DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Meeting

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Southern California Earthquake Center ANNUAL MEETING Hierarchical Seismic Networks around the San Jacinto Fault Zone Waveforms, Spectrograms & Correlograms Local Time (hours) -117.5 -117.0 -116.5 -116.0 -115.5 (Ben-Zion et al, 2015) 19 21 23 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 x 10-2 20250 162 10-100 Hz 34.5 150 1 0 Freq (Hz) 50 4000 -1 0 34.0 -4000 -2 250 -3 2 x 10 100-200 Hz 150 1 P1 Freq (Hz) 50 0 P2 33.5 5000 -1 P3 0 -5000 -2 P4 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 -0.2 -0.1 0 .01 0.2 UTC Time (hours) Correlation Time (s) 33.0 33.75 1 32.5 -117.5 -117.0 -116.5 -116.0 -115.5 33.50 Vp (km/s) 2 5.0 5.4 5.8 6.2 6.6 7.0 Vs 33.25 0 3.6 5 Profile 1 -117.00 -116.75 116.50 10 3.4 15 3 Rayleigh Group Velocities (m/s) 3.2 0 Profile 2 Frequency = 3 Hz 3.0 5 33.542 10 2.8 15 Depth (km) 2.6 33.540 4 0 Profile 3 (km/s) Depth (km) 5 10 33.538 15 (Zigone et al, 2015) 0 5 5 Profile 4 33.536 (Roux et al, 2016) 34.5 10 34.0 15 -116.595 -116.592 -116.589 -116.0 (Allam & Ben-Zion, 2012) 33.5 -116.5 -117.0 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 250 350 450 550 650 33.0 -117.5 Fault Normal Distance (km) MEETING PROGRAM September 10-14, 2016 Core Institutions and Board of Directors (BoD) The Board of Directors (BoD) is the USC Harvard Texas A&M UC Santa Barbara USGS Menlo Park primary decision-making body of SCEC; Tom Jordan, Chair Jim Rice Patrick Fulton Ralph Archuleta R. Harris, S. Hickman it meets three times annually to approve Caltech MIT UC Los Angeles UC Santa Cruz USGS Pasadena the annual science plan, management Nadia Lapusta, VC Tom Herring Peter Bird Emily Brodsky Rob Graves plan, and budget, and deal with major business items. The Center Director acts CGS SDSU UC Riverside UNR At-Large Member as Chair of the Board. The liaison Chris Wills Tom Rockwell David Oglesby Glenn Biasi Roland Bürgmann members from the U.S. Geological Columbia Stanford UC San Diego USGS Golden At-Large Member Survey are non-voting members. Bruce Shaw Paul Segall Yuri Fialko Jill McCarthy Michele Cooke Science Working Groups & Planning Committee (PC) The leaders of the Disciplinary SCEC4 Disciplinary Committee Committees and Interdisciplinary Focus Groups serve on the Planning Committee Seismology Tectonic Geodesy EQ Geology Computational Sci (PC) for three-year terms. The PC PC Chair Egill Hauksson* Dave Sandwell* Mike Oskin* Yifeng Cui* develops the annual Science Greg Beroza* Elizabeth Cochran Gareth Funning Whitney Behr Eric Dunham Collaboration Plan, coordinates activities Interdisciplinary Focus Groups relevant to SCEC science priorities, and PC Vice-Chair USR SoSAFE EFP EEII is responsible for generating annual Judi Chester* John Shaw* Kate Scharer* Jeanne Hardebeck* Jack Baker* reports for the Center. Leaders of SCEC Brad Aagaard Ramon Arrowsmith Ilya Zaliapin Jacobo Bielak Special Projects (i.e., projects with * PC Members FARM SDOT GMP funding outside the core science Greg Hirth* Kaj Johnson* Kim Olsen* program) also serve on the Planning Pablo Ampuero Liz Hearn Domniki Asimaki Committee. They ensure the activities of the Special Projects are built into the Special Projects TAGs annual science plans. CME CSEP WGCEP GMSV Phil Maechling* Max Werner* Ned Field* Nico Luco Danijel Schorlemmer Sanaz Rezaeian Technical Activity Groups (TAGs continued) Code Verification SIV EQ Simulators Transient Detection Ruth Harris Pablo Ampuero Terry Tullis Rowena Lohman SCEC5 Disciplinary Committee Seismology Tectonic Geodesy EQ Geology Computational Sci PC Chair Yehuda Ben-Zion* Dave Sandwell* Mike Oskin* Eric Dunham* Greg Beroza* Jamie Steidl Gareth Funning Whitney Behr Ricardo Taborda Interdisciplinary Focus Groups / Working Groups PC Vice-Chair FARM SDOT EFP Ground Motions Judi Chester* Nadia Lapusta* Kaj Johnson* Max Werner* Domniki Asimaki* The Communication, Education, and Nick Beeler Bridget Smith-Konter Ned Field Annemarie Baltay Outreach Planning Committee (CEO PC) * PC Members EEII SAFS CXM Special Projects comprises of stakeholders representing Jack Baker* Kate Scharer* Liz Hearn* Christine Goulet* CEO program focus areas (public Jon Stewart Michele Cooke Brad Aagaard Phil Maechling* education and preparedness; K-14 education initiative; experiential learning and career advancement; and the CEO Planning Committee (CEO PC) implementation interface). The CEO PC provides guidance for CEO programs, * Board liaison Tim Sellnow***, Chair Kate Long*** Danielle Sumy reviews reports and evaluations, and ** PC liaison U Central Florida CalOES IRIS *** AC liaison identifies synergies with other parts of Jacobo Bielak** Salley McGill Chris Wills* SCEC and external organizations. CMU CSUSB CGS The external Advisory Council (AC) Advisory Council (AC) provides guidance in all aspects of Gail Atkinson, Chair Donna Eberhart-Phillips M. Meghan Miller John Vidale Center activities, including basic and Western U UC Davis UNAVCO U Washington applied earthquake research and related Norm Abrahamson Kate Long Farzad Naeim Andrew Whittaker technical disciplines, formal and informal PG&E CalOES John A Martin MCEER/Buffalo education, and public outreach. Members of the AC are elected by the Roger Bilham Warner Marzocchi Tim Sellnow Board for three-year terms and may be U Colorado INGV Rome U Central Florida re-elected. The Council meets annually to review Center programs and plans, and prepares a report for the Center. 