HELP APPRECIATED-earthquakes and volcanoes question

jeez people,at least vote in the poll...

I think, technically, that U.S. west coast and Japan are ON the ring of fire and that Hawaii is within it. The ring is fired upbecause the ocean floor is subducting beneath the continental shelves.

Hawaii is a series of volcanic isles, each island is made when that island is/was over a thing called a hotspot - a thin piece of ocean floor where the magma beneath can get through. The ocean floor itself moves over the hotspot as it moves to crunch under Japan - hence the string of islands.

They're very different mechanisms and I think that Hawaii prolly has no earthquakes.

Iceland is an island also made from magma from beneath the ocean floor. But, the mechanism here is, again, different. Here the floor is splitting apart and a seam of magma is ozzing out, Iceland is part of that seam.

Now, tell me, is this about your homework?

lol no it's a project-but thanks for the information(though I did already research about that much).
and i thought this forum was for people who help in the research?

but i do need ppl to vote in the poll!!
.....think if no one else posts by this time tomorrow,I'll change this post to the poll only,maybe then more people will vote.....

Fyi, Linkat, Hawaii has MANY earthquakes... and a mostly active(eruption ongoing) volcano for the past 22 years...

Oops. I'm the only one who thought Iceland? <cringing> I could have sworn I heard that somewhere.



Starzz --I can't think of anything we could conceivably build that would withstand volcanic activity -- magma, mudslides and pyroclastic flows -- those are not going to be stopped by reinforced concrete or steel.

FYI: Here's Mt. St. Helen's projected ashflow pattern for the next 24 hours IF there were a hypothetical one hour eruption at midnight. Amazing that they (NOAA) are continually monitoring this.

Piffka-Thanks for the info,and by that(the quote from your post) I meant the place where it's most fit to build a warehouse(compared to the other four places on the list). Ex.San Francisco's EQ resistant building codes may help a bit. And I do think Iceland to be important too!

Now thanks for finally voting/posting!!

And an update on my findings :wink: :

So far I am putting the order as 1) Tokyo (most EQs and eruptions and predicted that a huge EQ should hit soon)(also because it's part of the ring of fire and on a converging boundary),
2) ICELAND (because it's also a hot spot and they use geothermal energy for most things which come from the heat of their volcanoes(but I'm not sure how this fits in yet? lol),and because of the previous Laki fissure eruption which caused famine for many years i think),
3) I'm still deciding between Hawaii and San Francisco because Hawaii IS a hot spot and has constant active volcanoes,but apparently the magma moves slowly and oozes out instead of exploding(which makes me think if the warehouse is located far enough inland away from the volcanoes,hawaii would be perfect?, and San Francisco has the "Big One"(EQ) coming up any day from now to year 2030.
The last is Sicily,Italy because it only has Mt.Etna so I can locate warehouse away from that, but I haven't done research on their EQs yet...

and thanks to everyone who read this extremely long post!

I think Iceland is more of an oozer too. Italy has other things going on aside from Etna. There have been a few strong EQs since I've been paying attention (over the last 20 years).

Why not locate your warehouse in an area not known for frequent/severe earthquakes and volcanic activity? Because the Earth is a dynamic system almost any place you name can have an earthquake or volcano. Currents within the molten core caused by the Earths rotation, shifting magnetic fields, and temperature differentials have great effect on the realtively thin surface crust that we live on. Large surface "plates" rotate (counter-clock), shift and grow as the core erupts and cools into solidity. Probably the best known and largest is the Pacific plate. As it rotates its edges move in the opposite direction from the adjacent plates causing many earthquakes, and very active geological change.

Other tectonic plates are less active, but can still on occasion move causing extremely large quakes. The New Madrid Quake in the first half of the 19th century was centered near the Mississippi River and Arkansas. The New Madrid Quake caused the Mississippi to reverse it's course, and was so large it that it caused church bells to ring as far away as Washington D.C. The world's large mountain chains (Sierras, Alps, Himalayas, etc.) are the result of the pushing and lifting resulting from sub-vection, and eruptions through faults and thin points in the crust of plates. Sub-vection occurs as plates grow longitudinally, and one is forced beneath its neighbor. Volcanic eruptions are very frequently within, or near those areas where plates meet, but can occur in other places as well. Thin places in the crust near the center of plates, like Hawaii, are an example.

