Comment on “Comparison between probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and flood frequency analysis”

Eos Science News
By:

Links

Abstract

Despite providing an exceptionally clear example of the basics of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA), Wang and Ormsbee [2005] nevertheless conclude that “…using PSHA for risk analysis is not only confusing, but is also inappropriate.” I argue here that (1) the results of a PSHA analysis are not confusing and have physical meaning, and (2) the authors' basis for declaring PSHA “inappropriate” is misguided. I note in passing that the authors consistently confuse “risk” with “hazard.” Both PSHA and flood frequency analysis provide estimates of hazard. Risk is the product of hazard, vulnerability and exposure. This discussion is only concerned with hazard.

Publication type Article
Publication Subtype Journal Article
Title Comment on “Comparison between probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and flood frequency analysis”
Series title Eos Science News
DOI 10.1029/2005EO330004
Volume 86
Issue 33
Year Published 2005
Language English
Publisher American Geophysical Union
Description 1 p.
First page 303
Last page 303
Google Analytic Metrics Metrics page
Additional publication details