Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Keith Porter

Publications and source records attributed to Keith Porter.

9 recordsLinked to original sources

Trimming the UCERF3-TD logic tree: Model order reduction for an earthquake rupture forecast considering loss exceedance

The Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast version 3-Time Dependent depicts California’s seismic faults and their activity. Its logic tree has 5760 leaves. Considering 30 more model combinations related to ground motion produces 172,800 distinct models representing so-called epistemic uncertainties. To calculate risk to a portfolio of buildings, one also considers millions of earthquakes and spatially correlated ground-motion variability. We offer a tree-trimming technique that retains the probability distribution of portfolio loss and identifies the leading sources of uncertainty for further study. We applied it to a California statewide building portfolio and various levels of nonexceedance probability between one in 100 and one in 2500. We trimmed the logic tree from 172,800 leaves to as few as 15. The result: a supercomputer that would otherwise run 24 h to estimate the distribution of one-in-250-year loss can calculate it in moments with the reduced-order model. Others can use the reduced-order model to calculate risk to different California portfolios, and scientists can prioritize study to reduce the remaining epistemic uncertainty.

Earthquake Spectra↗

Assessing the value of removing earthquake-hazard-related epistemic uncertainties, exemplified using average annual loss in California

To aid in setting scientific research priorities, we assess the potential value of removing each of the epistemic uncertainties currently represented in the US Geological Survey California seismic-hazard model, using average annual loss (AAL) as the risk metric of interest. Given all the uncertainties, represented with logic-tree branches, we find a mean AAL of $3.94 billion. The modal value is 17.5% lower than the mean, and there is a 78% chance that the true AAL value is more than 10% away from the mean, and a 5% chance that it is a factor 2.1 greater or lower than the mean. We quantify the extent to which resolving each uncertainty improves the AAL estimate. The most influential branch is one that adds additional epistemic uncertainty to ground motion models, but others are found to be influential as well, such as the rate of M ≥ 5 events throughout the region. We discuss the broader implications of our findings, and note that the time dependence caused by spatiotemporal clustering can be much more influential on AAL than the epistemic uncertainties explored here.

California↗

A prototype operational earthquake loss model for California based on UCERF3-ETAS – A first look at valuation

We present a prototype operational loss model based on UCERF3-ETAS, which is the third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast with an Epidemic Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) component. As such, UCERF3-ETAS represents the first earthquake forecast to relax fault segmentation assumptions and to include multi-fault ruptures, elastic-rebound, and spatiotemporal clustering, all of which seem important for generating realistic and useful aftershock statistics. UCERF3-ETAS is nevertheless an approximation of the system, however, so usefulness will vary and potential value needs to be ascertained in the context of each application. We examine this question with respect to statewide loss estimates, exemplifying how risk can be elevated by orders of magnitude due to triggered events following various scenario earthquakes. Two important considerations are the probability gains, relative to loss likelihoods in the absence of main shocks, and the rapid decay of gains with time. Significant uncertainties and model limitations remain, so we hope this paper will inspire similar analyses with respect to other risk metrics to help ascertain whether operationalization of UCERF3-ETAS would be worth the considerable resources required.

Earthquake Spectra↗

Trimming a hazard logic tree with a new model-order-reduction technique

The size of the logic tree within the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast Version 3, Time-Dependent (UCERF3-TD) model can challenge risk analyses of large portfolios. An insurer or catastrophe risk modeler concerned with losses to a California portfolio might have to evaluate a portfolio 57,600 times to estimate risk in light of the hazard possibility space. Which branches of the logic tree matter most, and which can one ignore? We employed two model-order-reduction techniques to simplify the model. We sought a subset of parameters that must vary, and the specific fixed values for the remaining parameters, to produce approximately the same loss distribution as the original model. The techniques are (1) a tornado-diagram approach we employed previously for UCERF2, and (2) an apparently novel probabilistic sensitivity approach that seems better suited to functions of nominal random variables. The new approach produces a reduced-order model with only 60 of the original 57,600 leaves. One can use the results to reduce computational effort in loss analyses by orders of magnitude.

