More than half a million without power in Ohio Valley as flood risk continues across Midwest
Forecasters have placed parts of four states under an elevated risk of flooding rainfall, with nearly 275,000 Indiana customers reported without power on Thursday.
More on this incident
Parts of Iowa, northern Illinois, Indiana and Ohio have been placed under an elevated risk for flooding rainfall, with isolated areas possibly receiving 3 to 6 inches or more if storms repeatedly pass over the same locations, the Economic Times reported on Thursday, August 13, 2026.
Nearly 275,000 homes and businesses in Indiana were without power on Thursday morning, while total outages across the Ohio Valley remained above half a million, according to the Economic Times.
Officials urged residents in vulnerable parts of Cambridge City, Indiana, to evacuate, according to the Wayne County Emergency Management Agency as cited in the same report.
The situation is developing. No casualty figures were included in the available reporting, and the full extent of flooding damage has not been established.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
- Indiana Flood Warning: Midwest braces for more dangerous flooding and stormseconomictimes.indiatimes.com
Revision history
- Version 113 Aug 2026, 13:17current
First published.
- Version 113 Aug 2026, 13:14current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.