Tsunami warning!

D_N Flay Table

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
2,711
Media
0
Likes
16
Points
183
Ok,:confused:
so there is a tsunami warning posted for hawaii.
sweet..
we are up high, and will watch and wait.
(shakes fist in the general direction of Japan):mad::mad:



TSUNAMI MESSAGE NUMBER 003
PACIFIC TSUNAMI WARNING CENTER
0847 PM HST 12 JAN 2007

TO - CIVIL DEFENSE IN THE STATE OF HAWAII

SUBJECT - TSUNAMI WATCH SUPPLEMENT

A TSUNAMI WATCH CONTINUES IN EFFECT FOR THE STATE OF HAWAII.

AN EARTHQUAKE HAS OCCURRED WITH THESE PRELIMINARY PARAMETERS

ORIGIN TIME - 0623 PM HST 12 JAN 2007
COORDINATES - 46.7 NORTH 154.4 EAST
LOCATION - EAST OF KURIL ISLANDS
MAGNITUDE - 8.2 MOMENT
MAGNITUDE - 8.1 RICHTER

MEASUREMENTS OR REPORTS OF TSUNAMI WAVE ACTIVITY

GAUGE LOCATION LAT LON TIME AMPL PER
------------------- ----- ------ ----- ------ -----
HANASAKI HOKKAIDO 43.3N 145.6E 0605Z 0.10M 28MIN

TIME - TIME OF THE MEASUREMENT
AMPL - AMPLITUDE IN METERS FROM MIDDLE TO CREST OR MIDDLE
TO TROUGH OR HALF OF THE CREST TO TROUGH
PER - PERIOD OF TIME FROM ONE WAVE CREST TO THE NEXT

EVALUATION

BASED ON ALL AVAILABLE DATA A TSUNAMI MAY HAVE BEEN GENERATED BY
THIS EARTHQUAKE THAT COULD BE DESTRUCTIVE ON COASTAL AREAS EVEN
FAR FROM THE EPICENTER. AN INVESTIGATION IS UNDERWAY TO DETERMINE
IF THERE IS A TSUNAMI THREAT TO HAWAII.

IF TSUNAMI WAVES IMPACT HAWAII THE ESTIMATED EARLIEST ARRIVAL OF
THE FIRST TSUNAMI WAVE IS

1223 AM HST 13 JAN 2007

MESSAGES WILL BE ISSUED HOURLY OR SOONER AS CONDITIONS WARRANT.
 

kalipygian

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2005
Posts
1,948
Media
31
Likes
139
Points
193
Age
68
Location
alaska
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Heard it on the radio 2 hours ago, 8.4 near the kuriles, a tsunami watch, not a warning. Think it said expected to arrive (if anything) 9:30 am tomorrow here, about 11 hours from now.

I'm at 1300'.
 

kalipygian

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2005
Posts
1,948
Media
31
Likes
139
Points
193
Age
68
Location
alaska
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
They just cancelled the tsunami watch for Ak and BC, possibly an 'observeable event'.

And the Kuriles have been part of Russia since WWII.
 

SpeedoGuy

Sexy Member
Joined
May 18, 2004
Posts
4,166
Media
7
Likes
41
Points
258
Age
60
Location
Pacific Northwest, USA
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
That alert seems to say that the height is 0.1 meters. Just how excited are they supposed to get in Hawaii about that?

Having issued a number of tsunami warnings in my career I'd like to comment on this.

Refraction and reflection of wave energy around land forms as well as distance from the epicenter can mask the true power of a tsunami at various reporting sites. No coastal resident should ever underestimate the tsunami potential of an 8+ oceanic earthquake.
 

drumstyck

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Posts
718
Media
0
Likes
5
Points
163
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
last nite Yahoo had a "breaking news update" about this on their front page...the article mentioned 3.3-foot waves for japan...like dirigible, i kinda thought that wasnt really a frightening height...i live in jersey, we get 3 foot waves all the time...that's not even enough to knock me down when i'm standing in it

i dont mean to like, mock such a potentially devastating thing, but was "3.3-foot" a typo? or is there really just that much that i dont understand about a tsunami?
 

SpeedoGuy

Sexy Member
Joined
May 18, 2004
Posts
4,166
Media
7
Likes
41
Points
258
Age
60
Location
Pacific Northwest, USA
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
i dont mean to like, mock such a potentially devastating thing, but was "3.3-foot" a typo? or is there really just that much that i dont understand about a tsunami?

The potential for damage from a tsunami depends on:

* The type of earthquake. A large vertical crust displacement (such as 2004's huge quake) moves a much greater volume of water than a lateral crust displacement. The bigger the amount of water moved, the larger the energy released and the greater the chance of a destructive tsunami. Underwater landslides can do this as well.

* Magnitude of quake. More energy released.

* Distance from epicenter. Distance tends to dissipate energy but is no guarantee of safety. There were tidal anomalies measured from the 2004 Asian tsunami as far away as Anchorage, Los Angeles and Mazatlan as well as others.

* Shape of landforms around the quake epicenter and the wave energy's impact zone. Reflection and refraction of the wave energy may spare some locations while concentrating energy and destructive potential in other areas.

* Bathymetry of the wave energy's impact zone. Deep water tends to disperse the wave's energy. Tsunamis are invisible to the human eye in mid ocean. However, as the shock front funnels up a gradually shallowing bay or river estuary the depth change causes the wave energy to become concentrated resulting in an astonishingly destructive flood of water.

A 3.3 foot wave may not sound like much but when the entire level of the ocean suddenly rises by 3.3 feet and surges inland, its dangerous.

No one should be fooled by preliminary reports labeling the tsunami as small or inconsequential. The potential is there until all the energy has dissipated (and that may take hours). Stay away from the water until an all-clear statement has been officially issued.

Hope this helps.
 

kalipygian

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2005
Posts
1,948
Media
31
Likes
139
Points
193
Age
68
Location
alaska
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
The 1964 alaska earthquake, 8.4, the sea level on islands surrounded by deep water, wasn't much beyond the normal tidal range, in bays with gradual sloping beaches, it in some cases went 1 mile inland. In Port Valdez it caused an underwater landslide that went down the fjord and echoed back, the town was hit by a 50' wall of water. It was relocated from the end of the fjord to the side.

Maybe it was a different occasion, but Hilo on the island of hawaii was wiped out by the tsunami produced by a very distant quake.

In lituya bay in SE Alaska a landslide on one side of the fjord produced a wave that went up the other side 650' , I think that is the record.

I was extremely disgusted with the andaman sea earthquake (about the same magnitude as this one) a couple of years ago, how useless the area governments (or any other agency) were in issuing warnings, still can't believe it. They squeeze taxes out of people forever, and give no return. Also how ignorant people were generally, sort of assumed there would have been more awareness. Living in an area with frequent earthquakes, we get regular reminders.