On 04/24/2017 8:28 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
writes:


Considering all the historic quakes on this fault, I find that
statement to be implausible, if not completely false. Particularly
given Loma Prieta, which was the San Andreas and didn't destroy
either SF or Berkeley. No more than Northridge or Sylmar destroyed
LA.

Actually the damage to LA was great.

Not when compared with 1906. And that's because of lessons learned from
Long Beach and Sylmar. From a cost basis, it cost less than Katrina.
Yes, it caused damage, for the most part relatively minor, and the
bulk of which affected soft-story apartment buildings in the valley.
....

All will depend on precise location and intensity...1906 was roughly
7.7-7.9 only 2 mi off coast of SF; 1989 was 6.9 (10X less energy) and
roughly 50-60 mi S.

In contrast, New Madrid 1811 comprised of a ~7.7 followed by a 7.4
"aftershock" only 6 hours later the same day and another ~7.4 roughly 5
weeks after. At that time the area was pretty-much still undeveloped so
not a lot of structural damage. Created what is now Reelfoot Lake;
eyewitness accounts say south of the location the Mississippi R ran
backwards for several minutes while the new depression created filled...

--