Map reveals best and worst places to live for natural disasters

Yahoo

5 days ago

Not all communities face disasters equally. Some are hit harder, recover slower, or are more vulnerable from the start. FEMA's Risk Map ranks every county and Census tract in the U.S. based on three key factors: how likely a natural disaster is, how socially vulnerable the population is, and how resilient the community might be in the aftermath.
The map factors in a wide range of natural hazards, including hurricanes, floods, drought, winter storms, extreme heat and cold, lightning, high winds, earthquakes, avalanches, volcanic activity, and more.
Worst places to live: California, Florida, and on the coast
Looking at the county version of the map, the worst areas to live are California, Florida, or anywhere on the U.S. coast, with a few exceptions. Most of Texas is moderate to high risk, but there are some pockets of low risk. The same goes for Washington, Oregon, and Nevada.
Switching to the Census tract view, which divides cities into many individual tracts, tells the story that most areas still have a mixed risk, with some areas safer than others.
Best places to live: New England and Ohio
Although West Virginia and Wyoming have no counties in a moderate or higher risk index, these states don't look as good when using the Census tract view.
Through that lens, most areas west of the Mississippi are mixed, but much of the Northeast quadrant of the country is lower risk, with exceptions on the coast and in some of the mountains. Vermont is the state with the smallest number of tracts in relatively low or low risk, and none are considered moderate.
Rhode Island, mainly because of its size, is another relatively low-risk state, with no moderate risk tracts. New Hampshire only had one moderate risk, and Ohio only had two. Massachusetts is mostly low risk, with a few moderate places, if you exclude Martha's Vineyard, which was high risk.
While most cities have some areas of risk, Pittsburgh is the lowest-risk major city, with only very low and relatively low risks in the metro area. Charlotte, North Carolina, also has no tracts with moderate or higher risk.
Climate change is making disasters worse, more common
Billion-dollar disasters are becoming more frequent due to climate change, according to Climate Central. In 2024, there was less than two weeks between disasters, compared to nearly two months in 1981.
Risk map may miss recent disasters, other info
Remember, this is a long-term index and takes into account all FEMA disaster declarations in history. It doesn't deduct points for, or may not even include, the most recent disasters, such as Hurricane Helene or the Texas floods. Counties affected by those two recent disasters had few disasters in the past and are still listed as low risk.
This risk index also doesn't directly take power outages into account, or non-disaster data like crime, home prices, or gas prices.
You can use the map to focus on specific types of disasters which is helpful if you're more concerned about certain threats than others. If you're thinking about relocating, compare the risk where you live now to potential new areas by zooming in and exploring the map.
Solve the daily Crossword