If they have not been hit for a century, it remains to be seen how well the existing kinds of flood defence will work out. Have they done anything to strengthen or at least maintain them since then?
That said, The Weather Channel is claiming that if it hits at high tide, the storm surge could be up to 15 feet, which is 5 feet higher than the average tsunami. I don’t think any city is prepared for that eventuality.
I’m not sure how exactly the tides are measured and if it differs internationally, but we have floods at around 5m every few years without any significant damage (German source). Hamburg had a flood with 6.45m in 1976 without damage to the city (only the port and other parts outside the levees were obviously damaged; German source).
It’s probably because of the last sentence. Which technically is a fact (because they obviously think that), but 5m is something at least cities in northern Germany are usually prepared for.
It’s almost definitely worse, more development means more covered land which means more water flowing faster to holding areas, that likely aren’t sized for the amount of developed land.
Why spend their own money, when they could just wait for that sweet federal money after a disaster? (While blaming the federal gov and being completely insufferable, ungrateful cunts.)
If they have not been hit for a century, it remains to be seen how well the existing kinds of flood defence will work out. Have they done anything to strengthen or at least maintain them since then?
They haven’t! Sad!
I’m guessing the answer is “poorly.”
Or simply “not”.
That said, The Weather Channel is claiming that if it hits at high tide, the storm surge could be up to 15 feet, which is 5 feet higher than the average tsunami. I don’t think any city is prepared for that eventuality.
I’m not sure how exactly the tides are measured and if it differs internationally, but we have floods at around 5m every few years without any significant damage (German source). Hamburg had a flood with 6.45m in 1976 without damage to the city (only the port and other parts outside the levees were obviously damaged; German source).
The big difference is Hamburg has a 3.5 meter tidal range and Tampa has a .6 meter tidal range.
Haha stupid dummies why didn’t you build the port further inland to prevent damage.
Love how you are getting down voted for stating fact
It’s probably because of the last sentence. Which technically is a fact (because they obviously think that), but 5m is something at least cities in northern Germany are usually prepared for.
5 ft ABOVE the average tsunami is something most cities are prepared for?
Nobody said 5 m above anything, the original comment was 5 ft above the average tsunami. So 15 ft total which isn’t quite 5 m but it’s close ish.
Sorry for the typo. Will correct it.
Sorry about the error of switching from ft to m.
But still 5 ft above an average tsunami is a large increase. I’d be surprise if most coastal cities could handle that
I’m not even sure what I said that was so objectionable, but whatever. It’s fake internet points.
It’s almost definitely worse, more development means more covered land which means more water flowing faster to holding areas, that likely aren’t sized for the amount of developed land.
This is Florida. All those abortionist, transgender, scientist, and librarians need to be dealt with before any plans to address imminent catastrophy.
Why spend their own money, when they could just wait for that sweet federal money after a disaster? (While blaming the federal gov and being completely insufferable, ungrateful cunts.)
this tragedy will have been preventable!
That’s too sad to be funny.