 |
This week marks the 25th anniversary of the 2001 Nisqually Earthquake (a 6.8 earthquake that caused billions in damage around the region). The shared video and this related Seattle Times op-ed by Washington State Seismologist Harold Tobin (also featured in the video) emphasize how it could have been much worse, and push back a bit on some of the fatalism and misconceptions that tend to pop up around earthquake risk here, and explain how the next damaging quake in Seattle is more likely another deep or crustal event, not “The Big One.” Still likely deadly, and still hugely expensive. But there’s also a lot that can be done. As noted in the op-ed, a bill that would’ve provided modest state funding to help upgrade high-risk buildings didn’t advance this session. (As a side note, yes “The Big One” would be very bad, it’s essential to mention that no, despite popular belief, not “everything West of I-5 is toast” and a coastal tsunami from a Cascadia earthquake would not impact Seattle. This is explained really well by former Pacific Northwest Seismic Network Director John Vidale at 28:30 in this older video. He explains how the wording of a couple of sentences in the infamous New Yorker article created this misconception, and sets the record straight). submitted by /u/Rogers-and-Clarke |
