Community suitability of Nevada, United States Of America
Moderately suitable confidence B · live score 61
71
best land · p90
76%
good land
—
one block
How each domain holds up
Governance, safety & tenure 78
Economy & cost 95
Society, freedom & health 88
Land & water 69
Climate, growing & hazards 60
Autonomy & access 25
Where it pushes back
Food & forage diversityAccessibilityWater availability & quality
Within Nevada — 17 sub-regions
Estimated finer-grained reads from the same open data. Phase-1, not yet verified.
Douglas
strongest Economy & cost (95) ·
weakest Climate, growing & hazards (71)
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 79
Carson City
strongest Economy & cost (95) ·
weakest Climate, growing & hazards (72)
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 75
Lyon
strongest Economy & cost (95) ·
weakest Climate, growing & hazards (63)
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 72
Storey
strongest Economy & cost (95) ·
weakest Climate, growing & hazards (62)
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 71
Clark
strongest Economy & cost (95) ·
weakest Climate, growing & hazards (52)
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 70
Washoe
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 67
Churchill
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 65
Lincoln
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 64
Mineral
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 63
Pershing
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 61
Elko
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 60
Humboldt
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 59
Nye
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 59
White Pine
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 59
Lander
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 58
Esmeralda
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 57
Eureka
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 57
Reading the land, criterion by criterion
Each signal names the open dataset behind it and how measured it is.
Seed & agricultural autonomycountry C UPOV membership proxy
Governance & corruptioncountry A World Bank WGI + Transparency CPI
Cost of living, labour & landcountry A World Bank PPP, ILOSTAT
Monetary & capital sovereigntycountry A IMF/World Bank, Chinn-Ito
Personal freedomcountry A Cato/Fraser Human Freedom Index
Healthcare qualitycountry B WHO GHO
Disease / vector burden A Malaria Atlas + dengue Index P
Soil quality A SoilGrids (ISRIC)
Water availability & quality A WRI Aqueduct + AQUASTAT
Terrain & buildability A SRTM / NASADEM
Land cover & degradation A ESA WorldCover + Global Forest Watch
Biodiversity & alignment B Biodiversity Intactness Index
Climate & natural hazards A ThinkHazard + NASA FIRMS + USGS
Growing conditions A CHELSA / FAO GAEZ
Food & forage diversity B FAO GAEZ crop suitability + GLW
Coastal risk B Climate Central CoastalDEM
Energy potential A Global Solar Atlas + Global Wind Atlas
Natural building materials B SoilGrids clay + forest + geology
Environmental quality A SEDAC PM2.5 + VIIRS night-lights
Connectivity A Ookla + ITU (+ Starlink)
Accessibility A Malaria Atlas friction surface
Remoteness / surroundings A GPWv4 population density
Contamination legacy C Maus mining polygons + WRI power plants
Phase-1 desk screening
These are desk numbers from open data. Soil tests, water rights and the welcome of actual neighbours all wait for a visit — we'd rather say so than pretend.
Other regions in United States Of America
Compare nearby options, ranked by overall suitability.