![new madrid seismac zone length new madrid seismac zone length](https://strangesounds.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/M3.0-earthquake-missouri-new-madrid-seismic-zone-july-5-2016-768x478.jpg)
Denying all those claims in a time of need would have been anathema to their tradition of helping their customers, not to mention toxic publicity. After the flooding, the insurers (all of them!) paid thousands of claims for flood damage, even though it was an unambiguously excluded peril. The amount of potential damage in the New Madrid area would surpass that of Cascadia, even though the devastation might be more intense after a Cascadia event.Īs these impending disasters loom, insurers might consider the 2013 Calgary floods. The 47 million inhabitants of the New Madrid region are much higher than the Pacific Northwest – the total population of Oregon, Washington, and B.C. But the crux of the Swiss Re report is that New Madrid earthquakes would be the costliest disaster that could strike the USA, and that is still true when considering Cascadia. Schulz explores in absolute detail.īased on the seismic potential, the Cascadia earthquake definitely sounds nastier – and many of the comments I have received say as much. The inundation zone of a Cascadia tsunami would be subject to almost complete devastation for reasons Ms. Subduction quakes are the main cause of tsunamis, and the coast from Oregon to British Columbia would be extremely vulnerable to a 40’ to 200’ wave of ocean, debris, vehicles, buildings, and trees. Maybe the starkest difference between possible New Madrid and Cascadia events, though, is the likelihood of a tsunami accompanying a Cascadia earthquake. Some stumps in the forest are as young as the 1700 Cascadia earthquake. It was created approximately 2000 years ago by an earthquake of the Cascadia Subduction Zone. The Neskowin Ghost Forest is the remnants of a Sitka spruce forest on the Oregon Coast.
![new madrid seismac zone length new madrid seismac zone length](https://www.kids-fun-science.com/images/eq13-1811-new-madrid.gif)
Decoding the Richter scores reveals that the worst subduction quakes are about 10 times as strong as the worst intraplate quakes. Indeed, as one lists famous 9.0+ quakes from the past half century (Sumatra, Tohoku, Alaska, Chile), they are all subduction-related. Subduction zones cause the most catastrophic earthquakes, typically responsible for all 9.0 and stronger events. Subduction zones, meanwhile, are where oceanic plates move under continental plates, and are found all around the “Ring of Fire”, or the Pacific Rim. Lawrence River – the risk of earthquake in Montréal and the surrounding area is real. Another known intraplate fault system in North America is along the St. The maximum estimated peak of the New Madrid events was about 8.1, and the 2012 Indian Ocean quakes off Aceh were 8.6 and 8.2, and were probably the strongest intraplate quakes recorded. These types of earthquakes are believed to have a maximum Richter value in the 8’s. The resulting earthquakes are called intraplate because they happen far from the edge of a tectonic plate. Intraplate fault zones are places where plates have fractured and the parts move relative to each other. To start, these two seismic zones are different types: Cascadia is an interplate subduction zone while New Madrid is an intraplate fault system. What are the similarities between the two seismic zones? Not much, beyond their shared potential for devastation (human and economic) of large populations. It’s a fantastic – and very scary – article, and it has made the rounds of social and traditional media. The article recounts the scientific detective story around its discovery, and describes the potential destruction to be wrought when (not if) the earthquake comes.
![new madrid seismac zone length new madrid seismac zone length](https://media.cheggcdn.com/study/d47/d4741f5d-47f0-4217-9626-4935add575e7/image.png)
![new madrid seismac zone length new madrid seismac zone length](https://image1.slideserve.com/1975454/slide3-l.jpg)
Thanks to a July 2015 article in the New Yorker by Kathryn Schulz, it now has a high profile in the public consciousness. Until the 70s and 80s, the Cascadia subduction zone was unknown to science. So, let’s explore that seismic time bomb, including a comparison with New Madrid. In those two weeks, the readership of that blog post has been enormous (thanks to Iain Bailey at Swiss Re for the original article!), and along with it came many questions and comments that mention the Cascadia subduction zone. A few weeks ago, I wrote about the New Madrid seismic zone, including how an earthquake there would be the costliest natural disaster in the country’s history.