Why can’t we have at least what they have in Japan, a cellphone message sent a few seconds before impat, the same systme that is tied to teh high speed rail so that it stops before a quake? It is working, it is not 100% accurate but 80% advance warning is good for me. I remember reporting that they had set up the bases and the the detection systems for something similar here in Taiwan.
Last night, there were 27 recorded earthquakes from 3.0 to 5.4 in Hualien County between midnight and 6AM. Who knew in advance?
ROCK-N-ROLL! :discodance:
It is not cost-effective to offer warnings such as “There will be a 6.5+ earthquake in the Central Mountain range sometime between July and November…”
Below is a short article on the high speed rail warning system. They don’t go right out and say it, but the system seems to be far from ideal. It’s based on the German model, which isn’t designed to be used in areas with lots of big earthquakes. Some engineers have recommended using the Japanese system, which is functional in geological areas such as Taiwan, but the decision makers don’t want to…If the HSR train does catastrophically derail (one has already derailed during an earthquake), it’ll be reported on for awhile and then everyone will forget, just like the plasticizer-food ordeal and not unlike the HSR crash in China about a year ago. Few will make the connection that it’s not an isolated event but a reflection of a more dangerous way of making decisions and the needless deaths/illnesses will carry on.
Frankly, after 7 years of these quakes over here in Hualien, about the only reliable early detection of a big one is the “prequake vibration”, a sort of humming that lasts about 2 seconds. It may just be a peculiarity of the quakes in our area, but I believe this is what should be detectable in time to alert a particular region and automatically shut down the HSR.
I think current technology can do better than 2 secs; it’s a matter of whether or not they will implement it…
Agreed that technology should be able to offer something better. Imagine sorting through all the possible indicators and weighting them accordingly! Taiwan certainly seems to be a PRIME location for attempting to do so.
Let’s see now…
- We haven’t had anything over a 5.8 for the past 7 weeks.
- Over 27% of the 3.0+ earthquakes in the past two months have been located south of the Tropic of Cancer.
- The Moon is in the right phase to apply added load to the fault.
- A typhoon is within 80nm of shore.
- 5 of 7 subject dogs are barking at a wall.
- I saw a lot of worms this morning…
SEND THE ALERT!
I very much like the OP’s question as majority of subject related responses.
While there is a HUGE article on Wikipedia –I also looked behind the page in “talks” in which I read that Israel can have a bullet proof warning system for 3 Million USD (if funding’s would allow)
I’d hope Taiwan authorities would buy 1/10 less of any military airplane from the US and put that one in place.
Even, the majority of “needs” can be met and the best mathematicians in the world are to be found here which need to highly skilled in complex data crunching from a multiple sourcing ground.
As with many catastrophes – those projects only get implemented AFTER the devestation (EG – Tsunami Pacific Alert system…)
[quote=“ceevee369”]I very much like the OP’s question as majority of subject related responses.
While there is a HUGE article on Wikipedia –I also looked behind the page in “talks” in which I read that Israel can have a bullet proof warning system for 3 Million USD (if funding’s would allow)
I’d hope Taiwan authorities would buy 1/10 less of any military airplane from the US and put that one in place.
Even, the majority of “needs” can be met and the best mathematicians in the world are to be found here which need to highly skilled in complex data crunching from a multiple sourcing ground.
As with many catastrophes – those projects only get implemented AFTER the devestation (EG – Tsunami Pacific Alert system…)[/quote]
There is a warning system set up here. I don’t know if it’s really functional, although the big heads say it’s better than the proven Japanese system. What’s worrisome, though, is that nobody knows how they will be warned, so even if the quake is detected 20-30 seconds out or what have you, most people will still be left in the dark.
Earthquake early warning is definitely being worked on here. Again, by some of the guys who sit upstairs from me (we once had a whole semester of seminars on early warning stuff - like ways to process the initial seismic signals early enough to create an accurate warning - deadly boring stuff). That’s just the science side though, I have no idea what’s going on on the delivery side. It does seem stupid that the HSR does not brake automatically upon receiving an alert. Human reaction time is always going to be slower than a computer. The rest of that article is horribly unclear about how the system actually works.
But really, if you really want to protect the general public from earthquake hazards, the way to do it is to set and enforce building codes, not let people build houses and schools directly on top of known active faults (looking at you, some of you post-Chi-Chi re-builders), etc. 6 or 10 seconds of warning is all well and good, but it’s not going to get you very far. By the time I heard my mobile, dug it out of my bag, and read the message, an earthquake would have already arrived.
[quote=“zyzzx”]Earthquake early warning is definitely being worked on here. Again, by some of the guys who sit upstairs from me (we once had a whole semester of seminars on early warning stuff - like ways to process the initial seismic signals early enough to create an accurate warning - deadly boring stuff). That’s just the science side though, I have no idea what’s going on on the delivery side. It does seem stupid that the HSR does not brake automatically upon receiving an alert. Human reaction time is always going to be slower than a computer. The rest of that article is horribly unclear about how the system actually works.
But really, if you really want to protect the general public from earthquake hazards, the way to do it is to set and enforce building codes, not let people build houses and schools directly on top of known active faults (looking at you, some of you post-Chi-Chi re-builders), etc. 6 or 10 seconds of warning is all well and good, but it’s not going to get you very far. By the time I heard my mobile, dug it out of my bag, and read the message, an earthquake would have already arrived.[/quote]
Zyzzx,…What are you doing? A masters in geology? Sounds like that could be interesting…
I take it from your post that the functionality of the early warning system here isn’t as sophisticated as the “big heads” have made it out to be, correct? As for the HSR, since a train has already derailed, whatever they’re doing now isn’t working well. It’s just a matter of time, considering that at most times during the day there is a train running…
[quote=“TaiwanTeacher”]Agreed that technology should be able to offer something better. Imagine sorting through all the possible indicators and weighting them accordingly! Taiwan certainly seems to be a PRIME location for attempting to do so.
Let’s see now…
- We haven’t had anything over a 5.8 for the past 7 weeks.
- Over 27% of the 3.0+ earthquakes in the past two months have been located south of the Tropic of Cancer.
- The Moon is in the right phase to apply added load to the fault.
- A typhoon is within 80nm of shore.
- 5 of 7 subject dogs are barking at a wall.
- I saw a lot of worms this morning…
SEND THE ALERT! [/quote]
There is technology that can do better than 2 secs; it’s not pseudo-technology but a tested, functional system that has saved lives in Japan…the warning is issued sometime around 20 secs before the quake.
[quote=“archylgp”]
There is technology that can do better than 2 secs; it’s not pseudo-technology but a tested, functional system that has saved lives in Japan…the warning is issued sometime around 20 secs before the quake.[/quote]
If the detection sensors are close to the quake, you could send a warning to everyone further away.
First you’ll need to put a sensor grid all over the island including the surrounding coastlines in order to achieve a reliable warning system.
I assume that this is not in place yet.
[quote=“Hamletintaiwan”][quote=“archylgp”]
There is technology that can do better than 2 secs; it’s not pseudo-technology but a tested, functional system that has saved lives in Japan…the warning is issued sometime around 20 secs before the quake.[/quote]
If the detection sensors close to the quake, you could send a warning to everyone further away.
First you’ll need to put a sensor grid all over the island including the surrounding coastlines in order to achieve a reliable warning system.
I assume that this is not in place yet.[/quote]
I’m hearing contrary things about the system in Taiwan. If it is any good, nobody knows how to get the warning, so it’s effectiveness is hindered greatly regardless of its technical quality…
The Japanese system seems pretty good. Here’s a bit:
The Earthquake Early Warning system automatically calculates the focus and magnitude of the earthquake and estimates the seismic intensity for each location by detecting the quake (i.e. the P-wave, or the preliminary tremor) near its focus. An Earthquake Early Warning is then given a matter of seconds (i.e. a few seconds to a few tens of seconds) before the arrival of strong tremors (i.e. the S-wave, or principal motion). Earthquake Early Warnings will be provided through various media outlets such as TV and radio.
Source: jma.go.jp/jma/en/Activities/ … _Donts.pdf
If something like that was linked up to the HSR, a train could be stopped a second after the quake starts…
[quote=“archylgp”][quote=“Hamletintaiwan”][quote=“archylgp”]
There is technology that can do better than 2 secs; it’s not pseudo-technology but a tested, functional system that has saved lives in Japan…the warning is issued sometime around 20 secs before the quake.[/quote]
If the detection sensors close to the quake, you could send a warning to everyone further away.
