Search USGS⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70196690

Geoelectric hazard assessment: the differences of geoelectric responses during magnetic storms within common physiographic zones

Stephen W. Cuttler·Jeffrey J. Love·Andrei Swidinsky
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Geomagnetic field data obtained through the INTERMAGNET program are convolved with with magnetotelluric surface impedance from four EarthScope USArray sites to estimate the geoelectric variations throughout the duration of a magnetic storm. A duration of time from June 22, 2016, to June 25, 2016, is considered which encompasses a magnetic storm of moderate size recorded at the Brandon, Manitoba and Fredericksburg, Virginia magnetic observatories over 3 days. Two impedance sites were chosen in each case which represent different responses while being within close geographic proximity and within the same physiographic zone. This study produces estimated time series of the geoelectric field throughout the duration of a magnetic storm, providing an understanding of how the geoelectric field differs across small geographic distances within the same physiographic zone. This study shows that the geoelectric response of two sites within 200 km of one another can differ by up to two orders of magnitude (4484 mV/km at one site and 41 mV/km at another site 125 km away). This study demonstrates that the application of uniform 1-dimensional conductivity models of the subsurface to wide geographic regions is insufficient to predict the geoelectric hazard at a given site. This necessitates that an evaluation of the 3-dimensional conductivity distribution at a given location is necessary to produce a reliable estimation of how the geoelectric field evolves over the course of a magnetic storm.

Explore related subjects

Earth, Planets and SpaceArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Stephen W. Cuttler, Jeffrey J. Love, Andrei Swidinsky. 2018-03-08. Geoelectric hazard assessment: the differences of geoelectric responses during magnetic storms within common physiographic zones. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-018-0807-7

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Special issue “The 2024 M7.6 Noto Peninsula earthquake and seismic swarm”

The 2024 Mw7.5 (M JMA 7.6) Noto Peninsula earthquake struck the Noto Peninsula, central Japan on January 1, 2024, causing widespread damage. This Mw7.5 mainshock, together with the prolonged seismic swarm that persisted in the northeastern Noto Peninsula since the end of 2020, of which the largest event was the 2023 M JMA 6.5 earthquake, constitutes one of the most significant seismic sequences in Japan in recent decades. The sequence provides a rare opportunity to investigate the complex interplay among swarm activity, fluid migration, fault geometry and distribution, and the preparatory conditions required for a large inland crustal earthquake. Motivated by this scientific context, this special issue brings together studies examining the sequence from diverse disciplinary perspectives, incorporating seismic, geodetic, and tsunami-related observations and modelling.

Noto Peninsula↗
USGS2025

Special issue "Effects of surface geology on seismic motion (ESG): General state-of-research"

To understand and predict the behaviors of strong ground motions incurred during devastating earthquakes, studies focused on the “effects of surface geology (ESG) on seismic motions” (following tradition, herein contracted as: “ESG”) have progressed steadily in the last three decades. These ESG studies typically involve in situ measurements of the wavefield and commonly apply both analytical and computational approaches. Concurrently, improvements in ESG related research can be readily attributed to the proliferation of openly accessible strong motion data, as well as advances in computational power. Nevertheless, there remain significant shortfalls in our understanding of the epistemic and aleatory uncertainties associated with the ESG as demonstrated by phenomena from recent deadly earthquake-related site effects. Thus, investigations toward addressing these deficiencies should be underscored in future earthquake related disaster mitigation efforts. This special issue of Earth, Planets, and Space (EPS) is dedicated to the ongoing efforts by the International Association of Seismology and Physics of the Earth’s Interior (IASPEI) and the International Association of Earthquake Engineering (IAEE) that champion activities promoting studies related to the ESG.

Earth, Planets and Space↗
USGS2022

Using a grid-search approach to validate the Graves-Pitarka broadband simulation method

This work assesses the ability of the Graves–Pitarka simulation approach to reproduce observed ground motions for 12 California and Baja California earthquakes. A total of 240 realizations are computed for each earthquake and compared with recorded strong motions from near-fault sites. In addition to spatial variability in slip, each realization samples from discrete combinations of average rupture speed, rise time, and down-dip fault width. Ground motions for each realization of a given earthquake are compared to the observations using a pseudo-spectral acceleration goodness-of-fit (GoF) metric. Parameters for the lowest misfit cases are then tabulated to develop relations for estimating median values and ranges for future applications. The results are generally consistent with published scaling relations for estimating rupture dimensions as a function of magnitude. Additionally, I find the average rise time scales as 2.3 × α T × 10 − 9 × M o 1 / 3 "> 2.3 × α T × 10 - 9 × M o 1 / 3 ( M o is seismic moment in dyne-cm) and average rupture speed as ( 0.765 ± 0.075 ) × α T − 1 × V s "> ( 0.765 ± 0.075 ) × α T - 1 × V s ( V s is local shear wave velocity), where 2.3 × α T × 10 − 9 × M o 1 / 3 "> α T is a mechanism adjustment ranging from a value of 1.0 for pure strike-slip to 0.9 for pure reverse-slip cases. There are cases where slightly different combinations of parameters produce equally good fits to the observations, demonstrating the non-uniqueness of using a single GoF metric in this approach. Nonetheless, the results reinforce the importance of adequately sampling ranges of rupture parameters when performing validations, as well as when simulating ground motions for future events.

Earth, Planets and Space↗