Geology topics

Alex R. Grant

Publications and source records attributed to Alex R. Grant.

32 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

USGS2022

Limits to coseismic landslides triggered by Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquakes

Landslides are a significant hazard and dominant feature throughout the landscape of the Pacific Northwest. However, the hazard and risk posed by coseismic landslides triggered by great Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) earthquakes is highly uncertain due to a lack of local and global data. Despite a wealth of other geologic evidence for past earthquakes on the Cascadia Subduction Zone, no landslides have been definitively linked to such earthquakes, even in areas otherwise highly susceptible to failure. While shallow landslides may not leave a lasting topographical signature in the landscape, there are thousands of deep-seated landslides in Cascadia, and these deposits often persist for hundreds of years and multiple earthquake cycles. Synthesizing newly developed inventories of dated large deep-seated landslides in the Oregon Coast Range, we use statistical methods to estimate the proportion of these types of landslides that could have been triggered during past great Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquakes. Statistical analysis of high-precision dendrochronology ages of landslide-dammed lakes and surface roughness-dated bedrock landslides reveal Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquakes may have triggered 0–15 % of large deep-seated landslides in the Oregon Coast Range over multiple earthquake cycles. Our results refine estimates from previous studies and further suggest that coseismic triggering accounts for a small fraction of the total deep-seated bedrock landslides mapped in coastal Cascadia. However, if the real rate of coseismic landslide triggering during CSZ earthquakes is near our estimated upper bound for the 1700 CSZ earthquake, we estimate up to 2400 coseismic large deep-seated landslides could occur in the Oregon Coast Range in a single earthquake. These findings suggest Cascadia is consistent with global observations from other subduction zones and that coseismic landslides may still represent a serious geohazard in the region.

Oregon↗

USGS2021

Changes in liquefaction severity in the San Francisco Bay Area with sea-level rise

This paper studies the impacts of sea-level rise on liquefaction triggering and severity around the San Francisco Bay Area, California, for the M 7.0 “HayWired” earthquake scenario along the Hayward fault. This work emerged from stakeholder engagement for the US Geological Survey releases of the HayWired earthquake scenario and the Coastal Storm Modeling System projects, in which local planners and engineers asked where, why, and by how much liquefaction hazards may change due to sea-level rise in the future. We assess the impacts of sea-level rise on liquefaction by computing changes in liquefaction potential index (LPI) for over 400 cone penetration test (CPT) soundings around the San Francisco Bay for groundwater table models developed for current and increased sea levels of up to 5 m. For the M 7.0 HayWired earthquake scenario, we find that while the majority of sites are insensitive to sea-level changes of less than 1 m, some sites are highly sensitive to small changes in water levels. We then repeat these analyses for a uniform shaking scenario to isolate the effects of sea-level rise and we find similar patterns of change. For both earthquake scenarios, modest changes in overall LPI are expected for increases in sea level, but individual sites may see significant increases in liquefaction likelihood and severity.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2021

A generic soil velocity model that accounts for near-surface conditions and deeper geologic structure

Near-surface soil conditions can significantly alter the amplitude and frequency content of incoming ground motions – often with profound consequences for the built environment – and are thus important inputs to any ground-motion prediction. Previous soil-velocity models (SVM) have predicted shear-wave velocity profiles based on the time-averaged shear-wave velocity in the upper 30 m ( V S30 ). This article presents a generic soil-velocity model that accounts both for near-surface conditions ( V S30 ) and deeper geologic structure, as represented to the depth at which the profile reaches a velocity of 1.0 km/s ( Z 1.0 ). To demonstrate the advantages of our new SVM, we apply it to the Cascadia Region of North America, where numerous geologic basins and glaciated landscapes give rise to a wide range of V S30 and Z 1.0 combinations. This soil velocity model yields good estimates of site response across all site conditions, and significantly improves upon a model calibrated using only V S30 data. In conjunction with existing models that describe the deep velocity structure of the region (e.g., (Stephenson et al., 2017) [27]; the proposed model is particularly suited for use in regional-scale predictions of site response, liquefaction, landslides, infrastructure damage, and loss. The proposed methodology is broadly applicable to the development of SVMs elsewhere, and with improved understanding of near-surface and deep velocity structures, can facilitate more accurate ground-motion predictions globally.

