This morning in the NY Times there is a good video and article: Promises of Preparedness Followed Devastating Earthquakes. And Yet. The video with this article is well worth watching.

Great video, good reminders. Thanks.

It seems lots of places in the US are now past due for having catastrophic sized quakes. One wonders if there might not be some domino effect possible, especially along the west coast.

That is an excellent report and video, thanks. For me, experiencing the unexpected will forever include the 5.8 magnitude August 2011 earthquake on the east coast (the Washington Monument -- damaged in that quake -- is only now nearing reopening).

Coincidentally, my to-do list this weekend includes cleaning out the car and fine-tuning the preps in it for spring.

All we, as individuals, can control is how prepared we are.



.

Earthquake prediction, at present, is not really possible, although there have been lots of attempts. A region may be overdue, or it may be underdue (is that a word?)for all we really know.

You just have to get ready,and stay ready. I am now in the habit of filling up when the gas tank is half empty. Post quake, gasoline will be in short supply. I also keep a robust pry bar under the bed....

I was going to ask why you need it in the bedroom, but decided that I don't wish to pry into your affairs!

Here in SD the only quakes we get are "geostatic rebound"- basically the Earth springing back from the weight of the now-melted glaciers that once covered the region.

if you extend the non preparedness to severe events in general... it's been 10 years since the power outages of the 04 hurricane season, and new (to Florida) neighbors questioned why I have more than one bulk propane tank for the grill...

Pry bars are needed to open doors in damaged door frames after a quake. Everyone working in a building should have one in their desk at work too. However, this may be frowned upon by some employers, so maybe a large screwdriver would be more acceptable.

I always thought that if I lived in a quake prone area like SoCal, I'd make sure that each bed in my home had a supply drawer or hollow on the underside for emergency gear. My custom bed would also have a plywood or metal grill canopy , supported by HD posts. What do you think: Chicken Little fantasy or a good marketing idea?

I think Ritter has it right as set forth here: www.equipped.org/earthqk.htm. I am dispersing my supplies throughout my property, since there may be considerable damage and some areas may be inaccessible. I just shove a few basic items under the bed, like the pry bar, kept there so I can pry my way out (In the event, AkSAR and others are welcome to pry into my affairs, likely the sooner the better).

I believe reinforced four posters have been marketed here in SoCal, but I don't think large numbers have been sold. If you have a one story framed dwelling, you are in an inherently good structure for withstanding EQs,especially if you are properly tied to your slab or foundation.

I always chuckle at the brief appearance of incredibly cheesy "survival kits" in the local big boxes following any shaking event that gets significant coverage. They disappear after a month.

I have been told that there is a dip in the housing market following something like Northridge or Loma Prieta, but that things are back to normal in about three months. Sounds about right.....

I am in the process of tweaking my EQ preps and renewing perishables.

This is true. Wood frame construction is generally among the safer places to be in an earthquake. The house can give and flex with the shaking, but not fall down on top of you. The house may damaged enough so as to be not be repairable afterwords, but you will likely live through the quake.

There are some exceptions to this, of course. If your house is built on ground prone to landslide, the house may be ripped apart. This is what happened in many of the photos you may have seen of the '64 Alaska Earthquake. Many of the deaths in Anchorage were in the "Turnagain Heights" area, where part of the subdivision was destroyed in a landslide.

The other thing that will get you in a wood frame house is things inside the house falling on you. Tall bookcases with heavy potted plants on top are not a good idea in earthquake country!

Nor are mirrors on the ceiling.....

A good idea IMHO, I read somewhere of concerned parents in earthquake country who purchased heavy duty steel framed bunk beds for kids with only the lower bunk used for sleeping.
The steel frame and upper bunk giving some protection against any structural damage to the home.
The upper bunk could be used for storage of only soft and lightweight articles such as spare bedding.

But it is more exciting if you are sleeping in the upper bunk when the shock comes rolling through. I know, I was sleeping in an upper bunk far from the epicenter when Northridge struck. It was a pretty good alarm clock...

We're good to go here, single story frame construction and no bunk-beds Still, I keep a good headlamp, flashlight, pry bar and boots nearby. Headlamp and boots are the priority. There's no telling what will have broken that you really don't want to step on.

Meanwhile, my other half is convinced I'll sleep right through it The dog will wake me up...

