Assessing earthquake hazards and reducing risk in the Pacific Northwest; Volume I
No abstract available.
British Columbia, California, Oregon, Washington↗
SEARCH · Search USGS
Results for “earthquake hazards”
Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Crustal structure and earthquake hazards of the subduction zone in southwestern British Columbia and western Washington
No abstract available.
British Columbia, Washington↗
Earthquake hazards and lifelines in the Interstate 5 urban corridor: Woodburn, Oregon, to Centralia, Washington
The Interstate 5 highway (I-5) corridor, which stretches from Mexico to Canada, is both the main economic artery of the Pacific Northwest and home to the majority of Oregonians and Washingtonians. Accordingly, most regional utility and transportation systems have major components located within the I-5 corridor. For the purposes of this map, we refer to these essential systems as lifeline systems. The Pacific Northwest section of I-5, the I-5 urban corridor, extends from Eugene, Oregon, to the border of Canada. The population of this region is rapidly increasing with the bulk of growth and economic development centered in the cities of Eugene, Salem, and Portland, Oregon, and Olympia, Tacoma, Seattle, Everett, and Bellingham, Washington.
Oregon, Washington↗
Earthquake hazards and lifelines in the Interstate 5 urban corridor: Cottage Grove to Woodburn, Oregon
The Interstate 5 highway (I-5) corridor, which stretches from Mexico to Canada, is both the main economic artery of the Pacific Northwest and home to the majority of Oregonians and Washingtonians. Accordingly, most regional utility and transportation systems have major components located within the I-5 corridor. For the purposes of this map, we refer to these essential systems as lifeline systems. The Pacific Northwest section of I-5, the I-5 urban corridor, extends from Eugene, Oregon, to the border of Canada. The population of this region is rapidly increasing with the bulk of growth and economic development centered in the cities of Eugene, Salem, and Portland, Oregon, and Olympia, Tacoma, Seattle, Everett, and Bellingham, Washington.
Oregon↗
Quantifying nuisance ground motion thresholds for induced earthquakes
Hazards from induced earthquakes are a growing concern with a need for effective management. One aspect of that concern is the “nuisance” from unexpected ground motions, which have the potential to cause public alarm and discontent. In this article, we borrow earthquake engineering concepts to quantify the chance of building damage states and adapt them to quantify felt thresholds for induced earthquakes in the Central and Eastern United States. We compare binary data of felt or not-felt reports from the “Did You Feel It” database with ShakeMap ground motion intensity measures (IM) for ∼360 earthquakes. We use a Monte Carlo logistic regression to discern the likelihood of perceiving various degrees of felt intensity, given a particular IM. These best-fit nuisance functions are reported in this article and are readily transferable. Of the shaking types considered, we find that peak ground velocity tends to be the best predictor of a felt earthquake. We also find that felt thresholds tended to decrease with increasing earthquake magnitude, after M ∼3.9. We interpret this effect as related to the duration of the event, where events smaller than M 3.9 are perceived as “impulsive” to the human senses. Improved quantification of the nuisance from induced earthquake ground motions could be utilized in management of the public perception of their causal operations. Although aimed at anthropogenic earthquakes, thresholds we derive could be useful in other realms, such as establishing best practices and protocols for earthquake early warning.
Earthquake Spectra↗
Earthquake shaking hazard estimates and exposure changes in the conterminous United States
A large portion of the population of the United States lives in areas vulnerable to earthquake hazards. This investigation aims to quantify population and infrastructure exposure within the conterminous U.S. that are subjected to varying levels of earthquake ground motions by systematically analyzing the last four cycles of the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Models (published in 1996, 2002, 2008 and 2014). Using the 2013 LandScan data, we estimate the numbers of people who are exposed to potentially damaging ground motions (peak ground accelerations at or above 0.1g). At least 28 million (~9% of the total population) may experience 0.1g level of shaking at relatively frequent intervals (annual rate of 1 in 72 years or 50% probability of exceedance (PE) in 50 years), 57 million (~18% of the total population) may experience this level of shaking at moderately frequent intervals (annual rate of 1 in 475 years or 10% PE in 50 years), and 143 million (~46% of the total population) may experience such shaking at relatively infrequent intervals (annual rate of 1 in 2,475 years or 2% PE in 50 years). We also show that there is a significant number of critical infrastructure facilities located in high earthquake-hazard areas (Modified Mercalli Intensity ≥ VII with moderately frequent recurrence interval).
