News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Case for the Subway by imbusy111 on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @12:43PM (#16063069)
My concern with Portland is that it can be washed away by a massive tsunami any day now. Reference: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big...
Re:The Case for the Subway by Aloha on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @03:04PM (#16064530)
The likelihood that Portland will be washed away by a tsunami is basically nil.

Portland is ~80 miles inland from the pacific ocean - and the odds of a tsunami coming up the columbia river from the pacific, and still having much destructive power to do more than just flood, is again, basically nil - it would literally need to be a perfect storm for it to work.

Re:The Case for the Subway by flukus on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @06:34PM (#16066543)
I thought you were wrong based on my memory of the 2011 Japan tsunami and the images we all watched as it raced inland for what seemed like forever, but according to wikipedia it only traveled up to 10 km (6 miles) inland.

So even the biggest tsunami the world has witnessed wouldn't come close.

Re:The Case for the Subway by xyhopguy on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @10:15PM (#16067750)
there is also a mountain range in the way.
Re:The Case for the Subway by ravitation on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @02:33PM (#16064254)
Considering Portland is about 80 miles inland, earthquake is the major risk... But that's no different than the other major cities on the Pacific Rim.
Re:The Case for the Subway by twobyfour on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @12:56PM (#16063221)
Meh, New York could be wiped out by a moderate-sized earthquake (that we're supposedly overdue for and definitely unprepared for) any day now.

I'm not sure there's such a thing as a city that's not vulnerable to at least one climate change or natural disaster threat.

Re:The Case for the Subway by electricslpnsld on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @01:46PM (#16063776)
> I'm not sure there's such a thing as a city that's not vulnerable to at least one climate change or natural disaster threat.

Denver seems pretty safe. No earthquakes, safe from rising seas, no hurricanes or tsunamis.

Re:The Case for the Subway by dankoss on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @02:26PM (#16064183)
True, except for freshwater availability. Denver already has to pipe water in and hope for plenty of snowmelt. Climate changes could impact that.
Re:The Case for the Subway by kgwgk on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @03:34PM (#16064807)
Yellowstone supervolcano.
Re:The Case for the Subway by twobyfour on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @02:19PM (#16064120)
Tornados? Drought?
Re:The Case for the Subway by cylinder on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @10:41PM (#16067863)
Driving in snow.
Re:The Case for the Subway by taoistextremist on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @03:58PM (#16065075)
Northern cities that are more inland seem to avoid them. Maybe they have the same earthquake vulnerability you mentioned, but I think it's extremely unlikely, but there's Chicago, Detroit, Toronto, even Montreal that are able to deal with the large snowfalls they get, and in general don't seem like they'll be hit as hard by climate change-caused extreme weather as other areas.
Re:The Case for the Subway by noarchy on Thursday January 04, 2018 @08:35PM (#16075775)
An even worse version of the 1998 ice storm could really cripple the northern cities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_1998_North_American_ic...