A superb commentary by Dr. Kevin Simmons on why better building codes in tornado alley pay for themselves. It is short, to the point, and well worth your time.
While this is great news that should be more widely adopted, I wonder how much impact it will truly have.
In, say, 10 years, what percentage of the total number of homes will have been constructed? 1%? Maybe 5%?
It would take another Greensburg-type disaster that wipes the slate clean - at immense human cost, both monetarily and and in human capital - for these building codes to truly have a lasting affect.
At "fault" is the superb construction under normal circumstances that this country has had in the past 100 years. I wouldn't know where to get this data, but I wonder what percentage of homes built since 1900 are still standing. 1930? 1950? 1970? There are diminishing returns the further you go back, but it's far cheaper to build on vacant land (which the US has in massive supply, especially in the plains) than to tear down a house and rebuild.
The following link answers a different question (what percentage of homes were build before date x) but interesting none the less.
Actually, there's a chart that tells the percentage of homes built between 2000 and 2009: 14.3%. That means nearly 86% of the homes in the country were built before 2000 and so wouldn't benefit from the new building codes.
As noted in the piece, this is highly geographic... the NE and the rust belt have the highest percentage of very old homes and even so, those are most likely to be very solidly built (we put an offer in on a home a few years ago from 1930 that had steel girder construction on the main floor... build like a commerical building!).
I guess my point is this... I'm not disagreeing with the premise, especially because the new codes are very inexpensive, relatively. But they would be massively more expensive per square foot if they were implemented in retrofitting older homes, which would have a wider impact.
Another Day With a Tornado and Giant Hail Risk The brown area has a significant risk of tornadoes. The risk may be a bit higher in Texas than in Oklahoma or Arkansas. The hail outlook has hatching where hailstones more than 2" in diameter or larger are forecast to fall. The red area has an enhanced risk and the yellow area has a significant risk of 1" or larger hail.
Here is the tornado forecast for the rest of the night (till 6am CST). Red, hatched = high risk of strong tornadoes. Yellow, hatched = enhanced risk of strong tornadoes. Blown = significant risk of tornadoes. This will be the last update of the night. Tornado Watch until 2am. Please make sure you have ways of getting warnings of tornadoes and 80 mph winds. 6:15pm NWS believes the chances for tornadoes and damaging winds are increasing in Mississippi. They also say they are going to extend the tornado watch to the east later this evening. 5:35pm: The northwest part of the tornado watch has been cancelled Here is the area where tornadoes are more likely from 4:30 to 7:30pm. From Atmosphere Analytics Rare "Particularly Dangerous Situation" Tornado Watch till 9pm If you live in these areas it is vital to monitor the weather until the watch expires at 9pm Note the forecast is for "numerous strong tornadoes." A very rare "particularly dangerous situation" ...
Note: this forecast has been updated. Go here for the latest. Update at 6:45pm. The National Hurricane Center now seems to agree with my forecast. The red area is where they are forecasting an 80% chance of a tropical depression, or stronger storm, to develop sometime during the next seven days. I believe the best chance is in the Tuesday to Thursday period for tropical storm development. Update at 6pm: The afternoon model runs, among the models I trust, continue to show a good chance (at least 50%) of a tropical storm forming in the western Gulf. I will update this forecast Sunday morning. Update at 1pm: The new run of the models I trust are in and my confidence has only grown that there is a threat of a tropical storm developing in the western Gulf of Mexico to the west of the orange line. The rest of this forecast (below) is still valid. People in the USA and northeast Mexico (west of the orange line) should keep an eye on the weather this week. While t...
While this is great news that should be more widely adopted, I wonder how much impact it will truly have.
ReplyDeleteIn, say, 10 years, what percentage of the total number of homes will have been constructed? 1%? Maybe 5%?
It would take another Greensburg-type disaster that wipes the slate clean - at immense human cost, both monetarily and and in human capital - for these building codes to truly have a lasting affect.
At "fault" is the superb construction under normal circumstances that this country has had in the past 100 years. I wouldn't know where to get this data, but I wonder what percentage of homes built since 1900 are still standing. 1930? 1950? 1970? There are diminishing returns the further you go back, but it's far cheaper to build on vacant land (which the US has in massive supply, especially in the plains) than to tear down a house and rebuild.
The following link answers a different question (what percentage of homes were build before date x) but interesting none the less.
http://www.oldhouseweb.com/how-to-advice/how-old-are-americas-houses.shtml
Actually, there's a chart that tells the percentage of homes built between 2000 and 2009: 14.3%. That means nearly 86% of the homes in the country were built before 2000 and so wouldn't benefit from the new building codes.
As noted in the piece, this is highly geographic... the NE and the rust belt have the highest percentage of very old homes and even so, those are most likely to be very solidly built (we put an offer in on a home a few years ago from 1930 that had steel girder construction on the main floor... build like a commerical building!).
I guess my point is this... I'm not disagreeing with the premise, especially because the new codes are very inexpensive, relatively. But they would be massively more expensive per square foot if they were implemented in retrofitting older homes, which would have a wider impact.