posted on May, 14 2008 @ 02:51 PM
I've thought about islands, and there are several disadvantages besides the obvious tsunami / sea level rising issue. Water is the first issue with
an island - and most tend to have limited amounts. The second is when your population recovers and grows, your land (and thus resources) are finite,
but the people will continue to grow. I've read this is what happened to the civilization on Easter Island.
I live in Canada, in Calgary, which is on the west side of the country just over the continental divide. While Calgary has no earthquakes, floods,
hurricanes, etc., the city is an oil hub, and could be a target, and the city is running out of fresh waters as our glaciers disappear.
The Yukon is nice, but cold, and the tarsand projects in Northern Alberta is going to poison the majority of the water down to the Arctic Ocean (this
will affect the Northwest Territories more).
I think the better location is coastal Northern British Columbia. Just below the Alaskan panhandle, there a place called Bella Coola. It is warm
(well, warm for Canada at least), has a large, yet unpolluted river, close to the coast but in the mountains (to be save from a rising ocean), and on
a deep fjord, (to protect against tsunamis). It is also part of the Pacific rainforest, so less likely to be wiped out by forest fires, which is an
issue in BC. It has a long growing season for growing crops, and has abundant wildlife / seafood if needed. If the world goes nuts, this is where
I'd run to.
I also think New Zealand is perfect as well, though I've never been. It is isolated, and far as I've heard, they seem to lack the natural disasters
the rest of the world endures.