Search USGS⌕ Search

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.

At least 307 records · Page 17Linked to original sources
USGS2012

Earthquake geodesy and hazard monitoring

Catastrophic events such as major earthquakes and volcanic eruptions result when the earth's crust fails in response to accumulated deformation. The accumulation of deformation results from ongoing processes such as aseismic deformation of subcrustal rock associated with relative plate motions, or the ascent of magma through a volcanic plumbing system. Geodetic measurements document the crustal deformation leading to these failures and the deformation resulting from them, providing unique insight into the physical processes involved. By virtue of the space and time domains of ground deformation detected with geodetic measurements, geodesy is a useful tool in monitoring active tectonic and volcanic regimes. For a wide range of natural events including earthquakes, aseismic fault motions, and volcanic events, geodetic measurements constrain physical models of the processes that cause such events. Because these geodetic studies probe the underlying processes leading to and culminating in catastrophic natural events, many such studies are directly applicable to earthquake and volcano hazard assessment.

California↗
USGS2006

Geologic map of the San Francisco Bay region

The rocks and fossils of the San Francisco Bay region reveal that the geology there is the product of millions of years at the active western margin of North America. The result of this history is a complex mosaic of geologic materials and structures that form the landscape. A geologic map is one of the basic tools to understand the geology, geologic hazards, and geologic history of a region. With heightened public awareness about earthquake hazards leading up to the 100th anniversary of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is releasing new maps of the San Francisco Bay Area designed to give residents and others a new look at the geologic history and hazards of the region. The “Geologic Map of the San Francisco Bay region” shows the distribution of geologic materials and structures, demonstrates how geologists study the age and origin of the rocks and deposits that we live on, and reveals the complicated geologic history that has led to the landscape that shapes the Bay Area.

California↗
USGS2015

Introduction to the focus section on the 2015 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake

It has long been recognized that Nepal faces high earthquake hazard, with the most recent large ( M w >7.5) events in 1833 and 1934. When the 25 April 2015 M w 7.8 Gorkha earthquake struck, it appeared initially to be a realization of worst fears. In spite of its large magnitude and proximity to the densely populated Kathmandu valley, however, the level of damage was lower than anticipated, with most vernacular structures within the valley experiencing little or no structural damage. Outside the valley, catastrophic damage did occur in some villages, associated with the high vulnerability of stone masonry construction and, in many cases, landsliding. The unexpected observations from this expected earthquake provide an urgent impetus to understand the event itself and to better characterize hazard from future large Himalayan earthquakes. Toward this end, articles in this special focus section present and describe available data sets and initial results that better illuminate and interpret the earthquake and its effects.

Gorkha↗
USGS2012

A comparison among observations and earthquake simulator results for the allcal2 California fault model

In order to understand earthquake hazards we would ideally have a statistical description of earthquakes for tens of thousands of years. Unfortunately the ∼100‐year instrumental, several 100‐year historical, and few 1000‐year paleoseismological records are woefully inadequate to provide a statistically significant record. Physics‐based earthquake simulators can generate arbitrarily long histories of earthquakes; thus they can provide a statistically meaningful history of simulated earthquakes. The question is, how realistic are these simulated histories? This purpose of this paper is to begin to answer that question. We compare the results between different simulators and with information that is known from the limited instrumental, historic, and paleoseismological data. As expected, the results from all the simulators show that the observational record is too short to properly represent the system behavior; therefore, although tests of the simulators against the limited observations are necessary, they are not a sufficient test of the simulators’ realism. The simulators appear to pass this necessary test. In addition, the physics‐based simulators show similar behavior even though there are large differences in the methodology. This suggests that they represent realistic behavior. Different assumptions concerning the constitutive properties of the faults do result in enhanced capabilities of some simulators. However, it appears that the similar behavior of the different simulators may result from the fault‐system geometry, slip rates, and assumed strength drops, along with the shared physics of stress transfer. This paper describes the results of running four earthquake simulators that are described elsewhere in this issue of Seismological Research Letters. The simulators ALLCAL (Ward, 2012), VIRTCAL (Sachs et al., 2012), RSQSim (Richards‐Dinger and Dieterich, 2012), and ViscoSim (Pollitz, 2012) were run on our most recent all‐California fault model, allcal2. With the exception of ViscoSim, which ran for 10,000 years, all the simulators ran for 30,000 years. Presentations containing content similar to this paper can be found at http://scec.usc.edu/research/eqsims/.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2014

Progress toward a safer future since the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake

The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake interrupted several decades of seismic tranquility in the San Francisco Bay Area. It caused damage throughout the region and was a wakeup call to prepare for potentially even more damaging future quakes. Since 1989, the work of the U.S. Geological Survey and many other organizations has improved the understanding of the seismic threat in the Bay Area, promoted awareness of earthquake hazards, and contributed to more effective strategies to reduce earthquake losses. These collective efforts will help reduce the impact of future large earthquakes in the Bay Area.

California↗
USGS2001

Principal facts for gravity data along the Hayward fault and vicinity, San Francisco Bay area, northern California

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) established over 940 gravity stations along the Hayward fault and vicinity. The Hayward fault, regarded as one of the most hazardous faults in northern California (Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 1999), extends for about 90 km from Fremont in the southeast to San Pablo Bay in the northwest. The Hayward fault is predominantly a right-lateral strike-slip fault that forms the western boundary of the East Bay Hills. These data and associated physical property measurement were collected as part of on-going studies to help determine the earthquake hazard potential of major faults within the San Francisco Bay region. Gravity data were collected between latitude 37°30' and 38°15' N and longitude 121°45' and 122°30' W. Gravity stations were located on the following 7.5 minute quadrangles: Newark, Niles, San Leandro, Hayward, Dublin, Oakland West, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo, Richmond, Briones Valley, Walnut Creek, and Clayton. All data were ultimately tied to primary gravity base station Menlo Park A, located on the campus of the U.S. Geological Survey in Menlo Park, Calif. (latitude 37°27.34' N, longitude 122°10.18' W, observed gravity value 979944.27 mGal).

California↗
USGS2025

Earthquake probabilities and hazards in the U.S. Pacific Northwest

Earthquakes and their cascading consequences pose a significant threat to the people, environment, infrastructure, and economy of the U.S. Pacific Northwest. The Pacific Northwest is susceptible to three types of earthquakes: deep (intraslab) earthquakes, subduction zone (megathrust) earthquakes, and shallow crustal earthquakes. For each of these earthquake types, earth scientists can use a variety of methods to estimate the probability of occurrence for future events, which constrains seismic hazard and informs building codes. The timing of past earthquakes indicates that there is an 85-percent chance of a magnitude 6.5 or greater deep earthquake in the Puget Sound region; a 10-15-percent chance of an approximately magnitude 9 earthquake on the Cascadia Subduction Zone; and a 17-percent chance of a magnitude 6.5 or greater crustal fault earthquake in the Puget Sound region in the next 50 years. Individuals and communities can take simple steps to prepare for and reduce the impact of future earthquakes.

California, Oregon, Washington↗
USGS1982

Volcanic hazard alert issued for the Long Valley-Mono Lake area of California

The ski resort of Mammoth Lakes, nestled against the east front of the Sierra Nevada just east of Yosemite National Park, knows about natural hazards. It is still being shaken by an unusual sequence of earthquakes that started in 1978 and included four earthquakes of magnitude 6 within 48 hours of each other in May 1980. An earthquake hazard watch is still in effect.

California↗
USGS1978

Hypothesis: Many earthquakes in the central and southeastern United States are causally related to mafic intrusive bodies

