Tsunami to hit U.S. in future.

Topics in this category pertain to planning. Discussions include how to prepare yourself, your family and your community for catastrophes and what you plan to do when they hit you.

Moderator: ZS Global Moderators

Post Reply
Sturmwehr

Tsunami to hit U.S. in future.

Post by Sturmwehr » Sat Dec 31, 2005 1:43 am

I'm not sure if this goes here. It's a disaster that we should prepare for, so I guess it should be here.


Anyways, I was just watching the History Channel. There's one part of the Canary Islands that was created from a volcano eruption from 50 years ago. Because of this, there is a LARGE landmass that is unstable.

The same mount that caused this unstable mass is due to erupt again. It could be tomorrow, it could be 150 years from now. However, it WILL happen.

And, when it does, that landmass is likely going to slip into the ocean... displacing enough water to generate 20-35 yard high waves to hit the U.S. Anything within 20 miles of the coast on the U.S. could be hit.

That said, keep this in mind, people. Remember what happened during the last tsunami!!!!!

(EDIT: I had to try and post this topic 5 times because I kept getting errors. What's going on?)

Eniram
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 4:24 pm

Post by Eniram » Sat Dec 31, 2005 6:25 pm

I live a mile away from the beach..

User avatar
Orson
* * * * *
Posts: 2233
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 6:31 pm
Location: IN UR BASE, EATING UR FOODZ

Post by Orson » Sat Dec 31, 2005 6:29 pm

So is this on the east coast or west coast :?:
kyle wrote:I, for once, actually agree with gundown.
GunDown wrote: I never would have fucked her if she didn't have a vagina.

Eniram
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 4:24 pm

Post by Eniram » Sat Dec 31, 2005 7:42 pm

East. The Canary islands are west of Africa. Come to think of it, what will happen to Africa's west coast? Wouldn't they experience an even stronger wave seeing as they'll be closer to the origin? Er.. Or maybe thats not how waves work.

User avatar
jptp0831
* * * * *
Posts: 1442
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:58 pm
Location: Phx,AZ
Contact:

Post by jptp0831 » Sat Dec 31, 2005 8:07 pm

I guess I'll wax my board. It would be Wicked Cool to surf in AZ!!! :D
ZS Fleet ZS0017 & ZS0024
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Image

User avatar
randomusername
ZS Member
ZS Member
Posts: 1907
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 10:22 pm

Post by randomusername » Sat Dec 31, 2005 8:18 pm

I'm 20 minutes from South Padre Island in Brownsville, Texas. Guess i better go grab a board, or a boat...

User avatar
the_klenzer
* * * * *
Posts: 3457
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 12:31 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Post by the_klenzer » Sat Dec 31, 2005 10:48 pm

Eniram wrote:East. The Canary islands are west of Africa. Come to think of it, what will happen to Africa's west coast? Wouldn't they experience an even stronger wave seeing as they'll be closer to the origin? Er.. Or maybe thats not how waves work.
No one cares about Africa. They aren't us!
;)


Seriously, yes, they are probably f-ed.
"Klenzer, you have to be one of the only guys I know of that goes to the Arctic and somehow manages to get lapdances." - redhotkat
Vicarious_Lee wrote:This guide is created to help you get a spoon and eat my ass:
First: Get a spoon.
Second: Eat my ass.

User avatar
Agent281
* * * * *
Posts: 1888
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 10:02 pm
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Contact:

Post by Agent281 » Sat Dec 31, 2005 11:14 pm

jptp0831 wrote:I guess I'll wax my board. It would be Wicked Cool to surf in AZ!!! :D
Because that wave is going to wipe out Mexico all together. :lol:
Ben wrote:
mr. right-wing wrote:Dude...all I did when I was a teenager was drink beer and watch porn...and shoot things, a lot.
And now you are here. Funny how you don't really have to grow up.

