Report predicts massive death, destruction from overdue Pacific Northwest mega-quake

Sry if this has been posted I did not see it

A report published by the Oregon Seismic Safety Policy Advisory Commission,said More than 10,000 people could die when — not if — a monster earthquake and tsunami occur just off the Pacific Northwest coast

They told Oregon legislators after the Legislature authorized the study of what would happen if a quake and tsunami such as the one that devastated Japan hit the Pacific Northwest

Oregon legislators requested the study so they could better inform themselves about what needs to be done to prepare and recover from such a giant natural disaster

The report says that geologically, Oregon and Japan are mirror images but Japan was way more prepared for such an event because it had spent billions on technology to reduce the damage

scary stuff, makes me glad I live in the midwest
www.staradvertiser.com... e=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

SALEM, Ore. >> More than 10,000 people could die when — not if — a monster earthquake and tsunami occur just off the Pacific Northwest coast, researchers told Oregon legislators today.

Coastal towns would be inundated. Schools, buildings and bridges would collapse, and economic damage could hit $32 billion.

These findings were published in a chilling new report by the Oregon Seismic Safety Policy Advisory Commission, a group of more than 150 volunteer experts

reply to post by goou111


When I lived in Jacksonville, FL in the early '80's, the grocery store bags all had maps of flooding in the city if there was hurricane of medium strength. I think they should have PSA on TV showing exactly how far inland would be flooded, structural damage, escape routes, ect. that would probably occur in this kind of scenario.

I know there would still be stupid people, but at least give the public a chance to be informed.

Oregon has signs in case of tsunami, seek higher ground. I don't know if they have an alarm system in case of. I also thought that Oregon had a building code that took into consideration earthquakes. Actually maybe only Portland has earthquake building codes.

But I think you are correct, I think to many in that area do not understand the true danger of an earthquake in the region. I think many think it is just a volcanic zone.

It seems like almost all the geological threats in the USA are beyond due for their periodic devastation. From what I understand, Yellowstone, Mount St. Helens, et al. should have blown their lids decades or centuries ago. I hope they don't all go off at once...

Yes, it's true only a matter of time. One of those not if but when. Older threads on ATS explain further. Here's one:
Experts say an earthquake surely will devastate the Northwest, US

Also, seems to be making it's way around thew news now: Source here

About a year ago ,westcoast did a thread on this very thing which also included John Vidale.

Westcoast's thread.....

A Serious Discussion On The Cascadia Subduction Zone and Latest Studies

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And John Vidale's blog on the PNSN...

4800 earthquakes in a mild 2012 in the Pacific Northwest December 31, 2012 by John Vidale

www.pnsn.org...

Something to keep an eye on for sure.

Peace,
K

All of the west coast fault lines, and there are many, have been a target of theory and speculation for a long time. I like to visit as the area is just amazing, the coastline is beautiful. But this timebomb has an unknown fuse size, and not even the experts know when it gets short. Our whole planet fits this description.

I hear Mt. Ranier is overdue also. Well I've lived up there and the Coast is not populated anything like Japan is. Plus all the trees should slow the tsunami down so hopefully it wouldn't be as bad as Japan.

Originally posted by Hopechest
I hear Mt. Ranier is overdue also. Well I've lived up there and the Coast is not populated anything like Japan is. Plus all the trees should slow the tsunami down so hopefully it wouldn't be as bad as Japan.

Jeesus Tinkerbell are you serious?
Millions are at risk on the west coast.
Cascadia, is a big fault and the California one just as....
The cities of Vancouver, and Seattle, would be devastated.
The trees wont slow crap. and the Tsunami would be the knockout blow to the west coasts small cities....
I live on vancouver Island and the moment i feel a huge quake im heading for high ground immediately.

reply to post by stirling


Both Seattle and Vancouver are relatively protected from a direct hit. It may swell in there through the channel but won't be like the one that hit Japan.

Both Seattle and Vancouver are relatively protected from a direct hit. It may swell in there through the channel but won't be like the one that hit Japan.

reply to post by Hopechest


A lot of people who died in Japan thought that way. They thought that a tsunami there couldn`t be that big.

Originally posted by stirling

Originally posted by Hopechest
I hear Mt. Ranier is overdue also. Well I've lived up there and the Coast is not populated anything like Japan is. Plus all the trees should slow the tsunami down so hopefully it wouldn't be as bad as Japan.

Jeesus Tinkerbell are you serious?
Millions are at risk on the west coast.
Cascadia, is a big fault and the California one just as....
The cities of Vancouver, and Seattle, would be devastated.
The trees wont slow crap. and the Tsunami would be the knockout blow to the west coasts small cities....
I live on vancouver Island and the moment i feel a huge quake im heading for high ground immediately.

