There's so much wrong with your post I don't know where to start:
1) The Cascadia subduction zone extends off all of California north of San Franciaco, Oregon, and Washington, and is capable of an earthquake and tsunami equivalent to Indian Ocean 2004 or the Japanese quake. Seattle itself is underlain by numerous large additional faults capable of earthquakes larger than the one that destroyed Port au Prince, Haiti or that killed 6,000 people in Kobe, Japan - and also generating massive tsunamis within Puget Sound.
In the next 30 years, there will be earthquakes in the San Franscisco Bay area, Los Angeles, or both, that will make Sandy, Katrina, and 9/11 look like a joke both in terms of damage and of deaths.
California has been absurdly lucky in terms of earthquakes since 1906, when the population really exploded. That luck will run out.
Honestly it's a fluke that the highest dollar value of damage, and of deaths, for natural disasters in the US has been from hurricanes. Long term, the top spots are going to be taken over by earthquakes.
“The Cascadia subduction zone extends off all of California north of San Franciaco, Oregon, and Washington, and is capable of an earthquake and tsunami equivalent to Indian Ocean 2004 or the Japanese quake. Seattle itself is underlain by numerous large additional faults capable of earthquakes larger than the one that destroyed Port au Prince”
“capable” is opeartive word
nuclear power plants are “capable” of exploding and capable other safety-concerning events but those events are rare and the worst of them very rare - unlike - as is my point, many flood prone areas that are continually and perennially not just “capable” of flooding but prone to
“In the next 30 years, there will be earthquakes in the San Franscisco Bay area, Los Angeles, or both, that will make Sandy, Katrina, and 9/11 look like a joke both in terms of damage and of deaths.”
we were told that when we moved to California in 1957, and the tale that such an occurance is guaranteed is no more thn a crystal ball projection - one will, but no one knows when
“California has been absurdly lucky in terms of earthquakes since 1906, when the population really exploded. That luck will run out.”
again, I would not rely on your crystal ball for anything
“Honestly it’s a fluke that the highest dollar value of damage, and of deaths, for natural disasters in the US has been from hurricanes. Long term, the top spots are going to be taken over by earthquakes.”
it is no fluke, they are a constant, not mearly “accidental” or random or infrequent occurance nor is their U.S. landfall infrequent - unlike earthquakes - it is assured there will be major earthquakes every year and it is assured that some, at least one or more, will make landfall in the U.S. every year and cause great damage - unlike the very rare major earthquakes
and knowledge of those areas MOST OFTEN under ANNUAL threat from Hurricanes is KNOWLEDGE not guessing and in those areas the most detailed subject to the most likely and most severe damage IS known (adjacent to the shore)
while the specific epicenter of “the next” rare earthquake, anywere is not known at all, nor is the overall most immediate area it will affect
meanwhile, as the billions in Hurricane damages mount year after year after year, no one will hold their breath waiting for your next big earthquake