[omgwtfbyobbq]

Yup. Especially with the ending. The site may get zero funding, but whoever owns the Patreon account is getting a couple grand a month.

With that said, I think there's a valid point there. Even if the chances of a large tsunami hitting the east coast of NA are low (chance of having an eruption, chance of that eruption being large, and chance of that eruption causing 500km^3 of displaced earth), the amount of destruction it could cause should at least prompt some analysis as to what could be done to mitigate that damage. Especially since there are likely useful public works projects that could be done to mitigate damage from climate change anyway.

[AnimalMuppet]

> Especially since there are likely useful public works projects that could be done to mitigate damage from climate change anyway.

If you did public works to protect against this, then they would help you against climate change. But if you did public works to protect against climate change, they would not protect against this, because this is maybe 3 times worse. (Nobody that I have ever heard is talking about an 80 foot sea level rise from climate change.)

[ethbr0]

There are some dual-purpose systems.

E.g. ensuring New Orleans' pumps are in working condition, and a levee system is built to survive overtopping without collapsing.

The difference between a crisis and a catastrophe is how quickly mitigation kicks in after an event.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

The cost of protecting against this would be very high. The marginal cost of additions to blunt the effects of a tsunami in addition to protecting against climate change might not be that much.