"Our operating assumption is that everything west of Interstate 5 will be toast." Ouch.
This shouldn't be in the article. It's unscientific, non-technically, and pretty much meaningless.
1700 Cascadia Earthquake
11–20 of 118 posts
Re: 1700 Cascadia Earthquake
#12I love how some cultures have recordkeeping that goes back hundreds of years that can be tied to explain some unusual sediment deposits found halfway around the world.
Nearby this in Oregon is Crater Lake, which is the stunning remnant of a catastrophic volcanic eruption 7,700 years ago. The volcanic explosivity index classifies it as a 7, "super-colossal", i.e. an order of magnitude larger than Krakatoa. And indeed there are Native American tribes who have passed down the story of the eruption over the millennia, believing it to be the site of a battle between gods. Super cool to see folklore and geology intersect.
Re: 1700 Cascadia Earthquake
#13Re: 1700 Cascadia Earthquake
#14"Our operating assumption is that everything west of Interstate 5 will be toast." Ouch.
It's a great soundbite, but it loses a lot of context when distilled down. Most of the infill west of I5 in the Seattle area will probably liquefy, but there's mountain ranges to the west of I5 that would take a hell of a quake to toast.
Anything low lying in that area is at high risk in a cascadia quake. Buildings on high ground "only" have the quake risk, which is still significant.
Re: 1700 Cascadia Earthquake
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a great soundbite, but it loses a lot of context when distilled down. Most of the infill west of I5 in the Seattle area will probably liquefy, but there's mountain ranges to the west of I5 that would take a hell of a quake to toast.
Anything low lying in that area is at high risk in a cascadia quake. Buildings on high ground "only" have the quake risk, which is still significant.
I'm more concerned about the homes that will go up in flames due to ruptured gas lines. With the fire department overwhelmed, the potential amount of toxic smoke/fumes post-quake scares me more than the quake. Assuming I survive, assuming my family/friends do, assuming we all even are happy about being survivors of something so colossal, at such scale...
Re: 1700 Cascadia Earthquake
#16Would not be complete without this fantastic article: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big...
Fun song by Tacocat inspired by this article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJH1WKSugNo
I saw them perform it at a concert in front of the Space Needle. Really felt I was tempting fate there.
Re: 1700 Cascadia Earthquake
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
This shouldn't be in the article. It's unscientific, non-technically, and pretty much meaningless.
I'm not sure I would call statements by a FEMA director "unscientific."
You aren't actually making a point.
Are you saying that ""Our operating assumption is that everything west of Interstate 5 will be toast" has scientific value?
Are you saying that because of someone's tittle they are incapable of saying something hyperbolic?
Do you disagree with my word use? What is a better word?
Re: 1700 Cascadia Earthquake
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything low lying in that area is at high risk in a cascadia quake. Buildings on high ground "only" have the quake risk, which is still significant.
I'm more concerned about the homes that will go up in flames due to ruptured gas lines. With the fire department overwhelmed, the potential amount of toxic smoke/fumes post-quake scares me more than the quake. Assuming I survive, assuming my family/friends do, assuming we all even are happy about being survivors of something so colossal, at such scale...
The worst smoke can do is suffocate you, or raise your risk of cancer, but you can move out of harm's way.
The quake itself and tsunami risk is the dangerous part for most people.
Re: 1700 Cascadia Earthquake
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure I would call statements by a FEMA director "unscientific."
You aren't actually making a point. Are you saying that ""Our operating assumption is that everything west of Interstate 5 will be toast" has scientific value? Are you saying that because of someone's tittle they are incapable of saying something hyperbolic? Do you disagree with my word use? What is a better word?
Neither are you
Re: 1700 Cascadia Earthquake
#20Would not be complete without this fantastic article: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big...
From that article:
> fema projects that nearly thirteen thousand people will die in the Cascadia earthquake and tsunami.
From the rest of the article, it seems that this estimate of deaths is too low by an order of magnitude. More people died in the Fukushima earthquake, and that is in a country that is probably the most earthquake ready country in the world.
If you only have 15 minutes from the start of the earthquake to when the tsunami rolls in, given the density and the lack of preparation, I could easily see several 100 thousand people perishing if not a million.