SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “earthquake hazards”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,495 records · Page 83Linked to original sources

USGS2020

Earthquake magnitude and Lg Q variations between the Grenville and northern Appalachian geologic provinces of eastern Canada

This article assesses the ability of regionally specific, frequency‐dependent crustal attenuation ( ⁠ 1 / Q "> 1 / Q ⁠ ) to reduce mean magnitude discrepancies between seismic stations in the northern Appalachian and Grenville provinces (NAP and GP) of Canada. Lg Q ( f ) "> Q ( f ) is an important parameter in ground‐motion models used in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. Discrepancies in regional magnitude estimates have long been noted to exist between stations in the two provinces for common event origins. Such discrepancies could arise from systematic site condition variations between the geologic provinces or from varying crustal attenuative properties. To evaluate the effect of frequency‐dependent anelastic attenuation, Lg Q ( f ) "> Q ( f ) on estimated magnitudes, we analyze Lg amplitudes from > 6000 "> > 6000 waveforms recorded by Grenville and northern Appalachian receivers from 420 natural earthquakes of M N "> M N magnitude 3–5.6. Waveform analysis is strictly limited to analyst‐reviewed, vertical‐component waveforms in which Lg is clearly identified, ensuring that the datasets exhibit dominant, high‐frequency energy in the Lg velocity window. Lg Q ( f ) "> Q ( f ) is found to be higher in the GP than in the northern Appalachians. In the Grenville, Q ( f ) = 761 ( ± 145 ) f 0.25 ( ± 0.014 ) "> Q ( f ) = 761 ( ± 145 ) f 0.25 ( ± 0.014 ) ⁠ , and in the northern Appalachians, attenuation is higher: Q ( f ) = 506 ( ± 172 ) f 0.33 ( ± 0.310 ) "> Q ( f ) = 506 ( ± 172 ) f 0.33 ( ± 0.310 ) . Earthquake magnitude determined using the peak amplitude of the Lg phase ( ⁠ m b L g "> m b L g ) for eastern Canada is corrected to incorporate the frequency‐dependent, regionally specific Lg Q ( f ) "> Q ( f ) determined in this study. Using the new Lg Q ( f ) "> Q ( f ) values diminishes and nearly resolves magnitude discrepancies between the provinces. Correcting regional magnitude discrepancies between provinces is critical for reliable regional seismic hazard estimates because magnitude error in a particular region could lead to increased uncertainty in seismic hazard models.

Grenville Geologic Province, Northern Appalachian ↗

USGS2015

Community clusters of tsunami vulnerability in the US Pacific Northwest

Many coastal communities throughout the world are threatened by local (or near-field) tsunamis that could inundate low-lying areas in a matter of minutes after generation. Although the hazard and sustainability literature often frames vulnerability conceptually as a multidimensional issue involving exposure, sensitivity, and resilience to a hazard, assessments often focus on one element or do not recognize the hazard context. We introduce an analytical framework for describing variations in population vulnerability to tsunami hazards that integrates ( i ) geospatial approaches to identify the number and characteristics of people in hazard zones, ( ii ) anisotropic path distance models to estimate evacuation travel times to safety, and ( iii ) cluster analysis to classify communities with similar vulnerability. We demonstrate this approach by classifying 49 incorporated cities, 7 tribal reservations, and 17 counties from northern California to northern Washington that are directly threatened by tsunami waves associated with a Cascadia subduction zone earthquake. Results suggest three primary community groups: ( i ) relatively low numbers of exposed populations with varied demographic sensitivities, ( ii ) high numbers of exposed populations but sufficient time to evacuate before wave arrival, and ( iii ) moderate numbers of exposed populations but insufficient time to evacuate. Results can be used to enhance general hazard-awareness efforts with targeted interventions, such as education and outreach tailored to local demographics, evacuation training, and/or vertical evacuation refuges.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2023

Latency and geofence testing of wireless emergency alerts intended for the ShakeAlert® earthquake early warning system for the West Coast of the United States of America

