Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Well, that was no fun to read. I wonder if my house would survive a flood as well as it would an earthquake.


The only reliable way to survive a flood with strong currents is to not be in one.

I will not live long term on land that has historically been subject to flooding, or where the site forms part of a constricted drainage.

There are enough risks in life that cannot be realistically mitigated. No sense exposing your family to one day in and day out that is just a matter of choice. Unfortunately, humans are terrible about understanding probabilistic risks, and our short, brutal lives offer little opportunity to appreciate the nature of long-period risk.

A “hundred year flood” means that there is a seventy percent chance that your house will be wiped away within your lifetime. It’s like choosing to be habitually reckless with fire in your home. We aren’t reckless with fire because the risk is very tangible and within our control. Long period risks are just as real and often just as much within our control, but we have to think in terms of math and not our “feeling” of security. Our instincts about safety and security are honed over millions of years to understand what is a safe Place to camp for the night. We are not intrinsically equipped to viscerally understand this kind of risk.


My parents property sits at the confluence of a creek and a river. They've built their house on a promontory that had signs of inhabitation by indigenous peoples. We had a "100-year flood" when I was growing up. It was quite impressive to wake up in the morning and see the water within six vertical feet of the house and 30 to 40 ft. of water the bottom field with entire trees floating Long.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: