A weekly round-up of news, articles and surveys to make your next emergency better. Have a suggestion for the round-up? Contact me at abetteremergency@gmail.com.

March 27th is the 50th anniversary of North America’s worst seismic event, The Great Alaskan Earthquake.  This week’s round-up is to refresh our memories and to stimulate actions that will hopefully mitigate the impact of the next big west coast event. As we’re all aware, growth in infrastructure and the population over the past five decades suggest the consequences will be greatly magnified.

In 1964 we did not have good tsunami warnings. Since then, systems have greatly improved for those distant from an earthquake epicenter.  However, if you are near the source, you must get to higher ground quickly.   Numerous maps have been produced for localized threats. So if you see natives running after an earthquake has taken place, try to keep up.

In California they have produced planning tools for Harbormasters. These tools help to develop strategies that will mitigate loss of life and property damage from a distant-generated tsunami.

It’s not just coastal communities of the United States that are at risk. In Canada, Port Alberni lucked out when no one was killed during the 1964 event.  As a regular visitor to that area, I hope they fare as well next time.   A recent study in Canada suggests they are looking at direct damages upwards of $75 billion dollars if a major quake struck.

Along the coast, much of the economy is based upon tourism.  Christchurch has some sobering news that businesses should consider for resilience planning and alternative business strategies.

From an individual and household standpoint, having potable water is a huge advantage after an earthquake. This how-to guide may be useful. You should also assume that power will be out for months in some locations and that your X-Box will rapidly lose its entertainment value. Instead, consider this board-game out of Texas A & M. It’s designed to help prepare people for disaster recovery.

Finally, this offers an outsider’s view of the confusing, non-linear method for earthquake measurement. People may intuitively guess a 7.0 and 7.2 magnitude earthquake are pretty close together in destructive force; however, a 7.2 would release almost twice the energy.

[GARD]