| May 2, 2008 @ 12:17 PM |
No one is saying much about this
|
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 7,499
|
Last month there was some concern by scientists over a "swarm" of earthquakes of an unusual nature off the coast of Oregon (reported on here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080413184801.htm). But over the past few weeks earthquake activity has risen far above average. This map (North American earthquakes in the past week) shows an unusually high degree of seismic activity, though not consisting of any "great quakes" (over 7.0 on the Richter scale), around Puerto Rico/Virgin Islands, the entire Alaska Penninsula and the west coast. Since this map only shows quakes measuring 2.5 and above, it doesn't show the thousands of microquakes that have been occurring. I just find it curious that with this level of activity, there doesn't seem to be any news about it.
|
|
  |
|
| May 2, 2008 @ 12:21 PM |
No one is saying much about this |
|
eastham
Posts: 7,913
|
I haven't read anything about the East Coast; however, we don't have a tsunami warning system for this coast.
I know there have been concerns about earthquakes in the Midwest. Feeling any rumblings out your way, Nightowl?
|
| |
|
| May 2, 2008 @ 12:37 PM |
No one is saying much about this
|
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 7,499
|
The ground was rumbling so much last evening from the thunder and the tornadoes (sirens went off three times in my county; one set down about a mile east of me) that it would have had to be a 5.0 or better to tell it was a quake and not just sonic shock!
|
|
| |
|
| May 2, 2008 @ 6:04 PM |
No one is saying much about this |
|
Paralegal_at_Law
Posts: 5,869
|
Since the Pacific "Ring of Fire" seismic and volcano threat not only includes Mount St. Helens, but also the slumbering super-volcano under Yellowstone, it is of vital importance that all fire, police, emergency medical service, and civil defense units be properly trained in volcanic natural emergencies.
Our day is coming and when Yellowstone erupts, Kansas City expects 5,000 deaths and Indiana expects its cornfields to be under a moonscape of volcanic ash, and the entire Earth may experience so much ash in the atmosphere that all talks of "global warming" will be eclipsed by the de facto blockage of the sun with the ash for several years, creating volcanic winters and crop failures.
Contact FEMA and get their assessment of the Yellowstone Vocano as to your viscinity. See Megadisasters on the Discovery Channel.
And then be afraid. Very afraid.
|
| |
|
| May 2, 2008 @ 7:50 PM |
No one is saying much about this
|
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 7,499
|
I don't want to detract from the dangerousness of a Yellowstone super-eruption, but I just have to point out, it is NOT part of the Pacific Ring of Fire. The western-US subduction zone that is part of the Ring of Fire lies west of the Cascades and the Sierras and outlines the eastern edge of the Pacific Plate. Yellowstone is 700+ miles into the North American Plate.
|
|
| |
|
| May 2, 2008 @ 8:06 PM |
No one is saying much about this |
|
lefthandedluckie
Posts: 6,386
|
There was a minor quake on the New Madrid Fault just the other day. From Chicago to below Memphis things were shaken. It is time for a major quake on this line. As the last quake made the Reelfoot Lake in Obion County in Tennessee. The Mississippi River ran backwards for 3 days to fill this place up. It happened around the turn of the 20th. Century.
So, it being now over a 100 years you can see the fearful expectation is building!
|
| |
|
| May 2, 2008 @ 9:47 PM |
No one is saying much about this
|
|
eastham
Posts: 7,913
|
Thanks for pointing that out Nightowl.
Here's a cool webpage on plate techtonics. It discussions the formation under Yellowstone.
|
|
| |
|
| May 3, 2008 @ 7:37 AM |
No one is saying much about this |
|
FunkyMonkey68
Posts: 450
|
we are twenty miles from the epicenter of the New Madrid quake. It was 5.2 and we still keep having little ones, not counting the ones that we don't feel that they say we keep having. I also found out, that we are close to another fault here in the midwest.. the Wabash Fault. I have read that nothing is really known about the New Madrid/Wabash Fault, not like what they know about say.. the San Andreas fault in California.
|
| |
|
| May 4, 2008 @ 11:40 AM |
No one is saying much about this
|
|
RareQuestor
Posts: 2,652
|
I wonder if any studies have been done on the long-term effects of mining on seismic stability? Our species is removing uncounted billions of gallons of oil from the reservoirs which trapped it for hundreds of millions of years and converting it to a gas. We have also transformed millions of tons of coal into gas as well. We are even blowing apart entire mountains just to extract coal! We have also created hundreds of new reservoirs and lakes and destroyed entire seas (e.g. the Aral Sea in Asia.) Individually, the seismic affect of such actions may be small, but the collective effect could be significant--perhaps even enough to trigger faults which were already under stress?