First you’ll need to put a sensor grid all over the island including the surrounding coastlines in order to achieve a reliable warning system.
I assume that this is not in place yet.[/quote]
I’m hearing contrary things about the system in Taiwan. If it is any good, nobody knows how to get the warning, so it’s effectiveness is hindered greatly regardless of its technical quality…
The Japanese system seems pretty good. Here’s a bit:
The Earthquake Early Warning system automatically calculates the focus and magnitude of the earthquake and estimates the seismic intensity for each location by detecting the quake (i.e. the P-wave, or the preliminary tremor) near its focus. An Earthquake Early Warning is then given a matter of seconds (i.e. a few seconds to a few tens of seconds) before the arrival of strong tremors (i.e. the S-wave, or principal motion). Earthquake Early Warnings will be provided through various media outlets such as TV and radio.
Source: jma.go.jp/jma/en/Activities/ … _Donts.pdf
If something like that was linked up to the HSR, a train could be stopped a second after the quake starts…[/quote]
From what I understand, what you say about Japan is done in Taiwan as well (except for the distribution of the warnings to the public). This is the standard early warning method, but here they have not carried all the way to public alerts. The big hurdle scientifically is estimating the magnitude quickly and accurately - this is not easy. I know nothing about the alert-issuing side, but I imagine that’s not easy too. When sending out simultaneous text messages to 23 million mobile phones, do they actually get through instantly? I have no idea.
Taiwan has a great network of seismometers, so that is no problem. It seems that the issue with the high speed rail is that they also have their own system, with it’s own sensors, and they are not willing to automatically stop trains based on warnings issued by the CWB (if I am understanding the article correctly). This does seem really stupid.
The amount of time you get with a warning depends on how far you are from the earthquake. Unfortunately, those leisurely 30+ second warnings are for people who are farther away, where the earthquake likely won’t be as destructive anyway. The people right on top of it won’t get any warning.
[quote=“archylgp”]
Zyzzx,…What are you doing? A masters in geology? Sounds like that could be interesting…[/quote]
I actually have a PhD in geology…
Why making things more complicated 
(yes - we do live in a Technological stronghold and mobile phones are like our third arm …)
The easiest / cheapest way to inform the public (Targeted per risk Area) :
Just need to have a 2-sound diversification. The first As-is now when the Chinese missiles are on their way and the other as done in the US for Hurricane warnings. 1PA- 2 Sounds
Simple - fast - cheap. Can save lives.
Looks feasible. How about a long wail for missiles 
;
a series of fast short blasts for an earthquake 
;
and for tsunamis they could just play Beach Boys’ songs. 
[quote=“zyzzx”]
I’m not sure you correctly interpreted what I said. Studies of earthquakes, seismicity, earthquake likelihood (ie. X% chance of earthquake of X magnitude in the next 30 years), paleo earthquakes, etc etc are being done and are very well funded, because they are scientifically valid. This stuff is the bread and butter of many Taiwanese geologists. Earthquake prediction is not done and is not funded because it does not work. I would say that ‘people’ generally believe in it a hell of a lot more than scientists do, since the vast majority of scientists recognize that it does not work and can easy recognize the flaws in the arguments of those claiming to be able to do it.
The guy who came with the Air France thing is, quite frankly, a bit of a crackpot. The majority of what he’s written has been published in a newsletter for a group that is pushing alternatives to plate tectonics. That would be like biologists pushing alternatives to evolution - crackpot territory. If he actually had something valid to say, it would be in a real journal. And again, it’s not like there’s some conspiracy amongst scientists to suppress earthquake prediction - if this guy had something that actually did work, we’d all be very happy to see it, and it’d be on the cover of Science. But he doesn’t. Again, most people who are able to successfully “predict” earthquakes are making predictions like “there will be a magnitude 3.5 or greater in Taiwan next week.” And they’re always right, because Taiwan has a magnitude 3.5 just about every day. Maybe I should predict earthquakes too - if I didn’t worry about magnitude or precise location or timing, I bet I could get 100% accuracy as well.[/quote]
I understood clearly what you said. However, I believe that at least some of these scientists are also looking at other methods outside their bread and butter. However as I have heard many of these scientists are also studying precursors, which is a type of prediction, however mostly, it would be on scientific data, but perhaps not all.
