New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

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.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe