Equipped To Survive Equipped To Survive® Presents
The Survival Forum
Where do you want to go on ETS?

Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#275817 - 07/17/15 12:49 PM Re: The New Yorker: The Really Big One [Re: Bingley]
Dagny Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/25/08
Posts: 1918
Loc: Washington, DC
Originally Posted By: Bingley
If you have a well-paying job in Seattle, and in your line of work it's hard to find a job anywhere else, will you still try to move away because of the possibility of an earthquake? People in the Northwest are aware a big one is coming, just like people in California know a big one is coming. But it's very hard to pull up your roots, leave your job, your friends, etc., for something that might happen in the next 100 years.

The alternative is to earthquake-proof your region as much as humanly possible, following Japan's example. Why aren't these areas doing that?



Doubtful many people in the PNW are interested in relocating because of the earthquake risk -- it's such a great place to live and its natural amenities (10,000-14,000-foot mountains, coastline, climate) don't exist anywhere else in the United States. And just about every region has threats -- natural (hurricanes/tornadoes/quakes) and/or man-made (terrorist targets like NYC, DC).

The extent of the CSZ threat is a pretty recent discovery and is continually being refined through scientific research. It wasn't until the 1990s that the public and public officials began to be informed about it. Building codes were strengthened, public awareness campaigns about tsunamis and preparedness were initiated.

California started strengthening its building codes after the 1933 Long Beach quake and has made the codes more strict with every successive big quake (Sylmar '71, Loma Prieta '89 and Northrdige '94). Oregonians did not even begin to become aware of the CSZ threat until the mid-90s.

The highest hurdle is to increase the earthquake resilience of the public and private-sector infrastructure. It's an enormous undertaking -- time-consming and extremely expensive -- but they are working on it. Most of Oregon's highway infrastructure dates back to the 1950s-70s and so do most of its buildings.

The state governments involved are constrained by their budget realities. For starters, state and local governments, unlike the feds, actually have to balance their budgets and earthquake preparedness competes with all the normal budgetary demands. State budgets were hammered by the economic crash of 2008-09.

Oregon is the 9th largest state (300 x 400 miles) but has only four million residents -- a subset of whom pay taxes. Absent federal largess, in normal times it is difficult to maintain the roads, bridges (8,000), train tracks (2400 miles), etc. Oregon has 72,000 miles of highways and roads. 300 miles of that is I-5, sitting atop the eastern edge of the CSZ, the north-south artery from Mexico to Canada.

Oregon's Department of Transportation estimates that a 9.0 CSZ quake would destroy (full or partial collapse) 400 bridges and cause major damage to 621 others.

http://www.oregon.gov/OMD/OEM/docs/earth_tsunami/2014%20Impacts%20on%20Oregon.pdf

On the private sector side, in Portland alone there are 1200 unreinforced masonry buildings -- deathtraps in a significant quake. Portland is a city of bridges, I-5 bisects the city. They're trying to retrofit these structures, but it is a daunting, multi-billion dollar endeavor. Here's one scenario for Portlanders to ponder ("The First Four Minutes"):

http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/the-first-four-minutes/Content?oid=5766214

I'm from Mt. Hood, Oregon, and my sister lives in Oregon City (suburb of Portland). ETS began influencing her life several years ago as the emerging knowledge of the CSZ threat and experiences with snow-clogged roads on Mt. Hood made her receptive to my urgings to keep some survival gear in her car (including water and protein bars). She's now in the habit of updating her kit for the seasons.

A couple nights ago we discussed the New Yorker article. She's fortunate that her home is newer so is in compliance with the latest building codes. Her house is secured to the foundation, her water heater is strapped to the wall, etc. But she has some catching up to do in terms of water storage and securing tall furniture and other things that may tip or fall off. The New Yorker article has been inspirational for her to progress further in her preparedness.

Like many Oregonians, the coast is one of her favorite places to vacation -- especially Cannon Beach (also my fave). We discussed whether in the future we'd opt for a hotel at some higher elevation, rather than our usual choices on the beach. And we pondered what we'd carry on future beach walks -- typically, we'd carry the hotel key and maybe a camera.

For sure, on my next beach walk on the Oregon coast I'll be carrying a daypack.

Will be a challenge to not make the pack so heavy I'd need a pack mule....

Twenty years ago, if I were walking on Cannon Beach and there were an earthquake, I'd probably have just stood there, stunned and looking around. Today, for darn sure if I felt even a slight tremor on that beach I'd be running toward the hills. A lot of Oregonians have similarly evolved in their reactions. Going to require constant reminders to ensure they stay so cognizant.