ShakeAlert, the earthquake early warning (EEW) system for the West Coast of the United States, attempts to provides crucial warnings before strong shaking occurs. However, because the alerts are triggered only when an earthquake is already in progress, and the alert latencies and delivery times are platform dependent, the time between these warnings and the arrival of shaking is variable. The ShakeAlert system uses, among other public alerting platforms like a mobile phone operating system, smartphone apps, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency Integrated Public Alert & Warning System (IPAWS). IPAWS sends Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEAs) informing people via their smartphones and other mobile devices about various events, such as natural hazards, child abductions, or public health information about COVID-19. However, little is known about the IPAWS delivery latencies. Given that people may have only a few seconds of notice after they receive an alert to take a protective action before they feel earthquake shaking, quantifying latencies is critical to understanding whether the IPAWS system is useful for EEW. In this study, we developed new methods to test the IPAWS distribution system's performance, both with devices in a controlled environment and as well as with a 2019 community-based feedback form, in Oakland and San Diego County, California, respectively. The controlled environment test used mobile phones (including smart and non-smart phones) and associated devices to determine alert receipt times; the community research form had participants self-report their receipt times. By triangulating the data between the controlled test environment and the community research, we determined the latency statistics as well as whether the geofence (the geographic area where the alert was intended to be sent) held broadly. We found that the latencies were similar between the two tests despite the large differences in population sizes. WEA messages were received within a median time frame of 6–12 s, and the geofence held with only a few exceptions. We use this latency to assess how the system would have performed in two large earthquakes, the 1989 M6.9 Loma Prieta and 2019 M7.1 Ridgecrest earthquakes, which both occurred near our WEA test locations. Our analysis revealed that had IPAWS been available during those earthquakes, particularly Loma Prieta, it would have provided crucial seconds of notice that damaging shaking was imminent in some locations relatively far from the epicenter. Further, we find affordable non-smart phones can receive WEAs as fast as smartphones. Finally, our new method can be used for latency and geospatial testing going forward for IPAWS and other similar alerting systems.

California↗

USGS2018

Earthquakes induced by hydraulic fracturing are pervasive in Oklahoma

Wastewater disposal is generally accepted to be the primary cause of the increased seismicity rate in Oklahoma within the past decade, but no statewide analysis has investigated the contribution of hydraulic fracturing (HF) to the observed seismicity or the seismic hazard. Utilizing an enhanced seismicity catalog generated with multi‐station template matching from 2010‐2016 and all available hydraulic fracturing information, we identified 274 HF wells that are spatiotemporally correlated with bursts of seismicity. The majority of HF induced seismicity cases occurred in the SCOOP/STACK plays, but we also identified prominent cases in the Arkoma Basin as well as some more complex potential cases along the edge of the Anadarko Platform. For HF treatments where we have access to injection parameters, modeling suggests poroelastic stresses are likely responsible for seismicity, but we cannot rule out direct pore pressure effects as a contributing factor. In all of the 16 regions we identified, ≥75% of the seismicity correlated with reported HF wells. In some regions, >95% of seismicity correlated with HF wells and >50% of the HF wells correlated with seismicity. Overall, we found ~700 HF induced earthquakes with M ≥ 2.0, including 12 events with M 3.0‐3.5. These findings suggest state regulations implemented in 2018 that require operators in the SCOOP/STACK plays to take action if a M > 2 earthquake occurs could have a significant impact on future operations.

Oklahoma↗

USGS2022

Empirical map-based nonergodic models of site response in the greater Los Angeles area