An easily accessible headlamp and boots or other sturdy footwear are definitely a good idea. Wood frame houses can flex a lot. Windows not so much.

I also keep a gas shut off wrench zip tied to the main valve by the gas meter on the outside of our house.

For a well thought out approach to dealing with earthquakes, consult "Seven Steps to Earthquake Safety" by Earthquake Country Alliance. I also highly recommend CERT training -here in earthquake country, specific measures for EQs are prominent. I keep a gas valve wrench in my CERT pack.

I mentioned earlier about the brief appearance of crummy emergency supply kits in stores immediately after a shaking event. One exception appears to be the local REI, which regularly stocks what appears to be a fairly decent emergency kit, although I am a staunch adherent of DIY for items like this.

the real dilemma here - is that we are all victims of "other peoples' preparedness". After the big quake in Japan (was it 2011?), I did a quick survey of my building in L.A. Virtually no-one had put away any kind of food and water reserves ... maybe people had 1 gallon at home. I was shocked. That water will last people a couple of days. Many, many people in L.A. are still like that now. Drills on "earthquake preparedness" are going nowhere - because people have heard the message too often.

There's no need to tell you what WILL happen. It a repeat of Katrina, but on a much larger scale. Stores will be looted immediately after a major quake. I figure that most people will run out of water in 2-3 days in Los Angeles, and maybe 4-5 days for food. After that ... all H*LL breaks loose. Unfortunately, there are a lot of "paranoid" people who have armed themselves - expecting this exact scenario. I personally thing the events will be much nastier than New Orleans - because a much larger city is involved.

I still expect we will see the "best" and the "worst" of human nature. But the "worst" will be a lot scarier than the USA has seen before ... I'm thinking anyway. I hope I am wrong.

Pete

I am not quite as pessimistic as you about the aftermath of a major quake in LA. Theregion has experienced Northridge in 94 and Sylmar in the early 70s, both with major damage. I believe there was indeed some looting, but nothing like societal collapse.

During the Northridge event, a lady thought the shuddering she felt while driving on the freeway might have been a flat tire. She was relieved to find it was "only" an EQ. It makes sense for her personally when you think about it. Changing a tire during the morning rush hour on a major freeway is fraught with peril

Actually, it is hard to say what "WILL happen", other than it probably will be different than what any of us imagine. I tend to agree with hikermor that while there may well be some looting and other social unrest in local areas, widespread societal collapse is rather unlikely, in my opinion.

I'm a geoscientist by training, and while my day job doesn't involve earthquakes, I'm very interested in the subject and have read a great deal about both historical earthquakes and basic earthquake science. The thing is that the effects of even a very large quake vary greatly across the region. Besides the size of the quake and distance from the epicenter, much depends on what sort of ground is under you. Areas underlain by bedrock do much better than areas on soft sediments or fill. Likewise, much depends on the quality of construction. Hence the severity of damage, death, and destruction also varies greatly. Likewise, the time it will take local, state, and federal emergency response to reach and help people will also vary over the area.

A few years back, the USGS assembled a large team (geologists, seismologists, engineers, emergency planners, etc) and tried to come up with a realistic scenario for what might happen if a M 7.8 quake started near the Salton Sea and ripped for 200 miles (300 km) to the north along the San Andreas Fault. You might want to take a look at the fact sheet for The ShakeOut Earthquake Scenario — A Story That Southern Californians Are Writing. The full 312 page report with the science behind it is at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1150/.

Ah, yes- nature of the ground and quality of construction. Much of my community is built on marine sediments, susceptible to liquefaction (buildings may sink into the ground when shaken). The local hospital is building an extensive addition and a major part of the project has been digging a mammoth hole and preparing the extensive subfoundation - as I understand it, a mammoth concrete plug on which the foundation will be placed - all to counter the effects of potential liquefaction.

AKSAR - I'm hoping that the Shakeout is the "most probable" outcome ... and not something worse. But if you look at the ground accelerations predicted for the Shakeout - they are still very high across large parts of the LA Basin. I think I saw comments recently that hundreds, and maybe thousands, of buildings will be badly damaged (or come down). We have still not brought all properties up to code, and some are also historic buildings. My main concern in terms of disasters is probably the fire potential - since water mains will be broken. we have many neighborhoods in LA now which have been built up to very high population densities ... almost no room between adjacent houses and apartments.