Washington↗

USGS2020

The normal faulting 2020 Mw5.8 Lone Pine, Eastern California earthquake sequence

The 2020 M w "> M w 5.8 Lone Pine earthquake, the largest earthquake on the Owens Valley fault zone, eastern California, since the nineteenth century, ruptured an extensional stepover in that fault. Owens Valley separates two normal‐faulting regimes, the western margin of the Great basin and the eastern margin of the Sierra Nevada, forming a complex seismotectonic zone, and a possible nascent plate boundary. Foreshocks began on 22 June 2020; the largest M w "> M w 4.7 foreshock occurred at ∼ 6    km "> ∼6 km depth, with primarily normal faulting, followed ∼ 40    hr "> ∼ 40 hr later on 24 June 2020 by an M w "> M w 5.8 mainshock at ∼ 7    km "> ∼ 7 km depth. The sequence caused overlapping ruptures across a ∼ 0.25    km 2 "> ∼0.25 km 2 area, extended to ∼ 4    km 2 "> ∼ 4 km 2 , and culminated in an ∼ 25    km 2 "> ∼25 km 2 aftershock area. The mainshock was predominantly normal faulting, with a strike of 330° (north‐northwest), dipping 60°–65° to the east‐northeast. Comparison of background seismicity and 2020 Ridgecrest aftershock rates showed that this earthquake was not an aftershock of the Ridgecrest mainshock. The M w "> M w M w – m B "> – m B relationship and distribution of ground motions suggest typical rupture speeds. The aftershocks form a north‐northwest‐trending, north‐northeast‐dipping, 5 km long distribution, consistent with the rupture length estimated from analysis of regional waveform data. No surface rupture was reported along the 1872 scarps from the 2020 M w "> M w 5.8 mainshock, although, the dipping rupture zone of the M w "> M w 5.8 mainshock projects to the surface in the general area. The mainshock seismic energy triggered rockfalls at high elevations ( ⁠ > 3.0    km "> > 3.0 km ⁠ ) in the Sierra Nevada, at distances of 8–20 km, and liquefaction along the western edge of Owens Lake. Because there were ∼ 30 % "> ∼ 30 % fewer aftershocks than for an average southern California sequence, the aftershock forecast probabilities were lower than expected. ShakeAlert, the earthquake early warning system, provided first warning within 9.9 s, as well as subsequent updates.

California↗

USGS2020

Site response, basin amplification, and earthquake stress drops in the Portland, Oregon area

Site response, sedimentary basin amplification, and earthquake stress drops for the Portland, Oregon area were determined using accelerometer recordings at 16 sites of 10 local earthquakes with M D "> M D MD 2.6–4.0. A nonlinear inversion was applied to calculate site response (0.5–10 Hz), corner frequencies, and seismic moments from the Fourier spectra of the earthquakes. Site amplifications at lower frequencies of 0.1–2.0 Hz were determined from Fourier spectra of four regional earthquakes with M w "> M w Mw 5.8–6.4. Amplifications were calculated relative to a stiff‐soil site outside the Portland and Tualatin basins. Sites on artificial fill and Holocene alluvium show strong amplification peaks (factor of 5) around 1–2 Hz. Sites on the Portland Hills, consisting of thin soil over basalt, display spectral peaks at 4–5 Hz (factor of 4). Spectral peaks at both sites are similar to those predicted for vertically propagating S waves from V S "> V S VS profiles determined at these sites using a borehole and refraction microtremor analysis. The largest amplifications at 0.1–1 Hz were found at stiff‐soil sites in the Tualatin basin, based on recordings of regional earthquakes. Amplifications of a factor of 10, at about 0.3 Hz, were observed for a site in the deeper portion of the Tualatin basin and a factor of 7 at 0.5–0.6 Hz for two adjacent sites closer to the border of that basin. Stiff‐soil sites in the Portland basin exhibit amplifications of 2–3 at frequencies of about 0.3–0.8 Hz. The frequencies of the amplification peaks for the deep Tualatin basin site can be explained by S ‐wave resonance in the shallow sediments, but the observed amplification is underestimated. Earthquake stress drops determined from the inversion range from 3 to 11 MPa, with no overall dependence on seismic moment.

