USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Journal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth”

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.

1,663 records · Page 41Linked to original sources
USGS2025

Phase 1 technical implementation plan for the expansion of the ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system to Alaska

Executive Summary The conference report accompanying the fiscal year (FY) 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 117–103) for the U.S. Department of the Interior and related agencies directed the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to “work with the State of Alaska to develop an implementation plan to be completed within two years in order to put ShakeAlert/Earthquake Early Warning in Alaska” (p. 29). Congress included $1 million in the FY 2022 appropriation to conduct this effort. The USGS Earthquake Hazards Program, along with partner organizations, has developed the ShakeAlert earthquake early warning (EEW) system for the West Coast, which currently operates in California, Oregon, and Washington. The purpose of the system and its alert delivery partners is to reduce the impact of earthquakes and save lives and property by delivering ShakeAlert-powered alerts that are transmitted to the public via mass notification technologies, and by providing more detailed data streams to institutional users and commercial service providers to trigger automated, user-specific, protective actions. ShakeAlert was designed in such a way that it could be expanded to other U.S. regions with high earthquake risk, after the build-out of seismic and geodetic networks to support ShakeAlert in a specified region is completed and the necessary funding is secured for long-term operation and maintenance. When an earthquake occurs, seismic waves radiate from the rupturing fault like waves on a pond. It is these waves that people feel as earthquake shaking and that can cause damage to structures. Using networks of ground-motion sensors and sophisticated computer algorithms, ShakeAlert can detect an earthquake seconds after it begins, calculate its location and magnitude, and estimate the resulting intensity of shaking. Early warnings of impending shaking are then sent to people and systems that may experience damaging shaking, allowing them to take appropriate protective actions. Depending on the user’s distance from the earthquake, alerts may be delivered before, during, or after the arrival of strong shaking. There will almost always be a region near the earthquake epicenter where alerts arrive after damaging shaking has begun. The ShakeAlert system updates its ground-motion estimates as an earthquake grows larger. In response to the FY 2022 congressional direction, the USGS worked with the State of Alaska to devise this implementation plan for ShakeAlert expansion to Alaska. The USGS engaged with the Alaska Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (DHS&EM) and the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (DGGS). A cooperative agreement was awarded to the Alaska Earthquake Center (AEC) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) for their contributions to the plan and their work coordinating with other networks in Alaska. The USGS engaged with the Alaska Seismic Hazards Safety Commission (ASHSC) throughout the process. The USGS also held a series of Alaska stakeholder engagements. The process of developing the implementation plan was facilitated by contracted staff from Corner Alliance, which is a government consulting firm. This implementation plan describes the details and estimates the costs for a Phase 1 expansion of the ShakeAlert system to Alaska. A geographically limited Phase 1 goal was chosen that covers the highest risk and most populated areas of Alaska. The areas proposed encompass the State’s main population centers and 90 percent of the State’s population. This Phase 1 design is considered very challenging and ambitious from the viewpoint of network operators. The lessons learned if this plan is implemented could be used to consider subsequent phases to expand EEW beyond Phase 1 in Alaska in the future. ShakeAlert is built on the foundation of the sensor networks and data processing infrastructure of the USGS-led Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS). This implementation plan calls for a total of 450 high-quality, real-time EEW-capable ANSS seismic stations in Alaska: 270 new stations, 160 upgraded stations, and 20 existing stations. These seismic station numbers are based on a station spacing of 10 kilometers (km) in urban areas, 20 km in seismic source areas that endanger population centers, and 40 km in other areas. The associated costs also include support for some EEW-capable global navigation satellite system (GNSS) stations, with a focus on improving warnings for large subduction zone earthquakes. For effective EEW, ShakeAlert requires low-latency, high-availability, robust telemetry links to deliver continuous, real-time data from field stations to the data centers. The Alaska data processing hardware infrastructure would follow the general design for fail-safe operation that is used for the ShakeAlert system on the West Coast. The ShakeAlert architecture uses two independent layers: the production layer for earthquake processing and the alert layer to make alerting decisions and serve alerts to users. This implementation plan includes two geographically separated data centers in Alaska, each with two fully independent production and alert layers using the same system design developed for the West Coast. As of March 2024, the ShakeAlert system is at version 3.0.1, with more advanced versions in the development and testing pipeline. ShakeAlert originally used two algorithms to determine the location and magnitude of earthquakes using seismic data. A third algorithm that can calculate very large magnitudes of very large earthquakes with geodetic data was added in March 2024. ShakeAlert publishes several data and alert products to meet the needs of different users. All messages include the location of the earthquake, either as a point or a line, and its magnitude. Ground-shaking estimates are published in two forms, as ground-motion contours and a map grid. Providing adequate warning time for strong shaking (the “target threshold”) requires sending alerts at a threshold lower than that strong shaking level (the “alert threshold”). The thresholds for public alerting in Alaska would be a joint USGS and State decision. To have the greatest benefit, ShakeAlert-powered alerts would be delivered to institutional users and individuals by all practical pathways. The USGS alert layer can support thousands of institutional users and alert redistributors, but the USGS does not have the mission nor the infrastructure and expertise to perform mass notifications to the public or implement automatic actions for end users of the alerts. To meet this need, ShakeAlert recruits private sector “technology enablers” that have the necessary expertise to develop end-user implementations using EEW alerts with the goal of stimulating an EEW industry. Earthquake early warning alerts are useless if people do not know how to respond to them. Although the alert messages include instructions about what to do (drop, cover, and hold on), alerts are more effective if people have been trained in advance. Messages about ShakeAlert’s capabilities, limitations, and benefits could be integrated with existing earthquake education programs, including State-run programs. Therefore, ShakeAlert would coordinate with both public and private partners and stakeholders through various partnerships and agreements to accomplish consistent and ongoing public earthquake hazard education. The estimated capital cost of completing the computing infrastructure and sensor networks for the Phase 1 ShakeAlert expansion to Alaska is approximately $66 million in 2024 dollars. The annual operation and maintenance cost of the completed system is estimated to be $12 million per year in 2024 dollars when fully built out.

