Earthquakes/tsunamis in WA

[Cinema Cat]

Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey

Global warming/climate change poses a much more immediate threat, with significate sea-level rises predicted within the next 25-50 years.

Weren't significant sea level rises already predicted to have happened by now? Shouldn't Manhattan already be underwater by 2018?

As for "climate change" -- that's the new "global warming," isn't it? Global warming predictions failed to materialize (e.g., the current freezing temps in the northeast), hence the switch to "climate change."

"Climate change" is a safe prediction. Earth's climate has been changing for billions of years, so it's a sure bet it will continue to change. Colder? Warmer? Wetter? Dryer? Either way, "climate change" prophets can claim to be correct.

[grega94]

Originally Posted by Cinema Cat

Weren't significant sea level rises already predicted to have happened by now? Shouldn't Manhattan already be underwater by 2018?

As for "climate change" -- that's the new "global warming," isn't it? Global warming predictions failed to materialize (e.g., the current freezing temps in the northeast), hence the switch to "climate change."

"Climate change" is a safe prediction. Earth's climate has been changing for billions of years, so it's a sure bet it will continue to change. Colder? Warmer? Wetter? Dryer? Either way, "climate change" prophets can claim to be correct.

Global warming and climate change are not conflicting words. Global warming is describing the overall global average rise in temperatures which is still happening. However this doesn't mean everywhere is getting warmer, or increasing at the same rate. Most notably the polar regions are warming at a much faster rate than the global average which causes many disturbances and causes theses huge fluctuations in seasons in various parts of the world such as the east coast which already has an unstable weather patterns to begin with. This is why climate change is used more often these days because it's a more accurate representation of what is going on. And on top of that the climates or not just getting warmer, or cooler in some areas, but also precipitation amounts and patterns are changing to which are factors in climate, so to say the Globe is just warming isn't the most accurate descriptor, even if it is happening as a global average. So climate change is the more accurate descriptor. Now how much of this change is natural and how much is human caused, or how much we can stall it is up to debate, but what isn't is that the world is indeed on average getting warmer which is putting all the various climates across the world out of whack and we can either try and preserve the current climate scheme as best as possible, or we face the consequences and try and adapt to a very different world with the real threat of run away climate change caused by the melting permafrost in the arctic which is releasing tons of methane which is far worse than CO2 and increasing every year.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by Cinema Cat

Weren't significant sea level rises already predicted to have happened by now? Shouldn't Manhattan already be underwater by 2018?

As for "climate change" -- that's the new "global warming," isn't it? Global warming predictions failed to materialize (e.g., the current freezing temps in the northeast), hence the switch to "climate change."

"Climate change" is a safe prediction. Earth's climate has been changing for billions of years, so it's a sure bet it will continue to change. Colder? Warmer? Wetter? Dryer? Either way, "climate change" prophets can claim to be correct.

Yep, the temperature of "da Nile" remains forever unchanging.

[Code Stemi]

Originally Posted by josie13

For comparison, LA county has four Level I Trauma Centers, but LA county has a population of more than 10 million people. Contrast that with the entire state of Washington, which has roughly 7.4 million people, many of whom can be choppered into Harborview rather quickly.

On an ordinary day, of course. In a disaster scenario, not so much. The hospital would have to divert. And where to? I viewed your list. There appears to only be three Level 2 trauma centers in Seattle Metro. (Tacoma, Everett, Bellingham).

[Diana Holbrook]

I'm not picturing choppering people anywhere as a major part of this kind of disaster. If it's truly been a disaster of the magnitude where people are injured all over the state, choppering them one or two at a time to Harborview, which is sitting in an old building in the middle of Seattle and may not even be functioning, is probably not going to be efficient use of energy.

I wouldn't assume the chopper, and it's fuel supply truck, is even available.

In a major regional disaster... it's back to basics. It's local.

[Code Stemi]

Originally Posted by chahunt

The pacific ring of fire has been quite active with large magnitude earthquakes in the past decade and beyond. However the North America region remains silent..for how much longer, unknown. The article says something about the effect being felt from Vancouver B.C. all the way down to Sacramento. That's terrible.

6 days after I posted this, a 7.0 hits Alaska, Anchorage region. Thoughts are with those effected and hope they are safe.
https://www.ksl.com/article/46438289...sunami-warning

[pnwguy2]

The science is still quite unpredictable. A 7.0 on the ring of fire is certainly well within the norms. The good news is Alaska is highly prepared for such an event, and indeed this quake (so close a to major population center), was proof that our 49th State has done an excellent job to prevent deaths. That said, the 1964 quake that all but destroyed Anchorage was a 9.2, a 1000X greater quake. So that is still a danger.

It is also worth noting, (to bring this back to Seattle), that much of Anchorage is built on soil that can liquify very quickly...that is why we see the major damage to highways up there. Seattle has more of a bedrock base, except for a few areas such as Harbor Island, and some Puget Sound coastal areas. Keep in mind the Seattle area was hit by a 6.8, though it was further away. Aftershocks were sparse, perhaps to it being a moderately deep quake. That said, the new Alaska Way Tunnel is a direct result of the old (1953) Alaska Way viaduct being damaged by that 2001 Nisqually Quake.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Nisqually_earthquake

[Code Stemi]

Construction codes are based on the probability of earthquakes striking a region. That means Seattle’s buildings, for example, are designed for roughly half of the earthquake loads of buildings in San Francisco or Los Angeles, because earthquakes occur roughly half as often in Seattle as in California’s cities. But the result is that Pacific Northwest cities are full of buildings with slender structural frames and fewer and smaller shear walls. In a mega-quake, many of the region’s iconic tall buildings would probably collapse.

Cascadia can produce temblors with magnitudes of 9 or greater, more powerful than anything we’ve experienced or expect from California’s famous San Andreas fault.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/opinion/28yanev.html