Oregon↗

USGS2020

Ensemble ShakeMaps for magnitude 9 earthquakes on the Cascadia Subduction Zone

We develop ensemble ShakeMaps for various magnitude 9 ( ⁠ M "> M M 9) earthquakes on the Cascadia megathrust. Ground‐shaking estimates are based on 30 M "> M M 9 Cascadia earthquake scenarios, which were selected using a logic‐tree approach that varied the hypocenter location, down‐dip rupture limit, slip distribution, and location of strong‐motion‐generating subevents. In a previous work, Frankel et al. (2018) used a hybrid approach (i.e., 3D deterministic simulations for frequencies < 1    Hz "> < 1 Hz <1 Hz and stochastic synthetics for frequencies > 1    Hz "> > 1 Hz >1 Hz ⁠ ) and uniform site amplification factors to create broadband seismograms from this set of 30 earthquake scenarios. Here, we expand on this work by computing site‐specific amplification factors for the Pacific Northwest and applying these factors to the ground‐motion estimates derived from Frankel et al. (2018) . In addition, we use empirical ground‐motion models (GMMs) to expand the ground‐shaking estimates beyond the original model extent of Frankel et al. (2018) to cover all of Washington State, Oregon, northern California, and southern British Columbia to facilitate the use of these ensemble ShakeMaps in region‐wide risk assessments and scenario planning exercises. Using this updated set of 30 M "> M M 9 Cascadia earthquake scenarios, we present ensemble ShakeMaps for the median, 2nd, 16th, 84th, and 98th percentile ground‐motion intensity measures. Whereas traditional scenario ShakeMaps are based on a single hypothetical earthquake rupture, our ensemble ShakeMaps take advantage of a logic‐tree approach to estimating ground motions from multiple earthquake rupture scenarios. In addition, 3D earthquake simulations capture important features such as strong ground‐motion amplification in the Pacific Northwest’s sedimentary basins, which are not well represented in the empirical GMMs that compose traditional scenario ShakeMaps. Overall, our results highlight the importance of strong‐motion‐generating subevents for coastal sites, as well as the amplification of long‐period ground shaking in deep sedimentary basins, compared with previous scenario ShakeMaps for Cascadia.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2020

Ground failure triggered by shaking during the November 30, 2018, magnitude 7.1 Anchorage, Alaska, earthquake

We developed an initial inventory of ground failure features from the November 30, 2018, magnitude 7.1 Anchorage earthquake. This inventory of 153 features is from ground-based observations soon after the earthquake (December 5–10) that include the presence or absence of liquefaction, landslides, and individual crack traces of lateral spreads and incipient landslides. This is not a complete inventory and simply shows general trends and examples of types and distribution of ground failures documented. Overflight observations (December 1–6) documented landslide and liquefaction presence or absence within the Chugach Mountains and along Cook Inlet in regions inaccessible to vehicles, which greatly expanded the geographic scope of this reconnaissance. Field-mapped ground-failure observations have been augmented with a set of 565 georeferenced and annotated images from both field and overflight reconnaissance cataloging additional ground-failure presence or absence from the Anchorage earthquake. Tidal erosion, fresh snowfall, limited daylight, and adverse flying conditions contributed significantly to the uncertainty and incompleteness of ground-failure observations during this reconnaissance. Notably, substantial liquefaction features at the mouths of the Little Susitna River (December 1) and Ingram Creek (December 5) were absent during subsequent overlapping missions (December 6 and 9, respectively) because of tidal action. A large rockfall observed on December 1 on Rainbow Peak was not observed during a subsequent December 5 overflight because of snow cover, which suggests that the general lack of observations of landsliding within the Chugach Mountains is uncertain.