Alaska↗
USGS2024

Assessing spatial variability of nutrients, phytoplankton, and related water-quality constituents in the California Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta at the landscape scale—2018 high resolution mapping surveys

Executive Summary This study examined the abundance and distribution of nutrients and phytoplankton in the tidal aquatic environments of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta) and Suisun Bay, comprising three spatial surveys conducted in May, July, and October of 2018 that used continuous underway high frequency sampling and measurements onboard a high-speed boat to characterize spatial variation across the extent of the Delta. The method used involves simultaneously collecting information about the concentration and spatial distribution of all major nutrient forms with analogous information about the major classes of phytoplankton and associated water-quality conditions. The results showed substantial variation across space and time, providing an unprecedented snapshot of the dynamic environmental processes that shape the ways nutrients interact with and affect aquatic habitats in the Delta. The purposes of this study were to improve our understanding of how hydrodynamics, landscape features, and aquatic primary productivity interact to drive nutrient cycling and transport in the Delta and to provide insights into the underlying processes most directly responsible for the conditions at the time of this study, and thus into the range of conditions that may be expected following the wide array of prospective future changes to the Delta. One major anticipated change at the time of this study was the planned upgrade to the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, but the study also informs our understanding of potential effects from other changes to the Delta, such as those caused by other nutrient-management actions, flow actions, large-scale wetland restoration, drought, flood, levee failure, and changes to water management. Nutrient loading is the primary driver of nutrient concentrations in the Delta, but several other major drivers interact to shape their distribution and effects: geomorphology, hydrodynamics, landscape features, and aquatic productivity. Hydrodynamics affect timescales of transport and dilution of nutrient loads in the Delta. During transit through the system, channel geometry, tidal mixing, and water exports affect hydrodynamics in diverse ways that influence water-residence and transport times, thereby markedly affecting the range of times during which natural internal cycling can alter nutrient concentrations and forms. Channel geometry and location shape tidal energy and river currents into these observed dynamics. Interactions with Delta aquatic landscapes such as herbaceous tidal marsh, submerged aquatic vegetation, and large expanses of intertidal or subtidal sediments (all highly productive landscapes) exert demand on available nutrient supplies but can also simultaneously transform and generate nutrients. Finally, while phytoplankton require nutrients to sustain production and thus are a potential nutrient sink, the amount and form of nutrients also can influence the occurrence of harmful algal blooms (HABs) that adversely affect aquatic organisms as well as affect the occurrence of beneficial algal blooms that result in production of algae that are favorable for imperiled Delta pelagic aquatic food webs. The surveys revealed a complex mosaic of spatial variation, with nutrient concentrations varying from near zero to well above concentrations considered eutrophic; nutrient concentrations were more often related to the extent of hydrologic transport and mixing than to specific geographic locations or to specific landscape features. Similarly, the surveys identified phytoplankton abundance ranging from near detection to the level of large phytoplankton blooms, with large variation in phytoplankton community composition. Although the study occurred during a period of low bloom activity, phytoplankton productivity appeared to be the strongest potential sink for inorganic nutrients in the Delta, indicating that it is a larger control on nutrient concentrations and distribution than previously understood. Cycling and transformation within the water column only appeared to substantially lower total nutrient concentrations at the longest estimated transport timescales. Contrary to expectations, we did not observe substantial nutrient depletion near landscape-scale features such as open-water habitats, submerged aquatic vegetation beds, extensive