Kiera Butler

Kiera Butler

Senior Editor

A senior editor at Mother Jones, Kiera covers health, food, and the environment. She is the author of the new book Raise: What 4-H Teaches 7 Million Kids—and How Its Lessons Could Change Food and Farming Forever (University of California Press).


Get my RSS |

What Would Happen if an 8.9 Quake Hit the US?

The explosion of a gas tank by an earthquake on March 11, 2011 in Sendai, Japan.

A few days ago, driven by equal parts neuroses and scientific curiosity, I downloaded an app on my phone that tells me about recent earthquakes around the world. Over the past few days, I've noticed a bunch of small quakes off the eastern coast of Japan's Honshu island, exactly where the devastating 8.9 quake struck early Friday morning, killing thousands. I began to wonder: If I knew about the smaller quakes, then certainly seismologists must have, so why didn't anyone warn Japan? According to Morgan Moschetti, a research geophysicist at the United States Geological Survey, clusters of small earthquakes are extremely common, and "rarely do they have any predictive value." In this case, the earlier small quakes were what's known as foreshocks, previews to a larger event. But there's no way to distinguish a foreshock from a self-contained cluster. Here are some answers to a few other earthquake questions:

What would an 8.9 quake be like in the US?

Moschetti says that an 8.9 quake is only possible in subduction zones, areas where one plate is underneath another plate. The only US subduction zones are in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska. Seismologists didn't discover the subduction zone in the Pacific Northwest until about 20 years ago; cities in that region have been scrambling to improve their infrastructure ever since. The city of Sendai is relatively close to the fault where it happened, while Seattle and other Northwest cities are further away from the fault, but an earthquake in the region could still cause a large tsunami. The subduction zone in Alaska has been known about for longer; of course, Alaska is much less densely populated than Japan, so a quake there wouldn't be as deadly. A 9.2 quake in 1964 killed 131 people in south-central part of the state.

California isn't in a subduction zone, but it's still very seismically active. Because there have been several devastating quakes in the state inthe past century, California is a little further along in its seismic retrofitting than the Pacific Northwest. Still, a major earthquake could (and probably would) cause significant damage, especially in cities.

What if a quake like this hit in a poor country?

The 2010 earthquake in Haiti was a 7.0 on the Richter scale. At 8.9, Friday's Japan quake had roughly 1,000 times the energy of the Haiti quake. "Haiti's a great example of the kind of destruction that quakes can cause in the developing world," says Moschetti. "And imagine a quake that was 1,000 times more powerful than that one."

Could climate change cause earthquakes?

Over at Grist, Christopher Mims explains that melting ice and rising oceans, and even small weather changes could indeed cause seismic activitiy, but the USGS doesn’t have an official position on climate change's potential to cause earthquakes, and Moschetti was not willing to comment.

Did the GOP budget cuts target tsunami warning centers?

Why yes, reports Suzy Khimm, to the tune of $27 million less for USGS.

Did the moon have anything to do with the earthquake in Japan?

Nope, although some seismologists believe the moon's gravitational pull can cause tides that stress tectonic plates. But it's not thought to be a sginificant cause of seismic activity.

What are the differences between the Japan quake and the cluster of small quakes in Arkansas?

The USGS doesn't know a lot about the tectonics in the part of Arkansas where the quakes have been ocurring, but they're sure that the area is not as earthquake-prone as the Pacific rim. "You don’t have two plates moving relative to each other in that area," says Moschetti. He didn't comment on whether the Arkansas quakes were related to natural gas drilling, but two gas companies stopped fracking in the area this week, since it's possible (even likely) that the drilling activities contributed to the quakes.

Are US nuclear plants prepared for an earthquake?

Several nuclear plants in Japan shut down today, and one reported that it had lost some of its cooling water, forcing a precautionary evacuation of the surrounding area. Moschetti says that in the US, all nuclear plants have to go through a seismic permitting process to show that they are prepared for whatever size of earthquake is likely in their area, "but there's always a chance that an earthquake will happen where don’t expect it."

Why’d the tsunami hit Santa Cruz, California, but not Indonesia?

The direction in which a tsunami travels has to do with the geometry of the fault. In this case, the fault was oriented southwest-northeast, so the energy that caused the tsunami moved to the southeast.

Any tips for choosing where you live based on earthquake safety?

If your building or house is older than a few decades, ask your landlord or real estate agent if it has been seismically retrofitted. If you're in earthquake-prone area, it's better to live over bedrock, not sediment, since "sediment can amplify waves of motion in earthquake," says Moschetti. Geological composition varies by neighborhood; the USGS' National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project can, in some cases, help you determine whether your area is particularly vulnerable. First floor dwellings are generally safer than upper floors.

I heard people in Santa Cruz were surfing on the tsunami. Is that safe?

Do Green Cars Just Make People Drive More?


Treehugger reports that in Sweden, purchases of fuel-efficient cars are on the rise, but so are emissions. So does this mean that Swedes are actually driving more (and thus creating more emissions) because their new green cars allow them to do so more cheaply?

This question is an example of the Jevons Paradox, which David Owen recently wrote about in the New Yorker: Make something more efficient, and people will use it more. "This effect is usually referred to as 'rebound'—or, in cases where increased consumption more than cancels out any energy savings, as 'backfire,'" he writes. (Owen uses the example of refrigerators and air conditioners in the piece, but the general principle can be applied to anything that consumes energy.)

Earlier this week I blogged about Maine governor Paul LePage's recent weird comments about the chemical BPA. "The only thing that I've heard is if you take a plastic bottle and put it in the microwave and you heat it up, it gives off a chemical similar to estrogen," remarked LePage, scientifically. "So the worst case is some women may have little beards." Uh-huh.

