Yes, the structure was the Banqiao Dam and the upper end of the death count estimate was 240,000 which includes subsequent diseases and hunger-related deaths. I followed the source's classification as a structural collapse.

Thanks for commenting on the flood. I was googling like crazy to figure out how tf 4 million people died in one flood. Your context helped.

Who would've thought a heat map of the Bolivian Forests would have so much tree coverage. 🌳

The most dangerous thing we all do in our lives is drive and most people still continue to have no respect for driving a couple of ton metal missile around. We need to bring back the car accident footage during drivers training and remind people there are consequences to this shit.

The source categorizes tsunamis, earthquakes, and floods separately and I followed that categorization.

Correct. However, I've just realized thanks to the link from u/denisrennes that the 1975 Banqiao Dam failure article gives an upper estimate of 240,000 deaths while the List of Accidents and Disasters by Death Toll page listed a single 171,000 figure. I use the past tense here because I just edited the page with a correction.

Regardless, the visualization rounds all figures (as stated in the image and my top-level comment) so both 171,000 and 240,000 would result in the same 2 squares being shown.

u/tremynci is correct: the source (listed in the visualization and my top-level comment) has the 1957 Mayak nuclear waste storage tank explosion as the all-time deadliest nuclear disaster with 200-6,000 deaths. I took the high end of this estimate (also mentioned in the visualization and my top-level comment).

Chernobyl is listed by the source as having a high end estimate of "4000+" with the note:

>Far higher death toll estimates have been made, but are disputed.

I took the Mayak disaster rather than going with disputed figures.

No one has verifiably been killed by meteors in the last century at least. And sources before that are dubious. Why did you even bring this up?

Thanks! I used Draw.io.

Thanks for the idea for comparing against smoking! I just may create a comparison for that in the future. :)

Depicting the exponential growth was definitely the hardest challenge of this visualization for me. I didn't want to just use a logarithmic bar/column chart because I find them boring and that people don't really understand them visually, so I opted to try something less conventional. I remembered this style of chart from somewhere and tried to at least hint at the increasing values (besides the explicit legend) with a red gradient and increasingly larger { brackets on the left. Any tips for how I could show this better? I'm pretty new to data visualization and am looking to learn.

Your visualization of the data is supported by the facts listed in your source for sure! Great job on it.

The point I’m trying to make is that most foodborne illnesses go unreported and the death toll is much higher than reported.

Let’s take that listeriosis source for example. Listeria has symptoms that very closely reflect a bad flu. And the onset time can be up to two weeks after ingestion. So I’d be willing to bet a lot of people just thought they had a bad flu when they became sick.

The source is cited in the visualization and my top-level comment. The all-time deadliest crash was the Tenerife airport disaster when two 747s collided on a runway killing 583 people, which I rounded up to 600 as stated in the visualization and my top-level comment.

Nice visualization! If would be cool to also visualize how "connected" one would be from those stations. Most of those stations are regional stations where only local trains run. It would be nice to see how long it would take to get from any point on the map to, say, the next city with >1M citizens, or a weighted average of getting to three such cities.

What structural collapse killed 200,000. There is almost no structure that can even hold that many? That's like 40-50 world trade centers.

Or is a dam failure? That would make sense but I would classify that different.

This is an interesting idea! Perhaps I'll make another post about war, but I wanted to keep this one focused on unintentional accidents and disasters rather than mixing in intentional actions like war and terrorism.

u/iiSpook is correct about why 9/11 doesn't count as a disaster according to the source's categorization. Per the top of the source page:

>Purposeful disasters, such as terrorist attacks, are omitted; those events can be found at List of battles and other violent events by death toll.

Hi! Thanks for sharing! In case you're wondering, the source lists the 2017–18 South African listeriosis outbreak as the deadliest of all time with 218 deaths, which I rounded down to 200.

But there is nothing we can do about traffic deaths. People have to drive. /s

The source categorizes them separately and I followed that categorization. The deadliest earthquake was the 1976 Tanghan earthquake and it does mention that some coal mines flooded but doesn't say how many deaths this accounted for out of the total figure of 655,000. The 2011 Japan earthquake caused 19,759 deaths but also doesn't break down deaths due to flooding. I'm sure there's an overlap between them, but I don't have the data to show that it would make a big enough difference to change the all-time deadliest in each category.

Yes, it's for the deadliest Maritime accident. The source lists the SS Kiangya as the deadliest with an upper estimate of 3920 deaths which I used and then rounded up (see explanation in the viz and my top-level comment) to 4000. I don't think the intentional sinking of the MV Wilhelm Gustloff would count as an accident because the top of the page says:

>Purposeful disasters, such as terrorist attacks, are omitted; those events can be found at List of battles and other violent events by death toll.

Yeah we should use less floods

It’s important to note that potential power increases with the cube of velocity, but too much power means the forces are so high that it’s impossible to keep the system from self destructing.

So the curve plateaus because the turbines purposefully puts on the brakes to limit power. And at some point the wind will be so strong that the turbine is completely shut down.

If a turbine were capable of operating at full power under 100km/hr winds, the output would be spectacular.

Elevators are the safest and most effective form of transportation. We should just build vertical cities.

Point being, the original post did not reflect this behavior at all.

[removed]