Geology topics

Danielle F. Sumy

Publications and source records attributed to Danielle F. Sumy.

12 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Deaf, deafblind, and hard of hearing university student experiences with earthquake early warning in the United States: Evaluating language planning and technology access

The growing literature on deaf and hard of hearing (DHH+) populations and disasters demonstrates that emergency communication (including alerts) is not reaching global DHH + individuals with dangerous impacts for morbidity and mortality. This is the first research study in the U.S. to qualitatively explore the experiences of DHH + persons with earthquake early warning (EEW) through group-based dialogue sessions. The study investigates eight DHH + university students'past earthquake experiences, access to EEW alerts, and perceptions of ShakeAlert Ⓡ , an EEW system for detecting earthquakes and alerting residents of California, Oregon, and Washington. Findings highlight key gaps in disaster alert usability within four thematic areas: lack of messaging in participants' language(s), unclear alert messaging, deficient message delivery mechanisms for deafblind persons, and insufficient access to earthquake information and training that leads to dependence on informal information networks. Weaknesses identified in these four themes reduce DHH + trust in EEW systems and compromise the capacity of alert recipients to take swift protective action or to mentally prepare before shaking starts. The study also underscores structural factors such as insufficient linguistic representation in disaster language planning and technology design, which ignores the linguistic and sensory access needs of DHH + individuals. Building on disaster language planning frameworks, we recommend involving DHH + populations to co-develop EEW alerts. By centering DHH + perspectives, this research contributes to ongoing efforts to ensure that EEW systems reach everyone.

California↗

USGS2025

ShakeAlert®—Communication, education, outreach and technical engagement strategic vision

Executive Summary In 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) began directly supporting ShakeAlert ® research and in 2012 the ShakeAlert demonstration system began testing ( Given and others, 2018 ). The ShakeAlert earthquake early warning (EEW) system is a partnership between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the three West Coast States (Washington, Oregon, and California) served by the ShakeAlert System, which is part of the larger Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS). With more than 143 million people exposed to potentially damaging shaking in the United States ( Jaiswal and others, 2015 ), earthquakes are a national hazard. Most of our Nation’s earthquake risk is concentrated in the highly populated areas on the active plate tectonic boundaries on the West Coast of the conterminous United States. ShakeAlert is the first public alert system in the United States to provide rapid mass notification of earthquake detection, potentially offering seconds of warning before strong shaking arrives. A few seconds may not seem like much time, but the information in ShakeAlert Messages can be used to trigger automated actions that can prevent injury or death, reduce immediate damage, and speed recovery from earthquakes. The information product issued by the ShakeAlert system is called a ShakeAlert Message and is one of the information products and tools of the ANSS. The ShakeAlert System includes the USGS component, plus the pathways by which ShakeAlert-powered products and (or) services are delivered to end users. Alerts can be delivered to cell phones or be used to trigger automated systems to protect equipment, facilities, and infrastructure, such as slowing or stopping a train. ShakeAlert-powered automated actions can include fire house doors that can be opened to prevent jamming, heavy equipment (for example, trains, elevators, and cranes) that can be automatically stopped or parked in safe positions, and pipeline valves that can be closed to prevent surges and spills. A few seconds of warning also may be sufficient for people to take protective actions, such as drop, cover, and hold on or modified protective actions for a broad range of populations. Advance training may increase the benefit of a speedy response to an alert. Outreach and education about EEW may raise awareness of the overall earthquake threat and how people can best react when they receive an alert or feel shaking. ShakeAlert communication, education, outreach, and technical engagement (CEO&TE) efforts are highly collaborative and essential for the success of the ShakeAlert System. This strategic vision informs how the vast ShakeAlert CEO&TE Community operates and works together. The CEO&TE Community delineates a strategic framework that is intended to set the path for a long-term, sustainable approach to CEO&TE through three focus areas and five priorities. Focus Areas Technical engagement.— The objective of this focus area is to expand and broaden ShakeAlert technical engagement and implementation. External engagement.— This focus area targets engagement in long-term communication, education, and outreach planning, implementation, and evaluation. Internal engagement.— The purpose of this focus area is to build and sustain a robust infrastructure to optimize collaboration, information sharing, and project planning among the community of stakeholders charged with implementing ShakeAlert CEO&TE. Priorities The enumeration of the five priorities listed below does not suggest priority ranking. Public safety, preparedness, and resilience; Technical implementation and engagement; Consistent messaging and communication; Integration with other Federal and State earthquake hazards products; and Educational resources development and dissemination. This strategic vision is a tangible outcome of collaboration among many stakeholders beginning in July 2016. Since then, the work of the ShakeAlert CEO&TE Community has grown into an international effort. The USGS has developed, tested, and implemented a broad spectrum of communication, education, and outreach tools and resources—all of which recognize that seconds matter when it comes to safety and mitigating harm from earthquake hazards. The CEO&TE social science research effort has provided invaluable insights into the ShakeAlert System’s human interface. USGS-licensed technical partners develop, test, and implement real-world applications using ShakeAlert Messages. The success of ShakeAlert CEO&TE efforts is predicated on robust collaboration across numerous agencies, organizations, and groups. As such, this strategic vision outlines a “partnership model” that delineates roles and responsibilities to ensure alignment with focus areas and priorities. The partnership model includes the CEO&TE lead agency (USGS); its principal partners (State agencies and university partners); its implementation partners (for example, technical partners who build systems to deliver ShakeAlert-powered products and (or) services [focus area one]), earthquake education partners who work to increase public preparedness for seismic events (focus area two); and other organizations that work together to enhance the adoption and effectiveness of the ShakeAlert System. These partners collaborate and convene through a variety of working groups and forums, which are also described in this strategic vision and align with focus area three (internal engagement). The CEO&TE Community collaboratively developed its operating principles and a consensus-based, decision-making strategic framework to guide its collective work. Performance metrics are used to continually measure success. Ultimately, the USGS and ShakeAlert CEO&TE Community are advancing the ShakeAlert System that as of the publication of this strategic vision to “provide earthquake early warning for all” serves more than 50 million people.

