Survivalist Forum banner

Where do you live?

  • Washington State

    Votes: 92 9.3%
  • Oregon

    Votes: 64 6.4%
  • California

    Votes: 119 12.0%
  • Idaho or Montana

    Votes: 49 4.9%
  • Wyoming or Utah

    Votes: 38 3.8%
  • Arizona or Nevada

    Votes: 64 6.4%
  • Colorado or New Mexico

    Votes: 68 6.8%
  • British Columbia, Canada

    Votes: 16 1.6%
  • Alberta, Canada

    Votes: 15 1.5%
  • Somewhere -- Anywhere! -- Else

    Votes: 484 48.7%
301 - 320 of 334 Posts

·
Retired curmudgeon
Joined
·
19,404 Posts
Lagnar, your posts would make a lot more sense if you ever bothered to read just the FIRST post in a thread.

Lazy lazy lazy.

The Cascadia Subduction Zone has ruptured 41 times over the last 10, 000 years, producing a megathrust quake of magnitude 8 to 9+ about once every 238 years, on average.

However, it has ruptured more frequently over the last 5,000 years, producing a megathrust quake about every 210 years.

The last rupture was in January of 1700, over 321 years ago... So we're "overdue" by 83 to 111 years.
I don't care about the cascadia subduction zone and the pacific northwest, I care about my location. And your OP wall of text is just that. TL/DR. The poll was where not to live. I already live in "earthquake country" so my concern is earthquake intensity and frequency here, not in portlandia. Which considering how spread out our generating plants are, most of which are not near the Wasatch fault, I'm not that wound up about "the big one" decimating our electrical power sources which are not in the PNW.

Scientists say: <eye roll>

"It's been about 1,300 years — plus or minus 650 — since the Salt Lake City segment (of the Wasatch fault) had an earthquake of that magnitude," said University of Utah seismologist Jim Pechman.

You who live in the Northwest states of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and Utah should be aware that your electricity may not return for months or YEARS, until such time as we can rebuild and repair significant numbers of lost and damaged generation facilities.
Pacificorp is the power company, but our electricity is generated here mostly from coal and natural gas not the big hydro dams on the Columbia river. 75% of the IPAs 1,900 MW power output near Delta is exported to los angeles.

The "big one" they keep telling us is just around the corner.

 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,519 Posts
Discussion Starter · #303 ·
I don't care about the cascadia subduction zone and the pacific northwest, I care about my location. And your OP wall of text is just that. TL/DR. The poll was where not to live. I already live in "earthquake country" so my concern is earthquake intensity and frequency here, not in portlandia. Which considering how spread out our generating plants are, most of which are not near the Wasatch fault, I'm not that wound up about "the big one" decimating our electrical power sources which are not in the PNW.

Scientists say: <eye roll>

"It's been about 1,300 years — plus or minus 650 — since the Salt Lake City segment (of the Wasatch fault) had an earthquake of that magnitude," said University of Utah seismologist Jim Pechman.


Pacificorp is the power company, but our electricity is generated here mostly from coal and natural gas not the big hydro dams on the Columbia river. 75% of the IPAs 1,900 MW power output near Delta is exported to los angeles.

The "big one" they keep telling us is just around the corner.

So you can't be bothered to read the OP because it's "too long", and you aren't interested in the topic anyway?

Right.

Well thanks for bumping the thread anyway. I guess your post was at least good for that much.
 

·
Retired curmudgeon
Joined
·
19,404 Posts
So your poll has nothing to do with your OP. Got it.
 

·
Live Secret, Live Happy
Joined
·
16,176 Posts
I don't care about the cascadia subduction zone and the pacific northwest, I care about my location. And your OP wall of text is just that. TL/DR. The poll was where not to live. I already live in "earthquake country" so my concern is earthquake intensity and frequency here, not in portlandia. Which considering how spread out our generating plants are, most of which are not near the Wasatch fault, I'm not that wound up about "the big one" decimating our electrical power sources which are not in the PNW.

Scientists say: <eye roll>

"It's been about 1,300 years — plus or minus 650 — since the Salt Lake City segment (of the Wasatch fault) had an earthquake of that magnitude," said University of Utah seismologist Jim Pechman.


