Slashdot Mirror
Pacific Northwest At Risk For Mega-Earthquake
Hugh Pickens writes "Science Daily Headlines reports on research by Oregon State University marine geologist Chris Goldfinger showing that earthquakes of magnitude 8.2 (or higher) have occurred 41 times during the past 10,000 years in the Pacific Northwest. By extrapolation, there is a 37% chance of another major earthquake in the area in the next 50 years that could exceed the power of recent seismic events in Chile and Haiti. If a magnitude-9 quake does strike the Cascadia Subduction Zone, extending from northern Vancouver Island to northern California, the ground could shake for several minutes, highways could be torn to pieces, bridges might collapse, and buildings would be damaged or even crumble. If the epicenter is just offshore, coastal residents could have as little as 15 minutes of warning before a tsunami could strike. 'It is not a question of if a major earthquake will strike,' says Goldfinger, 'it is a matter of when. And the "when" is looking like it may not be that far in the future.'" Read below for more.
The last major earthquake to hit the Cascadia Subduction Zone was in January 1700. Scientists are aware of the impact because of written records from Japan documenting the damage caused by the ensuing tsunami, which crested across the Pacific at about 5 meters (15 feet). Knowledge about what happened in Oregon and Washington is more speculative, but the consensus — gleaned from studies of coastal estuaries, land formations, and river channels — is that the physical alteration to the coast was stunning. The outer coastal regions subsided and drowned coastal marshlands and forests, which were subsequently covered with younger sediments. "Perhaps more striking than the probability numbers is that we ... have already gone longer without an earthquake than 75% of the known times between earthquakes in the last 10,000 years," says Goldfinger. "And 50 years from now, that number will rise to 85 percent."
The last major earthquake to hit the Cascadia Subduction Zone was in January 1700. Scientists are aware of the impact because of written records from Japan documenting the damage caused by the ensuing tsunami, which crested across the Pacific at about 5 meters (15 feet). Knowledge about what happened in Oregon and Washington is more speculative, but the consensus — gleaned from studies of coastal estuaries, land formations, and river channels — is that the physical alteration to the coast was stunning. The outer coastal regions subsided and drowned coastal marshlands and forests, which were subsequently covered with younger sediments. "Perhaps more striking than the probability numbers is that we ... have already gone longer without an earthquake than 75% of the known times between earthquakes in the last 10,000 years," says Goldfinger. "And 50 years from now, that number will rise to 85 percent."
Seriously? A man named Goldfinger is threatening the Pacific Northwest with tidal waves and earthquakes?
Well, at least MI5 will save us...
Hey, Microsoft, arrrreee youuuuu ready to ruuuuuuuummmmbllle!!!!!!!
My blog
Because everywhere else in the US doesn't have other natural disasters. There aren't wildfires in the west, tornadoes in the mid-west, hurricanes in the south, blizzards, snow storms, and ice storms in the north, flooding along the Mississippi...
This information is great and all, but now what? Sure, the governments could be responsible and dust off the ol' disaster plans and have more frequent drills, but honestly, the day that the big one (earthquake, or, earthquake plus tidal wave) hits, the situation is going to be FUBAR no matter what people do. Sure, some preparedness will result in minor differences in life loss, etc. but in the grand scheme of things the same net effect will occur: total destruction. Therefore, the government, the people, anyone will do nothing but scoff at the prediction, until it happens, and then will cry "why didn't anyone tell me about this or do anything".
Wha? There are blizzards, snow storms, ice storms, hail and excessive temperature and pressure changes in the midwest (which lead to tornadoes).
no need to make it sound like all they have is tornadoes. Tornadoes just hit the trailer parks.
if you consider snow to be a natural disaster then you are probably from Atlanta
True, but natural disasters aren't the only reason I'm glad I don't live in California. Imploding economy, poor leadership, overbearing laws, and similar issues are others.
Yet another reason ... why I'm glad I don't live in the USA.
Fixed that for the GP. I mean, seriously. Is there a form of natural disaster you guys aren't under constant threat of?