Earthquake Spectra↗
Evaluating the U.S. Geological Survey’s earthquake shaking hazard forecasts and their implications on seismic risk
We analyze the last six update cycles of the long-term probabilistic earthquake shaking hazard forecast from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and discuss the changes in hazard estimates from the 1996 to the latest 2023 update of the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the conterminous U.S. We summarize how our understanding of earthquake hazards has evolved over the last two decades and quantify the implications of changing hazards on people, buildings, and lifeline infrastructure. The net effect of changes in hazard estimates, with reference to the mean hazard from the 2023 NSHM update that has 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years, suggests an overall increase in total geographic areas facing very strong shaking levels (modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) of VII or more) when compared with any of the previous cycles. This increase puts ~159.2 million people (an increase from 111.8 million when using the 2018 NSHM), ~47.3 million residential buildings (an increase from 32.5 million with the 2018 NSHM), and ~$25.6 trillion of economic exposure of all buildings (an increase from $17.4 trillion when using the 2018 NSHM) at risk from earthquakes. We demonstrate that small changes in hazard estimates do not necessarily imply small changes in risk estimates. Therefore, changes in risk estimates can be used to highlight key USGS NSHM updates for improving risk mitigation efforts.
Earthquake Spectra Journal↗
Loma Prieta damage largely attributed to enhanced ground shaking
Earthquake hazards are commonly treated independently by Earth scientists, yet when a large earthquake occurs, property losses are seldom totaled separately for each earthquake hazard. Four years after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake rolled through northern California, a quantitative answer to the following question is not yet available: How much damage was caused by ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, tectonic ground rupture, or tsunami? Although the consequences of one earthquake do not necessarily follow for others, an answer to this question will help guide public policy and set research priorities. The cost effectiveness of earthquake hazard mitigation can be improved when the relative significance of earthquake hazards is known because it enables public agencies to concentrate mitigation efforts on the most portentous hazards.
Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
McVCO handbook 1999
McVCO is a microcontroller-based frequency generator that replaces the voltage controlled oscillator (VCO) used in the analog telemetry of seismic data. It accepts low-level signals from a seismometer and produces a frequency modulated subcarrier suitable for radio or telephone links to a data collection site. McVCO was designed for the purpose of improving the analog telemetry of signals within the Pacific Northwest Seismograph Network (PNSN). Its development received support from the University of Washington Geophysics Program, and both the Volcano Hazards and Earthquake Hazards programs of the United States Geological Survey (USGS). This handbook covers operation of McVCO, provides a technical reference for those who require a closer look at how McVCO works, and covers a collection of topics that need explicit treatment or that spring from deployment of the instrument.
Open-File Report↗
Manual del McVCO 1999
El McVCO es un generador de frecuencias basado en un microcontrolador que reemplaza al oscilador controlado por voltaje (VCO) utilizado en telemetría analógica de datos sísmicas. Acepta señales de baja potencia desde un sismómetro y produce una señal subportadora modulada en frecuencia adecuada para enlaces telefónicos o vía radio a un lugar remoto de recolección de datos. La frecuencia de la subportadora y la ganancia pueden ser seleccionadas mediante un interruptor. Tiene la opción de poder operar con dos canales para la observación con ganancia alta y baja. El McVCO fue diseñado con el propósito de mejorar la telemetría analógica de las señales dentro de la Pacific Northwest Seismograph Network (PNSN) (Red Sismográfica del Noroeste del Pacífico). Su desarrollo recibió el respaldo del Programa de Geofísica de la Universidad de Washington y del "Volcano Hazards and Earthquake Hazards programs of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) (Programa de Investigaciones de Riesgos Volcánicos y Programa de Investigaciones de Riesgos Sísmicos de los EEUU). Cientos de instrumentos se han construido e instalado. Además de utilizarlo el PNSN, el McVCO es usado por el Observatorio Vulcanológico de Alaska para monitorear los volcanes aleutianos y por el USGS Volcano Disaster Assistance Program (Programa de Ayuda en las Catástrofes Volcánicas del USGS) para responder a crisis volcánicas en otros países. Este manual cubre el funcionamiento del McVCO, es una referencia técnica para aquellos que necesitan saber con más detalle cómo funciona el McVCO, y cubre una serie de temas que requieren un trato explícito o que derivan del despliegue del instrumento.