2 | Southern California Earthquake Center WELCOME Welcome to the 2016 SCEC Annual Meeting! The 2016 annual meeting marks the nucleation phase of the SCEC5 collaboration. At this meeting, we will review recent research accomplishments for SCEC4 and lay the Table of Contents groundwork for achieving the ambitious science goals set forth in the SCEC5 proposal. SCEC Leadership . 2 Welcome . 3 Meeting Agenda . 4 Saturday, September 10 . 4 Sunday, September 11 . 7 Monday, September 12 . 9 Tuesday, September 13 . 10 Wednesday, September 14 . 11 Plenary Presentations . 12 Poster Presentations . 19 Meeting Participants . 29 SCEC Institutions . 35 Venue Map . 36 Upper bar chart shows registrants at SCEC Annual Meetings 1991-2016. Pie chart shows Go to meeting website: the demographic profile for 2016 pre-registrants (707 total). The lower bar chart is the www.scec.org/meetings/2016/am history of SCEC base funding in as-spent millions of dollars; the connected dots are the base-funding totals in 2002 dollars. The figure above makes clear that interest and involvement in SCEC, as gauged by @SCEC #scecmeet attendance at this meeting, are nearly off the charts. The SCEC Science Planning Committee has configured a program that will keep you engaged during your stay in the desert. Six workshops will be held on Saturday and Sunday, and at 6pm Sunday evening, Rick Sibson from the University of Otago will kick off the meeting as our Distinguished Cover Image Speaker with a talk on “Earthquakes on Compressional Inversion Structures - Problems in Mechanics and in Hazard Assessment.” Hierarchical seismic networks, data and imaging results for plate-boundary region The agenda for the rest of the meeting features keynote speakers giving plenary talks on around San Jacinto fault zone (SJFZ). thought-provoking subjects that feed directly into discussions of major science themes. Top left: Regional seismic stations (blue We also have dedicated time for poster sessions, technical demonstrations, education triangles) and earthquake epicenters (red and outreach activities, and of course, some lively social gatherings. circles). Top middle: Zoomed in views showing dense linear arrays (instrument Those of you who have attended past SCEC meetings realize that much of the action spacing 25-50m) across SJFZ at different locations and a dense rectangular array happens in the poster sessions. As in the past few years, posters will stay up for the (instrument spacing 10-30m) with 1108 entire meeting to allow more face-to-face interactions on the juicy details of SCEC sensors at site SGB. Top right: Waveforms research. SCEC leadership has a continuing interest in hearing your feedback on ways to and spectrograms recorded at two stations improve the meeting, particualrly now that it has grown so large. 10m apart next to stacked correlograms of waveforms recorded by the stations in 4 So welcome, or welcome back, to the SCEC annual meeting in sunny, temperate Palm weeks. Bottom left: P wave velocities from Springs! We hope you find this meeting as informative, and as inspiring, as we do. double-difference local earthquake tomography projected on vertical cross- sections crossing the San Jacinto, Elsinore and San Andreas faults (Allam & Ben-Zion, 2012). Bottom middle: Rayleigh wave group velocities from cross correlations of recorded ambient noise at the dense rectangular array Thomas H. Jordan, Director (Roux et al., 2016). Bottom right: S wave velocities from noise-based tomography along horizontal cross sections at different depths (Zigone et al., 2016). Courtesy of Yehuda Ben- Zion (USC). Cover composite image by Tran Gregory C. Beroza, Co-Director Huynh (USC). 2016 SCEC Annual Meeting | 3 AGENDA Saturday, September 10 08:00 - 09:00 Workshop Check-In at Plaza Ballroom Foyer of Hilton Palm Springs 09:00 - 17:00 SCEC SoSAFE Workshop: Recent Successes and Future Challenges Conveners: Kate Scharer (USGS) and Ramon Arrowsmith (ASU) Location: Palm Canyon Room 09:00 Introductions Earthquake Recurrence and Slip Over Short and Long Term: How Does It All Add Up? Creep and other earthquake cycle challenges from recent observations 09:15 The Dry Lake Valley site: Observations of structures formed by modern and prehistoric creep on the central San Andreas
Recommended publications
  • NEPEC) 1 September 2016, 12:00 to 2:00 PM EDT, Via Phone and Webex