We develop empirical estimates of site response at seismic stations in the Los Angeles area using recorded ground motions from 414 M 3–7.3 earthquakes in southern California. The data are from a combination of the Next Generation Attenuation‐West2 project, the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquakes, and about 10,000 newly processed records. We estimate site response using an iterative mixed‐effects residuals partitioning approach, accounting for azimuthal variations in anelastic attenuation and potential bias due to spatial clusters of colocated earthquakes. This process yields site response for peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and pseudospectral acceleration relative to a 760 m/s shear‐wave velocity ( ⁠ V S "> V V S "> s ) reference condition. We employ regression kriging to generate a spatially continuous site response model, using the linear site and basin terms from Boore et al. (2014) as the background model, which depend on V S "> V V S "> s V S "> 30 ⁠ and depth to the 1 km/s V S "> V V S "> s isosurface. This is different from past approaches to nonergodic models, in which spatially varying coefficients are regressed. We validate the model using stations in the Community Seismic Network (CSN) that are in the middle of our model spatial domain but were not considered in model development, finding strong agreement between the interpolated model and CSN data for long periods. Our model could be implemented in regional seismic hazard analyses, which would lead to improvements especially at long return periods. Our site response model also has potential to improve both ground‐motion accuracy and warning times for the U.S. Geological Survey ShakeAlert earthquake early warning (EEW) system. For a point‐source EEW simulation of the 1994 M 6.7 Northridge earthquake, our model produces ground motions more consistent with the ground‐truth ShakeMap and would alert areas with high population density such as downtown Los Angeles at lower estimated magnitudes (i.e., sooner) than an ergodic model for a modified Mercalli intensity 4.5 alerting threshold.

California↗

USGS2025

Estimated average annualized losses from potential building damage and fatalities due to earthquake-generated tsunamis in the United States

Earthquake-generated tsunamis represent substantial economic threats to states and territories in the United States (U.S.), but we are unaware of any effort to quantify potential impacts at the national level. This gap is partially due to the lack of nationally consistent data on tsunamigenic sources and associated return periods. This study addresses this issue and provides estimates of average annualized losses (AAL) for potential residential fatalities and capital stock losses associated with building damage (i.e., structural, non-structural, contents, and inventory damage) in the U.S. by curating tsunami-hazard information based on deterministic scenarios and probabilistic approaches, calculating potential losses, and estimating return periods where necessary. This assessment was done for the U.S. West Coast, Alaska, Hawaii, U.S. Pacific Territories, and U.S. Atlantic Territories. We estimate that earthquake-generated tsunamis that could affect these states and territories collectively represent $1 billion in potential AAL with 79 % of losses due to residential fatalities and 21 % of losses due to capital stock losses from building damage. We identify AAL variations based on county and county equivalents, states and territories, geographic regions, return periods, and departure-delay assumptions for evacuating residents. Results include high AAL values for potential fatalities in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Pacific Northwest region, high AAL values for potential building-related damage in Hawaii and California, and high building- and population-loss ratios for county equivalents in Alaska and U.S. territories.

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction↗

USGS2009

Preparing a population for an earthquake like Chi-Chi: The Great Southern California ShakeOut

The Great Southern California ShakeOut was a week of special events featuring the largest earthquake drill in United States history. On November 13, 2008, over 5 million southern Californians pretended that a magnitude-7.8 earthquake had occurred and practiced actions that could reduce its impact on their lives. The primary message of the ShakeOut is that what we do now, before a big earthquake, will determine what our lives will be like after. The drill was based on a scenario of the impacts and consequences of such an earthquake on the Southern San Andreas Fault, developed by over 300 experts led by the U.S. Geological Survey in partnership with the California Geological Survey, the Southern California Earthquake Center, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, lifeline operators, emergency services and many other organizations. The ShakeOut campaign was designed and implemented by earthquake scientists, emergency managers, sociologists, art designers and community participants. The means of communication were developed using results from sociological research on what encouraged people to take action. This was structured around four objectives: 1) consistent messages – people are more inclined to believe something when they hear the same thing from multiple sources; 2) visual reinforcement – people are more inclined to do something they see other people doing; 3) encourage “milling” or discussing contemplated action – people need to discuss an action with others they care about before committing to undertaking it; and 4) focus on concrete actions – people are more likely to prepare for a set of concrete consequences of a particular hazard than for an abstract concept of risk. The goals of the ShakeOut were established in Spring 2008 and were: 1) to register 5 million people to participate in the drill; 2) to change the culture of earthquake preparedness in southern California; and 3) to reduce earthquake losses in southern California. All of these goals were met. The final registration at www.shakeout.org for the 2008 ShakeOut was 5.47 million people, or one-quarter of the population of the region. A survey conducted with the registered participants showed that the messages they took from the ShakeOut were the concepts intended, including the importance of “Drop, Cover, Hold On”, the interdependency of earthquake risk (“We are all in this together”) and the possibility of reducing losses through preparation and mitigation. Sales data from the Home Depot hardware stores in southern California showed a 260% increase in the sale of earthquake safety products during the month of the ShakeOut, November 2008.

