What part of Califonia is in danger of falling in the ocean?|122222

I may be moving to Califonia, origonaly from Michigan. My two cities of choice are San francisco and Sacramento.

First, are either San Fran or Sacramento and metro in the danger zone of going under?

Second, In case of an earthquake is there any damage to electronic hardware or house structure and is it like a VIBERATION?

Third, What arer the cities you can recomend that are SREROID ACTIVITY LOADED but fairly SAFE for a major city?

THANKS!!

1) The part most in danger of falling into the ocean is the coast, and bits will fall mostly from erosion, not from earthquakes.

2) When we look at the long term trends of what has been going on with the rocks in that part of the world, what is actually happening is that the western strip of California (plus Mexico_s Baja California penninsula, and even up into Canada) is moving slowly but surely North. In fact, geological and archaeological evidence tells us that land now found in western Washington State used to hang out down by Mexico.

3) The earthquakes along the San Andreas fault generally happen because of this northward movement.

4) A more major reason for earthquakes and volcanoes along the Pacific coast (the _Ring of Fire_) is that the Pacific plate is scooting under the continental plates that make up North America and the other continents that surround the Pacific ocean.

This is the same cause for the very existence of the Cascade volcanoes (Tahoma/Mt. Ranier, Looowit/Mt. St. Helens, Shasta, Lassen, etc.), Japan, Indonesia, and the Aleutians. These are all subduction arcs, built by volcanoes which are formed when one plade subducts under another one.

It_s been going on for a long time. It will continue long after you and I are both dead. There is a risk of damage to your body and property from earthquakes in California.

There is also a risk of that from earthquakes in the Mississippi River Valley. Historic earthquakes along the New Madrid Fault toppled chimneys in Maine. In 1812 or thereabouts, there just weren_t that many large structures in Michigan, but a quake of a similar magnitude happening today might just affect your life and property.

The potential damage is just as great in either place. The more frequent earthquakes happen in Calfornia, but frequent earthquakes may release stress less catastrophically. Which Next Big Quake will hit first is anybody_s guess.

There are many different kinds of quakes, but they tend to affect structures more than they do electronics, unless the house collapses on the electronics.

All cities have risks to life, health, and property, but most of them come from other human beings, especially those behind the steering wheels of large machines travelling at high speed.

None!! This is a very common myth but not based in science. Most people are thinking of the San Andreas Fault, which is near the western edge of California. However, even in a massive shift along the fault, the plates travel an incredibly short distance -- a matter of feet in the most extreme shifts. The tension cannot build up to the point that one entire mass of land will shift many miles in relation to another one, so you will not see any sizable piece of land breaking away from another. Instead, the pieces of land will move away from each other very slowly, taking millions of years to make large scale changes. One end of California may slowly drift so that it is eventually under water, but this can hardly be construed as _sinking into the ocean._

I dont understand this part of your question:

SREROID ACTIVITY LOADED but fairly SAFE for a major city?
What is SREROID activity loaded????

Sacramento, California, is in danger of being sunk under-water in the ocean.

However, San Fransisco, California, isn_t in danger of being sunk into the ocean.