Open-File Report↗
Induced seismicity reduces seismic hazard?
Earthquakes caused by human activities have been observed for decades. Often these are related to industrial activities pumping fluids into deep geologic formations, like with wastewater disposal. The simplest theory connecting these processes to earthquakes is straightforward: injection leads to fluid pressure changes that either reduce the strength of preexisting faults or generate new faults. In practice, the conditions that lead to induced earthquakes are not always clear in ways that can be generalized. Kao et al. (2018, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL079288) show how the distribution of induced earthquakes in Western Canada relate to natural rates of deformation in the crust. Using these new results, they discuss an intriguing paradox: induced seismicity can cause short-term increases in the seismic hazard that are followed by a period of reduced seismic hazard. Such hazard-reducing scenarios are plausible but hinge upon simplifying assumptions about how the crust stores and releases strain energy in the form of earthquakes.
Geophysical Research Letters↗
Evaluation of ground failure susceptibility, opportunity, and potential in the urban area of Anchorage, Alaska : final technical report
This study was conducted as a part of the U.s. Geological Survey's Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program. The goal of this program is a reduction of earthquake hazards through the incorporation of research findings on these hazards into land-use planning decisions. An important objective of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program is assessment of the potential for earthquake-induced ground failure in areas of high seismicity.
Alaska↗
Structure and Velocities of the Northeastern Santa Cruz Mountains and the Western Santa Clara Valley, California, from the SCSI-LR Seismic Survey
Introduction: The Santa Clara Valley is located in the southern San Francisco Bay area of California and generally includes the area south of the San Francisco Bay between the Santa Cruz Mountains on the southwest and the Diablo Ranges on the northeast. The area has a population of approximately 1.7 million including the city of San Jose, numerous smaller cities, and much of the high-technology manufacturing and research area commonly referred to as the Silicon Valley. Major active strands of the San Andreas Fault system bound the Santa Clara Valley, including the San Andreas fault to the southwest and the Hayward and Calaveras faults to the northeast; related faults likely underlie the alluvium of the valley. This report focuses on subsurface structures of the western Santa Clara Valley and the northeastern Santa Cruz Mountains and their potential effects on earthquake hazards and ground-water resource management in the area. Earthquake hazards and ground-water resources in the Santa Clara Valley are important considerations to California and the Nation because of the valley's preeminence as a major technical and industrial center, proximity to major earthquakes faults, and large population. To assess the earthquake hazards of the Santa Clara Valley better, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has undertaken a program to evaluate potential earthquake sources and potential effects of strong ground shaking within the valley. As part of that program, and to better assess water resources of the valley, the USGS and the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) began conducting collaborative studies to characterize the faults, stratigraphy, and structures beneath the alluvial cover of the Santa Clara Valley in the year 2000. Such geologic features are important to both agencies because they directly influence the availability and management of groundwater resources in the valley, and they affect the severity and distribution of strong shaking from local or regional earthquakes sources. As one component of these joint studies, the U. S. Geological Survey acquired more than 28 km of combined seismic reflection/refraction data from the Santa Cruz Mountains to the central Santa Clara Valley in December 2000. The seismic investigation included both high-resolution (~5-m shot and sensor spacing) and relatively lower-resolution (~50-m sensor) seismic surveys from the central Santa Cruz Mountains to the central part of the valley. Collectively, we refer to these seismic investigations as the 2000 western Santa Clara Seismic Investigations (SCSI).