California↗

USGS2018

The influence of tectonic environment on dynamic earthquake triggering: A review and case study on Alaskan volcanoes

The phenomenon of dynamic earthquake triggering, when seismic waves from an earthquake trigger seismicity at distant sites, has been recognized for over 25 years, yet knowledge of the global distribution of dynamic triggering remains far from complete. Because occurrences of dynamic triggering provide in-situ information of the stress-state of a responding site, a more complete global picture of susceptible crustal environments becomes an important component of seismic hazard evaluations. Here we 1) review evidence for tectonic regime dependence of dynamic triggering susceptibility in the shallow brittle crust, and 2) explore triggering susceptibility at Alaskan volcanoes. We search for significant increases in seismicity rates at 19 Alaskan volcanic areas between 2006 and 2013 within 3 days following regional and teleseismic earthquakes of magnitude 7 and greater. We find evidence for 12 triggered responses at 9 volcanoes, but no evidence for triggered responses following hundreds of other earthquakes. The most impressive response was that of Pavlof Volcano to the 2011 M W 9.0 Tohoku-Oki earthquake. Our results suggest that triggered responses are difficult to predict, as they do not depend on background seismicity rates or amplitude of incident seismic waves from distant earthquakes. Taken together, observational and theoretical evidence suggests that dynamic triggering occurs in all tectonic environments. So far however, it appears to be more common in extensional and transtensional environments and regions with high pore-fluid pressure than in compressional and transpressional environments. Although some volcanic and geothermal areas may be primed for dynamic earthquake triggering, volcanoes in Alaska are relatively insensitive. The weak and variable responses of Alaskan volcanoes suggest that triggering susceptibility depends on time varying crustal conditions, such as the state of stress and distribution of pore pressure. Results also indirectly suggest that eruption triggering by distant earthquakes is unlikely in Alaska over the time scale of days.

Alaska↗

USGS2020

Mechanics of near-field deformation during co- and post-seismic shallow fault slip

Poor knowledge of how faults slip and distribute deformation in the shallow crust hinders efforts to mitigate hazards where faults increasingly intersect with the expanding global population at Earth’s surface. Here we analyze two study sites along the 2014 M 6.0 South Napa, California, earthquake rupture, each dominated by either co- or post-seismic shallow fault slip. We combine mobile laser scanning (MLS), active-source seismic tomography, and finite element modeling to investigate how deformation rate and mechanical properties of the shallow crust affect fault behavior. Despite four orders-of-magnitude difference in the rupture velocities, MLS-derived shear strain fields are remarkably similar at the two sites and suggest deceleration of the co-seismic rupture near Earth’s surface. Constrained by the MLS and seismic data, finite element models indicate shallow faulting is more sensitive to lithologic layering and plastic yielding than to the presence of fault compliant zones (i.e., regions surrounding faults with reduced stiffness). Although both elastic and elastoplastic models can reproduce the observed surface displacement fields within the uncertainty of MLS data, elastoplastic models likely provide the most reliable representations of subsurface fault behavior, as they produce geologically reasonable stress states and are consistent with field, geodetic, and seismological observations.

