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 649 records · Page 36Linked to original sources

2017 One‐year seismic‐hazard forecast for the central and eastern United States from induced and natural earthquakes

We produce a one‐year 2017 seismic‐hazard forecast for the central and eastern United States from induced and natural earthquakes that updates the 2016 one‐year forecast; this map is intended to provide information to the public and to facilitate the development of induced seismicity forecasting models, methods, and data. The 2017 hazard model applies the same methodology and input logic tree as the 2016 forecast, but with an updated earthquake catalog. We also evaluate the 2016 seismic‐hazard forecast to improve future assessments. The 2016 forecast indicated high seismic hazard (greater than 1% probability of potentially damaging ground shaking in one year) in five focus areas: Oklahoma–Kansas, the Raton basin (Colorado/New Mexico border), north Texas, north Arkansas, and the New Madrid Seismic Zone. During 2016, several damaging induced earthquakes occurred in Oklahoma within the highest hazard region of the 2016 forecast; all of the 21 moment magnitude ( M ) ≥4 and 3 M ≥5 earthquakes occurred within the highest hazard area in the 2016 forecast. Outside the Oklahoma–Kansas focus area, two earthquakes with M ≥4 occurred near Trinidad, Colorado (in the Raton basin focus area), but no earthquakes with M ≥2.7 were observed in the north Texas or north Arkansas focus areas. Several observations of damaging ground‐shaking levels were also recorded in the highest hazard region of Oklahoma. The 2017 forecasted seismic rates are lower in regions of induced activity due to lower rates of earthquakes in 2016 compared with 2015, which may be related to decreased wastewater injection caused by regulatory actions or by a decrease in unconventional oil and gas production. Nevertheless, the 2017 forecasted hazard is still significantly elevated in Oklahoma compared to the hazard calculated from seismicity before 2009.

Seismological Research Letters↗

Increased flood exposure in the Pacific Northwest following earthquake-driven subsidence and sea-level rise

Climate-driven sea-level rise is increasing the frequency of coastal flooding worldwide, exacerbated locally by factors like land subsidence from groundwater and resource extraction. However, a process rarely considered in future sea-level rise scenarios is sudden (over minutes) land subsidence associated with great (>M8) earthquakes, which can exceed 1 m. Along the Washington, Oregon, and northern California coasts, the next great Cascadia subduction zone earthquake could cause up to 2 m of sudden coastal subsidence, dramatically raising sea level, expanding floodplains, and increasing the flood risk to local communities. Here, we quantify the potential expansion of the 1% floodplain (i.e., the area with an annual flood risk of 1%) under low (~0.5 m), medium (~1 m), and high (~2 m) earthquake-driven subsidence scenarios at 24 Cascadia estuaries. If a great earthquake occurred today, floodplains could expand by 90 km 2 (low), 160 km 2 (medium), or 300 km 2 (high subsidence), more than doubling the flooding exposure of residents, structures, and roads under the high subsidence scenario. By 2100, when climate-driven sea-level rise will compound the hazard, a great earthquake could expand floodplains by 170 km 2 (low), 240 km 2 (medium), or 370 km 2 (high subsidence), more than tripling the flooding exposure of residents, structures, and roads under the high subsidence scenario compared to the 2023 floodplain. Our findings can support decision-makers and coastal communities along the Cascadia subduction zone as they prepare for compound hazards from the earthquake cycle and climate-driven sea-level rise and provide critical insights for tectonically active coastlines globally.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

A near-real-time model for estimating probability of road obstruction due to earthquake-triggered landslides

Coseismic landslides are a major source of transportation disruption in mountainous areas, but few approaches exist for rapidly estimating impacts to road networks. We develop a model that links the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) near-real-time earthquake-triggered landslide hazard model with Open Street Map (OSM) road network data to rapidly estimate segment-level obstruction risk following major earthquake activity worldwide. To train and validate the model, we process OSM data for 15 historical earthquakes and calculate the average segment-level landslide hazard from the USGS model for each event. We then fit a multivariate adaptive regression spline model for the probability of road obstruction as a function of road segment length and landslide hazard, using a training and validation dataset derived from the intersections of road networks with earthquake-triggered landslide inventories. The resulting probabilistic model is well calibrated across a range of earthquake events, with estimated obstruction probabilities matching the relative frequency of potential road obstructions. The model runs quickly and is capable of producing road segment-level obstruction estimates within minutes to hours of a major earthquake. However, in near-real-time application, the accuracy of the obstruction estimates will be dependent on the quality of the ShakeMap shaking estimates, which often improves with time as more information becomes available after the earthquake. By providing a rapid first-order translation of landslide hazard into potential infrastructure impacts, this model helps provide emergency responders with tangible information on initial areas of concern.

