Why aren't the largest earthquakes the most damaging an most deadly?

Answer 1

Large earthquakes often occur far from the most densely populated regions of the Earth. But they can still kill many people. When even a moderate quake hits a developed, populated area (such as San Francisco or Japan), the damage can be more more severe.

Probably the single biggest reason why the 2011 Japan quake caused less deaths than the much smaller, weaker 2010 Haiti quake would be the stringent building codes in Japan, versus Haiti which had no real building codes. Japan is a very technological, safety and quality-focused nation. Japan has a long history facing calamity from earthquakes and tsunami, going back centuries, and tragedies of the past has taught the Japanese government and people to always be prepared. They make their buildings to withstand earthquakes, and build great seawalls to protect against the horrors of tsunami. Tragically during the 2011 earthquake, the tsunami that struck was bigger than the walls had been designed for. Fortunately the Japanese government and culture is focused on safety and discipline, and from an early age, the Japanese are taught what to do when an earthquake strikes, to get to safe places if a tsunami is likely. The death toll is still horrific and devastating and not to be diminished, but many people were saved by the combination of the tsunami warning system and the education that Japanese people receive to heed tsunami warning sirens and get to higher ground.

Most places along the United States' west coast are prepared for moderate to large earthquakes, though not for earthquakes as strong as Japan's. A Haiti-sized earthquake striking Seattle or Los Angeles would likely not cause anywhere near the loss of life and infrastructure damage that it did in Haiti. However, because earthquakes are rare, cities and states in the United States farther inland and on the east coast are not prepared. New York only adopted its first earthquake building code in 1995, and it was only stipulated to make new buildings able to withstand an earthquake about one-tenth the intensity of the Haitian quake. No older buildings are required to be retrofitted, which means most of New York City's skyskrapers would be vulnerable and a Haiti-sized earthquake striking New York City would likely cause much more catastrophic death tolls than were it to strike cities on the West Coast where building codes are stronger.

Answer 2

Most earthquakes happen far away from populated areas and the destructive power has diminished to the point of being barely felt. The epicenter is the most effected area and like tornados, the actual location of one cannot be guessed or predicted to any accuracy. It would be equivalant to guessing where lightning would strike next. Seizmology is not an exact science and many people have been proven wrong as to where an earthquake will occur and when. Mt. Saint Helens is a good example. A few scientists decided to move to a new vantage point just hours before its explosive eruption, saving theirs and many others lives.

Answer 3

Earthquake's release compressional shear and surface waves with the surface waves being the slowest and most destructive. Depending on the material the Surface waves (Love and Rayleigh waves) pass through they will increase or decrease in amplitude or frequency. Bedrock or solid material decreases the amplitude and frequency of these waves causing less overall shaking. Unconsolidated sediment however increases both amplitude and frequency causing more violent shaking. This is why there can be pockets of more destruction and less destruction depending on the underlying stratigraphy.

Buildings also oscillate at a certain frequency i.e. Tacoma narrows bridge (galloping girde) so if the frequency that the seismic waves are oscillating at match the buildings frequency it will cause it to engage in harmonic motion and eventually tear itself apart. Smaller or shorter buildings tend to have higher frequencies whereas larger skyscrapers will oscillate at a lower frequency.

Answer 4

The reason the largest earthquakes aren't always the most damaging and/or deadly is due to the fact that most earthquakes occur on boundary lines. In first world countries the people know what they are getting themselves into and they take precautions against injury and fatality. In places such as Chile and California there are much stricter building codes to prevent shoddy building that could easily collapse during an earthquake. Although 3rd world countries do not have the same opportunities, the people there do not usually live in large cities and there is less to fall and cause damage to the people. A true disaster is what happens when you mix a 3rd world country's busy city with an earthquake, such as Port-au-Prince in Haiti.

Answer 5

The largest earthquakes are not always the most damaging and deadly because factors like the depth of the quake, distance from populated areas, building codes, and preparedness measures can influence the level of destruction. A shallow earthquake close to a densely populated area can cause more damage and casualties compared to a larger earthquake further away.

Answer 6

because some poor people cant save themselves because they have no money

Answer 7

Unfortunately, earthquakes are more powerful then we are, but if your or somebody else were to follow the guidelines of an earthquake, You would be OK.

Answer 8

some where away from volcanoes