Real-time earthquake monitor ·
USGS data
On August 8, 2024, a M7.1 earthquake struck off Miyazaki Prefecture on Japan's Pacific coast. Within two hours, the Japan Meteorological Agency issued something unprecedented: a "Nankai Trough Earthquake Temporary Information" (南海トラフ地震臨時情報) notice — the first of its kind ever activated. For one week, tens of millions of people along Japan's Pacific coastline were told that the chance of a far larger event had elevated. Tourism dipped sharply. Convenience stores sold out of bottled water. Evacuation routes were quietly reviewed by households across six prefectures.
On August 15, the notice was lifted. No megaquake had come.
But the episode illustrated how seriously — and how specifically — Japan has been preparing for one particular disaster. The Nankai Trough earthquake isn't a hypothetical. It carries a government-issued 70–80% probability of occurring within the next 30 years. It has its own dedicated warning system, evacuation towers built specifically for its tsunami, and a historical rupture record documented back to 684 AD. By any measure, it is the most forecast major natural disaster on Earth.
The Nankai Trough is a subduction zone running roughly 700 kilometers along Japan's Pacific coast — from the waters south of Kyushu, sweeping east past Shikoku, to the Tokai region southwest of Tokyo. Here, the Philippine Sea Plate dives beneath the Eurasian Plate at about 4–5 centimeters per year.
That slow, relentless convergence is the mechanism behind both Japan's mountainous landscape and its seismic character. As the oceanic plate subducts, its leading edge locks against the overlying plate, storing elastic energy like a compressed spring — over decades, sometimes over a century. When the lock breaks, it releases in seconds. In the case of the Nankai Trough, it releases enough energy to generate an M8–9 earthquake and the tsunamis that follow.
The trough is divided into segments from east to west: the Tokai (東海), Tōnankai (東南海), and Nankai (南海) segments. Historically, these segments have broken separately, in quick succession, or simultaneously. Which combination occurs in the next event is one of the central uncertainties — and one of the reasons a warning system designed for the "sequential rupture" scenario had to be built.
The earthquake record for the Nankai Trough extends back over 1,300 years, making it one of the best-documented fault systems on Earth.
The most recent major events were the 1944 Tōnankai earthquake (M7.9) and the 1946 Nankai earthquake (M8.0), which struck two years apart. Both occurred during World War II, and Japanese military authorities suppressed much of the damage reporting to maintain morale. The combined death toll was approximately 3,800 — low partly because even wartime-constrained tsunami warnings reached some coastal communities in time.
Before that, the 1854 Ansei-Tōkai and Ansei-Nankai earthquakes struck just 32 hours apart, each estimated at M8.4. The double event destroyed much of the Pacific coast infrastructure of the time and generated tsunamis reaching 10 meters in parts of Shikoku.
And before that: the 1707 Hōei earthquake — the last time the entire Nankai Trough broke simultaneously. Estimated at M8.6 to M9.0, it generated a tsunami that reached 25 meters in parts of Tosa Province (modern Kochi Prefecture) and killed an estimated 5,000 people. Forty-nine days later, the stress changes from the rupture may have triggered the last eruption of Mount Fuji. It remains Japan's largest historically documented earthquake.
The pattern across centuries is consistent: M8+ earthquakes occur along the Nankai Trough roughly every 100–150 years. The last full-scale event was in 1946. It has been 80 years.
In 2013, Japan's Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion (HERP) estimated the 30-year probability of an M8–9 Nankai Trough earthquake at 60–70%. By 2024, it had been revised upward to 70–80%.
These figures are unusual in seismology, where probability estimates for specific fault systems are often poorly constrained and typically low. The Nankai Trough estimate is high because the historical record is long, the recurrence is well-documented, and the current strain accumulation — measured by GPS networks across western Japan — is consistent with a fault approaching rupture. It amounts to the geological equivalent of knowing that a dam has been filling for 80 years and has overflowed every 100–150 years in the past.
This probability doesn't mean the earthquake will happen within the next 30 years. It means that, based on historical rates and current strain data, it is more likely than not. After 2055, the probability of it having already occurred climbs above 90%.
In 2012, Japan's Cabinet Office published a damage estimate for a worst-case simultaneous rupture of all Nankai Trough segments, modeled under winter nighttime conditions with strong winds — the scenario that maximizes casualties:
Up to 323,000 deaths. The majority from tsunamis arriving within minutes of shaking, before full evacuation is possible.
