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
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".
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
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
Arizona! Arizona doesn't have any overbearing laws.
Beware of the Leopard.
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.
Somehow I doubt it. Vulcanism is a completely different natural process than plate tectonics. If anything, a massive earthquake like this, even if its energy did reach that far away, would, at most, shift the location of the hotspot where the future eruption is likely to take place. Which means that a section of thin earth (the hotspot) would be pushed away and replaced with a section of thicker earth that hadn't been warmed to the same degree yet. This should minimize the chance for a new eruption, not increase it.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
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.
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.
... 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