Circular↗

USGS2024

K-12 trade books’ representation of earthquake safety and protective actions: A content analysis

Meaningful learning resources for earthquake safety and survival have become an increasingly important topic among geoscientists, especially educators and researchers. Various members of the public, especially K-12 (ages 5–18) learners, continue to depend on scientific trade books available at their local public and school libraries for information about earthquake concepts. To our knowledge, no research has empirically examined how trade books represent earthquake safety and survival actions. In this research, we combine an iterative qualitative inductive and deductive analysis to explore the representation of earthquake safety and protective actions in 50 trade books. We categorize these actions into time-based practices related to preparedness before an earthquake, protective actions during an earthquake, and recovery after an earthquake. These trade books emphasize preparedness by means of building earthquake-resistant structures and urban planning, and efforts toward community resilience and keeping home supplies. The recommended personal protective action during an earthquake in the United States (“Drop, Cover, and Hold On”) is emphasized in the majority of the trade books, as well as other protective actions related to emotional actions and current technological automated actions such as earthquake early warning systems. Finally, the books highlight actions such as damage evaluation and support as ways to recover after an earthquake. Our findings highlight the issues between accepted earthquake safety and survival actions and the limited and/or inaccurate knowledge represented in some trade books. We provide interpretations of how presentation of limited or inaccurate information may increase confusion about appropriate protective actions. The inclusion of accepted and recommended protective actions in future trade books and the use of earthquake drills in public libraries as a supplement for trade book users may improve understanding and implementation of appropriate actions. We further demonstrate the potential of trade book contents in fostering earthquake education through library-community partnerships.

Journal of Geoscience Education↗

USGS2023

Social vulnerability and geographic access barriers to earthquake early warning education in museums and other free choice learning environments

Given the earthquake risk on the West Coast of the United States, individuals and communities require a basic understanding of ShakeAlert earthquake early warning technology, which may provide crucial seconds of warning. Free choice learning environments (FCLEs), such as museums, public libraries, and national parks, are uniquely positioned to expand the reach of earthquake early warning through educational initiatives and resources. Earthquake education in these spaces creates awareness of earthquake hazards and risk in areas where people live or visit and may also increase engagement in preparedness behavior as they are trusted sources of information in their communities. However, population demographics within the ShakeAlert states has yet to be examined; audience segmentation theories require a better understanding of the demographics of the people the system seeks to serve. Here we build upon previous typology research that examined over 150 earthquake displays around the United States and found that most did not include information about earthquake preparedness or associated protective actions. This new research shifts to a hierarchical clustering analysis that identifies seven main population groups within the ShakeAlert states. We also find that the cost of admission and the geographic distance away from FCLEs, including the potential cost and time of transportation, may lead to an urban-rural divide in visitor access. Using audience segmentation theories as related to earthquakes, we can understand critical barriers to FCLEs and opportunities for ShakeAlert education. As earthquake early warning systems expand internationally, thoughtful and equitable education initiatives are beneficial to reach critical audiences.

