The Really Big One

Generali

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one

A long but absolutely fascinating piece about the largest fault line in the US you've never heard of which may, or of course may not, produce a bigger earthquake than the one in Japan that made a bit of a mess of things in 2011 and indeed continues to do so.

The time to save people from a tsunami is before it happens, but the region has not yet taken serious steps toward doing so. Hotels and businesses are not required to post evacuation routes or to provide employees with evacuation training. In Oregon, it has been illegal since 1995 to build hospitals, schools, firehouses, and police stations in the inundation zone, but those which are already in it can stay, and any other new construction is permissible: energy facilities, hotels, retirement homes. In those cases, builders are required only to consult with DOGAMI about evacuation plans. “So you come in and sit down,” Ian Madin says. “And I say, ‘That’s a stupid idea.’ And you say, ‘Thanks. Now we’ve consulted.’ ”

purch

As long as Superman is around to save the day, why should the Yanks worry :eek:

Generali

purch wrote: »

As long as Superman is around to save the day, why should the Yanks worry :eek:

What could possibly go wrong:

we now know that the Pacific Northwest has experienced forty-one subduction-zone earthquakes in the past ten thousand years. If you divide ten thousand by forty-one, you get two hundred and forty-three, which is Cascadia’s recurrence interval: the average amount of time that elapses between earthquakes. That timespan is dangerous both because it is too long—long enough for us to unwittingly build an entire civilization on top of our continent’s worst fault line—and because it is not long enough. Counting from the earthquake of 1700, we are now three hundred and fifteen years into a two-hundred-and-forty-three-year cycle.

[Deleted User]

Must be the power of prayer keeping nature at bay.

WR

michaels

Generali wrote: »

What could possibly go wrong:

I am not sure the mean without ant distribution information is that useful in this case....

antrobus

Generali wrote: »

...A long but absolutely fascinating piece about the largest fault line in the US you've never heard of which may, or of course may not, produce a bigger earthquake than the one in Japan that made a bit of a mess of things in 2011 and indeed continues to do so.

The "economy of the Pacific Northwest will collapse"? Is that all? If Yellowstone goes off, that's the end of the USA. Probably the end of a good deal of the world as well, mind you.

Jonbvn

antrobus wrote: »

The "economy of the Pacific Northwest will collapse"? Is that all? If Yellowstone goes off, that's the end of the USA. Probably the end of a good deal of the world as well, mind you.

If Yellowstone goes up, I suggest we all assume the crash position.

Mistermeaner

I know they're generally a bit bad but I kind of wish the UK had more earthquakes. Or just generally more extreme natural disasters etc. Just as long as I'm not personally effected of course

Generali

michaels wrote: »

I am not sure the mean without ant distribution information is that useful in this case....

They make the very same point in the article. As they put it, the average of 9 and 11 is 10, as is the average of 2 and 18.

cells

If building there was banned wouldn't existing building prices go up significantly and hence the cost of the damage be even more?

its virtually impossible to move cities. How do you tell a city worth msybe $1Trillion that you want it to decay and die slowly so it can avoid dieing fast some decades or centuries later

Generali

cells wrote: »

If building there was banned wouldn't existing building prices go up significantly and hence the cost of the damage be even more?

its virtually impossible to move cities. How do you tell a city worth msybe $1Trillion that you want it to decay and die slowly so it can avoid dieing fast some decades or centuries later

There is more that could be done, for example bringing the building code up to recognise the risks the area faces and moving schools to higher ground.

Clearly you can't just abandon Seattle but there is plenty that could be done to mitigate the risk. That people can simply continue to put up buildings that will likely kill the inhabitants if a known disaster happens (it's when not if) then that's just plain dumb.