Alaska↗

USGS2020

Probabilistic regional-scale liquefaction triggering modeling using 3D Gaussian processes

Liquefaction is a major cause of coseismic damages, occurring irregularly over hundreds or thousands of square kilometers in large earthquakes. Large variations in the extent and location of liquefaction have been observed in recent earthquakes, motivating the need for prediction methods that consider the spatial heterogeneity of geologic deposits at a regional scale. Contemporary regional-scale liquefaction hazard analyses are typically performed using only surficial data, which does not address the complicated subsurface mechanics and spatial variability associated with artificial fill and natural soil deposits. In this study, we develop a probabilistic, regional-scale, subsurface model using data from hundreds of borings to better understand subsurface conditions that could influence liquefaction. We then use this subsurface sample database to train Gaussian process models, yielding 3D independent random fields of groundwater depth, soil plasticity, and penetration resistance for each geologic unit. We incorporate the Gaussian process models into probabilistic liquefaction triggering procedures, producing 3D estimates of the probability of liquefaction for an example study area in Portland, Oregon. Near sampling locations, the variance of the Gaussian process models approaches the variance of site-specific liquefaction triggering procedures. Conversely, when no sample data are nearby to condition a Gaussian process, the variance approaches the marginal variance of the entire recorded dataset. Thus, the procedure described in this study unifies probabilistic site-specific and regional-scale liquefaction triggering procedures and provides an important step towards quantitative liquefaction hazard assessments for regionally distributed infrastructures, such as levees, pipelines, roadways, and electrical transmission facilities.

Oregon↗

USGS2020

Rainfall triggers more deep-seated landslides than Cascadia earthquakes in the Oregon Coast Range, USA

The coastal Pacific Northwest USA hosts thousands of deep-seated landslides. Historic landslides have primarily been triggered by rainfall, but the region is also prone to large earthquakes on the 1100-km-long Cascadia Subduction Zone megathrust. Little is known about the number of landslides triggered by these earthquakes because the last magnitude 9 rupture occurred in 1700 CE. Here, we map 9938 deep-seated bedrock landslides in the Oregon Coast Range and use surface roughness dating to estimate that past earthquakes triggered fewer than half of the landslides in the past 1000 years. We find landslide frequency increases with mean annual precipitation but not with modeled peak ground acceleration or proximity to the megathrust. Our results agree with findings about other recent subduction zone earthquakes where relatively few deep-seated landslides were mapped and suggest that despite proximity to the megathrust, most deep-seated landslides in the Oregon Coast Range were triggered by rainfall.

Oregon↗

USGS2019

USGS near-real-time products-and their use-for the 2018 Anchorage earthquake

In the minutes to hours after a major earthquake, such as the recent 2018 M w "> M w 7.1 Anchorage event, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) produces a suite of interconnected earthquake products that provides diverse information ranging from basic earthquake source parameters to loss estimates. The 2018 Anchorage earthquake is the first major domestic earthquake to occur since several new USGS products have been developed, thus providing an opportunity to discuss the newly expanded USGS earthquake product suite, its timeliness, performance, and reception. Overall, the products were relatively timely, accurate, well received, and widely used, including by the media, who used information and visualizations from many products to frame their early reporting. One downside of the codependence of multiple products is that reasonable updates to upstream products (e.g., magnitude and source characterization) can result in significant changes to downstream products; this was the case for the Anchorage earthquake. However, the coverage of strong‐motion stations and felt reports was so dense that the ShakeMap and downstream products were relatively insensitive to changes in magnitude or fault‐plane orientation once the ground‐motion data were available. Shaking and loss indicators initially fluctuated in the first hour or two after the earthquake, but they stabilized quickly. To understand how the products are being used and how effectively they are being communicated, we analyze the media coverage of USGS earthquake products. Most references to USGS products occurred within the first 48 hr after the event. The lack of coverage after 48 hr could indicate that longer‐term products addressing what actions the USGS is taking or what early reconnaissance has revealed might be useful for those people wanting additional information about the earthquake.

Alaska↗

USGS2019

Ground failure from the Anchorage, Alaska, earthquake of 30 November 2018

Investigation of ground failure triggered by the 2018 M w "> M w Mw 7.1 Anchorage earthquake showed that landslides, liquefaction, and ground cracking all occurred and caused significant damage. Shallow rock falls and rock slides were the most abundant types of landslides, but they occurred in smaller numbers than global models that are based on earthquake magnitude predict; this might result from the 2018 earthquake being an intraslab event. Liquefaction was common in alluvial and intertidal areas; ground deformation probably related to liquefaction damaged numerous houses and port facilities in Anchorage. Ground cracking was pervasive near the edges of slopes in hilly areas and caused perhaps the most significant property damage of all types of ground failure. A complex of slump–earth flows was triggered along coastal bluffs in southern Anchorage where slides also occurred in 1964; the 2018 slides involved both mobilization of new landside material and reactivation of parts of the 1964 landslide deposits. Large translational slides that formed during the 1964 Alaska earthquake showed evidence of deformation along pre‐existing failure surfaces but did not reactivate with new net downslope displacement. Modeling suggests that ground motion in 2018 was of insufficient duration and too high frequency to trigger reactivation of the deep landslides.

