Good Lifestyle

Having your home damaged or destroyed by a natural disaster can look like the cloth of the nightmares. Unfortunately, it is also very easy to assume that the worst could never occur before the tragedy strikes unexpectedly and the lives are upset. Of course, while nowhere is entirely free from dangers, some places are more prone to severe weather And other catastrophic acts of nature than others - while others are not prepared to face the benefits. And now new research has helped to establish which American cities are the safest and risky for natural disasters.

The results come from a study by the home service company Gutter . The researchers compared the data of the 500 largest American cities in five categories, in particular the risk of risks, vulnerable populations, vulnerable infrastructure, response and recovery and mobility. They also considered the 18 types of natural disasters defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Risk Index , including forest fires, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes and floods.

The categories were then divided into subcategories and weighted for importance to determine a safety score, the safest result as 100. Wondering where your hometown landed in the ranking? Read the continuation for the 20 safest and most risky cities in the United States for natural disasters.

In relation: The 10 most naturally beautiful states in the United States, the new data show .

The probability of a natural disaster may not be the most urgent concern of the spirit of potential house buyers when you consider a movement, but there is a certain peace of mind that comes from the move in an area historically safer. However, the researchers of the study point out that none of the best -classified cities deemed the safest excelled in all categories, each showing different forces and vulnerabilities, proving that no zone is perfectly sheltered from tragedy.

Global security score: 49.70

The GEM State Capital is distinguished for the 24th best in response to the recovery. But it is also the only city of the top 10 that has done the risk of dangers, falling in the 121st place overall.

Global security score: 49.85

Bloomington received high notes for its 14th risk risk rank on the list. However, it marks badly in infrastructure vulnerable to 343rd in total.

In relation: 10 states with the cleanest tap water, the new data show .

Global security score: 50.06

The city of Tyler, Texas, ranks 7th on the whole list for its risk of risk, but still faces serious problems with vulnerable populations and the ranks of vulnerable infrastructure: it came respectively in 355th and 366th for everyone.

Global security score: 50.47

Pittsburgh has the worst risk performance for any Top 10 city, landing in 70th place, while arguing badly in vulnerable populations and vulnerable infrastructures. But it was also second in the general classification of the response in the recovery rankings and 43 in mobility.

Global security score: 50.54

Despite relatively high rankings in terms of mobility and populations vulnerable to 199 and 184, respectively, this regional parameter of Minnesota managed to do well in the vulnerable infrastructure, the risk of dangers and the response and recovery. AE0FCC31AE342FD3A1346EBB1F342FCB

In relation: The 6 most cute little towns on the east coast .

Global security score: 50.93

The second city of Minnesota on the list recovers the top 10 in its risk of risk of risk. But its place at 319 in the rank of vulnerable infrastructure is distinguished among its data.

Global security score: 51.40

With vulnerable infrastructure and vulnerable populations at 300 or more, Midland still manages a comfortable place among the best cities in the safest United States in natural disasters. Its classification as fifth in total in risk risks compensates for these lower scores.

Global security score: 52.74

Roanoke, in Virginia, could rank low for populations vulnerable to 438, but it still reduces the first three thanks to its high marks in response and recovery and risks of risk.

Global security score: 53.64

Although he has reached the second overall row of the overall list, Lynchburg presents himself in the lead with regard to risk of risk. The researchers say that his potential sensitivity is derechos - which are powerful wind storms - but the data show that it only affects the city about four times per century.

Global security score: 53.81

The capital of Virginie completes the state domination of the three best sure of natural disasters in the United States by claiming first place. Although it ranks 23rd in danger risks, its worst performance is in its rank of vulnerable populations, at 417th.

In relation: The best 50 and worse states to retire, new data show .

Whether due to weather conditions or geological conditions, some places are simply more prone to natural disasters than others. But researchers note that many of the lower cities are vulnerable in several categories, which makes them particularly sensitive to disasters.

Global security score: 29.26

Largo's best performance among the categories is 210th in response and recovery. However, it is last in the list in the list with its classification of vulnerable infrastructure.

Global security score: 29.08

The most risky ninth city on the list is classified more than 400 in three categories: vulnerable populations, vulnerable infrastructure and risk of dangers.

In relation: The most anxious American states show new research .

Global security score: 28.50

El Monte ranks relatively low with regard to vulnerable populations, arriving at the 139th, which makes it almost the best watch at the bottom 10. But it also ranks 418 for response and recovery, 466 for vulnerable infrastructure and 486 for risk of risk, too.

Global security score: 28.42

Even as the only city in the northeast of the last 10, Paterson is still distinguished from its bad projections in infrastructure vulnerable to the 459th and risk of risk at 493rd.

Global security score: 28.33

The Miami region is not unrelated to hurricanes. But despite his neighbor of the big city which managed to get to the 49th place as a whole, the data shows that this suburb is late with regard to risk of risks, the vulnerable infrastructure and the response and recovery.

In relation: The 12 best American cities for outdoor adventures .

Global security score: 27.59

While Hawthorne ranks 167th for vulnerable populations, almost all of its other categories find it above 400. This includes infrastructure vulnerable to 421st, response and recovery at 439th, and risk of risk at 494.

Global security score: 27.57

Yet another place of California on the list, the best show of Bellflower is at 255th for vulnerable populations. However, it operates particularly badly in mobility at 452 and risk of risk at 492.

Global security score: 27.44

As the most upscale midwest in the list, Cicero also beats the rest of the Top 10 with its classification at the 495th risk at risk of risk.

Global security score: 27.18

Compton receives its highest ranking for vulnerable populations in the 308th. But it also arrives near the last country in other categories, including 491st for the risk of dangers and 497th for vulnerable infrastructure.

Global security score: 26.04

With the majority of the Top 10 composed of California Cities, it is probably not surprising that the first place goes to another place of Golden State: South Gate. The suburbs of Los Angeles is the best suitable for vulnerable populations, arriving at the 125th in total. But the city wins its title as the most risky for natural disasters thanks to bad projections of risk of dangers in the 491st and the infrastructures vulnerable to 497th.

For more news on natural disasters, delivered directly to your reception box, Register for our daily newsletter .