Open-File Report↗
Evaluation of hazardous faults in the intermountain west region: Summary and recommendations of a workshop
The U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Earthquake Hazards Program (EHP) has the responsibility to provide nationwide information and knowledge about earthquakes and earthquake hazards as a step to mitigating earthquake-related losses. As part of this mission, USGS geologists and geophysicists continue to study faults and structures that have the potential to generate large and damaging earthquakes. In addition, the EHP, through its External Grants Program (hereinafter called Program), supports similar studies by scientists employed by state agencies, academic institutions, and independent employers. For the purposes of earthquake hazard investigations, the Nation is geographically subdivided into tectonic regions. One such region is the Intermountain West (IMW), which here is broadly defined as starting at the eastern margin of the Rocky Mountains in New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, and Montana and extending westward to the east side of the Sierra Nevada mountains in eastern California and into the Basin and Range-High Plateaus of eastern Oregon and Washington. The IMW contains thousands of faults that have moved in Cenozoic time, hundreds of which have evidence of Quaternary movement, and thus are considered to be potential seismic sources. Ideally, each Quaternary fault should be studied in detail to evaluate its rate of activity in order to model the hazard it poses. The study of a single fault requires a major commitment of time and resources, and given the large number of IMW faults that ideally should be studied, it is impractical to expect that all IMW Quaternary faults can be fully evaluated in detail. A more realistic approach is to prioritize a list of IMW structures that potentially pose a significant hazard and to focus future studies on those structures. Accordingly, in June 2008, a two-day workshop was convened at the USGS offices in Golden, Colorado, to seek information from representatives of selected State Geological Surveys in the IMW and with knowledgeable regional experts to identify the important structures for future studies. Such a priority list allows Program managers to guide the limited resources toward studies of features that are deemed to potentially pose the most serious hazards in the IMW. It also provides the scientific community with a list of structures to investigate because they are deemed to pose a substantial hazard to population centers or critical structures. The IMW encompasses all or large parts of 12 states, including Arizona, New Mexico, extreme west Texas, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, eastern California, eastern Oregon, eastern Washington, Idaho, western Wyoming, and western Montana. In Utah, and more recently in Nevada, geoscientists have taken steps to evaluate geologic data related to well-studied faults and to develop a statewide priority list of hazardous structures. In contrast to Utah and Nevada, the other IMW states contain substantially fewer Quaternary faults, so there have not been any previous efforts to develop similar priority lists. This workshop was organized to address this matter and create a more balanced perspective of priorities throughout the entire IMW region. Because working groups and workshops had already been convened to specifically deal with Quaternary fault priorities in Utah and Nevada, this workshop specifically emphasized structures outside of these two states.
Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nev↗
An interview with Karl Steinbrugge
For thirty years the name of Karl V. Steinbrugge has been synonymous with the Insurance Services Office in San Francisco. There he was in charge of their earthquake engineering and research activities for the United States, and his work included detailed engineering investigations of the probable earthquake damage to structures as well as studies of actual earthquake effects. trained as a civil and structural engineer, Steinbrugge was on faculty of the University of California at Berkeley for 28 years, retiring as a Professor of Structural Design. He has served on numerous national and international committees on earthquake hazards, and he is now a consulting structural engineer, specializing in earthquake hazard evaluation. At the present moment he is chairman of an independent panel of the Federal Emergency Management Agency that is reviewing the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program. Henry Spall recently asked Steinbrugge some questions about his long career.
