If a tsunami hit the us, (being the same in strength) would it be more devistating on the east or west coast?

Question

if a tsunami hit the us, (being the same in strength) would it be more devistating on the east or west coast?

Answer 1

dude theres no fault lines in the east coast to cause a tsunami or earthquake

Answer 2

not trying to be annoying, but you need to define devastating.

is it people killed ?

houses destroyed ?

negative effects on the economy of the US?

destruction of port cities?

Answer 3

probably the east. their are more major cities, and the land is more low lying.

on the west coast they are more prepared becuase it is more likely on the west coast then the east coast. also some cities like los angeles is actually about 100 feet above sea level, and also the mountains protect alot of areas from something like that.

Answer 4

Well, on the West Coast, it would cause drastic mud slides which would destroy alot of homes and be mass destruction. So, either way, it would be a disaster.

Answer 5

it will probably be more devastating in the west coast because most of the mountains are ther so it may cause a more likely longer flood. But its just my opinion to this question.

Answer 6

It would all depend on the strength of the tsunami, and where it actually hit landfall.

A tsunami could cause either very little damage or massive damage on either coast.

The cause of the tsunami, where it occurred, the distance from the source of the cause to final landfall, and the type of gradient of the sea bed in the area, and population, all have to be taken into consideration.

To put it into some perspective, a tsunami wave which is only 6 inches in height out at sea could range anywhere from 6 inches to many yards (or meters) once it hits landfall.

If there is a gradual slope from the landmass into the sea, the water mass will rise much greater than in an area where there is a rapid drop to the ocean depths.

So I am sorry to say that there is really no valid answer to your question.