wetlands, or exposed sediments, indicating that these habitat types did not act as major sinks for nutrients in the Delta during these surveys. These results indicated that nutrient reduction efforts may have the greatest effect on pelagic phytoplankton productivity in the more productive reaches of the Delta and estuary, but these effects are unlikely to be magnified by changes to nutrient loss within the Delta over conceivable changes in flow conditions, Delta water management actions, or large-scale wetland restoration activities. Nevertheless, local processes were shown to cause substantial loss, and thus integrating of nutrient effects with other indicators of aquatic habitat conditions will help inform planning future actions at specific sites. Finally, we note that the primary contribution of this study was intended to be the survey data themselves. Aside from the results highlighted in this report, the surveys are a benchmark against which future environmental change may be evaluated, including changes to nutrient management or water exports, drought, large-scale wetland restoration, and climate change. Further, although we highlight some of the main findings from the surveys in this report, the necessarily limited scope precludes examination of many topics for which these surveys may be highly informative. To facilitate the utility of these data to stakeholders, managers, and researchers, we have released the data online (Bergamaschi and others, 2020) and created an online data exploration portal ( https:​//ca.water​.usgs.gov/​bay-​delta/​2018-​delta-​wide-​mapping-​surveys.html ) where users may query the surveys in a variety of ways to test hypotheses, examine relationships, assess spatial trends, and download data. The data exploration portal is intended to be an immersive experience that allows users to gain greater understanding of the complex interactions that shape Delta aquatic environments. This report is intended as a companion to the portal, allowing the reader to challenge and further explore the highlighted findings. This study was a collaboration between the U.S. Geological Survey and the Delta Regional Monitoring Program, with additional funding provided from U.S. Geological Survey Cooperative Matching Funds Program.

California↗
USGS2026

Capitalization of positional (Lower/Middle/Upper) and temporal (Early/Middle/Late) adjectives in the names of formal chronostratigraphic and geochronologic units of the Phanerozoic

Many authors are understandably confused about the capitalization of the words “lower,” “middle,” “upper,” “early,” and “late.” Where these words are used simply as descriptive adjectives, they should be in lowercase; where they form the first word of a formal chronostratigraphic or geochronologic unit name, they should be in uppercase.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2026

Methodology for construction of a three-layer geologic model of the conterminous United States using land surface, top of bedrock, and top of basement

This report describes the methodology used for the construction of a digital three-layer geologic model of the conterminous United States by mapping the altitude of three surfaces: land surface, the top of bedrock, and the top of basement. These surfaces are mapped through the compilation and synthesis of published stratigraphic horizons from numerous topical studies. The mapped surfaces create a three-layer geologic model with three geomaterial-based subdivisions: unconsolidated to weakly consolidated sediment; layered consolidated rock strata that constitute bedrock; and crystalline rocks that are described as “basement,” consisting of either igneous, metamorphic, or highly deformed rocks. The data compilation and synthesis are highly dependent on the definition of the informal terms “bedrock” and “basement,” which may describe different ages or types of rock in different parts of the conterminous United States. This report presents the conceptualization of the three mapped layers, describes the datasets used, and summarizes the decisions made while compiling the three-layer model from the various sources. This digital dataset was created as part of efforts by the U.S. Geological Survey to develop subsurface geologic data in geospatial form as part of a broad directive to develop two-dimensional and three-dimensional geologic information at detailed, national, and continental scales. This digital dataset partly fulfills the goal of the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program to construct a national-scale three-dimensional geologic model.