Earthquake Spectra↗

Earthquake scenario and probabilistic ground-shaking hazard maps for the Albuquerque-Belen-Santa Fe, New Mexico, corridor

New Mexico's population is concentrated along the corridor that extends from Belen in the south to Española in the north and includes Albuquerque and Santa Fe. The Rio Grande rift, which encompasses the corridor, is a major tectonically, volcanically, and seismically active continental rift in the western U.S. Although only one large earthquake (moment magnitude (M) ≥ 6) has possibly occurred in the New Mexico portion of the rift since 1849, paleoseismic data indicate that prehistoric surface-faulting earthquakes of M 6.5 and greater have occurred on aver- age every 400 yrs on many faults throughout the Rio Grande rift. We have developed a series of nine scenario and probabilistic hazard maps that portray the ground shaking that could occur in the Albuquerque-Belen-Santa Fe corridor from future earthquakes in New Mexico. These maps, at a scale of 1:500,000, display color-contoured ground-motion values in terms of the parameters of peak horizontal acceleration and horizontal spectral accelerations at 0.2 and 1.0 second (sec) periods. The maps depict surficial ground shaking and incorporate the site-response effects at locations underlain by unconsolidated sediments. The scenario maps are for a M 7.0 earthquake rupturing the Sandia-Rincon faults, which are adjacent to and dip west beneath Albuquerque. The probabilistic maps are for the two annual exceedance probabilities of building code relevance, 10% and 2% exceedance probabilities in 50 yrs (corresponding to return periods of 500 and 2,500 yrs, respectively). We included 57 Quaternary faults, all located within the Rio Grande rift, in the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. These faults were characterized in terms of their geometry, rupture behavior (including possible segmentation), maximum expected earthquake magnitude, recurrence model, probability of activity, and slip rate. Preferred maximum magnitude values for these faults ranged from M 6.1 to 7.4 and preferred slip rates from 0.01 to approximately 0.12 mm/yr. Regional source zones and Gaussian smoothing of the historical seismicity were also included in the probabilistic hazard analysis to account for the hazard from background earthquakes (M ≤ 6.5). A numerical ground-motion modeling approach and empirical attenuation relation- ships appropriate for extensional tectonic regimes were used to compute the scenario earthquake and probabilistic ground motions on rock. Amplification factors were then used to modify the rock motions and hence to incorporate site response into the hazard maps. These factors were based on three generalized geologic site-response categories (hard rock, soft rock, and firm/stiff soil) and were adopted from similar California-based categories because insufficient subsurface geologic and geotechnical data are available for the map area. The resulting hazard maps indicate that from both scenario and probabilistic perspectives, the ground-shaking hazard in the Albuquerque–Belen–Santa Fe corridor from future earthquakes could be severe, damaging, and potentially disastrous. In the event of a M 7.0 earthquake occurring on the Sandia–Rincon faults, ground shaking as characterized by peak ground acceleration could reach 0.7 g in much of the eastern half of the Albuquerque metropolitan area. (1 g = 980 cm/sec, the rate of gravitational acceleration.) These high ground motions will be attributable to the city’s location directly over the Sandia–Rincon faults and the amplifying effect of the unconsolidated sediments within the Albuquerque Basin. These levels of ground shaking will probably result in severe damage to traditional adobe construction and even to modern buildings. Long- period ground motions (> 1.0 sec), which are significant to long and tall structures (e.g., tall buildings, long bridges, and highway overpasses), will also be high (> 1.0 g). Injuries and loss of life will be likely. For the 500- and 2,500-yr return period maps, the highest peak accelerations are predicted to be at the damaging levels of 0.3 g and 0.6 g, respectively. All maps show dramatically the frequency-dependent amplification of unconsolidated sediments in the basins along the Rio Grande valley (e.g., Albuquerque Basin). The pattern of amplification and deamplification is clearly a function of the distribution of unconsolidated sediments. These maps are not intended to be a substitute for site-specific studies for engineering design nor to replace standard maps commonly referenced in building codes. Rather, we hope that these maps will be used as a guide by government agencies; the engineering, urban planning, emergency preparedness, and response communities; and the general public as part of an overall program to reduce earthquake risk and losses in New Mexico.