    NEPEC) 1 September 2016, 12:00 to 2:00 PM EDT, Via Phone and Webex

    Meeting summary: National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council (NEPEC) 1 September 2016, 12:00 to 2:00 PM EDT, via phone and Webex Main topics: 1. Completion of NEPEC statement on proper posing and testing of earthquake predictions. 2. Updates on previous topics. 3. Chair transition. Note: Copies of presentations noted below available on request to Michael Blanpied <[email protected]>. Agenda: The meeting was opened at 12:05 PM, with members, speakers and guests joined by phone and logged into a Webex session for sharing of slide presentations. After a roll call (attendees are listed at the end of this summary) and review of the agenda, Mike Blanpied and Bill Leith thanked and praised Terry Tullis for his outstanding service as chair of the NEPEC, and welcomed Roland Bürgmann to the chairmanship. Discussion of draft NEPEC statement, with goal of completing for delivery to USGS Tullis asked members for comments on a draft report, “Evaluation of Earthquake Predictions,” which the council has prepared at the request of USGS. Hearing no comments, Tullis thanked a writing team that had led the final phase of document development, and declared the document final and approved. Decision: NEPEC declared final their opinion document, “Evaluation of Earthquake Predictions.” Action: Tullis to send the report with cover letter to USGS Director Suzette Kimball. Update on Pacific Northwest earthquake communication plan development Joan Gomberg summarized progress of a project that aims to create an earthquake risk communications plan for the Casacadia region encompassing the western reaches of Washington, Oregon, northern California and British Columbia. NEPEC had earlier identified the need for such a plan, noting that it will be challenging for earthquake science experts residing in many federal, state and private institutions to swiftly agree on data interpretation and conclusions when faced with “situations of concern” such as a large offshore earthquake, large subduction interface creep event, or maverick earthquake prediction that catches public attention.
  • Prepared Rebuttal Testimony of John Geesman on Behalf

    Prepared Rebuttal Testimony of John Geesman on Behalf

    California Energy Commission Case No: A.12-11-009 DOCKETED Exhibit No: A4NR-1 13-IEP-1J Witness: John Geesman TN 71511 JUL 02 2013 Application of Pacific Gas and Electric ) Company for Authority, Among Other Things, ) to Increase Rates and Charges for Electric and ) Application 12-11-009 Gas Service Effective on January 1, 2014. ) (Filed November 15, 2012) (U 39 M) ) __________________________________________ ) ) And Related Matter. ) Investigation 13-03-007 __________________________________________) PREPARED REBUTTAL TESTIMONY OF JOHN GEESMAN ON BEHALF OF THE ALLIANCE FOR NUCLEAR RESPONSIBILITY BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA JUNE 28, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PURPOSE OF THIS TESTIMONY……………………………………………………………………2 II. PG&E’s REFUSAL TO APPLY LICENSE-REQUIRED TESTS TO NEW SEISMIC INFORMATION……………..…………………………………………………………………………….4 III. PG&E’s INTERNAL EMAILS …………………………………………………………………………6 IV. SIGNIFICANCE OF MORE CONSERVATIVE DAMPING ASSUMPTIONS………………………….………………………………………………………………..8 V. NRC STAFF’S DETERMINATION OF LICENSE VIOLATION ……………………………10 VI. PECULIAR COMMENTS FROM NEW NRC BRANCH CHIEF ……………………......13 VII. WITHDRAWAL OF PG&E’s LAR; DDE ANALYSES DEFERRED TO 2015…….…………………………………………………………………………………………………..15 VIII. NRC ENFORCEMENT FORBEARANCE = DE FACTO LICENSE AMENDMENT? ...........…………………………………………………………………………....19 IX. SELECTING THE WRONG LEVEL SSHAC ..…………………………………………………..22 X. PACKING THE SSHAC WITH PG&E INSIDERS................................................23 XI. OPENLY EMBRACING COGNITIVE BIAS........................................................24
  • UC Santa Cruz UC Santa Cruz Electronic Theses and Dissertations