User avatar
jptp0831
* * * * *
Posts: 1442
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:58 pm
Location: Phx,AZ
Contact:

Post by jptp0831 » Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:24 am

Laugh now! but I'll be outin the swell! :twisted:
ZS Fleet ZS0017 & ZS0024
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Image

Sturmwehr

Post by Sturmwehr » Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:53 am

jptp0831 wrote:I guess I'll wax my board. It would be Wicked Cool to surf in AZ!!! :D
Wrong coast. AFAIK, California, AZ, ect. won't be effected. Just the Eastern seaboard.

User avatar
mzmadmike
ZS Donor
ZS Donor
Posts: 1331
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:46 pm
Location: In a well-equipped suburban bunker
Contact:

Post by mzmadmike » Sun Jan 01, 2006 7:43 pm

Even when it slips, it would have to be at a precise and unlikely angle to actually create a tsunami that could cross at the proper angle to focus on the Eastern Seaboard, and would have to catch conducive currents to avoid being disrupted over that distance.

So yeah, it COULD happen, but I'd be a lot more worried about Yellowstone erupting. It goes about every 650K years, it's been 650K years, and the ground is heaving up to 4 feet from mantle pressure.

Typical eruption is 60-200 cubic MILES and would lay overburden from the PNW to Missouri, northern TX to Saskatoon.
A LONG TIME UNTIL NOW (paperback edition), Jul 2016 from Baen Books
ANGELEYES, Nov 2016 from Baen Books

http://www.MichaelZWilliamson.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.SharpPointyThings.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Custom, antique and commercial blades

Sturmwehr

Post by Sturmwehr » Sun Jan 01, 2006 11:38 pm

mzmadmike wrote:Even when it slips, it would have to be at a precise and unlikely angle to actually create a tsunami that could cross at the proper angle to focus on the Eastern Seaboard, and would have to catch conducive currents to avoid being disrupted over that distance.
I am not quite sure where you learned your version of physics.

Throw a stone into a pond at an angle, any angle. Where do the ripples go?


Everywhere. 360 degrees.

User avatar
mzmadmike
ZS Donor
ZS Donor
Posts: 1331
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:46 pm
Location: In a well-equipped suburban bunker
Contact:

Post by mzmadmike » Mon Jan 02, 2006 12:09 am

Sturmwehr wrote:
mzmadmike wrote:Even when it slips, it would have to be at a precise and unlikely angle to actually create a tsunami that could cross at the proper angle to focus on the Eastern Seaboard, and would have to catch conducive currents to avoid being disrupted over that distance.
I am not quite sure where you learned your version of physics.

Throw a stone into a pond at an angle, any angle. Where do the ripples go?

Everywhere. 360 degrees.
Where did you learn yours?

This isn't a meteor impact, it's a landslip. http://www.usc.edu/dept/tsunamis/alaska ... oseup.html this is the worst I'm aware of. It was a very local event.

Take a look at last year's Indian Ocean tsunami and notice the propagation shape from the fault shift.

Realize that said waves travel through several thousand miles of ocean, with varying shaped bottoms that create reflective angles and wave interference, that ocean water stratifies based on density, temperature and salinity.

By the time it reached Africa, that wave was about a meter.

http://www.drgeorgepc.com/TsunamiMegaEvaluation.html see here for an assessment of the likelihood of the collapse.

"To overcome the shear strength of 500 cubic km of material on LaPalma, as postulated, would require a very large triggering event and a tremendous lateral shear stress. Gaseous pressures do not built up on shield type of volcanoes as they do prior to the paroxysmal Plinian and Ultra-Plinian eruptions of the Krakatoan variety. Most of the eruptions of Cumbre Vieja and Kilauea are non-explosive types and involve primarily extrusions of pahoehoe and aa lavas, with only small amounts of pyroclastics, usually from secondary vents."

And assorted other analyses of the volcano.

