At Least 800 Dallas Residences Were Damaged by Tornadoes

[TexasTowelie]

We’re now getting a better sense of how much damage last month’s tornadoes wrecked upon the city. About 800 residential structures suffered some degree of damage. About half of those were either destroyed or seriously damaged. Residences bore the brunt of the EF-3 tornado that stormed from the area north of Love Field on its way to Richardson and Garland, wrecking Preston Hollow in the process. Another 87 commercial structures were damaged as well. The Insurance Council of Texas estimates that the tornadoes caused about $2 billion in damages.

Those numbers were provided by Phil Crone of the Dallas Builders Association, who got them from the city. I’m awaiting further details from City Hall and will update accordingly. Those numbers are just for the city of Dallas; when you factor in the other cities that were hit by tornadoes—10 of them tore through Dallas, Garland, Rockwall, and Richardson, among others—the property damage easily sails above 1,000 structures. Here’s how this all breaks down:

Affected: 156 – Very minimal damage

Minor: 356 – Damage to the exterior only. No structural members involved

Major: 287 – Damage to structural members

Destroyed: 106 – Loss of structural integrity

https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2019/11/about-800-dallas-residences-were-damaged-by-tornadoes/
(no more at link)

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

1. Oh, dear.

I don't live anywhere near Dallas, but I used to live in Kansas, in Tornado Alley. So I have nothing to offer but sympathy for those affected by those recent tornadoes.

Mother Nature is unforgiving. And whether global climate change is real, and if it's human caused, it's a huge problem.

For what it's worth, I'm of the "global climate change is real and humans are a huge component of that change" belief.

Anyone who doesn't understand that climate change is real is an idiot. I suppose it's possible that we're simply in an era of climate change, and that humans have no part in it. But even if that's the case, CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL.

Oh, and for what it's worth, I recall reading in the late 50s or early 60s that CO2 levels had risen precipitously since the start of the Industrial Revolution, and that those rises were clearly human caused. And that those rises were implicated in temperature rise. Hmmm. In the late 50s and early 60s. Trust me, I was not reading esoteric scientific publications, but things like Time and Newsweek. So If I was reading those things back then, so was everyone else. Yes? No? Maybe?