Based on what you say you seem to know who I am referring to regarding the Air France thing? That article showed up in the International Journal of Remote Sensing. Is that not a real journal? For any new field is not true that researches and observers start out with a lower impact journal and then work up, right?
Those that are doing non-scientific predictions are not just doing the 3.5 stuff, and although there is not a 3.5 every week I see your point. I’m not sure how much experience you have or how many times you have seen predictions being made. The types of predictions I don’t like to see are those from guys like Wang who are only out for financial gain.
Warning systems are indeed in place in Taiwan, and I am familiar with the new MDCB sensors (precursor monitoring) that have been installed out at sea. I am not sure if this stuff is what you were talking about with the people upstairs from you or not.
Technology can do much better than 2 seconds. Even in my home I have a sensor that will alert me up to 1-2 minutes in advance. Note, however, that in the 5-6 years I have had this thing, it has never gone off once, and I wouldn’t want it to. The quake has to be close enough and strong enough to where the device is in order to go off.
Indeed one of the best ways to prevent catastrophes is to educate people and ban all construction near faults and mud slide prone areas, but this is also going to take time to do.
[quote=“zyzzx”]
I actually have a PhD in geology…[/quote]
That’s great. Are you a professor here? What area do you do most your research in?
[quote=“Jeff”]
Indeed one of the best ways to prevent catastrophes is to educate people and ban all construction near faults and mud slide prone areas, but this is also going to take time to do.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree more, but I think people are too dumb, frankly…(In Washington State thousands of people are living on lahar sediments and it’s just a matter of time before the next one comes down and washes everyone out into the Puget Sound.)
[quote=“archylgp”][quote=“zyzzx”]
I actually have a PhD in geology…[/quote]
That’s great. Are you a professor here? What area do you do most your research in?
[quote=“Jeff”]
Indeed one of the best ways to prevent catastrophes is to educate people and ban all construction near faults and mud slide prone areas, but this is also going to take time to do.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree more, but I think people are too dumb, frankly…(In Washington State thousands of people are living on lahar sediments and it’s just a matter of time before the next one comes down and washes everyone out into the Puget Sound.)[/quote]
I’m originally from Seattle. I was there for the “Big One” back in 1965, and living in Skyway, not far north of the epicenter.
historylink.org/index.cfm?Di … le_Id=1986
Here, for all you Doctors of Geology… TRY TO PREDICT THIS! 
094 2012-06-14 11:17 3.9 9.8 km 23.70N 121.51E, i.e. 33.9 km SSW of Hualien County
095 2012-06-15 12:15 5.4 10.0 km 23.71N 121.64E, i.e. 31.5 km S of Hualien County
096 2012-06-15 12:19 4.3 9.4 km 23.71N 121.50E, i.e. 33.4 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 12:28 3.2 7.0 km 23.70N 121.52E, i.e. 33.3 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 12:29 3.3 7.5 km 23.72N 121.49E, i.e. 32.8 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 12:32 3.5 8.5 km 23.73N 121.52E, i.e. 30.9 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 12:35 3.3 8.7 km 23.74N 121.54E, i.e. 29.6 km SSW of Hualien County
097 2012-06-15 12:49 3.7 10.7 km 23.73N 121.50E, i.e. 31.3 km SSW of Hualien County
098 2012-06-15 12:53 3.9 7.8 km 23.69N 121.49E, i.e. 35.2 km SSW of Hualien County
