What really scares me about Japan's Earthquake:

[Taverner]

When I first heard there was an Earthquake in Japan, my first thought was "so what's new?" This is Japan, not Haiti. They prepared for this. Hell, we in California send our seizmologists and engineers to Japan to learn - that's how good they are at it.

When I heard about the destruction, however - my stomach dropped.

This kind of Earthquake could (some say will) happen here in California. And no matter how much we prepare, no matter how many buildings are retrofitted, its all useless if one of these comes around.

[Drale]

1. Its hard to avoid diasters like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIk3j9vvIAQ&feature=related

[godai]

2. NHKWorld just showed a town of 70,000 that is completely gone.

Hopefully, some residents escaped before the tsunami.

[adigal]

17. I saw that - they weren't sure if the people were dead or

evacuated. I feel terribly for all their animals, too, especially if they had to leave them behind.

[cbdo2007]

3. Yes, it isn't a matter of "if" but "when" and it will cause mass devastation in Calif.

[Taverner]

4. There is a chance that it will be a series of many little ones, rather thatn one big one

Although history leans on the side of the big one

[hunter]

5. I'm 90 feet above sea level.

I wouldn't be able to sleep if I was living near the beach.

[ReggieVeggie]

6. The power and majesty of nature

all of our hopes and dreams and plans won't mean much if, say, the Yellowstone caldera were to erupt

Most just don't realize how fragile all this civilization is.

[FourScore]

7. Actually, it is amazing to me that the damage wasn't worse from this earthquake.

It seems the tsunami has been the real destructive force. That isn't as likely to happen in CA since the fault lines that pose the greatest danger are not out in the ocean.

[malaise]

15. You're right

The truth is that were it not for the Japanese building code, it would have been a gazillion times worse.

[Peter1x9]

8. The same type of earthquake can happen off the west coast of US

Northern California (north of Cape Mendocino) through Oregon, Washington, and Southern Canada is on top of a subduction zone similar to Japan and Indonesia. See this link for a very basic intro to subduction zones: http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Glossary/PlateTectonics/Maps/map_juan_de_fuca_subduction.html


According to several places, the subducting plate is currently locked and building up to a major earthquake (possibly 9.0+) that would impact the entire Cascadia region.
Here's one source I found, there are lots of them:
http://ajdubre.tripod.com/Physics/CascadiaSubduction-Sci-52501.html


It has happened in the past:
http://www.livescience.com/3990-orphan-tsunami-frightening-parent.html

Based on geologic evidence, scientists think that a massive magnitude-9.0 earthquake rocked the region sometime between 1680 and 1720. The quake must have lasted for several minutes because it caused parts of coastal Washington to plummet by as much as 5 feet (1.5 meters) relative to coastal waters.

Unraveling the orphan tsunami mystery paid off in two ways, Atwater said. The first was that it allowed scientists to pinpoint the date for the Cascadia earthquake with a precision that would have been impossible if they had relied only on geological and tree-ring evidence.

Secondly, it raises the bar considerably for what the magnitude of an earthquake occurring along the Cascadia subduction zone can be. The tsunami showed that the risk of a major earthquake striking the Cascadia region not only existed but that it had manifested itself at least once in the recent past, Atwater said.


Here's the Wikipedia article on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1700_Cascadia_earthquake

Recent findings conclude that the Cascadia Subduction zone is more complex and volatile than previously believed. Geologists predict a 37 percent chance of a M8.2+ event in the next 50 years, and a 10 to 15 percent chance that the entire Cascadia Subduction will rupture with a M9+ event within the same time frame.<5> Geologists have also determined the Pacific Northwest is not prepared for such a colossal quake. The tsunami produced could reach heights of 80 to 100 feet (24 to 30 m).<6>

[BrklynLiberal]

9. Guess the irony is that they ARE the best prepared for this kind of disaster.

It was the tidal wave that followed the actual earthquake that did most of the damage.

[JuniperLea]

10. I hope to God I'm home...

I work on the 39th floor of a 60+ story building in Downtown Los Angeles... which has a fault going smack dab down the center... a fault that is long overdue.

[yawnmaster]

11. Living on an active planet is often dangerous, but still much better than living on an inactive one.

although Mars may be an interesting place to visit.

[Taverner]

13. We don't know if inactive planets cannot sustain life

Hell, I'd love to terraform the Moon and add water, atmosphere, etc.

[Peter1x9]

12. Even more info

The Great Cascadia Earthquake of 2xxx
http://geology.about.com/od/quake_preparedness/a/aa_cascadiaEQ.htm

Studies of past subduction earthquakes are inexact things, based on finding their geologic signs: sudden changes of elevation that drown coastal forests, disturbances in ancient tree rings, buried beds of beach sand washed far inland and so on. Twenty-five years of research has determined that Big Ones affect Cascadia, or large parts of it, every few centuries. Times between events range from 200 to about 1000 years, and the average is around 500 years.

The most recent Big One is rather well dated, although no one in Cascadia at the time could write. It occurred around 9 p.m. on 26 January 1700. We know this because the tsunami it generated struck the shores of Japan the next day, where the authorities recorded the signs and damages. In Cascadia, tree rings, oral traditions of the local people and geologic evidence support this story.

[Throd]

14. Useless? Hardly.

We learn from every seismic event and become better prepared for the next one.

[Taverner]

16. This is true - but preparing for a 9 is impossible

That is unless we live underground like hobbits

[adigal]

18. A seismologist said "not in California" tonight

He said the San Andreas fault wasn't big enough for such a huge earthquake. But I think he said there is a fault big enough near Oregon. I didn't realize that.

[neverforget]

20. The Cascadia Subduction Zone runs from off the coast of northern

California to British Columbia. Last major earthquake was in January 1700. It was around a 9.0.

Since I live in Portland, I am very aware of the possibility of a major earthquake.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascadia_subduction_zone

[Codeine]

19. All that prep and retrofitting will be the difference between something

that can be rebuilt and something like Haiti. We'll be able to get an infrastructure up and running in a short time that will allow for rescue mobilization, logistical management, and emergency medical services. I for one am glad we have put effort into making things as resilient as we can.

[wickerwoman]

21. Yep.

Pretty much all construction and infrastructure is designed to survive a hundred-year flood or a three-hundred year quake, etc. Anything more would be too expensive to build and maintain (assuming it's technically possible in the first place). But the problem is, every three hundred years or so, you actually have that quake or flood.

Having said that, though, generally your odds are quite good (certainly better than being killed in a car crash on the way to work or dropping dead of a heart attack tomorrow). I don't want to live in a steel-reinforced bunker in Kansas, so the risk is worth it to me.