4 ms·

Weird that the word "Japan" occurs 0 times in an article about skyscrapers and earthquakes. I realize the focus of the article is SF, but when the author elabo

by JackFr 9y ago

Weird that the word "Japan" occurs 0 times in an article about skyscrapers and earthquakes. I realize the focus of the article is SF, but when the author elaborates on our lack of experience with skyscrapers in earthquakes, with no mention at all of Japan, it makes me think that this is just a clueless scare piece rather than any kind of thoughtful analysis.

lev99 9y ago
I'm sure the New York Times has a vested interest in keeping New York the economic powerhouse of the United States and this article directly attacks San Fransisco's best option for economic growth. There are entire careers dedicated to determine buildings ability to survive natural disasters and informing people about the risk. There are entire careers dedicated to finding ways to make buildings more earth quake resistant. It seems like banks, developers, governments, and insurance companies would be listening to both of these professionals very closely before building something one thousand feet high. I would prefer to hear from them than Thomas Fuller of the New York Times.
vincvinc 9y ago
Funny, earlier today I just happened to see this Tokyo earthquake footage of skyscrapers swaying violently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACKMPD6MySs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACKMPD6MySs Then, in the article, I read about San Fransisco: "the issue of seismic safety of high rises was “never a factor” in the redevelopment plans" I can not imagine any positive outcome here.
- sdrothrock 9y ago
  > Funny, earlier today I just happened to see this Tokyo earthquake footage of skyscrapers swaying violently It's unclear from your comment, so I wanted to clarify for other people who may not know: skyscrapers are intentionally built such that they sway, as that helps to disperse the energy more than a rigid structure. http://www.businessinsider.com/earthquake-resistant-buildings-2011-3#the-e-defense-table-is-a-shifting-base-intended-to-simulate-an-earthquake-7 http://www.businessinsider.com/earthquake-resistant-building... https://earlywarninglabs.com/old/ewl/skyscraper-safety/ https://earlywarninglabs.com/old/ewl/skyscraper-safety/

by JackFr 9y ago

lev99 9y ago

I'm sure the New York Times has a vested interest in keeping New York the economic powerhouse of the United States and this article directly attacks San Fransisco's best option for economic growth. There are entire careers dedicated to determine buildings ability to survive natural disasters and informing people about the risk. There are entire careers dedicated to finding ways to make buildings more earth quake resistant. It seems like banks, developers, governments, and insurance companies would be listening to both of these professionals very closely before building something one thousand feet high. I would prefer to hear from them than Thomas Fuller of the New York Times.

vincvinc 9y ago

Funny, earlier today I just happened to see this Tokyo earthquake footage of skyscrapers swaying violently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACKMPD6MySs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACKMPD6MySs Then, in the article, I read about San Fransisco: "the issue of seismic safety of high rises was “never a factor” in the redevelopment plans" I can not imagine any positive outcome here.

sdrothrock 9y ago
> Funny, earlier today I just happened to see this Tokyo earthquake footage of skyscrapers swaying violently It's unclear from your comment, so I wanted to clarify for other people who may not know: skyscrapers are intentionally built such that they sway, as that helps to disperse the energy more than a rigid structure. http://www.businessinsider.com/earthquake-resistant-buildings-2011-3#the-e-defense-table-is-a-shifting-base-intended-to-simulate-an-earthquake-7 http://www.businessinsider.com/earthquake-resistant-building... https://earlywarninglabs.com/old/ewl/skyscraper-safety/ https://earlywarninglabs.com/old/ewl/skyscraper-safety/