#Shaky Sands
That disaster in Kobe reminded me of what one geologist once told me. He
said, that during a quake, structures built on bedrock fare better than built
on alluvial deposits (sand and clay).
I've only taken a "leisure course" in geology, so I don't claim any expertise
in this science. But, if what I was told is true, then all those filled-in
regions in SF bay, would be very bad places to be in the case of a major quake.
Frankly, if I live in San Francisco, I would prefer to live on the hilltops,
where bedrock is only a few feet below the topsoil.
Is my supposition right that rocky foundations result in less quake damage than
houses build on loose soil?
Leland in (non-seismic) Houston