California↗

USGS2013

Chronology of tectonic, geomorphic, and volcanic interactions and the tempo of fault slip near Little Lake, California

New geochronologic and geomorphic constraints on the Little Lake fault in the Eastern California shear zone reveal steady, modest rates of dextral slip during and since the mid-to-late Pleistocene. We focus on a suite of offset fluvial landforms in the Pleistocene Owens River channel that formed in response to periodic interaction with nearby basalt flows, thereby recording displacement over multiple time intervals. Overlap between 40 Ar/ 39 Ar ages for the youngest intracanyon basalt flow and 10 Be surface exposure dating of downstream terrace surfaces suggests widespread channel incision during a prominent outburst flood through the Little Lake channel at ca. 64 ka. Older basalt flows flanking the upper and lower canyon margins indicate localization of the Owens River in its current position between 212 ± 14 and 197 ± 11 ka. Coupled with terrestrial light detection and ranging (lidar) and digital topographic measurements of dextral offset, the revised Little Lake chronology indicates average dextral slip rates of at least ∼0.6–0.7 mm/yr and <1.3 mm/yr over intervals ranging from ∼10 4 to 10 5 yr. Despite previous geodetic observations of relatively rapid interseismic strain along the Little Lake fault, we find no evidence for sustained temporal fluctuations in slip rates over multiple earthquake cycles. Instead, our results indicate that accelerated fault loading may be transient over much shorter periods (∼10 1 yr) and perhaps indicative of time-dependent seismic hazard associated with Eastern California shear zone faults.

California↗

USGS2021

Subducting oceanic basement roughness impacts on upper plate tectonic structure and a backstop splay fault zone activated in the southern Kodiak aftershock region of the Mw 9.2, 1964 megathrust rupture, Alaska

In 1964, the Alaska margin ruptured in a giant Mw 9.2 megathrust earthquake, the 2nd largest during worldwide instrumental recording. The coseismic slip and aftershock region offshore Kodiak Island was surveyed in 1977 – 1981 to understand the region’s tectonics. We re-processed multichannel seismic (MCS) field data using current standard Kirchhoff depth migration and/or MCS traveltime tomography. Further surveys in 1994 added P-wave velocity structure from wide-angle seismic lines and multibeam bathymetry. Published regional gravity, backscatter, and earthquake compilations also became available at this time. Beneath the trench, rough oceanic crust is covered by ~3 to 5 km thick sediment. Sediment on the subducting plate modulates the plate interface relief. The accreted prism’s imbricate thrust faults have a complex P-wave velocity structure. Landward, an accelerated increase in P-wave velocities is marked by a backstop splay fault zone (BSFZ) that marks a transition from the prism to the higher rigidity rock beneath the middle and upper slope. Structures associated with this feature may indicate fluid flow. Further upslope, another fault extends >100 km along-strike across the middle slope. Erosion from subducting seamounts leaves embayments in the frontal prism. Plate interface roughness varies along the subduction zone. Beneath the lower and middle slope, 2.5 D plate interface images show modest relief whereas the oceanic basement image is rougher. The 1964 earthquake slip maximum coincides with the leading/landward flank of a subducting seamount and the BSFZ. The BSFZ is a potentially active structure and should be considered in tsunami hazard assessments.

Alaska↗

USGS2009

Palaeoseismology of the Vilariça segment of the Manteigas-Bragança fault in northeastern Portugal

The Manteigas-Bragança fault is a major, 250-km-long, NNE-striking, sinistral strike-slip structure in northern Portugal. This fault has no historical seismicity for large earthquakes, although it may have generated moderate (M5+) earthquakes in 1751 and 1858. Evidence of continued left horizontal displacement is shown by the presence of Cenozoic pull-apart basins as well as late Quaternary stream deflections. To investigate its recent slip history, a number of trenches were excavated at three sites along the Vilariça segment, north and south of the Douro River. At one site at Vale Meão winery, the occurrence of at least two and probably three events in the past 14.5 ka was determined, suggesting an average return period of about 5–7 ka. All three events appear to have occurred as a cluster in the interval between 14.5 and 11 ka, or shortly thereafter, suggesting a return period of less than 2 ka between events within the cluster. In the same area, a small offset rill suggests 2–2.5 m of slip in the most recent event and about 6.1 m after incision below a c . 16 ka alluvial fill event along the Douro River. At another site along the Vilariça River alluvial plain, NE of the Vale Meão site, several trenches were excavated in late Pleistocene and Holocene alluvium, and exposed the fault displacing channel deposits dated to between 18 and 23 ka. In a succession of closely spaced parallel cuts and trenches, the channel riser was traced into and across the fault to resolve c . 6.5 m of displacement after 18 ka and c . 9 m of slip after c . 23 ka. These observations yield a slip rate of 0.3–0.5 mm/a, which is consistent with earlier estimates. Combining the information on timing at Vale Meão winery and displacement at Vilariça argues for earthquakes in the M7+ range, with coseismic displacements of 2–3 m. This demonstrates that there are potential seismic sources in Portugal that are not associated with the 1755 Lisbon earthquake or the Tagus Valley, and, although rare, large events on the Vilariça fault could be quite destructive for the region. This work provides an analogue for the study of active faulting in intracontinental settings and supports the view that earthquakes within intracontinental settings tend to cluster in time. In addition, this study highlights the usefulness and application of multiple field, remote sensing and geochronological techniques for seismic hazard mitigation.

