I’m not trying to predict anything.
I’m just saying based on the history from the last 150 years, San Francisco is overdue and to look for trends and unusual changes in the ground.
I was in the ‘89 quake and that was over 100 miles from San Francisco.
Before I got into microprocessor design, I was considering Petroleum Engineering and the basics of CA faults and geology was part of it.
Frankly, the Cascadia Fault is going to trip first before we get a big one near San Francisco.
The potential energy release (magnitude) for a BIG one in central or southern Cali (mainly sideways movement along the fault zones) is much less than than if a subduction zone gives. Not that the damage could not be significant in Cali, it very much would.
And, if (actually "when") the Cascadia zone unzips, the enormous ground shaking damage will likely pale in comparison to the tsunami damage along the coast areas. (Could happen tomorrow, could happen in another century. )
Oddly, people worry about hoaxes such as "climate change", when they should be planning and preparing for genuine risks.
.
I'm keeping my eye on the Cascadia!