New Fault discovered in Eastern Arkansas - Threat to KC area?

[Midtownkid]

Not sure how sensational or real this story is, but just saw this on AOL's homepage.  Could it cause major damage in KC to places like Union Station and Liberty Memorial?

http://news.aol.com/article/newly-found ... ake/313909

"LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (Jan. 23) - A previously unknown fault in eastern Arkansas could trigger a magnitude 7 earthquake with an epicenter near a major natural gas pipeline, a scientist said Wednesday.
Haydar Al-Shukri, the director of the Arkansas Earthquake Center at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, said the fault is separate from the New Madrid fault responsible for a series of quakes in 1811-12 that caused the Mississippi River to flow backward."

[Highlander]

Not sure how sensational or real this story is, but just saw this on AOL's homepage.  Could it cause major damage in KC to places like Union Station and Liberty Memorial?

http://news.aol.com/article/newly-found ... ake/313909

"LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (Jan. 23) - A previously unknown fault in eastern Arkansas could trigger a magnitude 7 earthquake with an epicenter near a major natural gas pipeline, a scientist said Wednesday.
Haydar Al-Shukri, the director of the Arkansas Earthquake Center at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, said the fault is separate from the New Madrid fault responsible for a series of quakes in 1811-12 that caused the Mississippi River to flow backward."

There are faults all over the place.  The question is whether or not they are active, this one probably is not very active in a human time frame.  The location of the natural gas pipeline is probably inmaterial.  Sounds like a lot of sensationalism to  me. 

[mlind]

A large earthquake would damage more than those buildings.  I live in the San Francisco area now and I would be surprised if KC building codes are like the ones we have here.  Unreinforced masonry (stucco/brick), old houses with brick foundations, and 'soft story' buildings are at greatest risk.  Soft story buildings are where the ground floors are for parking or stores with apartments above.  This means there are large doors or windows instead of solid walls. 

Pictures and info here http://tinyurl.com/c4tyqg

I remember an earthquake in KCK when I was a kid in the 1950's.

[IraGlacialis]

Since the fault is a small, even though theoretically powerful, one on the east side of AK, KC will probably relatively fine in the chance of a major earthquake. The quake will probably be felt, there may be some minor damage such as crack windows, and, at the very most, deteriorated buildings may topple. But, all in all, KC will be fine. 
Besides the distance from this fault, as well as the more well-know New Madrid fault, the Ozark Plateau will absorb a chunk of the seismic waves; not enough to stop it but enough that distance can take care of the rest. 

St. Louis, on the other hand, may likely be royally screwed. Memphis will definitely be screwed.

[dangerboy]

New Madrid is predicted to do much serious damage in KC, so why would you be worried about a smaller fault further away?  If the Big One hits, the biggest impact in KC will be housing refugees from St. Louis and southeastern Missouri.

[IraGlacialis]

If the Big One hits, the biggest impact in KC will be housing refugees from St. Louis and southeastern Missouri.

Ooooh... I forgot about the human impact. Even though KC will not be too seriously damaged, there is a good chance that it will be inundated with refugees, which may lead to some social tension. As in, Katrina will most likely have nothing on the refugee situation caused by a Mississippi valley earthquake.

[Gladstoner]

The discovery of another fault in the New Madrid area doesn't necessarily increase the threat level. It merely gives a little further insight into some of the finer details. The regional stress acting upon the fault zone, which is what drives the quakes, remains the same. If geologists instead uncovered evidence of previously unknown earthquake events, then the media sensation would be a bit more justified.

[IraGlacialis]

If geologists instead uncovered evidence of previously unknown earthquake events, then the media sensation would be a bit more justified.

Justified or not, the media will sensationalize it.

[Highlander]

The discovery of another fault in the New Madrid area doesn't necessarily increase the threat level. It merely gives a little further insight into some of the finer details. The regional stress acting upon the fault zone, which is what drives the quakes, remains the same. If geologists instead uncovered evidence of previously unknown earthquake events, then the media sensation would be a bit more justified.

True.  There are faults essentially everywhere, including under KC, but they pose little threat because they are not in tectonically active areas.  They were formed under stress conditions that have long since waned.  I look at unmapped/unknown faults practically every day on my job, nearly all of them inconsequential in terms of risk because they've been inactive for 150 million years.  The mere presence of a fault in the subsurface is really meaningless to people living on the surface, it's the seismic activity associated with a particular fault that is important because it gives some clue regarding the frequency and magnitude of the resulting quakes.  Most won't have any associated seismic activity because they no longer move.