I used to live in Portland and Seattle for years and never thought about this until I moved. There's something about looking at areas like that from the outside that makes your brain say "okay, go ahead and look at the scary facts". I think the same way when I see people living in the mid-west with their trailers and tornadoes... they all seem insane to me.

There have been quite a number of television programs, between the History Channel, Discovery Channel, NatGeo, Science Channel, etc., that have basically been saying this exact thing. Well actually they are just interviewing scientists who specialize in this particular field, thus reporting the info to everyone who watches. So this report is on par with what has been said in the past. Speaking from a historical perspective, it is bound to happen at some point.

Geologists, seismologist, etc., are able to roughly pinpoint the times of previous natural disasters, and they are able to show the cyclical nature of many various types of these phenomena. This is how we know that a few different major natural disasters could possibly strike within our lifetimes. The good news however is that the extremely devastating disasters will give some warning beforehand, say like the Yellowstone super volcano. That will be horrible.

One good thing about the PNW coastline is that most major cities are not located directly on the coast. They are far enough inland that a tsunami would likely not reach them, and if it did, the damage may be minimal. I suppose it just depends on where the earthquake strikes. But we are talking about a megaquake here, so there will be loss of life, but it will not be a crippling blow fortunately to the order of our country.

The really bad spots for things like this to occur are those places where the population density is astronomical, often in third world countries. Look at what happened even recently with tsunamis and earthquakes. Looking back over the past 200 years or so, there have been some extremely devastating events that have occurred at various places around the world, killing tens of thousands of people. It is sad, but unfortunately inevitable. All we can really do is increase our chances of detecting when these disasters might strike, and evacuating these areas to minimize the loss of life. The property damage cannot really be minimized to any great extent.

Plus all the trees should slow the tsunami down so hopefully it wouldn't be as bad as Japan.

Congrats that was the single dumbest thing I've read today.

reply to post by Cuervo

I think the same way when I see people living in the mid-west with their trailers and tornadoes... they all seem insane to me.

Ive been in the midwest my whole life and have seen a couple of tornadoes they barely even scare me lol
hell we use to get excited in Oklahoma and go chase em

bUt I bet an earthquake would freak me out

reply to post by Hopechest


From what I have read, .. if there were a major earthquake at the San Andreas Fault, and it caused California to break loose, it would slide into the ocean causing a Wave/Tsunami so HUGE that it would carry water clear to indiana wiping Everything out. I don't think that trees are going to slow down anything lke that.

Originally posted by dreamingawake
Yes, it's true only a matter of time. One of those not if but when. Older threads on ATS explain further. Here's one:
Experts say an earthquake surely will devastate the Northwest, US

Also, seems to be making it's way around thew news now: Source here

edit on 14-3-2013 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)

Never come across that thread before, but it eerily coincides with Edger Cayce prediction...



Interesting times indeed...

Most of us that live in this area know about the Cascadia fault, it rarely causes issues, but when it does it's going to be big.

Luckily for us, compared to Japan, our coasts are not nearly as populated. We aren't like NY where we build huge cities right on the coast. The majority of out coastal towns are tiny little tourist stops. Then we have a huge mountain range, then we have bigger cities like Portland/Vancouver, Seattle, etc.

While it surely would be bad, it wouldn't be like Japan. If you want to talk about crazy things like California falling off into the Ocean, then we might as well worry about things like nuclear bombs being sent back in time and exploding all over the Northwest.

A wave would not reach inland enough to effect the larger cities.

Originally posted by James1982
A wave would not reach inland enough to effect the larger cities.

This. While Vancouver is on the water's edge it is shielded by Vancouver Island as a whole.

Majority of the damage in the cities would come from the 50+ year old buildings and everything made of brick.
Plus variables such as liquefaction/landslides/fires/flooding etc.. but no tsunami in that area is possible.

Another factor that came to mind, we generally don't have huge numbers of people stuffed together in high rise apartment buildings. I mean we do, but not nearly as much as other places. Most deaths would probably be from the earthquake, not the water, and even those deaths would be lesser than if such an earthquake took place in some more crammed together areas.

This whole thing is along the lines of Yellowstone, the odds of it happening are very slim, but if it does it will be bad. But you have to consider bad in context, if the same quake and tsunami that the northwest is supposed to get were to hit Japan, it would be far worse. More people crammed together and the proximity of major infrastructure and mass population center to the water are the main factors in this.

And if you look at a map, compare Japan to the PNW, you'll see that most major cities are farther away from the ocean, than the entire country of Japan is wide. Meaning, if it reaches major PNW cities, it's powerful enough to completely wipe Japan off the map, and cover it completely with water.