• Raiderkev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 days ago

    Super cool. I’m definitely not like 5 miles away from it. What’s the worst that could happen?

    • zabadoh@ani.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 days ago

      In a major earthquake, if a building you’re in is not modern, or reinforced, it could collapse on you.

      Gas and water pipes could rupture, causing fires and floods.

      Electricity and phone service, including mobile voice and data, could be down for days.

      Freeways would definitely be closed for some days before they can be checked for safety.

      Bridges and elevated freeways can collapse.

      Food could be in short supply.

      Your own house may not be habitable.

      Have a go bag with 3-4 days of food, water and supplies like toilet paper ready to go.

      Looting happens due to law enforcement being disrupted and having other priorities.

      And bad stuff could happen a lot further than 5 miles away from the epicenter.

      In the Loma Prieta quake in 1989, a section of the Bay Bridge collapsed. I-80 in downtown Oakland collapsed, crushing cars between the levels of the elevated freeway.

      That was about 70 miles away from the epicenter in Santa Cruz.

      • aramis87@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 days ago

        Gas and water pipes could rupture, causing fires and floods.

        Supposedly, after the 1908 earthquake in San Francisco, some of the homeowners set their own houses on fire because they realized their insurance covered fires but not earthquakes. No idea how true that is, but interesting.

        • zabadoh@ani.socialOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 days ago

          Fire safety in building codes didn’t exist back in 1906, so 500 square blocks of wood buildings burning down on their own isn’t farfetched.

          Same for the Great Chicago Fire in 1871, Mrs O’Leary’s cow or not.

    • aramis87@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 days ago

      Near the northern fault, the risk isn’t as bad; it gets worse the farther south you go. In 2013, USGS released a report that included estimates of the likelihood that different parts of the fault would have earthquakes of varying strengths over the following 30 years (so, the next 17-ish years now).

      The maximum quake would likely be around an 8 on the Richter scale. A 7-7.9 earthquake has the following description:

      Causes damage to most buildings, some to partially or completely collapse or receive severe damage. Well-designed structures are likely to receive damage. Felt across great distances with major damage mostly limited to 250 km from the epicenter. A magnitude 7.0 or greater will result in a tsunami alert being issued to certain regions.

      It’s also important to note that, because of the complexity of fault lines in California, once the San Andreas goes, there may be additional quakes for several years.

      National Geographic did an article on this a while back and said the most likely threat to people in the LA area would likely be wildfires.

  • Gerudo@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    This lines up with reports for awhile now that the fault has been due for a huge earthquake.