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction↗

USGS2023

Latency and geofence testing of wireless emergency alerts intended for the ShakeAlert® earthquake early warning system for the West Coast of the United States of America

ShakeAlert, the earthquake early warning (EEW) system for the West Coast of the United States, attempts to provides crucial warnings before strong shaking occurs. However, because the alerts are triggered only when an earthquake is already in progress, and the alert latencies and delivery times are platform dependent, the time between these warnings and the arrival of shaking is variable. The ShakeAlert system uses, among other public alerting platforms like a mobile phone operating system, smartphone apps, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency Integrated Public Alert & Warning System (IPAWS). IPAWS sends Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEAs) informing people via their smartphones and other mobile devices about various events, such as natural hazards, child abductions, or public health information about COVID-19. However, little is known about the IPAWS delivery latencies. Given that people may have only a few seconds of notice after they receive an alert to take a protective action before they feel earthquake shaking, quantifying latencies is critical to understanding whether the IPAWS system is useful for EEW. In this study, we developed new methods to test the IPAWS distribution system's performance, both with devices in a controlled environment and as well as with a 2019 community-based feedback form, in Oakland and San Diego County, California, respectively. The controlled environment test used mobile phones (including smart and non-smart phones) and associated devices to determine alert receipt times; the community research form had participants self-report their receipt times. By triangulating the data between the controlled test environment and the community research, we determined the latency statistics as well as whether the geofence (the geographic area where the alert was intended to be sent) held broadly. We found that the latencies were similar between the two tests despite the large differences in population sizes. WEA messages were received within a median time frame of 6–12 s, and the geofence held with only a few exceptions. We use this latency to assess how the system would have performed in two large earthquakes, the 1989 M6.9 Loma Prieta and 2019 M7.1 Ridgecrest earthquakes, which both occurred near our WEA test locations. Our analysis revealed that had IPAWS been available during those earthquakes, particularly Loma Prieta, it would have provided crucial seconds of notice that damaging shaking was imminent in some locations relatively far from the epicenter. Further, we find affordable non-smart phones can receive WEAs as fast as smartphones. Finally, our new method can be used for latency and geospatial testing going forward for IPAWS and other similar alerting systems.

California↗

USGS2022

Education initiatives to support earthquake early warning: A retrospective and a roadmap

As of May 2021, public alerting is now operational for the ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system for the West Coast of the United States in California, Oregon, and Washington. Successful early warning systems require the scientific and technical implementation to be coupled with social and humanitarian considerations, including education and outreach campaigns. Community engagement with the over 50 million people who live in ShakeAlert states is important to increase public safety, security, and awareness of local earthquake hazards, how to prepare, and how ShakeAlert earthquake early warning can help. Here, we describe the efforts of the ShakeAlert Educational Resources Working Group around the rollout of public alerting in the Pacific Northwest for Oregon in March 2021 and Washington in May 2021, respectively. Our initial approach was to engage in formative dialogue with community members in each ShakeAlert state, develop educational activities and animations based on the collective feedback, and then to disseminate our resources in both formal (K‐16) and informal (free choice) learning environments through workshops and outreach events. The rollout of public alerting in the Pacific Northwest provided an opportunity to directly engage with various publics around a specific event, and to collaborate with local news and social media, communications and social science professionals, educators, emergency managers, and scientific and technical experts on the ShakeAlert system. Following the rollouts, we developed a strategic plan for the next five years of ShakeAlert to promote earthquake early warning, as the importance of earthquake preparedness competes with the stressors of everyday life. Because earthquake early warning systems are rapidly expanding worldwide, our education and outreach efforts provide a roadmap for building successful education and outreach campaigns, leading up to public alerting and maintaining earthquake preparedness in the public consciousness following rollout.