099 2012-06-15 01:09 3.8 16.8 km 23.76N 121.45E, i.e. 30.7 km SW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 01:12 3.0 8.6 km 23.73N 121.53E, i.e. 30.9 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 01:17 3.3 8.4 km 23.72N 121.53E, i.e. 31.4 km SSW of Hualien County
100 2012-06-15 01:37 3.9 6.7 km 23.72N 121.53E, i.e. 31.9 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 02:00 3.3 9.7 km 23.72N 121.52E, i.e. 32.3 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 02:25 3.3 8.2 km 23.68N 121.53E, i.e. 35.3 km SSW of Hualien County
101 2012-06-15 02:26 4.1 16.5 km 23.80N 121.41E, i.e. 30.4 km SW of Hualien County
102 2012-06-15 02:28 3.5 9.2 km 23.69N 121.47E, i.e. 36.5 km SSW of Hualien County
103 2012-06-15 03:30 4.9 5.8 km 23.74N 121.52E, i.e. 29.7 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 03:32 3.4 7.7 km 23.73N 121.49E, i.e. 32.2 km SSW of Hualien County
104 2012-06-15 03:34 3.4 6.9 km 23.72N 121.51E, i.e. 32.2 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 03:48 3.2 7.9 km 23.71N 121.46E, i.e. 35.1 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 04:11 3.6 7.3 km 23.68N 121.53E, i.e. 35.6 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 04:15 3.6 6.7 km 23.65N 121.53E, i.e. 38.3 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 04:15 3.1 8.2 km 23.69N 121.55E, i.e. 34.6 km SSW of Hualien County
105 2012-06-15 04:21 4.2 9.7 km 23.72N 121.51E, i.e. 31.8 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 04:22 3.3 6.2 km 23.73N 121.50E, i.e. 31.5 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 04:39 2.9 8.6 km 23.73N 121.52E, i.e. 30.5 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 05:12 3.5 9.1 km 23.74N 121.49E, i.e. 30.6 km SSW of Hualien County
106 2012-06-15 09:54 3.3 5.5 km 23.69N 121.51E, i.e. 35.2 km SSW of Hualien County
107 2012-06-15 10:27 3.9 7.5 km 23.70N 121.50E, i.e. 34.6 km SSW of Hualien County
108 2012-06-15 10:52 3.9 8.2 km 23.72N 121.49E, i.e. 33.3 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 10:53 3.7 7.1 km 23.72N 121.52E, i.e. 32.1 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 10:53 3.2 6.9 km 23.71N 121.51E, i.e. 32.8 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 01:05 3.5 7.4 km 23.69N 121.51E, i.e. 35.0 km SSW of Hualien County
109 2012-06-15 01:56 3.8 7.8 km 23.69N 121.50E, i.e. 35.1 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 03:09 3.1 8.8 km 23.73N 121.39E, i.e. 37.0 km SW of Hualien County
110 2012-06-15 03:50 3.9 7.5 km 23.70N 121.52E, i.e. 34.4 km SSW of Hualien County
111 2012-06-15 04:03 3.4 7.9 km 23.70N 121.52E, i.e. 34.2 km SSW of Hualien County
112 2012-06-15 05:51 3.7 2.7 km 24.42N 121.43E, i.e. 48.2 km SW of Yilan County
Local 2012-06-15 07:39 3.6 8.2 km 23.70N 121.53E, i.e. 33.9 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 08:33 2.9 11.4 km 23.74N 121.42E, i.e. 34.8 km SW of Hualien County
113 2012-06-15 08:37 3.3 7.7 km 23.70N 121.50E, i.e. 34.7 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-15 08:51 3.3 8.1 km 24.75N 121.27E, i.e. 27.1 km ESE of Hsinchu County
Local 2012-06-15 11:42 3.4 7.2 km 23.70N 121.53E, i.e. 33.9 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-16 01:24 3.1 7.8 km 23.72N 121.53E, i.e. 31.6 km SSW of Hualien County
114 2012-06-16 02:58 3.3 6.9 km 23.73N 121.51E, i.e. 30.5 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-16 04:30 2.8 4.3 km 23.75N 121.54E, i.e. 27.7 km SSW of Hualien County
115 2012-06-16 03:54 3.7 6.8 km 23.72N 121.52E, i.e. 31.2 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-16 04:14 3.4 5.4 km 23.73N 121.53E, i.e. 30.7 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-16 06:29 3.0 5.6 km 23.71N 121.44E, i.e. 35.9 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 02:19 3.1 9.4 km 23.73N 121.53E, i.e. 30.7 km SSW of Hualien County