New Mexico↗

Characteristic earthquake magnitude frequency distributions on faults calculated from consensus data in California

An estimate of the expected earthquake rate at all possible magnitudes is needed for seismic hazard forecasts. Regional earthquake magnitude frequency distributions obey a negative exponential law (Gutenberg‐Richter), but it's unclear if individual faults do. We add three new methods to calculate long‐term California earthquake rupture rates to the existing Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3) efforts to assess method and parameter dependence on magnitude frequency results for individual faults. All solutions show strongly characteristic magnitude‐frequency distributions on the San Andreas and other faults, with higher rates of large earthquakes than would be expected from a Gutenberg‐Richter distribution. This is a necessary outcome that results from fitting high fault slip rates under the overall statewide earthquake rate budget. We find that input data choices can affect the nucleation magnitude‐frequency distribution shape for the San Andreas fault; solutions are closer to a Gutenberg‐Richter distribution if the maximum magnitude allowed for earthquakes that occur away from mapped faults (background events) is raised above the consensus threshold of M =7.6, if the moment rate for background events is reduced, or if the overall maximum magnitude is reduced from M =8.5. We also find that participation magnitude‐frequency distribution shapes can be strongly affected by slip‐rate discontinuities along faults that may be artifacts related to segment boundaries.

California↗

Earthquake scenarios for Quito, Ecuador; Cali, Colombia; and Santiago De Los Caballeros, Dominican Republic

Earthquake risk associated with Quito, Ecuador; Cali, Colombia; and Santiago de los Caballeros, Dominican Republic is examined by generating a set of hypothetical earthquake scenarios considering seismic sources, recent seismicity, and major historical earthquakes recorded in the vicinity. In this study, particular focus is given to the development of earthquake scenarios for use in emergency planning in each city as well as stimulating discussion with respect to addressing the gaps in current understanding of built stock inventory and their vulnerability when subjected to strong shaking. Exposure and vulnerability models from the Global Earthquake Model foundation, hazard and local site information available for the cities, and the U.S. Geological Survey near‐real‐time products are utilized to estimate potential consequences for postearthquake response planning. Results showed that the historic city centers remain the most susceptible to experiencing severe damage resulting in widespread casualties. Similarly, the scenarios highlight areas susceptible to shaking induced ground failure hazards, which may pose additional challenges when responding to such earthquakes. Moderate earthquakes originating from nearby seismic sources, for example, Quito fault system for Quito or the Septentrional fault zone in the case of Santiago de Los Caballeros, could potentially be of greater consequence in terms of direct economic impact and disruption to the city when compared to very large distant subduction interface earthquakes.

Cali, Santiago De Los Caballeros, Quito↗

Natural hazards and mineral commodity supply: Quantifying risk of earthquake disruption to South American copper supply

Mineral resources, and their mining and enrichment operations, are not equally distributed across Earth. The concentration of mineral supply in certain regions, owing to the geology or geography of the mineral resource, raises the level of risk related to supply disruption. Where mineral production coincides with areas prone to natural hazards, supply may be especially at risk. However, the level of risk that natural hazards pose to mineral supply has yet to be quantified on a global or regional scale. Using copper in South America as a case study, this paper offers methods for quantifying (i) the coincidence of mineral production and seismic hazards, and (ii) the Expected Annual Disruption (EAD) of the mineral supply from earthquakes. The first of these methods indicates that, of the 101 copper producing facilities in South America considered, 76 are located within an area of high seismic hazard, taken here as the area with>85% chance of exceeding Modified Mercalli Intensity VI earthquake shaking in 50 years. Collectively, the 76 facilities comprise 82%, 87%, and 91% of the 2015 South American mine production, smelter capacity, and refinery capacity, respectively. For each of the 101 facilities, the second method calculates the EAD using a full earthquake shaking hazard forecast at the location, the annualized copper production of the facility, and models of the vulnerability of that production to shaking. The EADs are summed by country, here within South America, as a demonstration of how supply risk could eventually be quantified globally. Consideration of two illustrative vulnerability models shows that future work is needed to determine percentages of disruption to mineral production for different levels of earthquake shaking. Ultimately, the methods presented herein could be applied to other mineral commodities and/or adapted for other natural hazards, and the resulting EADs could be summed. Results from these methods could be used to focus more detailed risk assessments where the risk is highest.

