[adrianpike]

That New Yorker article goes viral every few years - it's a well written piece and spins a great yarn, but there's some significant hyperbole and it's sources don't quite back up the claims. Yes, a 9.x will be devastating. No, everything west of i-5 will not be toast.

[rnk]

Good thing I'm 10 miles east from that road of doom, I'm sure I'll be safe ;-).

[karaterobot]

I'm 10 blocks east, should be fine too. Even if the earthquake somehow gets a couple blocks past I-5 (can't see how that could happen) I'd still have 7-8 blocks as a safety cushion.

[seattle_spring]

"East of I-5, lucky to be alive"

[JieJie]

You gotta worry about lahars. :)

[diogenes4]

> it's sources don't quite back up the claims.

I'll admit that FEMA isn't exactly cited in a way that's possible to corroborate, but presumably they're estimating a worst-case scenario and not a median- or average-case scenario. That might explain some of the large divorce in figures.

[adrianpike]

I'd love to find any actual FEMA publications that back up some of the numbers and claims - so far to the best I can tell is it's mostly from interviews with the regional director, which, while valuable, isn't quite at the level of citation I'd like. If anyone's got a PDF I'd love to retract all my critiques though. :)