9 ms·
Magnitude 6.5 earthquake hits off Northern California coast
- ejcx 10y agoI'm here in SF and didn't feel a thing. I see some people on reddit felt it a little bit, and that it lasted quite a while. I'm not seismologist, so I have no idea if this is possible, but I hope it doesn't jolt anything closer to the city loose. Good time to remind everyone to have an earthquake bag available and a plan with your family, and be prepared for -=The Big One=-
- amorphid 10y agoI am in SF and felt it. I live on the 9th floor of an 11 story building. The building swayed just enough to notice it. If I didn't know what an earthquake is, I may not have realized it was one. Had I been asleep, the quake would probably not have awakened me.
- darkstar999 10y agoThere should be a mass exodus away from seismically active areas. "The big one" is guaranteed to happen, not if, but when. Maybe this is too political for this week?
- pkaye 10y agoWhat about those areas prone to recurrent hurricanes, tornados and flooding?
- Retric 10y agoTornadoes are very localized damage in comparison, but people do move away from areas with regular flooding. Hurricanes also generally discourage development even though they tend to have much smaller impacts than earthquakes. EX: On 25 November 1839, an enormous cyclone caused a 40-foot storm surge that hit Coringa, Andhra Pradesh, wiped out the harbor city, destroyed vessels in its bay, and killed 300,000 people.[6] Survivors never entirely rebuilt the city.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> Hurricanes [...] tend to have much smaller impacts than earthquakes. Then why are there so many more tropical cyclones in the list of most deadly US disasters than there are earthquakes? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_disasters_in_the_United_States_by_death_toll# https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_disasters_in_the_Uni... And why are the ten costliest, by insured losses: 6 hurricanes, 2 other weather events, 9/11, and the Northridge earthquake? http://www.propertycasualty360.com/2016/04/26/here-are-the-10-costliest-us-catastrophes http://www.propertycasualty360.com/2016/04/26/here-are-the-1...
- JamesSwift 10y agoHurricanes are interesting because they _are_ announced in advance. A lot of work goes into boarding up and evacuating, and so when someone does that a few times but the storm misses the area, it creates a fatigue for the next one. I live in the forecasted direct impact zone for Hurricane Matthew which hit a few months ago. That was an extremely scary storm to consider hitting us. Immediately after it took a turn northward, friends were already lamenting that they evacuated and swore not to again.
- Retric 10y agoHurricanes cover a lot of land, but they are also predictable reducing deaths and thus loss of life. Earthquakes are less predictable, but far more localized. Consider, Katrina had losses from Florida to Ohio the 1906 San Francisco earthquake had little impact on Fresno. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1906_San_Francisco_earthquake#/media/File:1906_Boatwright_intensity.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1906_San_Francisco_earthquake#...
- mikestew 10y agoAnd to where do you suggest I move? Everywhere has something that can kill you in spectacular fashion. Indiana, where I grew up: tornadoes and cold that can literally kill if underdressed. Hurricanes and trigger-happy residents in Florida. You get the point. Or I can stay in Washington where "the big one" or an eruption of Mount Rainier might happen in my lifetime. In the meantime I won't be shoveling snow, watching my roof torn off, or shuttering my windows every other year.
- wfunction 10y agoI agree with your sentiment, but cold isn't a natural disaster; it's predictable and you can prepare for it systematically and people have been living through it just fine. And it doesn't destroy your entire life like an earthquake does.
- jonknee 10y agoTornados do destroy your entire life though and they are quite common in the Midwest.
- takeda 10y agobut unlike earthquake, you have ample time to at least save yourself, no?