Tempting though it may be to blame a comment this embarrassing on temprorary insanity, a great piece in the Boston Phoenix suggests otherwise. Turns out LePage has hired some lobbyists for out-of-state drug and toy industry groups to help him form his opinions on environmental and kid-safety legislation.

Shortly after he was elected last year, LePage released a "wish-list" of environmental and health regulations he hoped to roll back. LePage said the ideas in the document came from small business owners in Maine. But it turns out that the wish list was actually the work of Ann Robinson, head of the corporate lobbying group Preti Flaherty Beliveau & Pachios. Robinson's clients have included PhRMA and Merck. Also the Toy Industry Association of America, which fought Maine's proposed BPA ban in baby bottles and sippy cups last year. Robinson served as co-chair of LePage's transition team and is currently his head advisor on regulatory reform.

In addition to Robinson, LePage also hired Patricia Aho, a lobbyist with the law firm Pierce Atwood, as his deputy commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection.

Robinson and Aho are not exactly unbiased when it comes to regulations:

Lobbying disclosures on file with the state Ethics Commission show both PhRMA and Merck paid Robinson to defeat the KID-SAFE PRODUCTS ACT, a 2008 law that phased out toxic chemicals in toys, car seats, baby clothes, and other children's products. The AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE and drug maker ASTRAZENECA paid Aho to do the same. The governor's wish list calls for "revisions to prohibitions of chemicals and materials in products" saying that "if the state is going to regulate consumer products at all, it should only do so when clearly justified on risk-benefit or cost benefit basis." 

Meanwhile, the Lewiston Sun-Journal reports on questions surrounding LePage's recent dismissal of Dr. Dora Anne Mills, the former the head of the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention who testified last year that BPA should be banned from kids' products. A spokesman for LePage insists that her firing wasn't because of her support for the BPA ban, but, understandably, some people are not convinced.

For more on LePage's efforts to undo decades of environmental legislation (including his attempt at making sure corporations don't have to go to the trouble of recycling) read the full pieces in the Boston Phoenix and the Lewiston Sun-Journal.

Urban Homestead™?

Via's Sustainable Food blog, I just learned that the phrase "urban homestead" (think chickens, canning, and vegetable beds) is no longer up for grabs. A Pasadena-based group called the Dervaes Institute has trademarked it:

In what can only be described as a blatantly capitalistic move, the Dervaes Institute has successfully registered as trademarks such generic terms as "urban homesteading," "freedom garden," and "grow the future." Despite the claim on the Institute's Web site that the Dervaes "believe in giving freely to others," they recently sent out a barrage of letters to Web sites, bloggers, and authors that use these terms, informing them that they are legally required to either attribute these terms to the Dervaes Institute or replace them with supposedly more generic terms like "modern homesteading" or "urban sustainability projects."

Dervaes has forced Oakland's Institute of Urban Homesteading, which offers fascinating-sounding classes on topics like cheesemaking, quail farming, salami making, and coffee-bean roasting, to disable its Facebook page. Another one of the group's targets was a homesteading class at offered at the Santa Monica Public Library.

The weirdest part? Aside from the trademarking shenanigans, the Dervaes Institute seems like a pretty cool organization. The people behind it appear to be a family that decided to grow their own vegetables, and got hooked. Now they maintain a useful blog and website and run workshops geared toward urban homesteader (that's right, I said it!) wannabes.

Anyway, the irony of these folks claiming to have invented, and now own, the concept of self-sufficiency is just too blatant even to comment on. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going out to my backyard where I'm planning to build a chicken coop so I can have some eggs .

 Via OC Weekly.

Today, the Bangor Daily News reports on Maine governor Paul LePage's weird comments on the chemical bisphenol A. Last week, LePage remarked:

"Quite frankly, the science that I'm looking at says there is no [problem]," LePage said. "There hasn't been any science that identifies that there is a problem."

LePage then added: "The only thing that I've heard is if you take a plastic bottle and put it in the microwave and you heat it up, it gives off a chemical similar to estrogen. So the worst case is some women may have little beards."

Quick, someone call JAMA! We have a scientist in the house, folks.

Unfortunately, bizarre though LePage's comments may be, he's not the only one confused about BPA, as I reported in my piece on BPA in canned foods. The FDA can't seem to make up its mind on the issue, despite National Institutes of Health's finding that BPA is of "some concern for effects on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland in fetuses, infants, and children at current human exposures."

Also, I don't want a beard, even a little one. Just saying.

Fri Apr. 8, 2016 6:00 AM EDT
Mon Dec. 28, 2015 7:00 AM EST
Mon Apr. 6, 2015 6:00 AM EDT
Tue Mar. 10, 2015 3:17 PM EDT
Wed Jan. 28, 2015 7:00 AM EST
Wed Jan. 14, 2015 7:00 AM EST
Tue Aug. 12, 2014 1:35 PM EDT
Thu Jun. 26, 2014 6:42 PM EDT
Fri Apr. 25, 2014 6:00 AM EDT
Mon Nov. 11, 2013 7:00 AM EST
Mon Sep. 16, 2013 2:28 PM EDT
Mon Jul. 15, 2013 6:00 AM EDT
Mon May. 13, 2013 6:00 AM EDT
Thu Dec. 27, 2012 12:52 PM EST
Fri Sep. 21, 2012 2:02 PM EDT
Tue Sep. 18, 2012 4:37 PM EDT
Fri Aug. 31, 2012 11:12 AM EDT
Thu Aug. 23, 2012 6:00 AM EDT
Mon Aug. 20, 2012 6:00 AM EDT
Thu Aug. 16, 2012 6:00 AM EDT
Fri Aug. 10, 2012 2:43 PM EDT
Tue Aug. 7, 2012 12:49 PM EDT