Pacificorp is the power company, but our electricity is generated here mostly from coal and natural gas not the big hydro dams on the Columbia river. 75% of the IPAs 1,900 MW power output near Delta is exported to los angeles.

The "big one" they keep telling us is just around the corner.

You might want to think this through more closely. I believe a major quake in the PNW, or Southern California would definitely affect you in the Salt Lake Valley.

Not directly, I believe you are over 800 miles away. But indirectly, because the entire nation will by pushing relief supplies to the area, and most of this material will pass through Salt Lake, via the Interstates and the Rail lines.

Also, there will be tens of millions of refugees who will be evactuated. Once again, many of the Interstates and Rail lines pass through Salt Lake.

Rescue operations will likely need a great deal of jet fuel, and diesel fuel, and much of the will come from refineries in Salt Lake and Western Wyoming.

I suspect folks in Salt Lake will barely feel a +9 mag Cascadian quake, or a +8 mag Southern California quake, but you will be affected be the national response.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,409 Posts
I`ve lived in So Cal. for the last 40 years. I`ve been in several. It probly takes a 6 or bigger to get me out of bed. I would rather live with the occasional earthquake then have to deal with tornadoes in the plain states or hurricanes in the southern states. Big earthquakes are rare.
 

·
Bear Magnet
Joined
·
3,766 Posts
Great thread, superb write up and thorough research. I wonder what the chances are of the Cascadia event AND the San Andreas occurring simultaneously?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,519 Posts
Discussion Starter · #309 · (Edited)
You might want to think this through more closely. I believe a major quake in the PNW, or Southern California would definitely affect you in the Salt Lake Valley.

Not directly, I believe you are over 800 miles away. But indirectly, because the entire nation will by pushing relief supplies to the area, and most of this material will pass through Salt Lake, via the Interstates and the Rail lines.

Also, there will be tens of millions of refugees who will be evactuated. Once again, many of the Interstates and Rail lines pass through Salt Lake.

Rescue operations will likely need a great deal of jet fuel, and diesel fuel, and much of the will come from refineries in Salt Lake and Western Wyoming.

I suspect folks in Salt Lake will barely feel a +9 mag Cascadian quake, or a +8 mag Southern California quake, but you will be affected be the national response.
You raise another relevant issue that I never considered when I first started this thread -- the supply chain.

The west coast has several major shipping ports that receive goods from around the world. I don't know what proportion of the nation's goods pass through the west coast ports, but it's at least 1/3.

So when those ports are non-operational, and the highways and train routes that serve them need major repairs before they can be used again, what will that do to the nation's supplies of food and goods?

Yes, there are eastern and southern ports as well, but they can't suddenly expand to accept all the shipping traffic that normally arrives at ports on the western seabord.

How will that affect the rest of the nation?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,988 Posts
You raise another relevant issue that I never considered when I first started this thread -- the supply chain.

The west coast has several major shipping ports that recieve goods from around the world. I don't know what proportion of the nation's goods pass through the west coast ports, but it's at least 1/3.

So when those ports are non-operational, and the highways and train routes that serve them need major repairs before they can be used again, what will that do to the nation's supplies of food and goods?

Yes, there are eastern and southern ports as well, but they can't suddenly expand to accept all the shipping traffic that normally arrives at ports on the western seabord.

How will that affect the rest of the nation?
From a logistical standpoint, you may be surprised to the FEMA system already in place.
Disruptions of supply is nothing new and the Feds have long held a practical and working system for just that situation.
Politics typically get in the way of that.


here is a good example from FEMA on that.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,988 Posts
BTW.. The links are not in my opinion a be all end all.
I don't really trust the Feds overall, but if you are informed of the system they DO have, you can work with, in or around as necessary.

Your single best prep is to be prepped regardless of any Gov. offerings.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,519 Posts
Discussion Starter · #314 · (Edited)
I wonder what the chances are of the Cascadia event AND the San Andreas occurring simultaneously?
Probably pretty good. When both faults are stress-loaded, as they are now, the shakemap for one impinges on the other.

Give either one a good shake, and I'd guess the other might very likely rupture within days.

By the way, there are several active/dormant volcanoes in the area that last erupted about 300 years ago. Not as easy to pinpoint the exact date of those eruptions... but its possible that the rupture of the Cascadia subduction zone in 1700 may have triggered them too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,359 Posts
From the ridiculously long and wandering OP...
"You who live in the Northwest states of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and Utah should be aware that your electricity may not return for months or YEARS,..."

