It's all YOUR FAULT, Nammie!
Posted on 04/17/2006 8:48:42 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
SAN FRANCISCO - If an earthquake like the one that devastated the city in 1906 struck today, the toll would be staggering: tens of thousands of buildings damaged and hundreds of people dead, according to a new study.
The report released Monday calculated that a repeat of that 7.9-magnitude temblor would cause 1,800 to 3,400 deaths, damage more than 90,000 buildings, displace as many as 250,000 households and result in $150 billion in damage.
"We already witnessed the effect of the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people from last year's hurricanes," said Bill Ellsworth, a geophysicist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Menlo Park. "It would have huge social and economic effects on the entire country."
The study, "When the Big One Strikes Again," was released the day before the 100th anniversary of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. It was prepared for what is being billed as the biggest earthquake conference ever.
The three-day 100th Anniversary Earthquake Conference, starting Tuesday in San Francisco, was expected to draw more than 2,500 scientists, engineers, government officials and emergency response professionals. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record) and other politicians were scheduled to speak.
The conference is one of a long list of events being held around the Bay Area to commemorate the 1906 quake and promote earthquake preparedness. On Tuesday, survivors will lay wreaths at Lotta's Fountain in downtown San Francisco to mark the moment the temblor struck shortly after 5 a.m. 100 years ago.
The latest report, prepared by the engineering firm Charles Kircher & Associates in Mountain View, was commissioned by the earthquake conference's organizers: the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Seismological Society of America and California Governor's Office of Emergency Services.
Using computer models, the study estimated how a 1906-size earthquake would impact today's nine-county San Francisco Bay area, where the population has mushroomed to more than 7 million people.
The report found that a 7.9-magnitude quake would cause up to $34 billion in building-related losses in San Francisco, $28 billion in Santa Clara County, $26 billion in San Mateo County and $15 billion in Alameda County.
Most of the deaths would result from the collapse of old buildings made with unreinforced masonry or concrete, or structures not tied to their foundations, according to the report. Structures built after the 1970s are generally considered safe.
"We need to recognize the buildings that are the most dangerous and would cause the most loss of life," said conference chairman Chris Poland, chief executive officer at Degenkolb Engineers in San Francisco. "They need to be identified, then strengthened or replaced."
Estimates of the death toll from the 1906 quake and fire range from 478 to 6,000. In addition, 28,000 of San Francisco's 53,000 buildings were destroyed; 225,000 of San Francisco's nearly 400,000 residents were left homeless and estimated property damage was the equivalent of $8.2 billion in today's dollars.
Experts said the Bay Area has made a lot of progress strengthening buildings, roads and bridges since the 1989 Loma Prieta quake, but the study's findings indicate the region still has a lot of work to do.
"The Bay Area is probably better prepared than most urban areas for a natural disaster," Poland said. "But it's not prepared enough."
___
On the Net:
1906 Earthquake Centennial Alliance:
http://1906centennial.org
It's all YOUR FAULT, Nammie!
They're a blue area...think Bush's team is planting bombs as we speak a la the New Orleans levees?
1906 Earthquake Centennial Alliance
http://1906centennial.org
Why is this story not on the Quake Report - er - I mean the Drudge Report with a flashing siren?
if the big one hit really hit san franfreakshow again, it would probably be New Orleans all over again...</p>
Well, no...but unlike New Orleans, among the deaths here would be "people who matter." So the government needs to spend a trillion dollars to fix the fault - fundamental fairness demands it. ;)
Source: Article
Volcano-like tremors detected deep within Earth's crust near San Andreas
Rumbles are attributed to plate shifts, not volcanic activity
Tremors within the Earth are usually--but not always--related to the activity of a volcano. Now, such vibrations have been recorded nowhere near a volcano, but at a geologic observatory at the San Andreas Fault. Scientists believe the fault tremors may be related to activity at a subduction zone--a place where one of Earth's constantly moving tectonic plates slips beneath another.
To determine whether the San Andreas Fault is moving with the tremors, scientists with the San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth (SAFOD) are installing instruments to measure the tremors' activity. Located near Parkfield, Calif., SAFOD is part of the EarthScope Project, an effort to study the North American continent's geology.
"Unlike the sharp jolt of an earthquake, tremors within Earth's crust emerge slowly, rumbling for longer periods of time," said Kaye Shedlock, program director for EarthScope at the National Science Foundation (NSF), which funds the project. "Although not in this case, tremors are usually produced by magma moving in cracks or other conduits beneath a volcano."
The rumblings are the first recordings of non-volcanic tremors in a deep borehole, providing scientists with data to better understand such mysterious underground movements.
The results will help geologists understand whether the deeply buried rocks of the San Andreas Fault - which are derived from an ancient subduction zone - behave in a similar way to the rocks of the Cascadia Subduction Zone, still active today.
"In the Cascadia Subduction Zone off the Pacific Northwest, for example, tremors are associated with the slow slip of the undersea Juan de Fuca tectonic plate as it submerges beneath the North American tectonic plate," said Greg van der Vink, EarthScope facility project director.
I hereby officially rename San Andreas.........Bush's Fault !
Bring it on! Its time to separate the men from the boys around here.
"HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
"HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
Considering the population of the Bay Area then and now the fact that it would only cause 'hundreds' of deaths is completely amazing. I'm not sure hundreds dead in a area that has millions and millions is "staggering". The Loma Prieta quake killed about 50. I hate to sound insensative, but you get to the point of diminishing returns on this.
To put in it perspective the tsunami killed about 500,000. Now THAT would be staggering if it happened in the Bay Area. Really the only thing I can imagine doing that at this point are either a major bio outbreak or a nuke.
Of course in San Francisco they separate the men from the boys with a crowbar.
Probably much worse because more people live in SF than in NOLA. 750,000 in San Fran proper with 7 million in the metro area, compared to 470,000 in New Orleans proper and 1.3 million in metro area.
I keep hoping the whole think will drop into the Pacific. And my Grandfather worked on the Golden Gate and my father was born there...
The study actually estimated the likely death toll as 1,800 to 3,400, if you read the article. The idiotic headline proclaimed this "hundreds" of dead.
I suspect the death toll estimate in the study actually may be a bit low; a lot depends on the nature and rapidity of spread of the fires, which depends a lot on the weather at the time.
Correction: if the big one hit really hit san franfreakshow again, it would probably be BUSH'S FAULT...
There was a good show on last night about the quake on the National Geographic channel. It seems to depend on where you live. If you're on bedrock there's not much of a problem.
Seems to me the media is just dying for a disaster, any disaster to sensationalize.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.