conterminous United States↗
USGS1998

Satellite imagery of the north-central Gulf of Mexico, June 1993-May 1997

This CD contains imagery collected by the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) on the NOAA polar-orbiting weather satellites. The AVHRR provides almost daily coverage of a site at a resolution of approximately 1 km. The data types included are sea surface temperature (SST), water reflectance (REF), and a false-color infrared overview (FCI).

Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi↗
USGS2026

Production of mineral commodities and geospatial map of the mineral industries and related infrastructure of China

As part of the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) mission to distribute global mineral information and analyze supply chains, this study provides a comprehensive review of the global significance of China’s mineral production and capacity in 2023. Of 77 mineral commodities in the USGS dataset, China produced 74 and was the world’s first-ranked producer for 39 of the 74. Compared to the high share of global mineral production, including up to 98 percent of global gallium production, the country’s share of global mineral reserves was relatively small, ranging from 20 percent (zinc ore) to 52 percent (tungsten ore). China’s imports of metal ores, slag, and ash accounted for 64 percent of global imports of such commodities by value. The country’s exports of base metals and articles of base metal accounted for 17 percent of the global exports. To help nongeographic information system users assess the spatial distribution of mineral mines, processing facilities, and ports for trades in China, this study created a geospatial (also called “georeferenced”) portable document format (GeoPDF) map. In addition, the GeoPDF contains mineral resource tracts (such as antimony, copper, potash, coal, and oil and gas), exploration sites, and energy infrastructure based on the preexisting USGS data.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2025

Methodology for compilation of previously published contour data showing the altitude of the base of Dakota Sandstone on the Colorado Plateau, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah

Structure contours and other geologic information from numerous published geologic maps were digitized and compiled into a digital dataset showing the configuration of a single stratigraphic datum, the base of the Dakota Sandstone and its equivalents across the Colorado Plateau. The principal maps compiled in digital form are a series of 1:250,000-scale 1 degree (°) × 2° quadrangle maps published by the U.S. Geological Survey, augmented by other geologic maps published at various map scales. The compiled digital dataset contains geologic map polygons of the Dakota Sandstone and regional stratigraphic equivalents, the location of faults and fold axes, structure contour lines that define the altitude of the base of the unit and bedding orientation data computed from the structure contour lines. This report provides the scientific rationale for compilation of these data and describes the compilation methodology for each of the data elements. This report provides an extended description of the data compilation in a companion U.S. Geological Survey digital data release of spatial data and attributes associated with the contoured surface and associated geologic data layers.

Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah↗
USGS2024

Geospatial PDF map of the compilation of GIS data for the mineral industries and related infrastructure of Africa

Introduction In 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) National Minerals Information Center (NMIC) completed the project titled "Compilation of geospatial data for the mineral industries and related infrastructure of Africa." This project aimed to leverage the expertise and capabilities of the NMIC to collect, synthesize, and interpret geospatial data to inform on the extractive resources of the African region and expand the NMIC's understanding on the impact of mineral industry of African nations in the global economy. The African region, which comprises the independent nations that make up the African continent and its associated islands and dependencies, consists of a total of 58 mineral producing countries. The primary objective of this effort was to create a fully attributed Geographic Information System (GIS) portraying existing mining infrastructure, resources, and development capacity across Africa along with the related infrastructure capable of supporting current (for the reference year 2018) and future extractive industry operations in the region. The compiled GIS geodatabase with supporting documentation including comprehensive metadata was published as a USGS data release titled "Compilation of Geospatial Data (GIS) for the Mineral Industries and Related Infrastructure of Africa." This georeferenced portable document format (GeoPDF) map sheet presents a new geographic information product containing a partial representation of the GIS data. This GeoPDF map provides a visual comparison of the distribution of mineral industry and related infrastructure GIS data, which contributes to a deeper understanding of the intersections and complexities of the extractive industries within Africa.

Open-File Report↗