Manteigas - Braganca fault↗

USGS2000

Seismicity of California's north coast

At least three moment magnitude (M) 7 earthquakes occurred along California's north coast in the second half of the nineteenth century. The M 7.3 earthquake on 23 November 1873 occurred near the California-Oregon coast and likely was located on the Cascadia subduction zone or within the North American plate. The M 7.0 + earthquake on 9 May 1878 was located about 75 km offshore near the Mendocino fault. The surface-wave magnitude (M(s)) 7.0 earthquake on 16 April 1899 was located about 150 km offshore within the Gorda plate. There were at least three M 7 north-coast earthquakes in the 35 years before 1906, two M 7 earthquakes in the 20 years after 1906, no M 7 earthquakes from 1923 until 1980, and four M 7 earthquakes since 1980. The relative seismic quiescence after 1906 for M 7 earthquakes along California's north coast mimics the post-1906 seismic quiescence in the San Francisco Bay area for M 6 earthquakes. The post-1906 relative quiescence did not extend to lower magnitudes in either area. The 18 April 1906 earthquake apparently influenced the rate of occurrence of M 7 north-coast earthquakes as it apparently influenced the rate of M 6 earthquakes in the San Francisco Bay area. The relative seismic quiescence along the California north-coast region after 1906 should be taken into account when evaluating seismic hazards in northwest California.

California↗

USGS2025

Do Graviquakes exist?

The “Graviquake” model, proposed in 2015 as an alternative to the elastic dislocation model, posits that normal faults are passive features dominated by coseismic gravitational collapse into a dilated crustal wedge, and that normal faulting is fundamentally distinct from strike‐slip and reverse faulting. Developed using finite‐element modeling before the 2016 central Apennines earthquake sequence, the model was revamped based on interpreted Differential Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar data from these events and used as evidence for a gravitational collapse episode. However, this interpretation relies on miscalculated elevation changes and is not corroborated by independent geophysical and seismological observations. Our analysis exposes fundamental flaws in the Graviquake model. By assuming that faults are passive players, it underrepresents the dynamic role of strain accumulation and release in rocks adjacent to faults. The hypothesized rapid expulsion of overpressurized fluids appears inconsistent with observed diffusion rates and lacks supporting seismological evidence. Part of the uplifted–subsided volume imbalance is likely an artifact arising from data processing, and in part is a transient effect due to the delayed response of the lower crust. Moment tensor analyses detect no isotropic components indicative of gravitational collapse, and observed ground motion and stress‐drop levels remain fully consistent with elastic dislocation theory. In addition, finite‐element modeling of normal faulting replicates observed surface deformation without invoking a collapsing wedge. The Graviquake model proposes a representation of normal‐faulting mechanics that differs significantly from established models and observations. Gravity does play a role in normal faulting, but the elastic dislocation theory remains the definitive framework of fault mechanics. Reinterpreting the 2016 earthquakes as a cascade of gravitational episodes, based on incorrect data processing and modeling, fails to substantiate the Graviquake hypothesis. Persistence in advocating this model could mislead seismic hazard assessment and undermine our understanding of normal faulting.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2001