- mikestew 10y agoNo, at least not sometimes (for non-trivial amounts of "sometimes"). Take my anecdata in another comment on this thread. Partly cloudy day, something blows in from the west. Dad and I decide it's going to rain soon enough, we should head to the house. About halfway between the house and the barn, Dad says "run!". That sound of screeching metal and shredding wood? Yeah, that would be the entire roof structure of the barn being lifted up and deposited in a neighboring field. We're talking a building that has more square feet than your average McMansion. And that was a small tornado. The only mitigation for the big, freight-train-sized tornadoes is that there's usually some harsh weather to go along with it to warn you that something might be coming. Okay, so you're not outside. You're sitting cozy in your living room watching Orange is the New Black. Tornado warning on the news, but tornadoes are very localized and you don't have a basement in your manufactured home. So what are you going to do, run to the neighbor's again to huddle in their basement for what probably turns out to be a non-event? Nah, it'll be fine. Until it isn't. And by the time it looks like you really ought to be knocking on the neighbor's door, you sure as hell don't want to be caught outside. Now, the weather services are usually good about a heads-up, with tornado watches (could be a tornado) and warnings (confirmed sighting). A lot of towns have a siren that's goes off on a sighting. But it is quite possible to be caught unaware, and there isn't a lot of time before that giant sucky thing moving at 35mph gets to where you're at.
- 27182818284 10y agoIt isn't too political, but it makes little sense. It strikes me as obtuse as asking that all Africans in dictator-controlled or drought-affected areas simply have a mass exodus.
- darkstar999 10y agoWhy are either of those scenarios obtuse?
- CoryG89 10y agoBecause their obviously not acute? :P
- wfunction 10y agoI always wondered why people live in seismically active areas so much. Then a hypothesis hit me: people need fresh water -> fresh water has usually comes from mountains -> mountains are created by seismic activity. Not sure if it's true though; does anyone know?
- onion2k 10y agoIn the case of LA and San Francisco, they're really good places to put ports.
- thesimpsons1022 10y agoMountains are caused by seismic activity but seismic activity doesn't always create mountains. In general populations tend to stick towards coasts. Many tectonic plate boundaries are either directly on the coast of continents or a little off the shelf. My intuition puts that as the more likely cause but it's impossible to prove either way for certain.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> I always wondered why people live in seismically active areas so much Because the ones people live in are conveniently located near some combination of arable land, navigable inland waterways, large freshwater supplies, and convenient natural harbors. And, in many cases, are places that aren't prone to deadly weather events, which makes except earthquake risk a tolerable price.
- wfunction 10y agoYeah, sounds like you're also pointing to the same thing I was (water).
- Someone 10y agoI think the historically main reason is that volcano ash makes fertile farming ground (http://volcanology.geol.ucsb.edu/soil.htm http://volcanology.geol.ucsb.edu/soil.htm, http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/what-are-some-good-things-volcanoes-do http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/what-are-some-good-things-vol...)
- grandalf 10y agoI wonder if insurance prices accurately reflect the guaranteed nature of the event.
- amorphid 10y agoEarthquake insurance is pretty darn expensive, and most (all?) homeowner policies don't cover earthquake damage. Source: I used to be a licensed property and casualty agent in California.
- jacobwcarlson 10y agoThere is no cost-effective way to get residential earthquake insurance in the Bay Area.
- grandalf 10y agoAhh, ok, so that means the prices likely do reflect the probability accurately...
- goseeastarwar 10y agoTo inject numbers into the discussion: my homeowners insurance is $965 and earthquake is $1220. More than doubling the yearly bill to be sure, but it's easy to justify given bay area real estate prices.
- grandalf 10y agoIs your home worth between $1 and $1.5M ?
- pmoriarty 10y agoI wonder if there's an indirect way to get cheaper earthquake insurance, by investing in industries or companies that would benefit from an earthquake, or maybe by taking bets in a prediction market.
- eliben 10y agoSo you suggest places like Italy and Japan fully evacuate due to being seismically active?
- codegeek 10y agoI think about stuff like this sometimes but where can you go within the United States ? Move south or Midwest and you deal with tornadoes and hurricanes that can kill you or rip your homes off. How about East/North-East ? Low chance of Tornadoes but then be ready to get hit with Superstorms (Sandy anyone ?). If these things don't get you, be ready to deal with shit load of Snowstorms and blizzards. If nothing else, flooding will get you. So take your pick.