Assessment of earthquake hazards in the United States is based largely upon knowledge acquired in the seismically active parts of the western United States. Earthquakes in the central and southeastern United States are seismologically and geologically very anomalous, however, compared with those in the western United States. For example, shallow earthquakes of magnitude 7-f in the western United States in general have tectonic surface faulting associated with them. No tectonic surface faulting, however, has been found to be associated with the New Madrid, Mo., earthquakes of 1811 and 1812, several of which had estimated magnitudes of 7-f. The lack of surface faulting is, in part, responsible for the fact that the New Madrid earthquakes have not been related with certainty to any particular geologic structural element, which makes assessment of the seismic hazards associated with possible similar future earthquakes very difficult. Geologic and seismologic data from the central and southeastern United States, however, suggest a spatial correlation between mafic intrusive rocks and seismic activity. An additional supportive correlation is that the trend of many dikes coincides with the trend of nodal planes in many fault-plane solutions. These correlations differ greatly from the direct correlation of earthquakes with faults in the western United States. Consideration of different concepts of earthquake sources in the central and southeastern. United States seems necessary- The preferred concept is that local high-stress concentrations, which may result in earthquakes, occur at or close to the contact of mafic intrusives and their felsic host rocks. Ancient rift zones may have been the primary control of the location of the mafic intrusives. Implications of a causal relation between mafic intrusives and seismicity are that more useful seismo-tectonic maps may be possible and that the source dimensions of the earthquakes would be small. Because of low attenuation, however, effects of earthquakes in the central and southeastern United States, even if relatively small because of smaller source dimensions, must be considered hazardous.

Journal of Research of the U.S. Geological Survey↗
USGS2010

Probabilistic seismic hazard estimates incorporating site effects - An example from Indiana, U.S.A

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has published probabilistic earthquake hazard maps for the United States based on current knowledge of past earthquake activity and geological constraints on earthquake potential. These maps for the central and eastern United States assume standard site conditions with Swave velocities of 760 m/s in the top 30 m. For urban and infrastructure planning and long-term budgeting, the public is interested in similar probabilistic seismic hazard maps that take into account near-surface geological materials. We have implemented a probabilistic method for incorporating site effects into the USGS seismic hazard analysis that takes into account the first-order effects of the surface geologic conditions. The thicknesses of sediments, which play a large role in amplification, were derived from a P-wave refraction database with over 13, 000 profiles, and a preliminary geology-based velocity model was constructed from available information on S-wave velocities. An interesting feature of the preliminary hazard maps incorporating site effects is the approximate factor of two increases in the 1-Hz spectral acceleration with 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years for parts of the greater Indianapolis metropolitan region and surrounding parts of central Indiana. This effect is primarily due to the relatively thick sequence of sediments infilling ancient bedrock topography that has been deposited since the Pleistocene Epoch. As expected, the Late Pleistocene and Holocene depositional systems of the Wabash and Ohio Rivers produce additional amplification in the southwestern part of Indiana. Ground motions decrease, as would be expected, toward the bedrock units in south-central Indiana, where motions are significantly lower than the values on the USGS maps.

Environmental & Engineering Geoscience↗
USGS2019

Injection-induced earthquakes

Earthquakes in unusual locations have become an important topic of discussion in both North America and Europe, owing to the concern that industrial activity could cause damaging earthquakes. It has long been understood that earthquakes can be induced by impoundment of reservoirs, surface and underground mining, withdrawal of fluids and gas from the subsurface, and injection of fluids into underground formations. Injection-induced earthquakes have, in particular, become a focus of discussion as the application of hydraulic fracturing to tight shale formations is enabling the production of oil and gas from previously unproductive formations. Earthquakes can be induced as part of the process to stimulate the production from tight shale formations, or by disposal of wastewater associated with stimulation and production. Here, I review recent seismic activity that may be associated with industrial activity, with a focus on the disposal of wastewater by injection in deep wells; assess the scientific understanding of induced earthquakes; and discuss the key scientific challenges to be met for assessing this hazard.

Science↗
USGS2017

Development of the next generation of seismic design value maps for the 2020 NEHRP Provisions

During the period January 2015 through August 2018, a joint committee of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) representatives and National Institute of Building Sciences Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) volunteers and staff formed a committee to conduct Project 17. The purpose of Project 17 was to formulate recommendations for the rules by which next-generation seismic design value maps, derived from USGS national seismic hazard models, will be developed for adoption by the 2020 National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations of New Buildings and Other Structures (NEHRP Provisions), ASCE 7-22 and the 2024 International Building Code. Two similar projects, Project 97 and Project 07, had been conducted in the past. Each of these projects established, for a period of approximately ten years, the rules by which design ground motion values referenced by the building codes would be developed both by USGS and by private consultants engaged in site-specific studies. Project 17 was originally commissioned in response to issues identified in adopting the 2014 edition of the USGS national seismic hazard model and the design procedures that reference them for use, including the NEHRP Provisions, building codes and referenced standards. Specific issues included: the engineering profession’s discontent with the fluctuating design values portrayed by successive map editions; discovery that the standard spectral shape referenced by the design provisions did not adequately represent ground motion amplitude and spectral character on some sites; and a change in seismologic characterization of the possible size of earthquakes originating on various faults and source zones. Project 17 was funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and supported by the USGS with some collaborating experts. An initial planning committee met throughout calendar year 2015 to identify key issues to be considered and to develop a work plan for addressing these as part of the 2020 NEHRP Provisions update cycle. The planning committee recommended an effort of approximately 30-months duration during which the USGS would develop draft design maps based on the rules proposed, to allow evaluation and refinement of the recommendations. A Project 17 Committee (P17C) was empaneled and four task subcommittees were formed, each charged with evaluating one of the key issues identified in the planning effort: Stabilizing mapped values; Definition of Acceptable Risk; Development of multi-period spectral parameter data; and, Definition of procedures for computing deterministic caps, should it be necessary to continue use of such caps in development of the maps. A fifth task subcommittee was formed in 2017 to look at ways to stabilize the seismic design category as an extended effort to stabilize mapped values. The P17C met three times per year throughout 2016, 2017 and 2018 to resolve these issues and develop recommendations for an updated technical basis and procedures to be followed in preparing next-generation seismic design value maps for inclusion in the NEHRP Provisions. The P17C documented these in the form of draft proposals for revision of the NEHRP Provisions. In August 2018, the P17C passed these recommendations to the Provisions Update Committee (PUC) for completion, development of consensus and adoption as appropriate.

Report↗
USGS2022

Evolution of design ground motions in California: NEHRP 2009 to 2020

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) is used in construction codes, such as the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) Provisions, to develop ground motions for structural and geotechnical design. When the NSHM is updated (e.g. changes to its earthquake rupture forecast or ground motion models), or the manner in which it is implemented in construction codes changes, design ground motion values can increase or decrease at a given location. This study presents an analysis of 21 sites in California to characterize how design ground motion values (SS, S1, SMS, SM1) have changed from the 2009 to 2015 to 2020 NEHRP Provisions. Four sites are presented in greater detail: two in Southern California and two in Northern California. The results show that significant changes in design ground motion values between NEHRP releases are explained by major changes in the NSHM science (e.g., inclusion of basin effects) and its use (e.g., for a broader range of site classes), but in ways that are difficult to ascertain beforehand. It is therefore likely that design ground motion values may continue to evolve between NSHM and construction code updates as the earthquake science and engineering field's understanding continues to advance.

California↗
USGS1990

The Pacific Northwest; linkage between earthquake and volcano hazards

AS the title of the magazine Earthquake and Volcanoes suggests, these two geological phenomena are often closely associated. Earthquakes frequently precede volcanic eruptions, and volcanoes are often sources of small to intermediate size earthquakes resulting from the movement of magma within the volcano's plumbing system. In the Pacific Northwest, the association between earthquakes and volcanoes is much more fundamental- they both arise from the same large-scale interaction between two plates of the Earth's crust. The oceanic Juan de Fuca plate is being shoved beneath the edge of the continental North American plate in the process known as subduction. The result is the Cascade chain of volcanoes, the potential for very large earthquakes along the coastal margin, and the generation of stresses that produce other regional earthquakes. The Pacific Northwest (Oregon, Washington, and northern California) is experiencing rapid industrial and population growth. The same conditions that make the region attractive- close proximity to both mountains and oceans, volcanoes and spectacular inland waters- also present significant geologic hazards that are easily overlooked in the normal timetable of human activities. The catastrophic eruption of Mount St. Helens 10 years ago serves as a dramatic reminder of the forces of nature that can be unleashed through volcanism. other volcanoes such as mount Rainier, a majestic symbol of Washington, or Mount hood in Oregon, lie closer to population centers and could present far greater hazards should they become active. Earthquakes may affect even larger regions, prodcuging more cumulative damage.

Pacific Northwest↗
USGS2006

A new probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for greater Tokyo

Tokyo and its outlying cities are home to one-quarter of Japan's 127 million people. Highly destructive earthquakes struck the capital in 1703, 1855 and 1923, the last of which took 105 000 lives. Fuelled by greater Tokyo's rich seismological record, but challenged by its magnificent complexity, our joint Japanese-US group carried out a new study of the capital's earthquake hazards. We used the prehistoric record of great earthquakes preserved by uplifted marine terraces and tsunami deposits (17 M???8 shocks in the past 7000 years), a newly digitized dataset of historical shaking (10 000 observations in the past 400 years), the dense modern seismic network (300 000 earthquakes in the past 30 years), and Japan's GeoNet array (150 GPS vectors in the past 10 years) to reinterpret the tectonic structure, identify active faults and their slip rates and estimate their earthquake frequency. We propose that a dislodged fragment of the Pacific plate is jammed between the Pacific, Philippine Sea and Eurasian plates beneath the Kanto plain on which Tokyo sits. We suggest that the Kanto fragment controls much of Tokyo's seismic behaviour for large earthquakes, including the damaging 1855 M???7.3 Ansei-Edo shock. On the basis of the frequency of earthquakes beneath greater Tokyo, events with magnitude and location similar to the M??? 7.3 Ansei-Edo event have a ca 20% likelihood in an average 30 year period. In contrast, our renewal (time-dependent) probability for the great M??? 7.9 plate boundary shocks such as struck in 1923 and 1703 is 0.5% for the next 30 years, with a time-averaged 30 year probability of ca 10%. The resulting net likelihood for severe shaking (ca 0.9g peak ground acceleration (PGA)) in Tokyo, Kawasaki and Yokohama for the next 30 years is ca 30%. The long historical record in Kanto also affords a rare opportunity to calculate the probability of shaking in an alternative manner exclusively from intensity observations. This approach permits robust estimates for the spatial distribution of expected shaking, even for sites with few observations. The resulting probability of severe shaking is ca 35% in Tokyo, Kawasaki and Yokohama and ca 10% in Chiba for an average 30 year period, in good agreement with our independent estimate, and thus bolstering our view that Tokyo's hazard looms large. Given $1 trillion estimates for the cost of an M???7.3 shock beneath Tokyo, our probability implies a $13 billion annual probable loss. ?? 2006 The Royal Society.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A:↗
USGS2015

The 2014 United States National Seismic Hazard Model

New seismic hazard maps have been developed for the conterminous United States using the latest data, models, and methods available for assessing earthquake hazard. The hazard models incorporate new information on earthquake rupture behavior observed in recent earthquakes; fault studies that use both geologic and geodetic strain rate data; earthquake catalogs through 2012 that include new assessments of locations and magnitudes; earthquake adaptive smoothing models that more fully account for the spatial clustering of earthquakes; and 22 ground motion models, some of which consider more than double the shaking data applied previously. Alternative input models account for larger earthquakes, more complicated ruptures, and more varied ground shaking estimates than assumed in earlier models. The ground motions, for levels applied in building codes, differ from the previous version by less than ±10% over 60% of the country, but can differ by ±50% in localized areas. The models are incorporated in insurance rates, risk assessments, and as input into the U.S. building code provisions for earthquake ground shaking.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2020

Now trending … Earthquake information

The U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Hazards Program has overall successfully fulfilled its mission of providing timely earthquake information via web applications and other methods. Imagine a single month of earthquake data delivery, serving 3.6 billion total data requests, including 29 million pageviews by 7.1 million users, 606 million automated data feeds, and 45 million catalog downloads. Yet, some challenges and lapses in delivery have happened at critical times, including during the Ridgecrest earthquakes in 2019. We delve into the evolving demand for real‐time information as well as the technologies put in place to support the ever‐growing number of users in an increasingly mobile world.

Seismological Research Letters↗