116 2012-06-17 05:10 3.6 9.6 km 23.74N 121.43E, i.e. 33.9 km SW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 11:03 3.4 8.0 km 23.68N 121.54E, i.e. 35.2 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 11:37 3.4 5.9 km 23.68N 121.53E, i.e. 35.3 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 11:39 3.4 7.7 km 23.68N 121.54E, i.e. 35.3 km SSW of Hualien County
117 2012-06-17 03:33 3.5 8.5 km 23.71N 121.50E, i.e. 32.9 km SSW of Hualien County
118 2012-06-17 03:34 3.7 5.0 km 23.72N 121.50E, i.e. 32.6 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 04:28 3.7 8.3 km 24.37N 121.50E, i.e. 44.0 km NNW of Hualien County
119 2012-06-17 04:45 3.8 8.5 km 23.69N 121.52E, i.e. 35.4 km SSW of Hualien County
120 2012-06-17 05:01 4.7 5.0 km 23.69N 121.53E, i.e. 34.6 km SSW of Hualien County
121 2012-06-17 05:07 4.1 8.0 km 23.68N 121.53E, i.e. 35.1 km SSW of Hualien County
122 2012-06-17 05:09 4.5 5.1 km 23.70N 121.52E, i.e. 34.0 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 05:15 3.2 7.4 km 23.70N 121.53E, i.e. 33.9 km SSW of Hualien County
123 2012-06-17 05:17 4.0 7.4 km 23.67N 121.51E, i.e. 37.2 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 05:27 3.4 8.2 km 23.69N 121.55E, i.e. 33.9 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 05:28 3.3 7.2 km 23.65N 121.51E, i.e. 39.5 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 05:54 3.4 8.0 km 23.70N 121.52E, i.e. 33.2 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 05:57 3.2 6.9 km 23.72N 121.52E, i.e. 32.1 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 06:01 3.3 7.8 km 23.71N 121.53E, i.e. 32.8 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 06:26 3.5 6.4 km 23.65N 121.51E, i.e. 39.4 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 08:48 3.3 6.7 km 23.66N 121.51E, i.e. 38.2 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 10:19 3.9 7.6 km 23.66N 121.51E, i.e. 38.8 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-17 11:44 3.6 9.6 km 23.68N 121.53E, i.e. 35.7 km SSW of Hualien County
124 2012-06-17 11:48 4.0 4.9 km 23.68N 121.50E, i.e. 36.8 km SSW of Hualien County
125 2012-06-18 12:08 3.6 6.5 km 23.69N 121.50E, i.e. 35.3 km SSW of Hualien County
126 2012-06-18 02:52 4.2 5.0 km 23.71N 121.53E, i.e. 33.0 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-18 03:08 3.5 6.6 km 23.69N 121.53E, i.e. 34.2 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-18 03:13 3.1 6.8 km 23.70N 121.54E, i.e. 33.1 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-18 03:16 3.3 6.9 km 23.68N 121.54E, i.e. 35.0 km SSW of Hualien County
127 2012-06-18 03:45 3.4 5.6 km 23.70N 121.53E, i.e. 33.8 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-18 03:57 2.9 7.9 km 23.68N 121.53E, i.e. 35.5 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-18 04:05 3.1 5.8 km 23.71N 121.54E, i.e. 31.9 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-18 04:13 3.1 7.1 km 23.68N 121.52E, i.e. 35.5 km SSW of Hualien County
Local 2012-06-18 04:43 3.5 6.7 km 23.71N 121.54E, i.e. 32.1 km SSW of Hualien County
I count roughly 80 recorded earthquakes within a very small area over the past three days. I’ve taken to listening to Kenny G music just to cope with the nearly continuous swaying that we’re experiencing here. HAHAHAHAHAHA…
So, what do you make of that? Should we expect a volcano to pop up near Jici on the Central Hualien County coastline??
Per my prognosticaor, you should look for more quakes in the very near future somewhere around 35 km SSW of Hualian County. :neutral:
That may be so…
But, I’m going with the idea that there’s going to be a bigger one north near Yilan or south near Pingtung as the stresses build up in those locations from all this “slip sliding away” in ONE mid-coast region.
@zyzzx - I was also enroute from Portland to Seattle on I-5 as Mt. St. Helens was blowing up on May 18th, 1980. That was very cool to see! We got bumped off I-5 due the freeway closure, and managed to make it over the Toutle River bridge on a two-laner highway before it got whisked away… Bye Bye bridge!