.

Top
#275819 - 07/17/15 03:01 PM Re: The New Yorker: The Really Big One [Re: Dagny]
Russ Offline
Geezer

Registered: 06/02/06
Posts: 5357
Loc: SOCAL
Shepard Smith on Foxnews had a rather long segment discussing the CSZ. Per his report the wall of water that will hit the PNW coast will be up to 100' high and 700 miles long (Vancouver Island to NoCal). Fortunately, my place is over 300' elevation and the terrain has survived 10,000 years of ruptures. Regardless, the CSZ issue is getting much more press lately.


Edited by Russ (07/18/15 01:12 AM)
Edit Reason: Corrected info

Top
#275820 - 07/17/15 06:34 PM Re: The New Yorker: The Really Big One [Re: Dagny]
Dagny Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/25/08
Posts: 1918
Loc: Washington, DC
That New Yorker article really struck a chord. Many who are blogging or are writing other news articles are citing how exceptionally impactful the author's prose is.

Oregon has done tsunami zone maps for its entire coast. I was just looking at the Cannon Beach map. Where I've normally stayed is at the center of town (near Ecola Creek) with the longest trek to high ground. So I think in the future I'd stay in a place closer to the green safe zone (tsunami-wise).

http://www.oregongeology.org/pubs/tsubrochures/CannonBeachEvacBrochure-5-21-13onscreen.pdf



.

Top
#275821 - 07/18/15 01:24 AM Re: The New Yorker: The Really Big One [Re: Dagny]
Russ Offline
Geezer

Registered: 06/02/06
Posts: 5357
Loc: SOCAL
Shepard Smith based much of his report on the New Yorker article and also had Michio Kaku (City College of New York Physicist & Professor) to comment on the subject. Very interesting discussion, and if you're interested it is on YouTube of all places - Rpt: Mega-Quake Would Destroy Big Portion Of Pacific Northwest - First Warning - Shepard Smith Rpt. Good graphics for those who like pictures.

My property is over 300 ft elevation and well inland, but it is totally within a DNR liquefaction zone.

Top
#275823 - 07/18/15 02:15 AM Re: The New Yorker: The Really Big One [Re: Dagny]
dougwalkabout Offline
Crazy Canuck
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 02/03/07
Posts: 3223
Loc: Alberta, Canada
That is a hair-raising article. Thanks for posting.

We had thought about retiring out on Vancouver Island (in the distant future) because the climate is so much more friendly to geezers. A great many Canucks from the Prairies (the interior of the continent -- Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba) have had the same idea.

Are the direct benefits worth the risk? Phew. Good question.

Edit: how the heck do you make that calculation? Thoughts?


Edited by dougwalkabout (07/18/15 03:50 AM)

Top
#275824 - 07/18/15 05:24 AM Re: The New Yorker: The Really Big One [Re: dougwalkabout]
Mark_R Offline
Old Hand

Registered: 05/29/10
Posts: 863
Loc: Southern California
Originally Posted By: dougwalkabout
..
Edit: how the heck do you make that calculation? Thoughts?


There's an entire field of study called risk management which takes into account the severity of the event(s), the mathematical probability of the event(s), and the countermeasures needed to make the system (building, aircraft, car, water/sewer infrastructure, cell phone, etc) robust enough to survive it. The FAA has it nicely explained in their Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2), chapter 4.

https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies...ia/rmh_ch04.pdf

For a particular location, check with the local Emergency Management Agency for what they consider the top priorities. The very nature of their work requires heavy risk analysis and management.
_________________________
Hope for the best and prepare for the worst.

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane

Top
#275825 - 07/18/15 06:04 AM Re: The New Yorker: The Really Big One [Re: Dagny]
Bingley Offline
Veteran

Registered: 02/27/08
Posts: 1577
What are some good links for earthquake prep? I looked on equipped, and I didn't see anything specific to that. I'll go google a bit, but if there is a good site you know off the top of your head, please share!

Top
#275829 - 07/18/15 07:16 AM Re: The New Yorker: The Really Big One [Re: Bingley]
EMPnotImplyNuclear Offline
Enthusiast

Registered: 09/10/08
Posts: 382
tsunami
earthquake
72hours.org Are you prepared? archive

Earthquake Country Alliance: Welcome to Earthquake Country!

