08-21-2018, 03:36 PM
Is it correct that lava flows generally put no more than 50 feet of new rock over the existing terrain? And with the exception of the cinder shield around Fissure 8, almost all the acreage covered by our recent flow is re-habitable, albeit with some extra expenses for 1) re-surveying and 2) building new roads?
(Though the new Fissure 8 hill might have value as a park or scenic climb.)
If that is the case, maybe we ought to view our Puna destruction as similar to a fire, hurricane or tornado that razes homes to the ground.
Meaning those who want to rebuild should. But being aware of the significant probability of another flow within 30 years.
Movable homes might be the best option. In this respect, we are advantaged over fire and wind destruction. It's not feasible to move homes to avoid those rapid events, generally.
(Though the new Fissure 8 hill might have value as a park or scenic climb.)
If that is the case, maybe we ought to view our Puna destruction as similar to a fire, hurricane or tornado that razes homes to the ground.
Meaning those who want to rebuild should. But being aware of the significant probability of another flow within 30 years.
Movable homes might be the best option. In this respect, we are advantaged over fire and wind destruction. It's not feasible to move homes to avoid those rapid events, generally.