That depends on how much concentration you actually need.

You could kill SV and create five more.

It's easier to destroy the Valley than to create a timeline where a new Valley evolves. It really isn't an inevitability that anything like SV exist, and in fact, there are tons of reasons why it's unlikely a new one would evolve, chief among them the hostility to individual entrepreneurs* like regulatory capture, enforceable non-competes, and so on, as well a lot of the margin and efficiencies have been driven out of the business in favor of defensible moats and network effects.

The most likely thing isn't five more valleys, it's that the valley gets { Texas, Boston, Utah, Minnesota, DC Metro, ..}-ized and there is nothing like it again.

* (I _hate_ "entrepreneur"; I've founded and exited a company but as a term it is not in-line at all with the freewheeling, let's-do-this, let's-do-it-better-than-anyone way people who drove the valley in the 70s and 80s thought of themselves. The rise of "entrepreneur" as the way of thinking about founders correlates well, imho, with the decline of the valley as the center of technology.)

There should be efforts to to build new Silicon Valley’s. Putting all of tech’s eggs on one metro located near massive faultlines is just poor planning. There ought to be multiple redundancies.