Ultimately, it is the human reaction to the earthquake which I think is our biggest problem. there are very few fresh water sources in L.A., and it is impossible for the Gov't to get supplies to millions of people. so if the freeways are down, and people run out of water & food, that is the real problem (along with a climate of fear created by the earthquake and the subsequent fires).

Pete

It will suck to be in LA and other points covered in red when San Andreas cuts loose. Fortunately I live in an area covered by blue-green on that last graphic and should have no structural damage in that scenario. There are lots of faults throughout SOCAL though; San Andreas could trigger other faults which may put more red on that map.

Yes, Southern California does have its faults, and new ones are discovered all the time when they cause an EQ. Basically, I think we are all pretty much at risk to about the same degree.

The "same degree", I wouldn't take it that far. Just saying that not being in a Red zone on the graphic doesn't make you safe, just less threatened; a 5.8 EQ is not a minor shake, but it's way better than a 7.8 EQ. In general the entire SOCAL region will be in bad shape, but I have confidence this humble dwelling will mostly remain standing.

If I had my choice, I would rather live out the aftermath of an earthquake. Which although has the potential to destroy a lot of property and infrastructure in the actual earthquake and the immediate in terms of fire etc, it sure beats living in the aftermath of a flood where water can damage everything beyond any semblance of repair.

As for the question of water. Yes it may be hard to come by in the immediate quake center but there is enough US logistical support such as the military that has the ability to not only clean and sanitize water but also desalinate salt water if required. Also I am sure other countries such as Canada would deploy their DART team which can provide up to 50,000 liters of clean water per day.

Interesting related note to this. My wife who went over with a NGO to the Philippines immediately after Typhoon Haiyan, relayed to me that once aid from countries from around the world ramped up, they were almost overwhelmed in terms of logistics and supplies pouring in, even though that country does not even have close to the same infrastructure as California or any other major US regions.

In the event of a real major earthquake, I would suspect the same logistics and support would flood into the California area and there would be more then a couple of aircraft carriers and other navy ships anchored off the coast along with 1000's of hands of help coming onshore in a very short time. Not to mention the vast US civilian and military air support that would be put to use.

Teslinhiker - I do agree that the arrival of major naval ships is likely to help Los Angeles a lot. I'm not sure, though, that the "swing into action" phase can reach people in the first 10 days. so there is a time window there of about a week where ugliness could prevail.

I just read a nice article today by a lady who is a geologist from Oregon. she quoted another eminent seismologist (geophysicist) as saying something like this: "For those cities in the world where the population is high and earthquake risks are real - it would be appropriate to spend as much on 'earthquake defense' as they do on military defense". that's not an exact quote, but that was the meaning. I thought it was a very good comment, and it is applicable to Los Angeles and San Francisco right now. but no-one is doing it.

Pete

Pete, I think you greatly overestimate the time it would take the US military to respond to a major quake in Socal, and greatly underestimate the level of support they could provide.

You seem to be forgetting that there is a very large military footprint already in California, which could swing into action quite rapidly. And, it should be pointed out that the military bases in CA are dispersed over a wide area. Even assuming one or more bases were themselves hard hit by the quake, the others could still respond very quickly.

Just a short and by no means complete list:

Camp Pendleton - the 1st Marine Division is practically next door to LA.
Naval Base San Diego - Just a short sail down the coast, San Diego is home port to more than 50 navy ships, numerous other commands, and thousands of sailors. The first ships could arrive in LA in a couple of days.
Marine Corps Air Station Miramar - Also just down the coast near San Diego, home of the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing.
Fort Irwin - out in the desert, home of the Blackhorse Regiment.
Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms - Also out in the desert, lots Marines out there too.
Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow - More Marines, and lots of stuff.
Point Magu - big navy base with lots of sailors and planes.
Port Hueneme - lots of Seabees and their construction equipment.
Travis AFB - a bit further away, but how long does it take to fly one of their C-5s or C-17s to LA? (Not long!)

The point being that Socal has a great deal of military support very close at hand, which could be quickly mobilized in the event of a major disaster. The rest of the country should be so lucky!

By the way, did you mention civil unrest? Just how long do you think that would last when the Marines arrive? Not very damn long, I will wager.