Oregon↗

USGS2022

Typology development of earthquake displays in free-choice learning environments, to inform earthquake early warning education in the United States

Free-choice learning environments, such as museums, national parks, interpretive trails, and visitor centers, are trusted sources of information in their communities and support lifelong learning. Earthquake education in these spaces creates awareness of earthquake hazards and risk in areas where people live or visit and, in turn, may increase engagement in preparedness behavior. The ShakeAlert® Earthquake Early Warning System helps publics prepare by warning in advance of shaking from significant earthquakes along the West Coast of the United States. ShakeAlert can minimize earthquake damage by prompting automated actions (e.g., slowing trains, shutting off water valves) and prompting personal protective actions like “Drop, Cover, and Hold On” to significantly reduce damage, injury, and loss of life. Individuals and communities must have a basic understanding of earthquake hazards, as well as an awareness of ShakeAlert technology, to know how to respond if they feel shaking or receive an alert. Currently, there is a lack of contemporary scholarship on how free-choice learning environments approach earthquake education through exhibits and displays. We analyzed a sample of existing earthquake exhibits and their themes in the United States and explored how different display types are uniquely engaging. We found that most displays did not include information about how to prepare for an earthquake or associated protective actions. From this and the development of the typology, our research posits a foundational framework for how best to incorporate place-based learning on earthquakes and early warning into centers of free-choice learning which may apply to a range of other natural hazards and will enhance public awareness and safety.

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction↗

USGS2022

Evidence-based guidelines for protective actions and earthquake early warning systems

Earthquake early warning systems (EEW) are becoming increasingly available or in development throughout the world. With public alerting in Mexico, Japan, Taiwan, and parts of the United States, it is important to provide evidence-based recommendations for protective action so people can protect themselves when they receive an alert. Best-practice warning communication research suggests that providing a protective action will increase the efficacy of the message. However, given the diversity of earthquakes and building types, as well as social and cultural contexts where these systems exist, the question is: what is the best protective action to recommend? The answer lies in maximizing life-saving protective actions during an earthquake event requires both contextually relevant messaging and widespread public education about appropriate protective actions under a range of conditions. By researching previous earthquake injury literature, examining current best practices and public education campaigns, key protective actions may be determined and used to increase the life-saving potential of earthquake early warning systems.

Geophysics↗

USGS2022

Long-term ocean observing for international capacity development around tsunami early warning

The 2004 magnitude (M) 9.1 Sumatra-Andaman Islands earthquake in the Indian Ocean triggered the deadliest tsunami ever, killing more than 230,000 people. In response, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) established three additional Intergovernmental Coordination Groups (ICGs) for the Tsunami and Other Coastal Hazards Early Warning System: for the Caribbean and Adjacent Regions (ICG/CARIBE-EWS), for the Indian Ocean, and for the Northeastern Atlantic, Mediterranean, and Connected Seas. Along with the ICG for the Pacific Ocean, which was established in 1965, one of the goals of the new ICGs was to improve earthquake and tsunami monitoring and early warning. This need was further demonstrated by the 2011 Great East Japan (Tōhoku-oki) earthquake and tsunami, which killed more than 20,000 people, and other destructive tsunamis that occurred in the Solomon Islands, Samoa, Tonga, Chile, Indonesia, and Peru. In response to the call to action by the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021–2030), as well as the desired safe ocean outcome (von Hillebrandt-Andrade et al., 2021), the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of UNESCO approved the Ocean Decade Tsunami Programme in June 2021. One of its goals is to develop the capability to issue actionable alerts for tsunamis from all sources with minimum uncertainty within 10 minutes (Angove et al., 2019). While laudable, this goal presents complexities. Currently, warning depends on quick detection as well as the location and initial magnitude estimates of an earthquake that may generate a tsunami. Other factors that affect tsunamis, such as the faulting mechanism (how the faults slide past each other) and areal extent of the earthquake, currently take at least 20–30 minutes to forecast and are still subject to large uncertainties. Hence, agencies charged with tsunami early warning need to broadcast public alerts within minutes after an earthquake occurs but may struggle to meet this 10-minute goal without further technological advances, some of which are outlined in this article. To reduce loss of life through adequate tsunami warning requires global ocean-based seismic, sea level, and geodetic initiatives to detect high-impact earthquakes and tsunamis, combined with sufficient communication and education so that people know how to respond when they receive alerts and warnings. The United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction defines an early warning system as “a set of capacities needed to generate and disseminate timely and meaningful warning information to enable individuals, communities, and organizations threatened by a hazard to prepare and to act appropriately and in sufficient time to reduce the possibility of harm or loss” (UNISDR, 2012). In short, a successful early warning system requires technology coupled with human factors (Kelman and Glantz, 2014). In this article, we explore case studies from Japan and Canada, where scientists are leading the way in incorporating ocean observing capabilities in their early warning systems. We also explore advancements and challenges in the Caribbean, an area with a complex tectonic environment that would benefit greatly from increased global ocean observing capabilities. We also explore physical and social science interventions necessary to reduce loss of life.