Earthquake Spectra↗

The SAFRR tsunami scenario-physical damage in California: Chapter E in The SAFRR (Science Application for Risk Reduction) Tsunami Scenario

his chapter attempts to depict a single realistic outcome of the SAFRR (Science Application for Risk Reduction) tsunami scenario in terms of physical damage to and recovery of various aspects of the built environment in California. As described elsewhere in this report, the tsunami is generated by a hypothetical magnitude 9.1 earthquake seaward of the Alaska Peninsula on the Semidi Sector of the Alaska–Aleutian Subduction Zone, 495 miles southwest of Anchorage, at 11:50 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) on Thursday March 27, 2014, and arriving at the California coast between 4:00 and 5:40 p.m. (depending on location) the same day. Although other tsunamis could have locally greater impact, this source represents a substantial threat to the state as a whole. One purpose of this chapter is to help operators and users of coastal assets throughout California to develop emergency plans to respond to a real tsunami. Another is to identify ways that operators or owners of these assets can think through options for reducing damage before a future tsunami. A third is to inform the economic analyses for the SAFRR tsunami scenario. And a fourth is to identify research needs to better understand the possible consequences of a tsunami on these assets. The asset classes considered here include the following: Piers, cargo, buildings, and other assets at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach Large vessels in the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach Marinas and small craft Coastal buildings Roads and roadway bridges Rail, railway bridges, and rolling stock Agriculture Fire following tsunami Each asset class is examined in a subsection of this chapter. In each subsection, we generally attempt to offer a historical review of damage. We characterize and quantify the assets exposed to loss and describe the modes of damage that have been observed in past tsunamis or are otherwise deemed likely to occur in the SAFRR tsunami scenario. Where practical, we offer a mathematical model of the damageability of assets exposed to loss. Then, applying the damageability model and the velocity, wave amplitude, and inundation models discussed in other SAFRR chapters we offer a single realistic depiction of damage. Other outcomes are of course possible for this hypothetical event. Where practical we estimate repair costs and estimate the duration required to restore the assets to their pre-tsunami condition. We identify opportunities to enhance the resiliency of the assets, either through making them less vulnerable to damage or able to recover more quickly in spite of the damage. Finally, we identify uncertainties in the modeling where research would improve our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of damage and loss or otherwise improve our ability to estimate the future impacts of tsunamis and inform risk-management decisions for tsunamis. However, it is certain that the kinds of damages discussed here have occurred in past tsunamis, even in developed nations, and in a sufficiently large event, will occur in California. Our uncertainties can operate in either direction, either leading to an overestimate of damage or an underestimate. Therefore, losses in an actual future tsunami could be greater than depicted here. Furthermore this evaluation is not intended to be an exhaustive depiction of what could happen in this or similar tsunamis. Other impacts could occur that are not presented here.