None of this is meant to imply that a M 7 or 8 earthquake in Socal would not be a terrible thing. It would be extremely bad. The USGS scenario I linked upthread talks about thousands killed, many thousands more injured, major fires burning out of control, services severely disrupted for many months, and years for the economy to begin to recover. However, it is well to keep things in perspective. In many ways Socal is much better prepared than many other regions of the country (such as Oregon, for example).

I'm less confident. the reason why - is because we have millions of people in the disaster zone. Literally millions. It's simply IMPOSSIBLE for relief agencies to pass out water and food to millions of people over the space of a few days. it cant be done ... its a logistics impossibility. No doubt there will be some quick-action responders. They might set up some distribution points - but those places will get flooded with people. and many more people will never have access. The whole system would work fine if everyone in L.A. stored 2-3 weeks worth of food and water in their houses. Then it should be possible to get by. But as I said, we're lucky if people have 2-3 days worth of stuff. I do not think it will be possible for the military to enforce martial law on Los Angeles during the 1'st week after the Big Quake. More likely, they will be told to guard specific keypoints that need protection. But the city will be very messed up, it's a very big area, and there are far too many confused, frightened and rioting people. I still think "anything is possible" in that first 7-10 day period.

AND just to add something ... food for thought. The Marines at Camp Pendleton - yes they're a "force for good". But the problem for them is that the "escape route" for L.A. that goes south might be intact ... meaning that thousands and thousands of desperate people from L.A. will head towards San Diego. The Pendleton Marines will have their hands completely full - just dealing with those refugees, getting them supplies, and keeping law & order. And the Marines at Twenty-Nine Palms have a totally different headache. First, they are right beside the San Andreas fault - so they will take damage themselves. And then next ... their immediate neighbors are Palm Springs and Palm Desert. Those two populated areas are sitting on TOP of the San Andreas - they will be rubble. So the Twenty-Nine Palms Marines probably cant get any further than Palm Springs - so much help will be needed right there. And if they do go deeper into L.A. - they will just encounter huge crowds of refugees who are trying to escape by going east. It's a mess. No matter what the Marines commanders decide - its Mission Impossible.

Just my $0.02.
And I would certainly like to be wrong about this.

Pete

Picked up the paper this morning and this was on the front page: http://www.latimes.com/local/earthquakes/la-me-adv-fault-map-20140506-story.html#page=1

In a nutshell, the piece sketches some of the forces enabling denial of potential damage from earthquakes. When you have millions invested in a property, of course there is no danger from faults - faults, what faults? I paid a gemologist good money to tell me there are no faults under my building.....

Unfortunately, many faults are "hidden" until, say, some seismic activity reveals their presence. Take the LA basin, for instance. There are many new faults discovered in the past couple decades. For example, geologists think the Puente Hills Fault can cause significant damage to the LA area but it was only discovered in 1999.

The rapid expansion of fracking has also revealed many new faults and fault systems that were unknown before, too.

There is a two fold problem. The first issue is, as you note, simply finding and mapping in detail the faults. That there was probably a significant fault somewhere along the southern side of the eastern Santa Monica Mountains was recognized by geologists as early as 1908. Mapping the fault in sufficient detail to be a useful guide about where or where not to build is even tougher. In areas with a cover of soil and vegetation it can be extemely difficult to find faults at all, let along map them in detail. Areas that have been built up are even tougher, since many subtle topographic hints of faulting will have been bulldozed and paved over.

The second problem is determining a likelihood that the fault is still active. Since the repeat time of quakes can be many decades or even many centuries, the fact that no historical quake has been known to occur does not mean the fault is inactive. The methods of Paleoseismology have only been developed since the '70s, and can only work in certain environoments. And the results are often approximate at best. In onshore areas this typically requires trenching, and even then may not be definitive. And perusading someone to dig a deep trench in an area of high real estate values can be even more challenging!

It is the same issue that comes up in any discussion of potential risks, and expensive mitigation. It is not really any different than telling people they shouldn't build in river flood zones, below landslides, on barrier islands subject to hurricanes and sea level rise, etc etc. The annoying part is that all too often, the people who deny there is any risk, or actively suppress any effort to publicize those risks, are the same people who after a quake/flood/slide demand that the public help pay for them to rebuild in those same areas.

I hope your "gemologist" bought some nice jewellery with the money you paid him?