I grew up in southern Indiana. We learned about the 1811 event in grade school as the "Kentucky Shakes". I especially recall the account of the "Mississippi river flowing backward" and such. There was significant damage in what was the area of Evansville and throughout parts of of western and southern Indiana. Which was all sparsely popu…
I grew up in southern Indiana. We learned about the 1811 event in grade school as the "Kentucky Shakes". I especially recall the account of the "Mississippi river flowing backward" and such. There was significant damage in what was the area of Evansville and throughout parts of of western and southern Indiana. Which was all sparsely populated at the time as the "old midwest" was still "frontier" country in those days.
Fast forward to my college years, I took "Geology" as an elective at an Indiana university. They actually covered the New Madrid earthquake zone since it's regionally relevant. They showed us an impact chart much like the one you've shared here. The problem with this part of the country is the bedrock is much more contiguous and ancient than the west coast. This transmits seismic events over a longer distance. Research has been done in the area to attempt to predict how frequently there have been large scale events like the 1811 "shakes". IIRC it was on the order of 200-500 years maybe more.
Also the New Madrid faults run much further north than the tri-state region where the focal point of the geologic activity is. For example in 2008 a magnitude 5 quake erupted around 6am near the town of West Salem in southwestern Illinois. It was severe enough in the Indianapolis area to wake people up. This is quite a bit north of New Madrid, but is the same geologic instability.
So, like the San Andreas, whether or not it will produce another 1811-type "big one" event is probably not if but when. And given that the midwest does not have anything like the building codes relating to serious earthquake risk like in the west coast, and 200+ years later is much more developed and populated it will probably be rather devastating. And in a much greater area (as shown) than out west too, sadly.
I grew up in southern Indiana. We learned about the 1811 event in grade school as the "Kentucky Shakes". I especially recall the account of the "Mississippi river flowing backward" and such. There was significant damage in what was the area of Evansville and throughout parts of of western and southern Indiana. Which was all sparsely populated at the time as the "old midwest" was still "frontier" country in those days.
Fast forward to my college years, I took "Geology" as an elective at an Indiana university. They actually covered the New Madrid earthquake zone since it's regionally relevant. They showed us an impact chart much like the one you've shared here. The problem with this part of the country is the bedrock is much more contiguous and ancient than the west coast. This transmits seismic events over a longer distance. Research has been done in the area to attempt to predict how frequently there have been large scale events like the 1811 "shakes". IIRC it was on the order of 200-500 years maybe more.
Also the New Madrid faults run much further north than the tri-state region where the focal point of the geologic activity is. For example in 2008 a magnitude 5 quake erupted around 6am near the town of West Salem in southwestern Illinois. It was severe enough in the Indianapolis area to wake people up. This is quite a bit north of New Madrid, but is the same geologic instability.
So, like the San Andreas, whether or not it will produce another 1811-type "big one" event is probably not if but when. And given that the midwest does not have anything like the building codes relating to serious earthquake risk like in the west coast, and 200+ years later is much more developed and populated it will probably be rather devastating. And in a much greater area (as shown) than out west too, sadly.