- jliptzin 10y agoHurricanes and snowstorms are predicted days, if not weeks in advance. The scary thing about earthquakes is that they can hit any time with very little warning.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> Hurricanes and snowstorms are predicted days, if not weeks in advance. And, in the case of hurricanes in the US, still both kill more people and cause more property damage than earthquakes, both in aggregate and individually among the major instances of each class.
- gph 10y agoYea, there aren't many places on this earth that don't see some sort of natural disaster. Maybe we'll all be living in the UK/Ireland, they don't seem to get hit by much.
- robin_reala 10y agoWe get tsunamis[1] and tornados[2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsunamis_affecting_the_British_Isles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsunamis_affecting_the_British... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/sep/24/weather.world1 https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/sep/24/weather.world1
- JPKab 10y agoI used to live in northwest Arkansas, about 45 minutes south of Joplin, Missouri. My home had a steel tornado shelter dug into the ground. We used it several times a year when the sirens went off. Tornadoes in the UK are a freak phenomenon. In the central and southern US, they are a regular part of life. The point being that people outside of Tornado Alley don't really get how common tornadoes are in that part of North America. In the fall and spring, they are an inevitability, along with the most intense thunderstorms in the world.
- jeffnv 10y agoHow much danger is there really? The risk of being injured during an earthquake in the modern era is pretty low, all things considered.
- rybosome 10y agoThe big one will happen, and it's going to suck, but it won't be the end of the world. Modern structures built to more exacting standards will still be standing. Infrastructure like water and electricity will be unusable for some time, but with immediate stores of water and the inevitable aid this shouldn't be deadly. I'd be nervous about spending a lot of time in old, brick buildings, but otherwise I expect that I and most people I know will be fine. Note that this is said as a resident of Seattle - I would be way more nervous if I were on the Oregon coast.
- ihaveajob 10y agoThe Big One in California is expected to have Richter magnitude below 8.0, much like the 1906 one. While that might not be much consolation, building has improved significantly and we can do a lot to prevent damage. That said, after having been in the market for a house on the east bay, I'm afraid to say that there's still a huge number of old houses with brick foundations, despite incentives to reinforce and retrofit. My biggest fear is not the shake itself, but damage to power and gas lines shortly after.
- JPKab 10y agoYou make a good point. California is prepared. Seattle, however, is another story. On a geologic time scale, the Pacific Northwest is long overdue for a massive earthquake and the ensuing tsunami.
- Analemma_ 10y agoAnd that epicenter looks like it was on the Juan de Fuca plate boundary. I see some Bay Area folks in here concerned that this was a foreshock, but I think those of us in the PNW are the ones who should really be concerned.
- pmoriarty 10y agoPortland is also apparently going to be majorly screwed in case of a big earthquake.[1] I considered moving there until I read about this. [1] - http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-...
- mysticlabs 10y agoMost people don't realize earthquakes themselves are not very likely to kill you, it's the gas leaks and fires that usually follow that cause the most loss of life and property damage. In 1906 nearly 80% of San Francisco burned down after the quake. Most of the rubble was then pushed into the bay to create the very landfill that a lot of buildings are built on top of now.
- 10y ago
- mturmon 10y agoI support your concept of a mass exodus away from LA due to earthquake risk. The beach was too crowded when I went boogie boarding there just before Thanksgiving. Save yourselves from all this, people!
- maverick_iceman 10y agoCan't wait for the big one in SF!
- jdavis703 10y agoI'm not sure what you're angle is, but if you think it'll cause housing prices to go down you're probably wrong. Most apartments contain clauses saying if the building is destroyed the lease is terminated and that's all. So all of a sudden you'll have a bunch of people in condemned housing clamoring for the places that are still habitable.
- maverick_iceman 10y agoNo such angle, I was just being facetious.
- maverick_iceman 10y agoAh, should have added the /s.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]