You people who list the Pacific Northwest of the US: have you not heard of Mount St. Helens? I'd rather have earthquakes, hurricanes, and flooding than VOLCANOES!
If you want to avoid natural disasters, don't live in the United States, with the remote exception of the northern states of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. Of course, you'll see blizzards there like you can't imagine. But you didn't mention blizzards.
2007-08-24 17:37:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Boots McGraw 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
Earthquakes--no place is completely safe, but obviously the entire west coast--California, the Pacific Norhwest and Alaska are out. Washington gets a LOT. Two major earthquakes in the Seattle area: 2001--magnitude 6.8, 1965--magnitude about 6.5. By comparison, the Northridge earthquake in Los Angeles (1994) was magnitude 6.7
Hurricanes--everywhere but the Gulf Coast and the East Coast are OK.
Floods--mostly a problem in the Eastern 2/3 of the country, which is flat and gets more rain (except the Appalachians).
This leaves the mountain states and the Southwest (but not California): New Mexico, parts of Arizona, the western part of Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Montana, western Wyoming, Nevada, except the low desert areas of the Southwest which can get flooding. Probably also the Appalachian mountains in the East are OK.
I would also include things like tornados, blizzard and bitterly cold weather if you really wanted to avoid all the nastiness.
2007-08-24 14:49:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Denver avoids all of the above.
I live in the Pacific NW. I'll take my chances with Volcanos. I lived 20 air miles from Mt. St. helens the day she blew, and didn't even know it until two hours later.
HOWEVER, there's that big cascadia subduction zone fault off the coast that's winding up for the next 9.0 earthquake. . . .
2007-08-27 10:43:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
100 miles inland (minimal risk of hurricane damage)
up off a flood plain or at 20 feet least higher than a local river/creek
In the US, avoid California to reduce risk of bad earthquakes, although they've been known to happen a long time ago in the midwest (New Madrid fault - Missouri area), and the southeast (Charleston, SC)
2007-08-24 14:50:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Smarty-Marti 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Space station: Because no place on the earth is safe as every place is likely to be affected atleast by any one of these natural phenomena.
2007-08-28 01:50:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by Arasan 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Michigan
2007-08-24 14:42:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Pacific Northwest. Almost no natural disasters. Most vulnerable to minor earthquakes, but there haven't been any where I live for years.
2007-08-24 14:36:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by Shapeshift 2
·
1⤊
3⤋
The moon!
No water- no floods
NO wind- no hurricanes!
NO molten core- no earthquakes!
2007-08-24 15:31:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Payson or Prescott or Flagstaff all in Arizona
2007-08-24 14:54:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by andyg77 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
You cannot predict the future. Maybe on a mountain top?
2007-08-24 14:41:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by ~SheSul~ 6
·
0⤊
2⤋