New article from Scientific American: Communities are spending money on disasters at the wrong time: after the damage has been done, not before.

That is the central theme Zurich Insurance Group takes in a recently released report that draws conclusions about natural disaster mitigation by analyzing a series of 12 events—floods, storms and hurricanes—since the summer of 2013.

In its study, the global insurer found that every $1 spent on “disaster resilience” saves $5 in limiting future costs, including post-storm cleanup efforts.

In recent years, various reports have cited savings of $4,.$5, and $6 dollars in costs but whatever the number the message is mitigation pays.

Here is the direct link to the new study by the National Institute for Building Science re Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves. (Updated 2019)

Important study on the costs and benefits of mitigation. An update on an earlier study, with even more encouraging results.

Update on June 8. See the IBHS site called Mitigation Matters.  It too explains the 6 to 1 cost benefit ratio.

New report re research done at TX A&M: Handling disasters differently critical for coastal cities.

This is a significant report, based on 5 years of research.

A key finding of the new study is: Mitigation Saves: Federal Mitigation Grants Save $6 per $1 Spent, Exceeding Building Codes Saves $4 per $1 Spent. The title of the study is: Investing in Mitigation to Build a More Resilient Nation.

Here is an article from Bloomberg on the report: Disaster Mitigation Programs Targeted by Trump Seen Saving Money.

To Prevent Disaster, Rethink Development. 3 ways better building practices can reduce the risks of hurricanes like Harvey, Irma and Maria.

One of the authors, Ed Thomas, is a long-time supporter of this blog. Congrats on the national exposure.

Modern computing power may help mitigate future flood disasters

Staying safe from disasters pays, but will funders listen?  Excerpts:

The startup MyStrongHome, which works in the coastal areas of Alabama, Louisiana and South Carolina, allows homeowners to pay for a new, reinforced roof out of savings from the lower insurance bills they get thanks to their dwelling being safer.

Green estimates that potential losses in a storm would be 30 to 60 percent lower in the strengthened homes. The work, carried out by the firm’s contractors, typically costs around $10,000. Participants make a down-payment of between $2,000 and $3,000, and pay back the rest over five to seven years.

New metric shows that when building in areas prone to natural disasters, it pays to make informed decisions

Hazard-induced maintenance costs can be significant over the lifetime of a building. Researchers at the MIT Concrete Sustainability Hub (CSHub) are developing new methods to calculate the benefits of investing in more hazard-resistant structures. Jeremy Gregory, executive director of the CSHub recently presented one metric, the CSHub’s Break-Even Hazard Mitigation Percentage (BEMP), to officials in Florida and Georgia—states that can see millions in property damage due to hurricanes.

“The BEMP evaluates the cost-effectiveness of mitigation features for a building in a particular location by factoring in the expected damage a conventional building designed to code would endure over its lifetime, and comparing it to a more resilient, enhanced building design,” says Gregory. “In areas prone to natural disasters, more spending on mitigation is justified—the BEMP helps to identify how much extra spending is recommended.”