Resources Policy↗

An update of USGS bear-real-time earthquake shaking and impact products

We report on advancements in both hazard and consequence modeling that form the core of the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) strategy to improve rapid earthquake shaking and loss estimates. Whereas our primary goal is to improve our operational capabilities of the USGS National Earthquake Information Center, the science, software, and datasets behind these systems continue to advance uses and studies of earthquake shaking and impact by the seismological, engineering, financial, and risk modeling communities. Several important updates to our integrated shaking and impact products are outlined and we introduce new earthquake information products that have recently been brought online, including rapid ground failure estimates and more spatially refined loss estimates domestically (in the U.S). We continue to compile, develop, and refine key openly available models and datasets that contribute to calibrating these systems and report on the collection and storage of new inventories. We also describe some of the basic operational considerations in the current generation of these shaking and loss-estimation systems. A key aspect of the product integration and development is leveraging earthquake-hazard and loss-modeling science done internally (within the USGS) and by external researchers and collaborators. Lastly, we outline new opportunities for further research and development by emphasizing scientific, data, and application gaps and challenges that must be solved in order to improve our shaking and impact information tools.

Conference Paper↗

The radiated seismic energy and apparent stress of interplate and intraplate earthquakes at subduction zone environments; implications for seismic hazard estimation

The radiated seismic energies (ES) of 980 shallow subduction-zone earthquakes with magnitudes ? 5.8 are used to examine global patterns of energy release and apparent stress. In contrast to traditional methods which have relied upon empirical formulas, these energies are computed through direct spectral analysis of broadband seismic waveforms. Energy gives a physically different measure of earthquake size than moment. Moment, being derived from the low-frequency asymptote of the displacement spectra, is related to the final static displacement. Thus, moment is crucial to the long-term tectonic implication of an earthquake. In contrast, energy, being derived from the velocity power spectra, is more a measure of seismic potential for damage to anthropogenic structures. There is considerable scatter in the plot of ES-M0 for worldwide earthquakes. For any given M0, the ES can vary by as much as an order of magnitude about the mean regression line. The global variation between ES and M0, while large, is not random. When subsets of ES-M0 are plotted as a function of seismic region, tectonic setting and faulting type, the scatter in data is often substantially reduced. There are two profound implications for the estimation of seismic and tsunamic hazard. First, it is now feasible to characterize the apparent stress for particular regions. Second, a given M0 does not have a unique ES. This means that M0 alone is not sufficient to describe all aspects of an earthquake. In particular, we have found examples of interplate thrust-faulting earthquakes and intraslab normal-faulting earthquakes occurring in the same epicentral region with vastly different macroseismic effects. Despite the gross macroseismic disparities, the MW?s in these examples were identical. However, the Me?s (energy magnitudes) successfully distinguished the earthquakes that were more damaging.

Open-File Report↗

Seismotectonic Map of Afghanistan and Adjacent Areas

Introduction This map is part of an assessment of Afghanistan's geology, natural resources, and natural hazards. One of the natural hazards is from earthquake shaking. One of the tools required to address the shaking hazard is a probabilistic seismic-hazard map, which was made separately. The information on this seismotectonic map has been used in the design and computation of the hazard map. A seismotectonic map like this one shows geological, seismological, and other information that previously had been scattered among many sources. The compilation can show spatial relations that might not have been seen by comparing the original sources, and it can suggest hypotheses that might not have occurred to persons who studied those scattered sources. The main map shows faults and earthquakes of Afghanistan. Plate convergence drives the deformations that cause the earthquakes. Accordingly, smaller maps and text explain the modern plate-tectonic setting of Afghanistan and its evolution, and relate both to patterns of faults and earthquakes.

