- This topic has 103 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 1 month ago by
spdrun.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 12, 2011 at 8:25 AM #677460March 12, 2011 at 8:53 AM #676319
meadandale
Participant[quote=paramount]Is an earthquake of magnitude 8.0+ even possible around Southern California?[/quote]
Probably not. All of the faults here (including the san andreas) are slip faults (transform plate boundaries). The quakes in japan, chile and indonesia were all caused by convergent subduction faults (convergent plate boundaries). They generate much larger earthquakes. There is a large subduction fault that runs from northern california past the PNW up into alaska that could generate an 8.0 quake however.
March 12, 2011 at 8:53 AM #676377Participant[quote=paramount]Is an earthquake of magnitude 8.0+ even possible around Southern California?[/quote]
Probably not. All of the faults here (including the san andreas) are slip faults (transform plate boundaries). The quakes in japan, chile and indonesia were all caused by convergent subduction faults (convergent plate boundaries). They generate much larger earthquakes. There is a large subduction fault that runs from northern california past the PNW up into alaska that could generate an 8.0 quake however.
March 12, 2011 at 8:53 AM #676985Participant[quote=paramount]Is an earthquake of magnitude 8.0+ even possible around Southern California?[/quote]
Probably not. All of the faults here (including the san andreas) are slip faults (transform plate boundaries). The quakes in japan, chile and indonesia were all caused by convergent subduction faults (convergent plate boundaries). They generate much larger earthquakes. There is a large subduction fault that runs from northern california past the PNW up into alaska that could generate an 8.0 quake however.
March 12, 2011 at 8:53 AM #677121Participant[quote=paramount]Is an earthquake of magnitude 8.0+ even possible around Southern California?[/quote]
Probably not. All of the faults here (including the san andreas) are slip faults (transform plate boundaries). The quakes in japan, chile and indonesia were all caused by convergent subduction faults (convergent plate boundaries). They generate much larger earthquakes. There is a large subduction fault that runs from northern california past the PNW up into alaska that could generate an 8.0 quake however.
March 12, 2011 at 8:53 AM #677470Participant[quote=paramount]Is an earthquake of magnitude 8.0+ even possible around Southern California?[/quote]
Probably not. All of the faults here (including the san andreas) are slip faults (transform plate boundaries). The quakes in japan, chile and indonesia were all caused by convergent subduction faults (convergent plate boundaries). They generate much larger earthquakes. There is a large subduction fault that runs from northern california past the PNW up into alaska that could generate an 8.0 quake however.
March 12, 2011 at 8:57 AM #676324UCGal
Participant[quote=paramount]Is an earthquake of magnitude 8.0+ even possible around Southern California?[/quote]
From what the “experts” were saying on the TeeVee yesterday SoCal could “only” get up to an 8.0 earthquake – max.The fault that runs from British Columbia down through Mt. Shasta – along the coast of WA and OR is similar to the one that is active in Japan right now…
Rainier, St. Helens, etc are proof that this fault is active. That’s the fault that could go “big”.March 12, 2011 at 8:57 AM #676382Participant[quote=paramount]Is an earthquake of magnitude 8.0+ even possible around Southern California?[/quote]
From what the “experts” were saying on the TeeVee yesterday SoCal could “only” get up to an 8.0 earthquake – max.The fault that runs from British Columbia down through Mt. Shasta – along the coast of WA and OR is similar to the one that is active in Japan right now…
Rainier, St. Helens, etc are proof that this fault is active. That’s the fault that could go “big”.March 12, 2011 at 8:57 AM #676990Participant[quote=paramount]Is an earthquake of magnitude 8.0+ even possible around Southern California?[/quote]
From what the “experts” were saying on the TeeVee yesterday SoCal could “only” get up to an 8.0 earthquake – max.The fault that runs from British Columbia down through Mt. Shasta – along the coast of WA and OR is similar to the one that is active in Japan right now…
Rainier, St. Helens, etc are proof that this fault is active. That’s the fault that could go “big”.March 12, 2011 at 8:57 AM #677126Participant[quote=paramount]Is an earthquake of magnitude 8.0+ even possible around Southern California?[/quote]
From what the “experts” were saying on the TeeVee yesterday SoCal could “only” get up to an 8.0 earthquake – max.The fault that runs from British Columbia down through Mt. Shasta – along the coast of WA and OR is similar to the one that is active in Japan right now…
Rainier, St. Helens, etc are proof that this fault is active. That’s the fault that could go “big”.March 12, 2011 at 8:57 AM #677475Participant[quote=paramount]Is an earthquake of magnitude 8.0+ even possible around Southern California?[/quote]
From what the “experts” were saying on the TeeVee yesterday SoCal could “only” get up to an 8.0 earthquake – max.The fault that runs from British Columbia down through Mt. Shasta – along the coast of WA and OR is similar to the one that is active in Japan right now…
Rainier, St. Helens, etc are proof that this fault is active. That’s the fault that could go “big”.March 12, 2011 at 9:28 AM #676340bearishgurl
Participant[quote=UCGal]From what the “experts” were saying on the TeeVee yesterday SoCal could “only” get up to an 8.0 earthquake – max.
The fault that runs from British Columbia down through Mt. Shasta – along the coast of WA and OR is similar to the one that is active in Japan right now…
Rainier, St. Helens, etc are proof that this fault is active. That’s the fault that could go “big”.[/quote]Arrrrgggh!! That “baby-boomer mecca” in the giant redwoods and Mt Shasta are on my retirement “short list.” :=O
March 12, 2011 at 9:28 AM #676397Participant[quote=UCGal]From what the “experts” were saying on the TeeVee yesterday SoCal could “only” get up to an 8.0 earthquake – max.
The fault that runs from British Columbia down through Mt. Shasta – along the coast of WA and OR is similar to the one that is active in Japan right now…
Rainier, St. Helens, etc are proof that this fault is active. That’s the fault that could go “big”.[/quote]Arrrrgggh!! That “baby-boomer mecca” in the giant redwoods and Mt Shasta are on my retirement “short list.” :=O
March 12, 2011 at 9:28 AM #677005Participant[quote=UCGal]From what the “experts” were saying on the TeeVee yesterday SoCal could “only” get up to an 8.0 earthquake – max.
The fault that runs from British Columbia down through Mt. Shasta – along the coast of WA and OR is similar to the one that is active in Japan right now…
Rainier, St. Helens, etc are proof that this fault is active. That’s the fault that could go “big”.[/quote]Arrrrgggh!! That “baby-boomer mecca” in the giant redwoods and Mt Shasta are on my retirement “short list.” :=O
March 12, 2011 at 9:28 AM #677141Participant[quote=UCGal]From what the “experts” were saying on the TeeVee yesterday SoCal could “only” get up to an 8.0 earthquake – max.
The fault that runs from British Columbia down through Mt. Shasta – along the coast of WA and OR is similar to the one that is active in Japan right now…
Rainier, St. Helens, etc are proof that this fault is active. That’s the fault that could go “big”.[/quote]Arrrrgggh!! That “baby-boomer mecca” in the giant redwoods and Mt Shasta are on my retirement “short list.” :=O
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.