Posted on 03/05/2008 2:24:39 PM PST by blam
US Cities At High Risk For Terrorist Attacks Identified
A color-coded map identifies American cities' level of risk to bioterrorism. Red identifies urban areas of highest risk, yellow is medium risk, and green is lowest risk. (Credit: Walter W. Piegorsch
ScienceDaily (Mar. 5, 2008) — A University of Arizona researcher has created a new system to dramatically show American cities their relative level of vulnerability to bioterrorism.
Walter W. Piegorsch, an expert on environmental risk, has placed 132 major cities -- from Albany, N.Y., to Youngstown, Ohio -- on a color-coded map that identifies their level of risk based on factors including critical industries, ports, railroads, population, natural environment and other factors.
Piegorsch is the director of a new UA graduate program in interdisciplinary statistics and a professor of mathematics in the College of Science, as well as a member of the UA's BIO5 Institute.
The map marks high-risk areas as red (for example, Houston and, surprisingly, Boise, ID), midrange risk as yellow (San Francisco) and lower risk as green (Tucson). The map shows a wide swath of highest-risk urban areas running from New York down through the Southeast and into Texas. Boise is the only high-risk urban area that lies outside the swath.
The model employs what risk experts call a benchmark vulnerability metric, which shows risk managers each city's level of risk for urban terrorism.
Piegorsch says terrorism vulnerability involves three dimensions of risk -- social aspects, natural hazards and construction of the city and its infrastructure.
He concludes that the allocation of funds for preparedness and response to terrorism should take into account these factors of vulnerability.
"Our capacity to adequately prepare for and respond to these vulnerabilities varies widely across the country, especially in urban areas," he wrote in an article about the research. Piegorsch argues that "any one-size-fits-all strategy" of resource allocation and training ignores the reality of the geographic differences identified in his study. Such failures, he says, would "limit urban areas' abilities to prepare for and respond to terrorist events."
The research, funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, was published in a recent issue of Risk Analysis, a journal published by the Society for Risk Analysis.
Piegorsch was the lead author, in collaboration with Susan L. Cutter, director of the Hazards & Vulnerability Research Institute and Carolina Distinguished Professor of Geography at the University of South Carolina; and Frank Hardisty, research faculty at the GeoVISTA Center at Pennsylvania State University.
Adapted from materials provided by University of Arizona.
It looks as if Michigan is more safe than Idaho.
Boise, Idaho is red and not LA, Seattle or Las Vegas?
I can read it well enough to see that “We’re all gonna die in Dallas!!”
I wonder why Boise?
I think the research is flawed.
at least were better off then the cesspool of Houston....
Mickey D's french fry potatoes?
That map is a little strange. South Carolina has three hot spots.
A very handy planning tool for AQ?
(For resource allocation, etc.)
Living life in the big white space.
So you’re one of those with Big H complex, eh?
Where do you think the terrorists are living now? ;-)
Maybe I’ll move back to the U.P.!
Thanks, Tom.
Detroit suburbs?
I’m surprised Las Vegas or Hollywood are not red. No red at all in California.
Potato viruses. They've been all over the news. Cause really ugly skin problems.
Why is Boise, Idaho bright red? Is there something here that I don’t know about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.