"The recent tsunami modeling studies (Ward & Day, 2001, Ward 2001) used unrealistic source dimensions of flank collapses that are even greater than those of prehistoric events. The postulated Cumbre Vieja collapse is based on a massive monolithic slide block 15-20 km wide, 15-25 km long and up to 500 cubic Km in volume. Similarly unrealistic are the source dimensions for the postulated flank collapse of Kilauea along Hawaii's southern coast."

"The explosion/collapse of Krakatoa generated formidable tsunami waves that were up to 37 m in height. However, the tsunami was only destructive locally in Indonesia. Only small waves were recorded away from the source region (Pararas-Carayannis 2002). Similarly, the great explosion/collapse and flank failures of Santorin generated a very destructive tsunami estimated to be 40-50 m high near the source area. However, at Jaffa-Tel Aviv, 900 km away, the maximum height of the tsunami had attenuated to about 7 m tsunami (corrected for eustatic change) (Pararas-Carayannis, 1973, 1992)."
A LONG TIME UNTIL NOW (paperback edition), Jul 2016 from Baen Books
ANGELEYES, Nov 2016 from Baen Books

http://www.MichaelZWilliamson.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.SharpPointyThings.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Custom, antique and commercial blades

Sturmwehr

Post by Sturmwehr » Mon Jan 02, 2006 12:17 am

mzmadmike wrote: This isn't a meteor impact, it's a landslip. http://www.usc.edu/dept/tsunamis/alaska ... oseup.html this is the worst I'm aware of. It was a very local event.
That's insignificant with what is to happen.

In the case of Lituya Bay, imagine something the size of Cenotaph Island instead of a mere rockslide. Imagine the entire mass of Centopah falling into the ocean.


Take a look at last year's Indian Ocean tsunami and notice the propagation shape from the fault shift.


And you do realize that the waves distributed 360 degrees in that scenario? It was just a larger force with what impacted the South Pacific islands.

User avatar
tommygun
* * * * *
Posts: 1227
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 1:47 am
Location: Kansas City Mo

Post by tommygun » Mon Jan 02, 2006 12:45 am

How far inland would a 20 to 35 yard wave go? the people who live on the beach are screwed, but if you live far enough inland you should be ok.
Behold a pale horse, and the name of him who sat upon it was Death, and Hell followed with him.

theomegaman.org

User avatar
mzmadmike
ZS Donor
ZS Donor
Posts: 1331
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:46 pm
Location: In a well-equipped suburban bunker
Contact:

Post by mzmadmike » Mon Jan 02, 2006 1:23 am

Sturmwehr wrote:
mzmadmike wrote: This isn't a meteor impact, it's a landslip. http://www.usc.edu/dept/tsunamis/alaska ... oseup.html this is the worst I'm aware of. It was a very local event.
That's insignificant with what is to happen.
Actually, if you look at the real projections for what MIGHT happen at Cumbre Vieja, the worst case is pretty minor. If it happens at some point in the next few million years.

The Mother Of All Tsunamis projection was based on absolute theoretical worst case that has no real world documentation and was designed to gain funding (excuse me, "raise awareness") for the project.

In the case of Lituya Bay, imagine something the size of Cenotaph Island instead of a mere rockslide. Imagine the entire mass of Centopah falling into the ocean.
And in the cases where that has happened, referenced in that link, the results were largely unremarkable even in a small, shallow, confined body like the Mediterranean.

Take a look at last year's Indian Ocean tsunami and notice the propagation shape from the fault shift.


And you do realize that the waves distributed 360 degrees in that scenario? It was just a larger force with what impacted the South Pacific islands.
There were two arcs totalling not quite 360 degrees, with the western arc being of greater magnitude and approximately { shaped. That was an earthquake that moved the entire island of Sumatra several FEET. 3800 miles away, the wave was about 1 meter.

A similar effect at worst can be expected at 3275 miles in NYC, especially as there is considerably more ocean volume in the Atlantic, and the worst case slip will be of far smaller volume than the displaced sea floor in Aceh. I can calculate the comparative displacement if you like.

And most of the field think that worst case scenario is wildly improbable even in the event of a slip.