Open-File Report↗

Absence of remotely triggered large earthquakes beyond the mainshock region

Large earthquakes are known to trigger earthquakes elsewhere. Damaging large aftershocks occur close to the mainshock and microearthquakes are triggered by passing seismic waves at significant distances from the mainshock. It is unclear, however, whether bigger, more damaging earthquakes are routinely triggered at distances far from the mainshock, heightening the global seismic hazard after every large earthquake. Here we assemble a catalogue of all possible earthquakes greater than M 5 that might have been triggered by every M 7 or larger mainshock during the past 30 years. We compare the timing of earthquakes greater than M 5 with the temporal and spatial passage of surface waves generated by large earthquakes using a complete worldwide catalogue. Whereas small earthquakes are triggered immediately during the passage of surface waves at all spatial ranges, we find no significant temporal association between surface-wave arrivals and larger earthquakes. We observe a significant increase in the rate of seismic activity at distances confined to within two to three rupture lengths of the mainshock. Thus, we conclude that the regional hazard of larger earthquakes is increased after a mainshock, but the global hazard is not.

Nature Geoscience↗

An efficient, analytic solution using order statistics for probabilistic seismic‐hazard assessment without the Poisson assumption

Standard approaches to probabilistic seismic‐hazard assessment (PSHA) assume that earthquakes are random, independent events that follow a Poisson distribution of occurrences in a given time period ( Cornell, 1968 ). To overcome the limitations of the Poisson assumption, such as ignoring earthquake clustering, we introduce an analytic method for PSHA that uses order statistics to allow for arbitrary distributions of earthquake occurrence. Cornell (1968) used the Poisson assumption to achieve a computationally efficient method that enables users to explore the impact of parameters used in earthquake occurrence and ground‐motion models. We apply our order statistics method to the highly clustered seismicity associated with caldera collapses at Kīlauea and explore the general implications of non‐Poisson behavior for PSHA. We find that non‐Poisson behavior has the greatest impact for high probabilities of exceedance, low‐mean rates of occurrence, and multiple exceedances. Those conditions can be important for applications such as operating standards for buildings and infrastructure engineering, standards for temporary structures and during construction, the insurance industry, the design of earthquake early warning, and to assess hazards due to clustered processes such as aftershock sequences and earthquake swarms. The commonly used rate of exceedance hides the difference between the hazard due to a non‐Poisson distribution and a Poisson distribution with the same mean rate of earthquakes. Thus, including non‐Poisson behavior in PSHA means that we must plot and discuss PSHA results as the probability and not the rate of exceedance.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

First Results of the Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models Experiment

The ability to successfully predict the future behavior of a system is a strong indication that the system is well understood. Certainly many details of the earthquake system remain obscure, but several hypotheses related to earthquake occurrence and seismic hazard have been proffered, and predicting earthquake behavior is a worthy goal and demanded by society. Along these lines, one of the primary objectives of the Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models (RELM) working group was to formalize earthquake occurrence hypotheses in the form of prospective earthquake rate forecasts in California. RELM members, working in small research groups, developed more than a dozen 5-year forecasts; they also outlined a performance evaluation method and provided a conceptual description of a Testing Center in which to perform predictability experiments. Subsequently, researchers working within the Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability (CSEP) have begun implementing Testing Centers in different locations worldwide, and the RELM predictability experiment-a truly prospective earthquake prediction effort-is underway within the U. S. branch of CSEP. The experiment, designed to compare time-invariant 5-year earthquake rate forecasts, is now approximately halfway to its completion. In this paper, we describe the models under evaluation and present, for the first time, preliminary results of this unique experiment. While these results are preliminary-the forecasts were meant for an application of 5 years-we find interesting results: most of the models are consistent with the observation and one model forecasts the distribution of earthquakes best. We discuss the observed sample of target earthquakes in the context of historical seismicity within the testing region, highlight potential pitfalls of the current tests, and suggest plans for future revisions to experiments such as this one. ?? 2010 The Author(s).

Pure and Applied Geophysics↗

Tsunami hazards to U.S. coasts from giant earthquakes in Alaska

In the aftermath of Japan's devastating 11 March 2011M w 9.0 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami, scientists are considering whether and how a similar tsunami could be generated along the Alaskan-Aleutian subduction zone (AASZ). A tsunami triggered by an earthquake along the AASZ would cross the Pacific Ocean and cause extensive damage along highly populated U.S. coasts, with ports being particularly vulnerable. For example, a tsunami in 1946 generated by a M w 8.6 earthquake near Unimak Pass, Alaska (Figure 1a), caused significant damage along the U.S. West Coast, took 150 lives in Hawaii, and inundated shorelines of South Pacific islands and Antarctica [ Fryer et al. , 2004; Lopez and Okal , 2006]. The 1946 tsunami occurred before modern broadband seismometers were in place, and the mechanisms that created it remain poorly understood.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗

Implications for prediction and hazard assessment from the 2004 Parkfield earthquake

Obtaining high-quality measurements close to a large earthquake is not easy: one has to be in the right place at the right time with the right instruments. Such a convergence happened, for the first time, when the 28 September 2004 Parkfield, California, earthquake occurred on the San Andreas fault in the middle of a dense network of instruments designed to record it. The resulting data reveal aspects of the earthquake process never before seen. Here we show what these data, when combined with data from earlier Parkfield earthquakes, tell us about earthquake physics and earthquake prediction. The 2004 Parkfield earthquake, with its lack of obvious precursors, demonstrates that reliable short-term earthquake prediction still is not achievable. To reduce the societal impact of earthquakes now, we should focus on developing the next generation of models that can provide better predictions of the strength and location of damaging ground shaking.

California↗

The 1964 Great Alaska Earthquake and tsunamis: A modern perspective and enduring legacies

The magnitude 9.2 Great Alaska Earthquake that struck south-central Alaska at 5:36 p.m. on Friday, March 27, 1964, is the largest recorded earthquake in U.S. history and the second-largest earthquake recorded with modern instruments. The earthquake was felt throughout most of mainland Alaska, as far west as Dutch Harbor in the Aleutian Islands some 480 miles away, and at Seattle, Washington, more than 1,200 miles to the southeast of the fault rupture, where the Space Needle swayed perceptibly. The earthquake caused rivers, lakes, and other waterways to slosh as far away as the coasts of Texas and Louisiana. Water-level recorders in 47 states—the entire Nation except for Connecticut, Delaware, and Rhode Island— registered the earthquake. It was so large that it caused the entire Earth to ring like a bell: vibrations that were among the first of their kind ever recorded by modern instruments. The Great Alaska Earthquake spawned thousands of lesser aftershocks and hundreds of damaging landslides, submarine slumps, and other ground failures. Alaska’s largest city, Anchorage, located west of the fault rupture, sustained heavy property damage. Tsunamis produced by the earthquake resulted in deaths and damage as far away as Oregon and California. Altogether the earthquake and subsequent tsunamis caused 129 fatalities and an estimated $2.3 billion in property losses (in 2013 dollars). Most of the population of Alaska and its major transportation routes, ports, and infrastructure lie near the eastern segment of the Aleutian Trench that ruptured in the 1964 earthquake. Although the Great Alaska Earthquake was tragic because of the loss of life and property, it provided a wealth of data about subductionzone earthquakes and the hazards they pose. The leap in scientific understanding that followed the 1964 earthquake has led to major breakthroughs in earth science research worldwide over the past half century. This fact sheet commemorates Great Alaska Earthquake and examines the advances in knowledge and technology that have helped to improve earthquake preparation and response both in Alaska and around the world.

Alaska↗

Quakes; U. S. plans ways to cope

To minimize damage and loss of life when, as is believed inevitable, a major earthquake strikes the United States, plans have been prepared for the creation of new Federal agencies, widespread reinforcement of structures and extensive research on earthquake prediction, control, and hazard reduction.

Earthquake Information Bulletin (USGS)↗

Modeling the occurrence of M ∼ 5 caldera collapse-related earthquakes in Kīlauea volcano, Hawai'i

During the 2018 Kīlauea eruption and caldera collapse, M ∼ 5 caldera collapse earthquakes occurred almost daily from mid-May until the beginning of August. While caldera collapses happen infrequently, the collapse-related seismicity damaged nearby structures, and so these events should be included in a complete seismic hazard assessment. Here, we present an approach to forecast the seismic hazard of the collapse earthquakes. We model their occurrence by combining a Poisson distribution for the number of collapses with a negative binomial for the number of earthquakes in a collapse, based on observations at Kīlauea. This rate model is then combined with a ground motion model to assess the seismic hazard posed by caldera collapse events. The rate model is non-Poisson but a Poisson model is adequate for low exceedance probabilities (e.g., <10% in 50 years). This approach could be generalized to model the hazard from earthquakes triggered by other underlying processes.

Hawaii↗