I've lived south of Seattle for 30 years, and predictions like these have been coming for years and years. I've personally felt 2 earthquakes, and seen dust from Mt. Saint Helens. While this doesn't minimize the likelihood of another big earthquake, I just question the reason this is news - especially on /.
//TODO: create a signature
Well, either you or the moderators misunderstood that strip, though (my guess is that it's the mods). The point isn't that all extrapolation is bad, flimsy or invalid; it's just that not all naive extrapolations are automatically valid.
It's rather like with correlation and causation, too. Sure, correlation doesn't imply causation, but that doesn't mean that when there is correlation, there NEVER is causation (also an unfortunately all too common Slashdot meme that gets employed whenever an article causes cognitive dissonance...)
I'm curious what the impact of earthquakes in/around the NW would have on the Yellowstone Caldera.
Granted, it sounds like the earthquakes in the NW are orders of magnitude more frequent (and less catastrophic) than the eruption of the Yellowstone formation, but it seems likely that one might impact the other, being that they're only what, about 700mi apart?
-Styopa
I've lived in British Columbia for 28 years and this is old news. They've been measuring the distance and stress on the plates between Vancouver and Vancouver Island for decades. Most of us are well aware that at any time we could get hit with an earthquake of biblical proportions.
For the rest of the world they are referring to the North Eastern Pacific.
$ unzip, strip, touch, finger, grep, mount, fsck, more, yes,fsck,fsck,fsck,umount, sleep
The subduction zone is off the coast. How would an earthquake there affect Portland, Oregon, which is 80 miles inland?
Create a lot of new beachfront property?
John
Ducks and Beavers living together, UTTER CONFUSION!!!!
Arizona! Arizona doesn't have any overbearing laws.
Beware of the Leopard.
You must be new here. Any xkcd reference gets an automatic +3 Interesting/Insightful mod, it's built in to slashcode. The fact that you think that someone would click on a link before moderating is laughable.
37%? 37% even? Are you sure it's not 37.367%?
Honestly, guys.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
No statistician I have met was ever willing to extrapolate beyond the set.
How many have you met?
I ask because it is done every day. Virtually the entire work of theoretical econometrics is extrapolation, and complicated by the absence of the usual experimental controls. Climate scientists do it as well. Obviously the results are subject to a lot of debate. Some bookies have statisticians on staff. Insurance companies want all sorts of extrapolation from their actuaries. Players in futures markets aren't doing seat of the pants guessing. U Iowa has been studying prediction markets of many kinds on a large scale for a very long time, and have well developed statistical models. Large companies and governments alike pay people to forecast everything from crime rates to how many drilling permits to hand out.
But it's not pure extrapolation. Earthquakes in subduction zones are the result of pressure buildup. They are not spaced randomly, as the time between them is determined by the tectonic action that causes the pressure to be generated or released. Thus, the time difference between earthquakes is relevant.
I hate printers.
Actually, there was a pretty interesting BBC Horizon show on this a while back. Possibly the origin of the Thunderbird legend in Native American mythology and they traced a likely quake to a Tsunami that caused flooding in Japan according to an existing written record that is well dated. Aside from coastal flooding the question was whether the modern buildings would bend or break. Show left it with, "it'll be an interesting test."
I'd rather have earthquakes than tornadoes, hurricanes, or flooding. With an earthquake, at least all of your stuff is in the hole that used to be your house, rather than scattered around the county.
Of course, the latest fear-mongering here in the Pacific North-wet is that if the Cascadia Subduction Zone rips open, it could light off Mt. Rainier and other cascade volcanoes. Pyroclastic flows, lahars, and ash, oh my!
Is it weird in here, or is it just me?
If you live in the Pacific Northwest, there's a good chance that your house *is* built to at least some earthquake code. My house was built in 1960, has metal tie plates, and is bolted to the foundation, and not as a retrofit.
This isn't exactly new knowledge that earthquakes happen close to active volcanos, you know.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Besides, keep in mind that they said "Pacific Northwest". As in Seattle. And they note it's the Cascadia zone, which extends to Canada. And, by coincidence, northern California. This is pretty much along the western states.
