Do you really think "the Big One" is coming? (San Diego: home, earthquakes)

[LoriBee62]

Originally Posted by capoeira

How about in Mexico City in 1985?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNWCYG2MnC8

Poor construction standards.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by Bluefox

Yeah that IMO is the far bigger threat to the West Coast. In the hierarchy of natural disasters tsunami is king. The areas within the inundation zones will be completely erased and not a question of if but when.

This is more of a concern for the PNW, and maybe the far northern parts of CA. The subduction zone ends in far northern CA.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by capoeira

What 7+ quake was that? The Feb. 9,1971 Sylmar quake was a 6.6 and the Jan. 21,1994 Northridge quake was 6.7. Since the Richter scale is logarithmic, a 7.0 has twice the ground dispalcement as a 6.7. A 7+ that hits LA directly will do much more damage. The Puente Hills Blind Thrust fault directly under parts of LA has the potential to do a lot more damage.

This fault could bring an earthquake worse than 'The Big One' - latimes

Historic Earthquakes

Historic Earthquakes

At the time, the Sylmar quake was said to be a 7.2 I believe. They may have changed that.

[rodentraiser]

Originally Posted by LoriBee62

Poor construction standards.

I agree. I knew people who went down there with their dogs to do SAR. I was told they went through the buildings with an architect and an engineer. The architect would tell them which way to go and the engineer wold tell them if it was safe.

[Bluefox]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

This is more of a concern for the PNW, and maybe the far northern parts of CA. The subduction zone ends in far northern CA.

Yes, I know. I didn't imply there was a significant threat to CA, at least areas with major population centers. I was just responding to the other poster's comment. There aren't many offshore faults near CA and the ones that exist aren't nearly as active nor as reliable nor as deadly as Cascadia. It's really alarming how complacent the PNW is regarding Cascadia. It's going to happen, and it's overdue. Tsunamis are no joke. It brought Japan to its knees in 2011, a country that knows tsunamis like the back of its hand. The Cascadia earthquake/tsunami will likely be far more devastating than what happened to Japan. Thankfully, none of the major cities are directly exposed to the ocean, and will most likely be spared for the most part, but it will still be devastating.

[kettlepot]

Originally Posted by Bluefox

I lived in SD during the 6.9 magnitude "Easter Earthquake" of 2010 centered near Calexico. I can tell you that was one of the scariest things I'd ever experienced. It was surreal and it lasted about a minute, which, when it is happening, is a very very long time. But the damage, even near the epicenter, was comparatively minimal, especially when you look at places like Haiti which was devastated by an earthquake with a similar magnitude.

"Palm Sunday Earthquake." Scary? No. Interesting? Yes.

I was in SD to, sitting in the same chair I'm sitting in now. While the earthquake felt bigger than others I've experienced, and it certainly had my attention while it was happening, I didn't even get out of my chair. Maybe you were located in an area subject to liquefaction.

[Bluefox]

Originally Posted by kettlepot

"Palm Sunday Earthquake." Scary? No. Interesting? Yes.

I was in SD to, sitting in the same chair I'm sitting in now. While the earthquake felt bigger than others I've experienced, and it certainly had my attention while it was happening, I didn't even get out of my chair. Maybe you were located in an area subject to liquefaction.

Well that was the first earthquake I'd ever experienced so yeah it was scary. I remember first feeling myself shaking and thinking I was having a seizure. Then noticed my blinds shaking and my fan shaking and looking outside to see all the cars parked on the street rocking back and forth. I lived in the Banker's Hill neighborhood at the time and I didn't see any liquefaction. And this wasn't on Palm Sunday. It was Easter Sunday, April 4, 2010.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Having experienced - on 10/18/89 - concrete street light poles flopping around like bobble heads, plate glass windows shattering like smash-and-grab-thug-slammed car windows, coupled with an instant failure of most radio stations, all local traffic signals and the power grid, it would take a pretty major event to freak me out.

[saibot]

Originally Posted by Bluefox

Well that was the first earthquake I'd ever experienced so yeah it was scary. ... And this wasn't on Palm Sunday. It was Easter Sunday, April 4, 2010.

We felt it in Mission Viejo, but it didn't seem terribly strong up there. We were having lunch outside with my in-laws and I remember thinking it was a nice change and not nearly as scary to be outside during an earthquake instead of inside.

And yes, it was definitely Easter. We don't get together with the in-laws for Palm Sunday.

[Jehjeh]

Originally Posted by Blimp

There is no need to prepare in San Diego or Sacramento or in a lot the rest of the state further inland, as those areas aren't in earthquake zones.

San Diego is most definitely in an earthquake zone. Not only can we still get strong shaking from LA/Imperial quakes, but we've got the Rose Canyon fault running under downtown SD and La Jolla, as well as the Elsinore and San Jacinto faults. In fact, the San Jacinto fault could be more of a danger than previously thought: New concerns about big quake fault | SanDiegoUnionTribune.com

There are several other faults in the region that are of concern, too: Earthquake Facts and Preparedness

Sacramento doesn't have known quake faults of its own (I'm waiting for the bad jokes about other faults to begin), but shaking from other areas is still a problem: 2006 News Releases Sacramento may be affected by large earthquakes elsewhere

Earthquake Study Finds Fault Between Napa, Fairfield Primed For Magnitude-7.1 Temblor « CBS Sacramento