First thing....Utah is NOT a Pacific Northwest state. Nor is Montana.

Second thing...in most of the state of Utah, our power won't be interrupted at all by any major quakes on the west coast, nor along the Wasatch front. We SELL power to the west coast, our generation is distributed across the state, and is mostly natural gas, with some wind thrown in to make the greens feel good while other people make MEGA bucks off the silliness.

Third thing....due to those completely inaccurate statements found in skimming, I didn't bother reading the rest.

Which is why a long rambling OP is justified as being labeled TL/DR

You might want to think this through more closely. I believe a major quake in the PNW, or Southern California would definitely affect you in the Salt Lake Valley.
Sure it will. But NOT like the OP said.

Not directly, I believe you are over 800 miles away. But indirectly, because the entire nation will by pushing relief supplies to the area, and most of this material will pass through Salt Lake, via the Interstates and the Rail lines.
You know where the FIRST relief supplies will come from?
Salt Lake City. The Church of Jesus Christ almost always beats the government response to crisis by several days.
The rest of it will be buying our fuel and using our commercial resources. Sales tax windfall.

Also, there will be tens of millions of refugees who will be evactuated. Once again, many of the Interstates and Rail lines pass through Salt Lake.
Yeah...we may not have enough Starbucks for that. But we have LOTS of flat empty land to put up refugee camps and a large percentage of people that will help.

Rescue operations will likely need a great deal of jet fuel, and diesel fuel, and much of the will come from refineries in Salt Lake and Western Wyoming.
Good. We'll all be making money. Too bad Biden is making the supply of fuel harder, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,359 Posts
Oh sure, the poll is related to the OP -- but since you can't be bothered to read it, there's no point discussing it, is there?

Thanks for the bump anyway!
But it's CERTAINLY not related to the title of the thread.
Where do you live, versus where NOT to live? Really?:rolleyes:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,519 Posts
Discussion Starter · #318 · (Edited)
Yeah, like Ranier, Hood and Shasta.
Also Eagle Peak.

When I first started this thread, I felt a little smug because we lived in the perfect BOL -- remote, easily defended, right on a year-round creek, in a neighborhood where everyone prepped of necessity, because any winter storm might cause a weeks-long power outage (like the one that occurred the month we were supposed to move in).

Yup, we were pretty cozy and smug, with our spare bedroom full of preps.

Then we went for a lovely drive and saw Eagle Peak. I researched it and found out that the last time it had erupted was around 1700.

Then I looked at a topographic map of the mountain and surrounding area.

Ah yes. So THAT'S why our well water smelled like rotten eggs!

Our "perfect" BOL, our refuge from post-earthquake madness, and our neighborhood, and the creek that flowed through it... were all located on top of a silty, sandy lahar -- a mud flow from Eagle Peak, possibly from its previous eruption.

Oops. 😳

We moved.
 

·
Retired curmudgeon
Joined
·
19,404 Posts
Yeah...we may not have enough Starbucks for that. But we have LOTS of flat empty land to put up refugee camps and a large percentage of people that will help.
We have the west desert. Also the feds could fire up the Topaz War Relocation Center down by Delta. It would do wonders for their economy not to mention there is a 1,900 megawatt power plant a stone's throw away. Plenty of juice to charge all their iFruits. Plus Los Angeles won't be needing it anymore after the 90 foot Tsunami.

You know where the FIRST relief supplies will come from?
Salt Lake City. The Church of Jesus Christ almost always beats the government response to crisis by several days.
During any humanitarian crisis the Church is among the first if not the first to respond.
====

But seriously, do we really want the west coast invading our state? Colorado is just a few hours drive further east on I-80 and I-70.
 

·
Retired curmudgeon
Joined
·
19,404 Posts
"Where NOT to live: WA OR CA ID MT WY UT CO NV AZ NM BC and AB"

Utah, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico - then you go international with Alberta Canada, none of which are in the PNW and subject to your volcanos, earthquakes and the cascadia subduction zone.

But we are only supposed to talk about the pacific northwest?

Bait and switch.
 
301 - 320 of 334 Posts
Top