Center for Integration of Natural Disaster Information

The U.S. Geological Survey's Center for Integration of Natural Disaster Information (CINDI) is a research and operational facility that explores methods for collecting, integrating, and communicating information about the risks posed by natural hazards and the effects of natural disasters. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is mandated by the Robert Stafford Act to warn citizens of impending landslides, volcanic eruptions, and earthquakes. The USGS also coordinates with other Federal, State, and local disaster agencies to monitor threats to communities from floods, coastal storms, wildfires, geomagnetic storms, drought, and outbreaks of disease in wildlife populations.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2011

Recent faulting in western Nevada revealed by multi-scale seismic reflection

The main goal of this study is to compare different reflection methods used to image subsurface structure within different physical environments in western Nevada. With all the methods employed, the primary goal is fault imaging for structural information toward geothermal exploration and seismic hazard estimation. We use seismic CHIRP (a swept-frequency marine acquisition system), weight drop (an accelerated hammer source), and two different vibroseis systems to characterize fault structure. We focused our efforts in the Reno metropolitan area and the area within and surrounding Pyramid Lake in northern Nevada. These different methods have provided valuable constraints on the fault geometry and activity, as well as associated fluid movement. These are critical in evaluating the potential for large earthquakes in these areas, and geothermal exploration possibilities near these structures.

Nevada↗

USGS2019

Volcanic hazards in Alaska’s National Parks

There are over 100 volcanoes in Alaska, 54 of which are considered historically active. A historically active volcano is one that fits one of the following criteria: a documented or strongly suspected eruption since the year 1700, persistent fumaroles near boiling point, significant deformation with a volcanic cause, or an earthquake swarm with a volcanic cause (Cameron and Schaefer, 2016). Alaska’s National Parks, Preserves, and Monuments contain a total of 14 historically active volcanoes (Fig. 1). There are numerous other volcanoes within Alaska’s National Parks, Preserves, and Monuments that are not considered historically active but which could erupt at some point in the future. In the past 100 years, there have been seven confirmed eruptions from historically active volcanoes within Alaska’s National Parks, Preserves, and Monuments. The Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO) monitors and conducts research on volcanoes in Alaska in order to better understand volcanic processes and determine the likelihood of future volcanic hazards, with a primary goal of informing the public and local, state, and federal entities about volcanic hazards and impending volcanic activity. Volcanic hazards in Alaska’s National Parks, Preserves, and Monuments include both proximal hazards (within 30 km or 19 mi of the vent) and distal hazards that are capable of impacting areas at the regional, national, or international scale.

Alaska↗

USGS2015

The 1868 Hayward fault, California, earthquake: Implications for earthquake scaling relations on partially creeping faults

The 21 October 1868 Hayward, California, earthquake is among the best-characterized historical earthquakes in California. In contrast to many other moderate-to-large historical events, the causative fault is clearly established. Published magnitude estimates have been fairly consistent, ranging from 6.8 to 7.2, with 95% confidence limits including values as low as 6.5. The magnitude is of particular importance for assessment of seismic hazard associated with the Hayward fault and, more generally, to develop appropriate magnitude–rupture length scaling relations for partially creeping faults. The recent reevaluation of archival accounts by Boatwright and Bundock (2008), together with the growing volume of well-calibrated intensity data from the U.S. Geological Survey “Did You Feel It?” (DYFI) system, provide an opportunity to revisit and refine the magnitude estimate. In this study, we estimate the magnitude using two different methods that use DYFI data as calibration. Both approaches yield preferred magnitude estimates of 6.3–6.6, assuming an average stress drop. A consideration of data limitations associated with settlement patterns increases the range to 6.3–6.7, with a preferred estimate of 6.5. Although magnitude estimates for historical earthquakes are inevitably uncertain, we conclude that, at a minimum, a lower-magnitude estimate represents a credible alternative interpretation of available data. We further discuss implications of our results for probabilistic seismic-hazard assessment from partially creeping faults.

California↗