    UC Santa Cruz UC Santa Cruz Electronic Theses and Dissertations

    UC Santa Cruz UC Santa Cruz Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Investigations of fault zone behavior during earthquake cycles using hydrology and geodesy Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/90p323z6 Author Xue, Lian Publication Date 2015 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ Investigations of fault zone behavior during earthquake cycles using hydrology and geodesy A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in EARTH SCIENCES with an emphasis in GEOPHYSICS by Lian Xue September 2015 The Dissertation of Lian Xue is approved: _________________________________ Professor Emily Brodsky, Chair _________________________________ Professor Susan Schwartz _________________________________ Professor Thorne Lay _________________________________ Professor Andrew Fisher _________________________________ Tyrus Miller Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies Copyright © by Lian Xue All rights reserved Table of Contents List of figures ............................................................................................................. VI Abstract ................................................................................................................... VIII Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................... X Introduction ................................................................................................................
  • 1 Agenda 2016 UJNR Meeting, Napa, CA Wednesday, 16 November 2016 08:30 Welcoming Remarks (Dr. William Leith, Mr. Masato Kano)

    1 Agenda 2016 UJNR Meeting, Napa, CA Wednesday, 16 November 2016 08:30 Welcoming Remarks (Dr. William Leith, Mr. Masato Kano)

    1 Agenda 2016 UJNR Meeting, Napa, CA Wednesday, 16 November 2016 08:30 Welcoming Remarks (Dr. William Leith, Mr. Masato Kano) Session 1 National Policies, Strategies Programs, Networks, and ongoing/upcoming Projects 08:45 William Leith “Update on the Earthquake Hazards Program” 09:00 Gerald Bawden “DeVelopment of a GNSS-Enhanced Tsunami Early Warning System” 09:15 Naoshi Hirata “Japanese earthquake researches for seismic and tsunami disaster reduction” 09:30 Gerald Bawden “NISAR – NASA and ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar Mission OVerView of the mission and science objectiVes” 09:45 Elizabeth Cochran “The Path Towards Public Earthquake Early Warning for the Western U.S.” 10:00 Morgan Moschetti “The 2014 Update of the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model” 10:15 Gavin Hayes “Recent advances in earthquake response and research at the USGS NEIC” 10:30-10:45 Break Session 2 The 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake Sequence 10:45 Noriko Kamaya “The 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake - OVerView of the Seismic ActiVity and New Guidelines for the Seismic Forecast Information after Big Earthquakes” 11:00 Masayuki Yoshimi “Strong ground motion of the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake obserVed in the midst of seVerely damaged area” 11:15 Norimitsu Nakata “Seismicity and structure responses following the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake” 2 11:30 Takahiko Uchide “Fault model of the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake inferred from hypocenter distribution and strong-motion records” 11:45 Tomokazu Kobayashi “Detailed ground surface displacement and fault ruptures of the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake Sequence
  • Do Faults Preserve a Record of Seismic Slip: a Second Opinion

    Do Faults Preserve a Record of Seismic Slip: a Second Opinion

    Journal of Structural Geology 78 (2015) 1e26 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Structural Geology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jsg Review article Do faults preserve a record of seismic slip: A second opinion * Christie D. Rowe a, , W. Ashley Griffith b a Department of Earth & Planetary Sciences, McGill University, 3450 University St., Montreal, QC H3A 0E8, Canada b Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Texas at Arlington, Box 19049, Arlington, TX 76019, USA article info abstract Article history: Exhumed fault zones offer insights into deformation processes associated with earthquakes in unpar- Received 31 January 2015 alleled spatial resolution; however it can be difficult to differentiate seismic slip from slow or aseismic Received in revised form slip based on evidence in the rock record. Fifteen years ago, Cowan (1999) defined the attributes of 5 June 2015 earthquake slip that might be preserved in the rock record, and he identified pseudotachylyte as the only Accepted 9 June 2015 reliable indicator of past earthquakes found in ancient faults. This assertion was based on models of Available online 12 June 2015 frictional heat production (Sibson, 1975, 1986) providing evidence for fast slip. Significant progress in fault rock studies has revealed a range of reaction products which can be used to detect frictional heating Keywords: Fault rocks at peak temperatures less than the melt temperature of the rock. In addition, features formed under Paleoseismology extreme transient stress conditions associated with the propagating tip of an earthquake rupture can Pseudotachylyte now be recognized in the rock record, and are also uniquely seismic.
  • Proceedings of the 11Th United States-Japan Natural Resources Panel for Earthquake Research, Napa Valley, California, November 16–18, 2016