Oceanography↗

USGS2017

Low stress drops observed for aftershocks of the 2011 Mw 5.7 Prague, Oklahoma, earthquake

In November 2011, three M w ≥ 4.8 earthquakes and thousands of aftershocks occurred along the structurally complex Wilzetta fault system near Prague, Oklahoma. Previous studies suggest that wastewater injection induced a M w 4.8 foreshock, which subsequently triggered a M w 5.7 mainshock. We examine source properties of aftershocks with a standard Brune-type spectral model and jointly solve for seismic moment ( M 0 ), corner frequency ( f 0 ), and kappa ( κ ) with an iterative Gauss-Newton global downhill optimization method. We examine 934 earthquakes with initial moment magnitudes ( M w ) between 0.33 and 4.99 based on the pseudospectral acceleration and recover reasonable M 0 , f 0 , and κ for 87 earthquakes with M w 1.83–3.51 determined by spectral fit. We use M 0 and f 0 to estimate the Brune-type stress drop, assuming a circular fault and shear-wave velocity at the hypocentral depth of the event. Our observations suggest that stress drops range between 0.005 and 4.8 MPa with a median of 0.2 MPa (0.03–26.4 MPa with a median of 1.1 MPa for Madariaga-type), which is significantly lower than typical eastern United States intraplate events (>10 MPa). We find that stress drops correlate weakly with hypocentral depth and magnitude. Additionally, we find the stress drops increase with time after the mainshock, although temporal variation in stress drop is difficult to separate from spatial heterogeneity and changing event locations. The overall low median stress drop suggests that the fault segments may have been primed to fail as a result of high pore fluid pressures, likely related to nearby wastewater injection.

Oklahoma↗

USGS2015

Strong-motion observations of the M 7.8 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake sequence and development of the N-shake strong-motion network

We present and describe strong-motion data observations from the 2015 M 7.8 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake sequence collected using existing and new Quake-Catcher Network (QCN) and U.S. Geological Survey NetQuakes sensors located in the Kathmandu Valley. A comparison of QCN data with waveforms recorded by a conventional strong-motion (NetQuakes) instrument validates the QCN data. We present preliminary analysis of spectral accelerations, and peak ground acceleration and velocity for earthquakes up to M 7.3 from the QCN stations, as well as preliminary analysis of the mainshock recording from the NetQuakes station. We show that mainshock peak accelerations were lower than expected and conclude the Kathmandu Valley experienced a pervasively nonlinear response during the mainshock. Phase picks from the QCN and NetQuakes data are also used to improve aftershock locations. This study confirms the utility of QCN instruments to contribute to ground-motion investigations and aftershock response in regions where conventional instrumentation and open-access seismic data are limited. Initial pilot installations of QCN instruments in 2014 are now being expanded to create the Nepal–Shaking Hazard Assessment for Kathmandu and its Environment (N-SHAKE) network.

Seismological Research Letters↗

USGS2014

Observations of static Coulomb stress triggering of the November 2011 M5.7 Oklahoma earthquake sequence

In November 2011, a M 5.0 earthquake occurred less than a day before a M 5.7 earthquake near Prague, Oklahoma, which may have promoted failure of the mainshock and thousands of aftershocks along the Wilzetta fault, including a M 5.0 aftershock. The M 5.0 foreshock occurred in close proximity to active fluid injection wells; fluid injection can cause a buildup of pore fluid pressure, decrease the fault strength, and may induce earthquakes. Keranen et al . [ 2013 ] links the M 5.0 foreshock with fluid injection, but the relationship between the foreshock and successive events has not been investigated. Here we examine the role of coseismic Coulomb stress transfer on earthquakes that follow the M 5.0 foreshock, including the M 5.7 mainshock. We resolve the static Coulomb stress change onto the focal mechanism nodal plane that is most consistent with the rupture geometry of the three M ≥ 5.0 earthquakes, as well as specified receiver fault planes that reflect the regional stress orientation. We find that Coulomb stress is increased, e.g., fault failure is promoted, on the nodal planes of ~60% of the events that have focal mechanism solutions, and more specifically, that the M 5.0 foreshock promoted failure on the rupture plane of the M 5.7 mainshock. We test our results over a range of effective coefficient of friction values. Hence, we argue that the M 5.0 foreshock, induced by fluid injection, potentially triggered a cascading failure of earthquakes along the complex Wilzetta fault system.

Oklahoma↗