Software Assesses Risks of Terrorism and Natural Disasters

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

After the Oklahoma City bombing and several natural disasters in 1998, the General Services Administration (GSA) decided it needed a better tool to assess the risks that face government buildings. Now, after working with Regina Hunter and colleagues at Sandia National Laboratory for several years, the GSA has got its wish: a Risk Assessment Method¿Property Analysis and Ranking Tool (RAMPART). "Traditionally buildings have been constructed to code, which pays attention to disasters that have already happened," Hunter explains. "RAMPART looks to the future probability of events occurring and what there is to lose if those events take place."

The Sandia team rolled out the RAMPART system at the GSA's regional office in Denver this month and plans to visit nine other offices by the end of September. The scientists worked out elaborate sets of equations to evaluate the risk of threatening events¿hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, winter storms, floods, terrorist attacks and crimes¿to buildings in set locations, made using certain types of construction, housing specific activities and different numbers of people, among other variables. Users of the RAMPART software "point and click their way through the assessment," Hunter says, thanks to a simple user interface. "They will be asked basic questions about the building¿location, construction, security monitoring etc.¿and the computer program will do the rest." The scientists hope RAMPART might eventually be adapted for analyzing other buildings such as embassies and schools.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American