Earthquake Information Bulletin (USGS)↗
Studies for seismic zonation of the San Francisco Bay region
The analyses presented in the preceding six papers show that the geologic setting of the San Francisco Bay region has a dominant influence on potential earthquake hazards. The strong correlation between geologic conditions and the amount of earthquake damage in 1906 emphasizes the importance of this influence and demonstrates the need for seismic zonation. Seismic zonation can provide the logical basis for preparation of special-purpose land-use maps that, with appropriate public policy, would be a significant step toward reducing the currently expected catastrophic effects of another great earthquake (Algermissen, 1972). Seismic zonation requires a set of integrated multidisciplinary predictions about the geologic effects of potential earthquakes. To illustrate a strategy for making such predictions, a demonstration profile has been chosen perpendicular to a segment of the San Andreas fault, along which a magnitude 6.5 earthquake has been postulated. This profile includes a wide variety of geologic conditions and provides a means for application of the analyses presented in the preceding six papers. Earthquake hazards to life and property originate from (1) surface faulting, (2) ground shaking, (3) flooding, (4) liquefaction, and (5) landsliding. The extent to which each of these geologic effects can be predicted for an earthquake of a given magnitude and location depends on the current state of the art. To illustrate techniques and data currently available, each effect is considered for the postulated earthquake. This paper does not provide final estimates for the total earthquake hazard along the demonstration profile. Such an objective would require analysis of individual manmade structures as well as consideration of earthquakes of other sizes and locations. Instead, this paper illustrates the extent to which the above effects can be predicted for an earthquake of this given size and location. Such an analysis demonstrates a methodology for seismic zonation based on available data.
Professional Paper↗
Proceedings of Conference XIII, evaluation of regional seismic hazards and risk
The participants in the conference concluded that a great deal of useful research has been performed in the national Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program by USGS and non-USGS scientists and engineers and that the state-of-knowledge concerning the evaluation of seismic hazards and risk has been advanced substantially. Many of the technical issues raised during the conference are less controversial now because of new information and insights gained during the first three years of the expanded research program conducted under the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act. Utilization of research results by many groups of users has also improved during this period and further improvement in utilization appears likely. Additional research is still required to resolve more completely the many complex technical issues summarized above and described in the papers contained in the proceedings. Improved certainty of research results on the evaluation of regional seismic hazards and risk is required before full utilization can be made by state and local governments who deal. with people frequently having a different perception of the hazard and its risk to them than that perceived by scientists or engineers. Each of the papers contained in the proceedings contain throughtful recommendations for improving the state-of-knowledge. Two papers, in particular, focussed on this particular theme. The first was presented by Lynn Sykes in the Geologic Keynote Address. He identified geographic areas throughout the world which may be considered as counterparts or analogues of seismic zones in the United States. He concluded that much can be learned about prediction, tectonic settings, earthquake hazards, and earthquake risk for sites in the United States by studying their tectonic analogues in other countries. The second paper was presented by John Blume in the Engineering Keynote Address. He suggested 20 specific research topics that, in his opinion, will significantly advance the state-of-the-art in earthquakeresistant design. The papers by Sykes and Blume are presented in the front of the proceedings.
Open-File Report↗
Program and plans of the U.S. Geological Survey for producing information needed in National Seismic hazards and risk assessment, fiscal years 1980-84
In accordance with the provisions of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (Public Law 95-124), the U.S. Geological Survey has developed comprehensive plans for producing information needed to assess seismic hazards and risk on a national scale in fiscal years 1980-84. These plans are based on a review of the needs of Federal Government agencies, State and local government agencies, engineers and scientists engaged in consulting and research, professional organizations and societies, model code groups, and others. The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act provided an unprecedented opportunity for participation in a national program by representatives of State and local governments, business and industry, the design professions, and the research community. The USGS and the NSF (National Science Foundation) have major roles in the national program. The ultimate goal of the program is to reduce losses from earthquakes. Implementation of USGS research in the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program requires the close coordination of responsibility between Federal, State and local governments. The projected research plan in national seismic hazards and risk for fiscal years 1980-84 will be accomplished by USGS and non-USGS scientists and engineers. The latter group will participate through grants and contracts. The research plan calls for (1) national maps based on existing methods, (2) improved definition of earthquake source zones nationwide, (3) development of improved methodology, (4) regional maps based on the improved methodology, and (5) post-earthquake investigations. Maps and reports designed to meet the needs, priorities, concerns, and recommendations of various user groups will be the products of this research and provide the technical basis for improved implementation.
Circular↗