Alaska↗

USGS2019

Quantitative coseismic and precipitation-induced landslide risk mapping for the country of Lebanon

Quantitative landslide risk assessment is a key step in creating appropriate land use policies. The forced migration of those displaced by recent events in Syria has highlighted the need for studies to guide humanitarian aid and resettlement policies. In 2011, armed conflict in the region precipitated the largest refugee crisis in a generation. Over 1.5 million displaced Syrians now reside in Lebanon, rapidly changing the population distribution in geomorphically-active areas of the country. We use a multi-step process to quantitatively assess the landslide risk profile of Lebanon throughout the ongoing Syrian conflict. First, mode-specific geotechnical models are utilized to assess the individual hazard contributions of a suite of triggering scenarios and types of landslides appropriate to the varied terrain of Lebanon. Second, vulnerability estimates and population data from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) are combined to produce scenario-specific risk. Finally, risk data is aggregated to create a comprehensive landslide risk profile for Syrian refugees in Lebanon and compared to that of the pre-conflict Lebanese population.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2019

Risk at the margins: A natural hazards perspective on the Syrian refugee crisis in Lebanon

Quantitative landslide risk analysis is a key step in creating appropriate land use policies. The forced migration of those displaced by recent armed conflict in Syria has highlighted the need for studies to guide humanitarian aid and resettlement policies. Over 1.5 million displaced Syrians now reside in Lebanon, self-settling throughout the country through urban integration and informal encampment due to Lebanon's prohibition of formal refugee camps. The Syrian-Lebanon refugee crisis coincides with the recent reexamination of the established aid practice of camp-based resettlement, focused on issues of aid efficacy, security, and human dignity but lacking an environmental hazards perspective. In light of these issues, we quantitatively assess the landslide risk profile of Lebanon, finding a 75% increase in landslide risk since the start of the Syrian crisis. The risk is highest in the debris flow-prone mountains of central and northeastern Lebanon. Additionally, Syrian refugees settled in informal camps experience 9–11 times greater risk then urban populations due to sub-standard shelter, suggesting that urban rather than camp-based resettlement policies are preferable from an environmental-hazards perspective.

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction↗

USGS2019

Seismological, geological, and geotechnical engineering aspects of the 2018 MW 6.6 Hokkaido Eastern Iburi earthquake

The 2018 Hokkaido Eastern Iburi MW6.6 earthquake struck the southern coast of the north island of Japan in the early morning (3:08 AM JST) on September 6, 2018. The event had a hypocentral depth of 35 km, centered beneath the port city of Tomakomai. Extremely strong shaking with peak ground acceleration in excess of 0.5 g was felt in the communities directly north of Tomakomai, in the districts of Abira and Atsuma. There, a very high density of landslides occurred in pumices soil that affected the majority of slopes in the region above the floodplain. These landslides were typically a thin veneer of 1 to 3 m of recent (<9000 ybp) volcanic pumice mantling older Kawabata marine sedimentary rocks. The source of the pumice layers are recent eruptions from Mt. Tarumae, south of Shikotsu-ko Caldera lake. Several block megaslides were observed in the Kawabata marine unit. A flow failure resulting from soil collapse or liquefaction was observed in fill deposits placed in a residential community district of Kiyota ward in Sapporo. The community, Satozuka-1 is situated on a natural steep ravine that was filled with pumice soil to level construction area to a gently sloping landscape for housing construction. The flow failure consisted of lateral migration of soil from the upper slope regions of the community onto the surface of the lower community. The upper community topographically deflated as large quantities of fluidized soil flooded the lower streets.

Hokkaido↗