An earthquake in the Cascadia Subduction Zone could produce a tsunami comparable to the December 2004 Sumatra earthquake and tsunami, says Kevin Furlong, a geophysicist at Penn State. That area is capable of producing a M9.0 or large event every 300 to 500 years, with the last quake hitting in the 1700’s.
But Furlong’s biggest concern is the so-called Cascadia Subduction Zone, a 600-mile fault formed by the meeting of two tectonic plates off the Pacific coast between northern California and central Vancouver Island. “At some point this area will host an earthquake and tsunami comparable in size to what happened in December in Sumatra,” he said flatly. “And when it happens, we can expect a similar pattern of devastation.”
Fifteen to 20 years ago, Furlong conceded, “people thought the Cascadia zone was a very safe margin.” In the interim, however, several lines of research have converged to create a much different picture. First, researchers found deposits of sea-floor sediment in Oregon, Washington and British Columbia, in places too far inland to be reached by ordinary tidal activity. “When a tsunami comes in it’s picked up a lot of sand,” Furlong noted. “People talk about the wave looking black.”
Similar Posts on Geology News:
- Possible Cascadia and San Andreas fault link
- Rethinking Giant Earthquake Theories
- Asia primed for next big quake
- M7.7 Hits Indonesia, Causes Tsunami
- Cascadia Subduction Zone - Modeling Tsunamis in Oregon

3 comments
Friday, November 18, 2005 at 4:49 am
tomás de zárate
there is no sense in lookin for another origin; iof course an earthquake in the Cascadia Subduction Zone could produce a tsunami; but there’s not sedimentary register, so there is no reason to think about that as a geology’s theory.
Monday, November 21, 2005 at 4:38 pm
Chris Zhang
tch. That would really suck if we got hit by a tsunami here in the U.S. I mean, sure, I’m in Missouri, so I’m pretty far inland, but we could still get bowled over and drowned by a tsunami from the Gulf of Mexico. I agree, a quake in that area could be of large enough magnitude to give birth to a tsunami, but I’m willing to bet not in my lifetime. Sue me if I’m wrong.
Monday, November 21, 2005 at 4:41 pm
Chris Zhang
Sorry for the double post. Ok, sue me, i didn’t see the 300-500 years thing from 1700s.