Slashdot Mirror
What Will Happen When Cascadia Subduction Zone Slips
Noryungi writes: The New Yorker has published a chilling account of what would happen in the case of a major earthquake (roughly magnitude 9.0) inevitably striking the Cascadia subduction. "Under pressure from Juan de Fuca, the stuck edge of North America is bulging upward and compressing eastward, at the rate of, respectively, three to four millimetres and thirty to forty millimetres a year. It can do so for quite some time, because, as continent stuff goes, it is young, made of rock that is still relatively elastic. (Rocks, like us, get stiffer as they age.) But it cannot do so indefinitely." Most of the west coast of the U.S. and Canada is at risk, from Vancouver all the way down to Los Angeles and beyond. Most of the states and cities within this region are woefully under-prepared for a large earthquake. Scientists peg the odds at 1-in-3 for a quake within the next 50 years, and 1-in-10 for a really powerful one.
Why not take out of Oklahoma's or Texas's playbook and do some fracking near the fault line? It will likely cause earthquakes but hopefully they would be minor, and would relieve the pressure a little bit at a time, instead of all at once.
Every so often I like to look over this list just so see what kinds of things can go wrong with the planet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
This one has always gotten my attention, I have heard about from multiple sources.
10 deadliest volcanic eruptions --1815 eruption of Mount Tambora-- 92,000 dead -- Year Without a Summer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It just boggles my mind that there is a real potential for global disaster like this. I believe there is only a 40-90 day world wide food surplus available. I remember in the 1970s there were some discussions on the talking head shows about it. I think it was after Vietnam and the talking heads were scraping the barrel for things to get people excited about. A few economists said it was too big of a capital expenditure on something with a speculative return. But the possibility of an event is not 0... gives me something to ponder when I don't have anything else to worry about.
Actually, neither is astounding, considering how shallow their bench is
Particularly to find a young face to put in ads. The average Dem in congress is something like 5 years older now than the average Republican. The GOP has clearly been shaken up in the past decade, with lots of new faces (and the shaking hasn't stopped - lots of conservative blogs now spend more time criticizing Republicans than Democrats).
Yes, they have some toxic folks among them (e.g. Trump), but they'll flame out long before the primaries are underway.
Trump is an "issue candidate", not a real contender. He's using the race to get a soapbox to stand on, a long tradition in American, and I think a good one. It's the only way to bring some points of view into the political discussion at all, and it's good to have these arguments about issues during the primaries..
Sanders has the populist imagination
I've come to like Sanders: much as I fine his politics vile, his quite upfront and honest about what he stands for. We need more of that in politics!
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.