As the core cools plate activity will slow and the number of earthquakes and volcanoes will diminish. The cooler, thicker magma currents will slow and eventually be frozen into immobility. At that point earth's ability to generate magnetic fields will be reduced to zero with potentially devastating effect on the planet's ability to nurture life. Don't lose any sleep over this scenario, at current cooling rates it is far more likely that we will either be extinct, or off to more fertile fields millions of years before our planet loses its molten center. The presence of earthquakes and volcanoes are, you see, one of those features that may seem bad but in reality are both essential and good.

Littlek-You're right, Sicily has had a few strong EQs. Great, now I have no idea how to order them lol.
And Iceland-apparently 10% are glaciers (would this help in my explaination?), and it has effusive volcanoes and recorded explosions in the past. But their volcanoes are all lined in a belt in the center, so it could be safe to place a warehouse along the east or west coast as the EQs there aren't as strong and tsunamis are not likely to hit.

Again, why not choose some other location less subject to earthquake and/or volcanic action? Why are Japan, Sicily, Iceland, and Hawaii the only choices?

Typically, volcanic eruption is disruptive and destructive over a smaller area than large earthquakes. However, I doubt that you would site anything permanent on the slopes of an active valcano anyway. Japan and Sicily may be the least likely of the choices to have a serious volcanic eruptions. Iceland probably is the least predictable of the four, and hence is probably the place to avoid if volcanos are going to be a major factor.

Earthquakes, on the other hand, are relatively short in duration, and proper archetectural design can greatly increase the survivability of structures. Japan is by far the most subject to major earthquakes, but it may also have best prepared for them. All of your choices are subject to earthquakes, though Sicily may be the least probable to experience a major (8+ pt.) quake in the foreseeable future. Hawaii could be effected by Tsunami waves originating almost anywhere in the Pacific, so it may be a bit more subject to quake damage than Iceland.

Sicily >>>>>> Quake=1.......Volcano=1
Iceland >>>> Quake=2.......Volcano=4
Japan >>>>> Quake=4.......Volcano=3
Hawaii>>>>> Quake=3.......Volcano=2

Oddly enough the NE of the US is supposed to be due for a big quake. There are records, historically or geologically, of repetative quakes, but we've had nothing more than little tremors for a way over-due amount of time (sorry, not sounding very scientific here).

hey would you happen to be doing this project for KDG enterprise?? :wink: :wink:

starzz, Tokyo may be the hot spot for earthquakes, but they have improved the construction of buildings and other structures to withstand the biggest of earthquakes. The premise of your question concerning the "safest" location must be balanced against the ability of man to minimize the destructive nature of earthquakes. There are natural phenomenon such as the melting of the ice caps which threatens all life forms on this planet. This planet has also experienced ice ages several times. There is just so much control man has over nature.

Asherman-thanks for the advice, but I am doing a project that requires me to choose between the five places which all have EQs or volcanoes. And at first I thought there weren't much for Sicily either, but apparently Mt.Etna has had several big explosions and Sicily's had some devastating EQs including the one that destroyed Messina. And for Hawaii-much of their volcanoes oozes or aren't too dangerous and only has tremors, barely big EQs?

littlek-by NE of US, do you mean around where Hawaii is? And could you provide a link or resource to look into that?

cicerone imposter-Yes,Tokyo has improved their building codes, but there're still a LOT of old buildings which suffers from EQs and other effects after. And their building codes aren't too EQ-proof...i think?

starzz, Try this link. There might be some info you can use. http://www.eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp/eandv.html

thanks,cicerone imposter. Thanks so much everyone-I am now done researching (except Hawaii). Tokyo will most likely be the most dangerous place out of the five. More info on Hawaii would be helpful.

I am now done. Thank you everyone.

Well, what did you come up with?

I meant the North East of the United States.

Hawaii? Well I found the technology they use at HVO site and talked about landslides and Mauna Loa and Kilauea etc. (Don't want to be specific because some people doing the same project as me with different due dates are on this site...)