placestats

Expected yearly loss from natural hazards

The damage natural disasters are expected to do to buildings in an average year, in dollars for every $100,000 that the buildings are worth. FEMA works this out for 18 kinds of hazard, such as floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires and earthquakes, from how often each has struck in the past and how much damage it did. It is an average: most years bring less, and a bad year can bring far more. A rate is used rather than a dollar total, which would mostly show how big the county is.

Reported for3,144areas, in 51 states — none in PR
Link to density0.23not mostly about how urban a place is
Nearby places alike0.53Moran’s I: strongly, neighbouring places tend to be similar
Typerate$ per $100,000 of buildings

How it has moved

Loading…

Every state, every year

One row per state and one column per year, sorted by the latest value. It shows states, not counties: nobody can scan 3,222 rows, and the pattern only shows when it all fits on one screen.

Loading…

Where it comes from

FEMA National Risk Index · FEMA National Risk Index v1.20, NRI_Table_Counties / NRI_Table_States, ALR_VALB

Expected yearly damage to buildings from all eighteen natural hazards FEMA models. A rate over the area's building value. FEMA publishes it for counties and states; it is not rebuilt for other areas here.

Combining areas: it cannot be combined, so it is shown only where its publisher works it out.

What it goes with

The strongest links that have a page of their own. Unadjusted is the link before adjusting for anything, from −1 (opposite) to +1 (in step). Adjusted compares places with the same population density, income and education levels, so those differences can’t explain the link. This list leaves out the 4 pairs built from the same numbers or the same model as this measure, since they are bound to match.

MeasureUnadjustedAdjusted
Expected yearly loss from natural hazards and Natural amenities scaleWhere Expected yearly loss from natural hazards is higher, Natural amenities scale tends to be higher: a weak link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Natural amenities scale by US county+0.31+0.33

Population makeup

How this measure varies with the racial and ethnic makeup of counties. Every group is shown, whatever its rank. These are links across counties: they describe places, not people. They say nothing about any person’s risk or behaviour based on their race. Counties with a larger share of one group also differ in much else, such as income, segregation, region and history. The adjusted figure only accounts for density, income and education.

Share of residentsUnadjustedAdjusted
Expected yearly loss from natural hazards and Share White, not HispanicCould easily be chance once only places with similar density, income and education are compared. Share White, not Hispanic by US county-0.03-0.05
Expected yearly loss from natural hazards and Share Black, not HispanicCould easily be chance once only places with similar density, income and education are compared. Share Black, not Hispanic by US county+0.01+0.01
Expected yearly loss from natural hazards and Share Hispanic or Latino, any raceCould easily be chance once only places with similar density, income and education are compared. Share Hispanic or Latino, any race by US county+0.04+0.04
Expected yearly loss from natural hazards and Share Asian, not HispanicWhere Expected yearly loss from natural hazards is higher, Share Asian, not Hispanic tends to be higher: a weak link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared. Share Asian, not Hispanic by US county+0.09+0.21
Expected yearly loss from natural hazards and Share American Indian or Alaska Native, not HispanicCould easily be chance once only places with similar density, income and education are compared. Share American Indian or Alaska Native, not Hispanic by US county+0.00-0.05

Highest and lowest

Of 3,144 counties reporting it. These are the two ends of a national ranking. For most measures, that ranking mostly sorts places by income and how urban they are. That is why the place pages compare each place with similar places instead.

Highest

  1. Jackson County, OK — 1,022
  2. Hyde County, NC — 924
  3. Hawaii County, HI — 895
  4. Red River County, TX — 829
  5. Trinity County, CA — 749

Lowest

  1. Kusilvak Census Area, AK — 7.72
  2. Wrangell City and Borough, AK — 22.4
  3. North Slope Borough, AK — 31.7
  4. Petersburg Borough, AK — 34.3
  5. Ketchikan Gateway Borough, AK — 34.6

The middle area reports 149. The middle half of counties falls between 117 and 200 (the 25th to 75th percentile).

US Counties With the Highest Expected Yearly Loss From Natural Hazards · US Counties With the Lowest Expected Yearly Loss From Natural Hazards

All measures · Explore its pairs · How the US county data works