Hi Ed
I fully agree. We have had major slippages also, but now we have been through it, we are much more knowledgeable, plus a major fact is that the demolitions and rebuilds, will make Christchurch much safer and EQ resistant. Sadly 185 were lost, mainly in 2 building collapses, one of which was poorly designed and court action has shown this. We have one of the best EQ building laws in the world, and with some exceptions, it stood up well. I was in the CBD when it hit, on a high floor, and it did the job. If we get a big one, and I am home or at work, or in many building in the city I will feel safe. Naturally, still a risk factor, but I do know that while most thinsg at home and work were on the floor afterwards, the structure was safe. Hurricanes, tornados, well, what can a teeny human do to survive, very dangerous.
From: Ed <huckleberryed@gmail.com>
To: iPad@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2012 11:59 AM
Subject: RE: [iPad] OT Hurricane Sandy
On Oct 30, 2012, at 4:54 PM, "Ed" <huckleberryed@gmail.com> wrote:
I fully agree. We have had major slippages also, but now we have been through it, we are much more knowledgeable, plus a major fact is that the demolitions and rebuilds, will make Christchurch much safer and EQ resistant. Sadly 185 were lost, mainly in 2 building collapses, one of which was poorly designed and court action has shown this. We have one of the best EQ building laws in the world, and with some exceptions, it stood up well. I was in the CBD when it hit, on a high floor, and it did the job. If we get a big one, and I am home or at work, or in many building in the city I will feel safe. Naturally, still a risk factor, but I do know that while most thinsg at home and work were on the floor afterwards, the structure was safe. Hurricanes, tornados, well, what can a teeny human do to survive, very dangerous.
From: Ed <huckleberryed@gmail.com>
To: iPad@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2012 11:59 AM
Subject: RE: [iPad] OT Hurricane Sandy
Tony, there is one exception to my recently posted personal comments… 35 years ago when I was younger and more indestructible I did live for a year on the San Andreas fault…. I lived on Oakmont Drive in San Bruno, of the SF Bay area, and that street apparently 'was' the fault line. The far side of the street was several feet higher than my side due to a prior shift in that fault in the 50's, I believe. I never really gave it much thought in 1976, but I sure would be thinking about it now were I living there ! ☺
Ed in Oregon
From: iPad@yahoogroups.com [mailto:iPad@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tony
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 3:51 PM
To: iPad@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [iPad] OT Hurricane Sandy
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 3:51 PM
To: iPad@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [iPad] OT Hurricane Sandy
I agree with Ed.
I live in an earthquake area, 11000 aftershocks after a 7.1 2 yearsd ago, and 4 over 6, many many over 5, and all local and shallow. In fact the 6.3 we has had one of the highest ground acceleration figures at 2.2g
Having seen floods in Australia and the US, let alone hurricane or super storms, I'd live in a EQ area any day
I live in an earthquake area, 11000 aftershocks after a 7.1 2 yearsd ago, and 4 over 6, many many over 5, and all local and shallow. In fact the 6.3 we has had one of the highest ground acceleration figures at 2.2g
Having seen floods in Australia and the US, let alone hurricane or super storms, I'd live in a EQ area any day
From: Ed <huckleberryed@gmail.com>
To: iPad@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2012 11:32 AM
Subject: RE: [iPad] OT Hurricane Sandy
To: iPad@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2012 11:32 AM
Subject: RE: [iPad] OT Hurricane Sandy
Alice, if you live in N.Cal 2 hours from SF, unless right up the coast, you probably have no problem. I lived most of my life in N.Cal about 2 hours from SF and never had any concerns, although we 'felt' many quakes from nearby areas. I never really felt the Loma Prieta quake when that one occurred in 89 . If you live in a stick built house of fairly modern construction, you're probably quite safe. Personally, I consider living in a flood prone area is far more risky than living in Earthquake territory, assuming your housing is appropriately constructed. It's all in the 'odds' I guess.
Ed
From: iPad@yahoogroups.com [mailto:iPad@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Alice
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 12:22 AM
To: iPad@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [iPad] OT Hurricane Sandy
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 12:22 AM
To: iPad@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [iPad] OT Hurricane Sandy
I understand that, Ed. Some would say, why risk moving to earthquake country too. Olive in northern CA, 2 hrs from SF..
\
\ /\
( ) Alice
.( ). whiterabbit32@gmail.com
Just Murray <krismurray@gmail.com> wrote:
\
\ /\
( ) Alice
.( ). whiterabbit32@gmail.com
Just Murray <krismurray@gmail.com> wrote:
The government subsidized insurance as I read it. Insurance made it ok to live below sea level. Inevitable is a word that comes to mind.
~KLM
\,,/ 01001100 01001111 01001100 \,,/
On Oct 30, 2012, at 4:54 PM, "Ed" <huckleberryed@gmail.com> wrote:
Fully agree with that! Why people chose to ignore the risks in moving to such places boggles the mind. New Orleans is a primo example. Who would chose to live in such a place with so much land BELOW sea level
__._,_.___
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (60) |
.
__,_._,___