Hi All.

It took three decades to develop Japan's earthquake prediction system, and a mere 20 seconds to tear it apart. When a powerful temblor ripped without warning through the Kobe region in 1995, it left in its wake nearly 6,400 dead, 35,000 injured and 400,000 homeless. At the same time, the 7.2-magnitude shudder dealt a blow to the widely accepted view in Japan that, with the proper technology in place, earthquakes ultimately are predictable. "It would be great if we could accurately predict a big quake," says Tadao Minami, a professor at the University of Tokyo's Earthquake Research Institute. "But Kobe showed us that isn't possible."

The reason behind this was that no one was looking for a quake of this magnitude in that area. Japan has a long written history and there was nothing for that area indicating a quake of that magnitude in the past had ever occurred.

Should they have been prepared for it? The answer to that depends upon whom you talk to. Critics say Tokai research has not helped places like Kobe that have been hammered by quakes. Yet seismologists involved in the project believe that a huge earthquake is overdue in Tokai, a coastal region of 10 million. They have positioned dozens of sensors and gauges in the area capable of detecting the faintest tremors or deformations in the earth's crust--warning signs that might enable them to forecast a quake and warn residents. Says the Prevention Council's Mizoue: "Tokai is one earthquake we may be able to predict." The phrase “we may be able to predict” just isn’t good enough for some. They want a guarantee that it can be done before anymore money is spent on a project that may not work.

It stands to reason that those who live in large cities want to see earthquake prediction become reality because the cost of retrofitting could bankrupt some if not all of those cities. Those who live in rural areas are in favor of retrofitting because they are paying through taxes for something that may not happen in their lifetime and if it did it wouldn’t have the same affect on them as it would on those living in large cities. There seems to be some logic in this, but is it good logic? The cost of the Kobe quake was 200 billion American dollars. Kobe didn’t have that kind of money so those living in the rural areas are paying for it anyway even though it didn’t affect them.

Now for the question. Should they have been prepared for it? The answer to that question is a resounding yes. A major quake can strike at any given place at any given time, but if you live in an area that is prone to having major it makes all that much more sense to prepare for it. The majority thinking of the scientists here in the U.S. is that earthquakes can’t be predicted so why pour more money into something that can’t be done? While it is true that they are still getting some money for the purpose of looking for ways to predict earthquakes it’s not at the level it was 20 years ago and may never be at that level again.

The cost of retrofitting doesn’t come cheap either and there is no guarantee that it will work either. A building, or a bridge may stay up long enough for the people to evacuate, but in the end it may have to be torn down and rebuilt. Will there be enough money to retrofit and then rebuild it once the quake has struck and left it in a state of disrepair so that it can’t be inhabited again?

The further along in time we are from the last major quake the closer we are to the next one, but at the same time the more we tend to forget about the last one and the less we think about the next one.

If you’re not prepared to be a survivor there is a chance you may not be one. Take Care…Don in creepy town