California↗

Overview of the ARkStorm scenario

The U.S. Geological Survey, Multi Hazards Demonstration Project (MHDP) uses hazards science to improve resiliency of communities to natural disasters including earthquakes, tsunamis, wildfires, landslides, floods and coastal erosion. The project engages emergency planners, businesses, universities, government agencies, and others in preparing for major natural disasters. The project also helps to set research goals and provides decision-making information for loss reduction and improved resiliency. The first public product of the MHDP was the ShakeOut Earthquake Scenario published in May 2008. This detailed depiction of a hypothetical magnitude 7.8 earthquake on the San Andreas Fault in southern California served as the centerpiece of the largest earthquake drill in United States history, involving over 5,000 emergency responders and the participation of over 5.5 million citizens. This document summarizes the next major public project for MHDP, a winter storm scenario called ARkStorm (for Atmospheric River 1,000). Experts have designed a large, scientifically realistic meteorological event followed by an examination of the secondary hazards (for example, landslides and flooding), physical damages to the built environment, and social and economic consequences. The hypothetical storm depicted here would strike the U.S. West Coast and be similar to the intense California winter storms of 1861 and 1862 that left the central valley of California impassible. The storm is estimated to produce precipitation that in many places exceeds levels only experienced on average once every 500 to 1,000 years. Extensive flooding results. In many cases flooding overwhelms the state’s flood-protection system, which is typically designed to resist 100- to 200-year runoffs. The Central Valley experiences hypothetical flooding 300 miles long and 20 or more miles wide. Serious flooding also occurs in Orange County, Los Angeles County, San Diego, the San Francisco Bay area, and other coastal communities. Windspeeds in some places reach 125 miles per hour, hurricane-force winds. Across wider areas of the state, winds reach 60 miles per hour. Hundreds of landslides damage roads, highways, and homes. Property damage exceeds $ 300 billion, most from flooding. Demand surge (an increase in labor rates and other repair costs after major natural disasters) could increase property losses by 20 percent. Agricultural losses and other costs to repair lifelines, dewater (drain) flooded islands, and repair damage from landslides, brings the total direct property loss to nearly $ 400 billion, of which $ 20 to $ 30 billion would be recoverable through public and commercial insurance. Power, water, sewer, and other lifelines experience damage that takes weeks or months to restore. Flooding evacuation could involve 1.5 million residents in the inland region and delta counties. Business interruption costs reach $ 325 billion in addition to the $ 400 billion property repair costs, meaning that an ARkStorm could cost on the order of $ 725 billion, which is nearly 3 times the loss deemed to be realistic by the ShakeOut authors for a severe southern California earthquake, an event with roughly the same annual occurrence probability. The ARkStorm has several public policy implications: (1) An ARkStorm raises serious questions about the ability of existing federal, state, and local disaster planning to handle a disaster of this magnitude. (2) A core policy issue raised is whether to pay now to mitigate, or pay a lot more later for recovery. (3) Innovative financing solutions are likely to be needed to avoid fiscal crisis and adequately fund response and recovery costs from a similar, real, disaster. (4) Responders and government managers at all levels could be encouraged to conduct risk assessments, and devise the full spectrum of exercises, to exercise ability of their plans to address a similar event. (5) ARkStorm can be a reference point for application of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and California Emergency Management Agency guidance connecting federal, state and local natural hazards mapping and mitigation planning under the National Flood Insurance Plan and Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. (6) Common messages to educate the public about the risk of such an extreme disaster as the ARkStorm scenario could be developed and consistently communicated to facilitate policy formulation and transformation. These impacts were estimated by a team of 117 scientists, engineers, public-policy experts, insurance experts, and employees of the affected lifelines. In many aspects the ARkStorm produced new science, such as the model of coastal inundation. The products of the ARkStorm are intended for use by emergency planners, utility operators, policymakers, and others to inform preparedness plans and to enhance resiliency.

California↗

Global building inventory for earthquake loss estimation and risk management

We develop a global database of building inventories using taxonomy of global building types for use in near-real-time post-earthquake loss estimation and pre-earthquake risk analysis, for the U.S. Geological Survey’s Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response (PAGER) program. The database is available for public use, subject to peer review, scrutiny, and open enhancement. On a country-by-country level, it contains estimates of the distribution of building types categorized by material, lateral force resisting system, and occupancy type (residential or nonresidential, urban or rural). The database draws on and harmonizes numerous sources: (1) UN statistics, (2) UN Habitat’s demographic and health survey (DHS) database, (3) national housing censuses, (4) the World Housing Encyclopedia and (5) other literature.