Tsunami heights reaching 34 meters in parts of Kochi Prefecture, with arrival times as short as 2–3 minutes along the closest coastlines. For comparison, the 2011 Tōhoku tsunami — which killed nearly 20,000 people — reached approximately 40 meters at its maximum but had arrival times of 30–40 minutes in most areas.
1.75 million buildings destroyed. The Tokai industrial corridor — running through Shizuoka, Aichi, and Mie prefectures — accounts for a significant portion of Japan's manufacturing output. Toyota's primary production facilities sit in Aichi Prefecture, directly in the expected impact zone. Port closures and infrastructure damage would ripple through global supply chains for months.
Economic damage of approximately 220 trillion yen (~$1.5 trillion at 2012 exchange rates) — more than Japan's annual government revenue. The Tōkaidō Shinkansen, Japan's busiest rail corridor connecting Tokyo and Osaka, runs directly through the highest-risk zone.
The Nankai Trough rarely breaks all at once. More often, one segment ruptures first — which can transfer stress to adjacent segments, potentially triggering them within minutes, hours, or years.
The 1854 pair struck 32 hours apart. The 1944 and 1946 events were separated by two years. This sequential pattern creates the "half-split" scenario: if the eastern Tokai segment breaks alone, seismologists must assess whether the remaining segments are now closer to failure. The uncertainty window — during which a follow-on rupture is more likely than baseline — is estimated at days to weeks after the initial event.
This is precisely why the 2024 Miyazaki earthquake triggered a formal public warning. The M7.1 struck in the Hyuganada Sea, in the southwestern portion of the expected Nankai rupture zone. The JMA's Nankai Trough Earthquake Temporary Information system, established in 2019, activates when a M6.8+ earthquake occurs within or adjacent to the trough's source region. The notice is explicitly not a prediction — it's an elevated alert that preparation should be immediately reviewed. The public was advised to confirm their evacuation routes and not to change their daily lives beyond that.
Calibrating that message — urgent enough to drive action, measured enough to avoid panic — is one of the most challenging aspects of communicating about a disaster that is real, imminent in geological terms, and entirely uncertain in human ones.
Japan's preparation for the Nankai Trough earthquake is the most extensive disaster preparedness program ever built around a single known event.
Tsunami evacuation towers (津波避難タワー) — squat reinforced concrete structures 10–20 meters tall — line the coastlines of Kochi, Wakayama, Mie, and Tokushima prefectures. They exist because in flat coastal areas, residents cannot reach natural high ground before a tsunami arrives. In Kuroshio Town, Kochi, where a 34-meter wave is forecast to arrive within three minutes of shaking, evacuation towers are the only viable alternative for those who cannot immediately flee inland.
Retrofitting laws passed after the 1995 Kobe earthquake have required seismic reinforcement of public buildings across Japan over the past 30 years. Schools in tsunami-prone areas double as elevated evacuation points. Municipalities conduct pre-dawn tsunami drills to simulate the conditions of a nighttime event, when situational awareness is lowest.
"Tsunami tendenko" (津波てんでんこ) — a philosophy originating from the Sanriku coast's long history of tsunami destruction: when a warning is issued, evacuate immediately and independently, without waiting for family members. The logic is brutal but demonstrably correct. In the 2011 Tōhoku disaster, many of those who died had delayed their own evacuation to find relatives. Communities that drilled on "tendenko" principles had markedly higher survival rates.
The 323,000 figure assumes low evacuation compliance. Cabinet Office modeling suggests that if 70% of the coastal population evacuates immediately when shaking stops, the death toll could drop to 60,000–80,000. At 90% compliance, below 30,000.
The challenge is that Japan's most tsunami-exposed coastal communities are also some of its most elderly and depopulated. Kochi Prefecture, which faces the highest tsunami risk in the worst-case scenario, has one of Japan's oldest average population ages. Physical mobility, social isolation, and declining community infrastructure all affect evacuation rates in ways that maps and towers cannot fully offset.
A second challenge is the psychological dynamic the 2024 episode exposed. When the week-long notice lifted with no earthquake, some residents expressed relief that shaded, in media coverage, toward "see, it wasn't as serious as they said." Managing a society's relationship with a known risk — one that is real but whose timing is unknowable — is as difficult, in its way, as building the evacuation towers themselves.
The next Nankai Trough earthquake will be one of the defining events of this century — not because it is surprising, but precisely because it isn't. Every year the fault doesn't break is another year of accumulating strain and another year of preparation investment. Japan has done more to get ready for a known disaster than any society in history.
Whether that will be enough depends on variables no seismologist can model: how many people are awake, how many are near the coast, how many seconds it takes a family to decide to run.
The fault is patient. The preparation has to be too.