Laserfiche WebLink
<br />22 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Even one-digit accuracy is not assured. Published reports sometimes disagree greatly on <br />the amount of damage in a particular flood event. For example, shortly after the failure of the <br />Teton Dam in Idaho in 1976, damage estimates ranged from $400 million to $1 billion <br />(Chadwick et al. 1976). In subsequent reports from several agencies, the $1 billion estimate was <br />used repeatedly with no further refinement (for example, USACE Walla Walla District 1977). A <br />final report on the Teton Dam failure (Eikenberry et al. 1980) gave the only specific figures: loss <br />of a $102.4 million project investment and over $315 million paid to more than 7,500 claimants. <br />This establishes a minimum loss of about $417 million, but only covers a portion of the total <br />damage. In creating the reanalyzed data set, we chose to use the geometric mean of the <br />minimum and maximum estimates, producing a damage estimate of $650 million. <br /> <br />After NWS reports on flood damage were discontinued in 1980, Storm Data became the <br />primary source of flood damage estimates (see Section 2). From 1980 until about 1984, the <br />accuracy of available estimates is limited by Storm Data reporting procedures. At that time, <br />NWS field offices reported damage estimates by checking categories on the following <br />logarithmic scale: <br />1 Less than $50 <br />2 $50 to $500 <br />3 $500 to $5,000 <br />4 $5,000 to $50,000 <br />5 $50,000 to $500,000 <br />6 $500,000 to $5 million <br />7 $5 million to $50 million <br />8 $50 million to $500 million <br />9 $500 million to $5 billion <br />Such estimates indicated only the order of magnitude of the damage (e.g. roughly a $100,000 <br />flood, a $1 million flood, a $10 million flood). Occasionally, more specific damage estimates <br />were included in narrative descriptions of a flood event. <br /> <br />To add a set of these categorical estimates, each category must be assigned a point value. <br />Proportional errors are minimized by using the geometric mean of a category's end points. That <br />is, category k is from $0.5 x 10k to $5 X 10k (when k> 1), so the best estimate is <br /> <br />(2.5)0.5 X 10k = 1.58 X 10k. <br /> <br />However, the individual estimates could be in error by more than a factor of 3. For example, an <br />event with damage originally estimated anywhere between $500,000 and $5 million would be <br />entered into the data set as damage of $1.58 million. This is about 3 times higher than an <br />estimate at the low end of the range, and about 1/3 of an estimate at the high end of the range. <br /> <br />Errors associated with these logarithmic categories are of concern primarily in the 1980- <br />1984 flood damage estimates. By 1985, it appears that NWS-IDC had instituted some follow-up <br />checking and refinement of the estimates, at least for major floods. Use of logarithmic <br />categories in Storm Data was discontinued in 1995. Since then, one- or two-digit estimates have <br />been given in thousands or millions of dollars (e.g. $60K or $3.2M). <br />