Earthquake Spectra↗

The ShakeOut Earthquake Scenario— A story that southern Californians are writing

The question is not if but when southern California will be hit by a major earthquake - one so damaging that it will permanently change lives and livelihoods in the region. How severe the changes will be depends on the actions that individuals, schools, businesses, organizations, communities, and governments take to get ready. To help prepare for this event, scientists of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) have changed the way that earthquake scenarios are done, uniting a multidisciplinary team that spans an unprecedented number of specialties. The team includes the California Geological Survey, Southern California Earthquake Center, and nearly 200 other partners in government, academia, emergency response, and industry, working to understand the long-term impacts of an enormous earthquake on the complicated social and economic interactions that sustain southern California society. This project, the ShakeOut Scenario, has applied the best current scientific understanding to identify what can be done now to avoid an earthquake catastrophe. More information on the science behind this project will be available in The ShakeOut Scenario (USGS Open-File Report 2008-1150; http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1150/). The 'what if?' earthquake modeled in the ShakeOut Scenario is a magnitude 7.8 on the southern San Andreas Fault. Geologists selected the details of this hypothetical earthquake by considering the amount of stored strain on that part of the fault with the greatest risk of imminent rupture. From this, seismologists and computer scientists modeled the ground shaking that would occur in this earthquake. Engineers and other professionals used the shaking to produce a realistic picture of this earthquake's damage to buildings, roads, pipelines, and other infrastructure. From these damages, social scientists projected casualties, emergency response, and the impact of the scenario earthquake on southern California's economy and society. The earthquake, its damages, and resulting losses are one realistic outcome, deliberately not a worst-case scenario, rather one worth preparing for and mitigating against. Decades of improving the life-safety requirements in building codes have greatly reduced the risk of death in earthquakes, yet southern California's economic and social systems are still vulnerable to large-scale disruptions. Because of this, the ShakeOut Scenario earthquake would dramatically alter the nature of the southern California community. Fortunately, steps can be taken now that can change that outcome and repay any costs many times over. The ShakeOut Scenario is the first public product of the USGS Multi-Hazards Demonstration Project, created to show how hazards science can increase a community's resiliency to natural disasters through improved planning, mitigation, and response.

California↗

The ShakeOut Scenario

This is the initial publication of the results of a cooperative project to examine the implications of a major earthquake in southern California. The study comprised eight counties: Imperial, Kern, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura. Its results will be used as the basis of an emergency response and preparedness exercise, the Great Southern California ShakeOut, and for this purpose we defined our earthquake as occurring at 10:00 a.m. on November 13, 2008. As members of the southern California community use the ShakeOut Scenario to plan and execute the exercise, we anticipate discussion and feedback. This community input will be used to refine our assessment and will lead to a formal publication in early 2009. Our goal in the ShakeOut Scenario is to identify the physical, social and economic consequences of a major earthquake in southern California and in so doing, enable the users of our results to identify what they can change now?before the earthquake?to avoid catastrophic impact after the inevitable earthquake occurs. To do so, we had to determine the physical damages (casualties and losses) caused by the earthquake and the impact of those damages on the region?s social and economic systems. To do this, we needed to know about the earthquake ground shaking and fault rupture. So we first constructed an earthquake, taking all available earthquake research information, from trenching and exposed evidence of prehistoric earthquakes, to analysis of instrumental recordings of large earthquakes and the latest theory in earthquake source physics. We modeled a magnitude (M) 7.8 earthquake on the southern San Andreas Fault, a plausible event on the fault most likely to produce a major earthquake. This information was then fed forward into the rest of the ShakeOut Scenario. The damage impacts of the scenario earthquake were estimated using both HAZUS-MH and expert opinion through 13 special studies and 6 expert panels, and fall into four categories: building damages, non-structural damages, damage to lifelines and infrastructure, and fire losses. The magnitude 7.8 ShakeOut earthquake is modeled to cause about 1800 deaths and $213 billion of economic losses. These numbers are as low as they are because of aggressive retrofitting programs that have increased the seismic resistance of buildings, highways and lifelines, and economic resiliency. These numbers are as large as they are because much more retrofitting could still be done. The earthquake modeled here may never happen. Big earthquakes on the San Andreas Fault are inevitable, and by geologic standards extremely common, but probably will not be exactly like this one. The next very damaging earthquake could easily be on another fault. However, lessons learned from this particular event apply to many other events and could provide benefits in many possible future events.

Open-File Report↗