Earthquake Country Alliance: Seven Steps to Earthquake Safety

NOAA Tsunami Warning Center

tsunamiready.noaa.gov
TsunamiZone.org - Are You in the Zone?
Earthquake Country Alliance: Seven Steps to Earthquake Safety

earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/preparedness.php

earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/preparelinks.php

The Disaster Handbook - National Edition Earthquakes

Top
#275830 - 07/18/15 12:09 PM Re: The New Yorker: The Really Big One [Re: Bingley]
Dagny Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/25/08
Posts: 1918
Loc: Washington, DC
Originally Posted By: Bingley
What are some good links for earthquake prep? I looked on equipped, and I didn't see anything specific to that. I'll go google a bit, but if there is a good site you know off the top of your head, please share!



I'm impressed by Oregon Public Broadcasting's guide to preparing:

http://www.opb.org/news/article/cascadia-earthquake-pacific-northwest-prepare/


They followed some families who practiced survival post-quake:

http://www.opb.org/news/series/unprepared/


The Red Cross has a handy checklist one-pager and a service for survivors to check-in so family and friends can be assured that they are okay:

http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m4240216_Earthquake.pdf


CDC has a comprehensive quake preparedness page.

http://emergency.cdc.gov/disasters/earthquakes/

CDC's kit list is worth perusing:

http://emergency.cdc.gov/disasters/earthquakes/supplies.asp


FEMA has a number of resources for fortifying your home.

https://www.fema.gov/earthquake-safety-home


Pulling from all these and other sources, I'm compiling my own checklist to share with my sister in Portland and periodically nudge her on specific items. Yesterday, I went on Amazon and ordered a Reliance Aquitainer (7 gal.) to get her moving on water storage and small AM-FM radio and battery container for her car.

Am also compiling links of some items I think she should look into -- such as one or more rain barrels, an emergency stash of water that would be useful for flushing toilets should the city service be cut of.

http://www.lowes.com/Outdoors/Watering-Irrigation-Drainage/Rain-Barrels/_/N-1z0wg6q/pl?cm_mmc=search_google-_-Hardscape%20Exact%20Brand-_-Rain%20Barrels-_-lowes%20rain%20barrel&k_clickID=3cc9abf2-5ef9-20c8-e289-0000257aa26c#!







.

Top
#275831 - 07/18/15 12:19 PM Re: The New Yorker: The Really Big One [Re: dougwalkabout]
Dagny Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/25/08
Posts: 1918
Loc: Washington, DC
Originally Posted By: dougwalkabout
That is a hair-raising article. Thanks for posting.

We had thought about retiring out on Vancouver Island (in the distant future) because the climate is so much more friendly to geezers. A great many Canucks from the Prairies (the interior of the continent -- Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba) have had the same idea.

Are the direct benefits worth the risk? Phew. Good question.

Edit: how the heck do you make that calculation? Thoughts?



Geologists believe that the northern portion of the CSZ is less likely to rupture soon than the southern portion (Oregon-California) is. Odds are it won't happen in your lifetime.

If I could retire on Vancouver Island, I'd do it. Just would choose and fortify my home with regard to the quake-tsunami risk. And prep accordingly.

And go on living.

Good luck! :-)


.

Top
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >



Moderator:  MartinFocazio, Tyber 
May
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
Who's Online
0 registered (), 245 Guests and 7 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Explorer9, GallenR, Jeebo, NicholasMarshall, Yadav
5368 Registered Users
Newest Posts
New Madrid Seismic Zone
by Jeanette_Isabelle
Yesterday at 03:49 PM
EDC Reduction
by Jeanette_Isabelle
05/16/24 07:59 PM
Any shortages where you are?
by adam2
05/16/24 09:49 AM
Bird Flu (H5N1) found in cattle -- are Humans next
by dougwalkabout
05/10/24 01:28 AM
My Doug Ritter Folder Attacked Me!
by dougwalkabout
05/04/24 02:30 AM
People Are Not Paying Attention
by Bingley
04/28/24 03:24 AM
Corny Jokes
by wildman800
04/24/24 10:40 AM
Newest Images
Tiny knife / wrench
Handmade knives
2"x2" Glass Signal Mirror, Retroreflective Mesh
Trade School Tool Kit
My Pocket Kit
Glossary
Test

WARNING & DISCLAIMER: SELECT AND USE OUTDOORS AND SURVIVAL EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES AND TECHNIQUES AT YOUR OWN RISK. Information posted on this forum is not reviewed for accuracy and may not be reliable, use at your own risk. Please review the full WARNING & DISCLAIMER about information on this site.