[Edited to add that we must also factor seismic stress from the nuclear tests of the previous century in the equation.]
|
|
| |
|
| May 4, 2008 @ 12:02 PM |
No one is saying much about this |
|
SweetNapaGuy
Posts: 8,499
|
I think fault lines tend to lie MUCH deeper than where we're getting our oil and minerals.
|
| |
|
| May 4, 2008 @ 4:13 PM |
No one is saying much about this
|
|
SyndilLucian
Posts: 1,046
|
When I was in high school, I did a science project on that very concept, RQ. There was a geologist? (I can never remember which it is) that came by our school, and when I saw my project, he asked a some questions, and then said something like:
They don't really know what effects removing the crude oil and natural gas from under the ground will have on the future, and that was almost 40 years ago now.
|
|
| |
|
| May 4, 2008 @ 4:14 PM |
No one is saying much about this |
|
SyndilLucian
Posts: 1,046
|
Some of the fault lines are, but when you are shifting that much, there have to be some effects. Even if the oil and natural gas is replaced by ground water, they don't have the same density.. so.. 
|
| |
|
| May 4, 2008 @ 4:26 PM |
No one is saying much about this
|
|
lefthandedluckie
Posts: 6,386
|
I believe I understand what...."RareQuestor"...is saying. It is the rearranging of the pressure being caused by the removal of all the coal, oil and other minerals.
Alas, I am not a geologist. But, it does make sense. Knowing how the "plates" are and how they rub against one another. Pressure either negative or positive will make a movement in the plates very, very probable over time.
It would remind someone of scales. You fill one side with the product then you fill the other with weights to get the exact measurement. But, once you remove one or the other pressure and gravity will put the heaviest side down. Thus, creating the increasing pressure he is talking about....I believe! As compared to the plates!
|
|
| |
|
| May 4, 2008 @ 4:30 PM |
No one is saying much about this |
|
SyndilLucian
Posts: 1,046
|
ok.. .. never said I was a geologist, just vaguely remember something he said... (mumbles to herself, prolly the only one here who doesn't claim to be knowledgeable in anything, I just know about me... )
I'll just wander away to something else.. never said I knew a lot, was just my 2 cents worth.. sheesh
|
| |
|
| May 4, 2008 @ 4:45 PM |
No one is saying much about this
|
|
lefthandedluckie
Posts: 6,386
|
SyndilLucian.......Understand..."I am not a geologist either"! Nor do I claim the knowledge they have!
I was only using what I have learned and read over time to state what I said. If I am right or wrong I cannot specifically say.
I just.....used what my brain told me to say...nothing else.
And not taking anything away from you! As a matter of fact I did not see your postings till I posted mine. So, my posting had nothing to do with yours. I hope you understand! Believe me nothing in my posting was in anyway to slight you! 
|
|
| |
|
| May 4, 2008 @ 4:47 PM |
No one is saying much about this |
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 7,499
|
From: http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq130-1.htm
On 9 March 1957 an 8.3 magnitude earthquake south of the Andreanof Islands in Alaska generated another Pacific-wide tsunami that damaged buildings in Hilo Bay as well as again destroying the Coconut Island bridge.
This is concerning in that the area off Andreanof Island is where they have had a swarm of recent quakes (more than 100 in the past week over 2.5, including one of 6.6). I cannot find any data on whether or not there was increased minor quake activity around the one that produced a tsunami that caused damage in Hawaii in 1957. Arguably, all the "little" quakes prevent everything from slipping in one massive quake, the tension being released a little at a time rather than in one explosive burst. But, again, I don't see where anyone is really saying much about this situation. The quakes off the coast of Oregon have continued as well. Conceivably, a seafloor quake could generate a local tsunami that would hit Seattle, Portland, and Northern California before warnings had time to be effective. If I lived in these areas, I'd be thinking about taking a long vacation!
|
| |
|
| May 5, 2008 @ 8:31 AM |
No one is saying much about this
|
|
SyndilLucian
Posts: 1,046
|
My guess is the reason no one is pointing this out (besides the Discovery Channel in a round about way) Is, what can you do about it? I sincerely doubt the people who live in these areas would move (the Midwest?) and if they chose to, where would they go anyway? This could be as far off as 100 years (doubtful) or as soon as next week, no one knows for sure, although the increase in activity should be telling someone somewhere something. For all we know, the government has plans either in place or being drawn up, to deal with the aftermath of something of this magnitude. If the response to Katrina is any indication, I suggest that state and local authorities put together their own disaster relief plans, because the federal governments response probably won't be of much help, sorry to say.
All the people who live in these areas can do is to educate themselves of what may happen, the best emergency plans they can put together, and then pray it doesn't happen in their lifetimes.
|
|
| |
|
| May 5, 2008 @ 1:25 PM |
No one is saying much about this |
|
RareQuestor
Posts: 2,652
|
Well it is a geological fact that during the last ice age the ice sheet covering Norway, Sweden and other Scandinavian countries was so heavy that it actually compressed the crust into the mantle. The crust has been "rebounding" ever since the ice melted and causing minor seismic activity in Scandinavia. Surely a large reservoir such as Lake Powell must similarly compress the crust to a certain extent. As I said, individually the effect of such changes may be insignificant, but collectively and accumulatively may be significant enough to trigger new seismic activity. I also note that the oceans are expanding due to global warming, ice sheets (including much of Greenland and the arctic) are rapidly melting and normal geological processes have been altered or disrupted. (The Missouri and Mississippi rivers once transported a vast amount of sediment into the Gulf of Mexico, for example, but now that sediment is trapped by the multitude of dams on both rivers.) I'm not blaming the recent earthquakes on human activity--I'm just saying that I do not think enough research has been done on the long-term geological effects of human activity.
|
| |
|
|