How to determine an earthquake rate budget? A comparison of geodetic, geologic, and seismologic moment rates

Abstract

How much tectonic geodetic strain is accommodated as earthquakes? Can estimates of tectonic geodetic strain be used in probabilistic seismic hazard analyses? Understanding the balance of moment accumulation (i.e., geodetic moment) and accommodation (i.e., geologic and seismologic moment) is a necessary step toward leveraging corrected geodetic strain rates to quantify earthquake budgets. We investigate these questions using updated geodetic, geologic, and seismologic datasets compiled for the western United States (WUS) portion of the 2023 U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM23‐WUS) to provide new views of moment rates across the WUS. We compare moment rates using a floating footprint approach across the extent of the NSHM23‐WUS fault sections database. We make these comparisons using “moment rate deviation (MRD),” which is defined as a surplus or deficit of geodetic moment rate relative to the sum of geologic and seismologic moment rates. We find that, in general, higher strain rate areas of the WUS (i.e., plate boundary) have smaller values of MRD, meaning that geodetic moment rates approximate the earthquake record preserved by geologic and seismologic moment rates well. In contrast, the lower strain rate, eastern portions of our analysis domain (i.e., intraplate) have very high values of MRD, with geodetic moment rates exceeding measured geologic and seismologic moment rates. We find that geodetic moment rates appear to be representative of the earthquake budget in relatively well‐characterized, interplate regions, and geodetic estimates of off‐fault deformation could be considered in seismic hazard analyses where MRD is minimized.