Frankly, having grown up in California and now living in Seattle, I can deal with earthquakes - most of what they cause tends to be very mild widespread wide-scatter (emphasis on scatter) panic.
I'd rather live on the west coast than in, say, Pella Iowa. Not only are there twisters, but there is also little to do unless you're a dairy farmer. (Incidentally, I left California for another problem that isn't so much a disaster: little to no opportunity for someone of my skills.)
This sig no verb.
Just based on statistics, sure. However, tectonics provide some less fluffy predictions, and they also agree. I mean hell, you can go take a walk near Puget Sound and see where one side of the fault is sticking up a good 6 feet higher than the other. If that energy all releases at once (and there's nothing saying it will, but it might) we're absolutely going to have some problems up here.
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
Try reading the bill, smart guy. It specifically prohibits profiling based on skin color, and if the people claims the police officer did arrest them because of their skin color (and they can prove it), they hit pay dirt. By the way, the bill specifically states that such rare and difficult-to-obtain forms of identification like A DRIVER'S LICENSE is acceptable evidence that you're here legally. Actually read the bill for yourself and stop relying on biases "news" sources to feed you twisted summaries and you might actually learn the truth.
As a native to the Pacific Northwest, this is something you are constantly aware of. Every time there is a major earthquake or tsunami, the local news posts stories about how the "Big one" is due to hit in the next 50 years. Every time a volcanic eruption becomes major news, we get reports about how Mount Rainer is going to erupt and bury my hometown. I was born a year after our last major volcanic eruption, so you could say that this has been something I have been aware of my entire life.
More interesting than when the big one is going to hit is how well we are setup to handle it when it does. I was in a building rated only for a 7.0 Ricter magnitude quake during our last major quake (which measured 6.8), and there were major fears that the building was going to collapse either during or just after the quake. Luckily for me, it weathered the quake with only minor damage.
However, after the Chile quake last year, I heard a report from our local NPR affiliate comparing the infrastructure of the NW with the infrastructure of Chile (our buildings are built to roughly the same standards, and are around the same age), and mentioning that the state governments up here were taking interest in learning from the lessons of that quake to prepare better for our next big quake.
... It's not that I think the stories are incorrect so much as they serve no purpose other than to feed the human hunger for new and overwhelming things to fear.
I've lived in Los Angeles since I left Vancouver and been faced with the same cycle of destruction predictions and they serve no useful purpose. They are not instructive. They just terrify people to no real end. How are people supposed to respond to a supposedly impending natural disaster that spells utter destruction?...
How are people supposed to respond? Allow me to explain.
"Fear mongering" can create public pressure, and political support, for introducing strong building codes and enforcement, and effective disaster planning that can drastically reduce death and injury.
Alerting people to the danger, and giving them good information about danger zones (e.g. tsunamai strike zones, soil liquifaction zones, etc.) allows them to avoid placing themselves at avoidable risk.
Are you truly unaware of how you can reduce your own exposure to risk? If so, you have only your own ignorance to blame. (Hint: staying out of old masonry buildings helps. I sure do. Also, did you strap your water heater? How about that masonry chimney?)
Even the largest earthquake ever recorded did not create "utter destruction", even though it was vast; the vast majority of people still survived and most who died could have been saved with appropriate planning.
On the other hand, throwing up your hands and saying "nothing can be done" assures that the maximum number of people are killed and maimed.
Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
It's unknown if large geological events like this occur according to any central tendency. It may be that the mean time between large earthquakes is not related to the mean. Ultimately we have no idea, the data is not good enough to say...
This is an absurd contention. Paleoseismic research provides precisely this information, and is a very well developed field. Further, we actually understand the basic mechanism that creates very large earthquakes and thus have a normative theory that explains and reinforces a purely statistical approach. Large earthquakes follow the same frequency law (the Guttenburg-Richter Law) as small and moderate earthquakes.
It strikes me as sad (but I guess not surprising given the anti-scientific political culture on the right) to find this same contra-factual "we don't really know anything" claim for earthquake geology that is currently pushed by those hostile to climate research.
For a useful backgrounder on earthquake statistics loook at: www.earthquake.ethz.ch/education/NDK/NDK
Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj