Mt Pinatubo day and Japan

[hullexile]

Today is a public holiday here in memory of the 20th anniversary of the Mt Pinatubo eruption. I have heard people say how will they ever rebuild the towns destroyed in Japan, but if a third world country like the Philippines can rebuild to the extent it has then there is clearly hope for a developed country like Japan in its rebuilding efforts.

[MovingIn07]

You have to wonder, however, whether building towns in the firing line of repeatable natural disasters like volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and tsunamis is actually a good idea.

[hullexile]

You have to wonder, however, whether building towns in the firing line of repeatable natural disasters like volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and tsunamis is actually a good idea.

Not to build in such places knocks out a lot of the world though. Hopefully Pinatubo won't go off for a while yet as I live under it.

[gilleshk]

You have to wonder, however, whether building towns in the firing line of repeatable natural disasters like volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and tsunamis is actually a good idea.

Gee, let's not build along the coasts and in any countries where there are volcanoes and earthquake because of maybe once or twice in a lifetime events that may or may not be serious...

Let's move the 30 million + people of California into Kansas...Oops can't do that there are tornadoes...

People have a much higher chance of dying from crime or traffic accidents, maybe they shouldn't choose to live in urban areas with cars? Or move to crime free places?

I'm sure you can find a lovely hut in the sahara

[Satay Sue]

You have to wonder, however, whether building towns in the firing line of repeatable natural disasters like volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and tsunamis is actually a good idea.

That was quite a statement - so Japan, all the islands in the Pacific should be uninhabited then? And the entire Pacific rim? all the 'stans ? How about the Southern states of the US, they have tornadoes, particularly bad this year. And as GillesHK says, the west coast of the US. These are just a few examples.
I usually agree with your comments MI07 but not this time.

[MovingIn07]

During the commentary in the Japan earthquake, there was an article which said that along the coast of japan there were ancient stone markers, and the custom was that one should not build a house nearer the sea than the marker. Most people were not too sure why and over time ignored the markers. Now we see the result. Perhaps if they had listened to the wisdom of the people there before, who had noted how high the water rose and put a marker there to signify the safer areas, not so many people would have died.

I am not advocating moving the entire population of California. I am saying that people who build RIGHT ON TOP of the fault lines, or RIGHT BY THE SHORE in tsunami prone areas, or ON THE SLOPES of active volcanoes, are pretty dumb and such behaviour should not be encouraged. It's hardly half the world. It's common sense.

[gilleshk]

I guess then that there are a lot of people lacking common sense since most of the beach areas in the pacific rim are very built up and prime real estate, then there's the city of San Francisco that sits right on the San Andreas fault line. Would you suggest they move the whole city somewhere safer? How about typhoons and hurricanes? Should people avoid living in those zones? Relocate New Orleans? Between typhoons which kill many every year and tsunamis/volcanoes that happen very rarely, where should the people in the Philippines live? I guess that makes for a lot of people that are dumb according to you...

Meanwhile you live on a boat in an area prone for typhoons(11 000 dead in HK, 1937) that are guaranteed to come every year unlike tsunamis(which could technically hit Hong Kong though extremely unlikely) earthquakes or volcanoes which might never happen or at most once or twice in a lifetime. That's a funny position from which to call others dumb...

[MovingIn07]

There is a complete difference between suggesting one relocate millions of existing dwellings (which I am not) and suggesting that when flattened after a disaster, one take a step back and rethink exactly what gets rebuilt to be safer / more prudent for the future (which I am suggesting). I struggle to figure out why this is such a contentious position to be honest. Is anyone in Japan really wanting to rebuild homes on the beach right now?

[Satay Sue]

It was your initial comment - " building towns in the firing line of repeatable natural disasters like volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and tsunamis"

[hullexile]

So they shouldn't rebuild Christchurch?