbera.
Edited by Laurence Bouvard
.
The record-breaking intensity of the tornado that hit Moore, Okla. could have claimed many fewer victims had the small, Midwestern town been better prepared for this type of extreme weather event.
As American writers Howard Kunreuther and Michael Useem explain in the first-rate book “Learning from Catastrophes: Strategies for Reaction and Response,” we continue to make the same mistakes by systematically ignoring the risk of extreme weather events, even though the number of inhabitants living in high-risk areas continues to rise.
This was the case with the devastating tornado which struck May 20 and was the case with Hurricane Katrina.
It’s not a question of money — it’s about short-sighted risk management policies and collective amnesia. The United States has the means to prevent such catastrophes, and the cost of prevention is without doubt lower than the enormous costs of recurring catastrophes.
Not to mention the lives saved.
In 1970, the Midwestern town of Moore, located in the eye of Tornado Alley where tornadoes form every year during this period, had a population of 18,000 inhabitants. Today, Moore has a population of more than 55,000 inhabitants.
Yet it’s in this same town that the most violent tornado in history destroyed more than 1,000 buildings in 1999.
Despite the population increase, Moore has made little improvement in protecting its inhabitants in the case of a tornado emergency.
According to The New York Times’ excellent blog "Dot Earth,” the state of Oklahoma’s building code still does not require the construction of storm shelters, a structure which researchers have long since proved are very effective in tornado protection. Yet a couple thousand dollars per building would be enough to render buildings completely tornado-resistant, even when winds strike a building at more than 250 mph.
At least we could definitely make certain key buildings, like schools, tornado-resistant.
Since last year, Oklahoma has offered $2,000 to property owners who wish to make their buildings tornado-resistant, but the funds are allotted by a lottery system and are certainly not sufficient to meet the demand for conversion.
Today Oklahoma is mourning its dead … until next time. Are we doing any better in Quebec to protect ourselves against catastrophes? I have my doubts.
In June 2011, floods ravaged the Montérégie region located in Richelieu Valley. Around 3,000 homes were flooded.
The Executive Council of the Government of Quebec approved reconstruction in the flood disaster zones, going against the advice of its civil servants and numerous experts. The province of Quebec also chose to ignore its 2005 Protection Policy for Lakeshores, Riverbanks, Littoral Zones and Floodplains.
The International Joint Commission is developing a plan of study aimed at reducing the risk of flooding. It will present its first results in three years at the earliest.
How long will it be before concrete measures are put into place?
As American writers Howard Kunreuther and Michael Useem explain in the first-rate book “Learning from Catastrophes: Strategies for Reaction and Response,” we continue to make the same mistakes by systematically ignoring the risk of extreme weather events, even though the number of inhabitants living in high-risk areas continues to rise.
This was the case with the devastating tornado which struck May 20 and was the case with Hurricane Katrina.
It’s not a question of money — it’s about short-sighted risk management policies and collective amnesia. The United States has the means to prevent such catastrophes, and the cost of prevention is without doubt lower than the enormous costs of recurring catastrophes.
Not to mention the lives saved.
In 1970, the Midwestern town of Moore, located in the eye of Tornado Alley where tornadoes form every year during this period, had a population of 18,000 inhabitants. Today, Moore has a population of more than 55,000 inhabitants.
Yet it’s in this same town that the most violent tornado in history destroyed more than 1,000 buildings in 1999.
Despite the population increase, Moore has made little improvement in protecting its inhabitants in the case of a tornado emergency.
According to The New York Times’ excellent blog "Dot Earth,” the state of Oklahoma’s building code still does not require the construction of storm shelters, a structure which researchers have long since proved are very effective in tornado protection. Yet a couple thousand dollars per building would be enough to render buildings completely tornado-resistant, even when winds strike a building at more than 250 mph.
At least we could definitely make certain key buildings, like schools, tornado-resistant.
Since last year, Oklahoma has offered $2,000 to property owners who wish to make their buildings tornado-resistant, but the funds are allotted by a lottery system and are certainly not sufficient to meet the demand for conversion.
Today Oklahoma is mourning its dead … until next time. Are we doing any better in Quebec to protect ourselves against catastrophes? I have my doubts.
In June 2011, floods ravaged the Montérégie region located in Richelieu Valley. Around 3,000 homes were flooded.
The Executive Council of the Government of Quebec approved reconstruction in the flood disaster zones, going against the advice of its civil servants and numerous experts. The province of Quebec also chose to ignore its 2005 Protection Policy for Lakeshores, Riverbanks, Littoral Zones and Floodplains.
The International Joint Commission is developing a plan of study aimed at reducing the risk of flooding. It will present its first results in three years at the earliest.
How long will it be before concrete measures are put into place?