Also note the existing calderas orient more toward South America.

Feel free to try a small scale slip in a nearby pond from a pile of muck, and note the propagation shape will tend toward a C rather than a circle.
A LONG TIME UNTIL NOW (paperback edition), Jul 2016 from Baen Books
ANGELEYES, Nov 2016 from Baen Books

http://www.MichaelZWilliamson.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.SharpPointyThings.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Custom, antique and commercial blades

Sturmwehr

Post by Sturmwehr » Mon Jan 02, 2006 1:40 am

mzmadmike wrote: Actually, if you look at the real projections for what MIGHT happen at Cumbre Vieja, the worst case is pretty minor. If it happens at some point in the next few million years.
Scientists warn that in some future eruption within the next few thousand years the western half of the island, approximately 500km3 of land weighing an estimated 500 billion tons, will slide into the ocean -- a so called "lateral collapse". Should that happen, the resulting megatsunami would reach local heights of well over 300 meters and the speed of a jetliner, reaching the African coast in three hours, the coast of England in five, and the eastern seaboard of North America in eight. This could greatly damage if not completely destroy cities along the United States' east coast, such as New York, Boston, Washington, DC, Norfolk, Virginia, and Miami with 10 to 25 m high waves. It is observed that, over the last several thousand years, the distribution and orientation of vents and feeder dykes within the mountain have shifted from a triple rift system (typical of most oceanic island volcanoes) to one consisting of a single N-S rift with westward extending vent arrays. Some argue that these structural re-organizations are in response to evolving stress patterns associated with the growth of a detachment fault under the volcano's west flank.

There is controversy about the seriousness of the threat at Cumbre Vieja, with indications that usually the landslides there are gradual, and unlikely to generate tsunamis. Others, who have studied localized megatsunami in the Hawaiian Islands, draw distinctions between the tsunami wave periods caused by landslides and subduction-zone earthquakes, arguing that a similar collapse in Hawaii would not endanger Asian or North American coastlines.

History has also documented large and damaging tsunamis from far smaller lateral collapses of stratovolcanos and residual debris found on the seafloor does provide evidence of their abundance in recent geological time (see Storegga Slide). In recorded history, the Krakatoa and Santorini eruptions have generated devastating and deadly tsunamis, yet the damage was local and did not propagate across long distances. An earthquake and landslide in Crillon Inlet at the head of Lituya Bay on July 10, 1958 generated a monstrous megatsunami more than 500 m high, which stripped trees and soil from the opposite headland and consumed the entire bay, destroying three fishing boats anchored there and killing two people. By the time the wave reached the open sea, however, it dissipated quickly.

As of 2004, there is very little seismological monitoring of Cumbre Vieja in progress





I don't know about that. 25 meter high tsunamis hitting the American eastern seaboard sounds rather horrible.


And in the cases where that has happened, referenced in that link, the results were largely unremarkable even in a small, shallow, confined body like the Mediterranean.


You consider 500 meters high tsunamis unremarkable?


A similar effect at worst can be expected at 3275 miles in NYC, especially as there is considerably more ocean volume in the Atlantic, and the worst case slip will be of far smaller volume than the displaced sea floor in Aceh. I can calculate the comparative displacement if you like.


500 tons of mass suddenly being dumped into the ocean is going to displace a shitload of water. It will generate a tsunami. The size is debatable, but it will happen. That water will move.
Feel free to try a small scale slip in a nearby pond from a pile of muck, and note the propagation shape will tend toward a C rather than a circle.
1.) That's a horrible simulation. What we're talking about is more of a sink than a slip, and muck rolls, it doesn't slide.
2.) It generates a C because there's a LANDMASS behind the breakoff. Duh. The energy is STILL transfered, though. It just stops dead at the landmass it broke from. Lean forward and fall into a pool - there will be waves behind you, they are just dampened and neutered from the pool liner (since you'll be inches away from it).

Post Reply

Return to “Contingency Planning & Preparation”