    Proceedings of the 11Th United States-Japan Natural Resources Panel for Earthquake Research, Napa Valley, California, November 16–18, 2016

    Proceedings of the 11th United States-Japan Natural Resources Panel for Earthquake Research, Napa Valley, California, November 16–18, 2016 Edited By Shane Detweiler and Fred Pollitz Open-File Report 2017–1133 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey William H. Werkheiser, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2017 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov/ or call 1–888–ASK–USGS (1–888–275–8747). For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit https://store.usgs.gov. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. The abstracts by non-U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) authors in this volume are published as they were submitted. Abstracts authored entirely by non-USGS authors do not represent the views or position of the USGS or the U.S. Government and are published solely as part of this volume. Suggested citation: Detweiler, S., and Pollitz, F., eds., 2017, Proceedings of the 11th United States-Japan natural resources panel for earthquake research, Napa Valley, California, November 16–18, 2016: U.S.
  • Secondary Aftershocks and Their Importance for Aftershock Forecasting by Karen R

    Secondary Aftershocks and Their Importance for Aftershock Forecasting by Karen R

    Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 93, No. 4, pp. 1433–1448, August 2003 Secondary Aftershocks and Their Importance for Aftershock Forecasting by Karen R. Felzer, Rachel E. Abercrombie, and Go¨ran Ekstro¨m Abstract The potential locations of aftershocks, which can be large and damag- ing, are often forecast by calculating where the mainshock increased stress. We find, however, that the mainshock-induced stress field is often rapidly altered by after- shock-induced stresses. We find that the percentage of aftershocks that are secondary aftershocks, or aftershocks triggered by previous aftershocks, increases with time after the mainshock. If we only consider aftershock sequences in which all after- shocks are smaller than the mainshock, the percentage of aftershocks that are sec- ondary also increases with mainshock magnitude. Using the California earthquake catalog and Monte Carlo trials we estimate that on average more than 50% of after- shocks produced 8 or more days after M Ն5 mainshocks, and more than 50% of all aftershocks produced by M Ն7 mainshocks that have aftershock sequences lasting at least 15 days, are triggered by previous aftershocks. These results suggest that previous aftershock times and locations may be important predictors for new after- shocks. We find that for four large aftershock sequences in California, an updated forecast method using previous aftershock data (and neglecting mainshock-induced stress changes) can outperform forecasts made by calculating the static Coulomb stress change induced solely by the mainshock. Introduction It has long been observed that aftershocks may produce sequence. We also show that while the exact factors that their own aftershocks, commonly known as secondary af- determine aftershock location may be many and complex, tershocks (Richter, 1958).
  • Computing a Large Refined Catalog of Focal Mechanisms for Southern California

    Computing a Large Refined Catalog of Focal Mechanisms for Southern California

    Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 102, No. 3, pp. 1179–1194, June 2012, doi: 10.1785/0120110311 Ⓔ Computing a Large Refined Catalog of Focal Mechanisms for Southern California (1981–2010): Temporal Stability of the Style of Faulting by Wenzheng Yang, Egill Hauksson, and Peter M. Shearer Abstract Using the method developed by Hardebeck and Shearer (2002, 2003) termed the HASH method, we calculate focal mechanisms for earthquakes that occurred in the southern California region from 1981 to 2010. When available, we use hypocenters refined with differential travel times from waveform cross correlation. Using both the P-wave first motion polarities and the S/P amplitude ratios computed from three-component seismograms, we determine mechanisms for more than 480,000 earthquakes and analyze the statistical features of the whole catalog. We filter the preliminary catalog with criteria associated with mean nodal plane uncertainty and azimuthal gap and obtain a high-quality catalog with approximately 179,000 focal mechanisms. As more S/P amplitude ratios become available after 2000, the average nodal plane uncertainty decreases significantly compared with mechanisms that in- clude only P-wave polarities. In general the parameters of the focal mechanisms have been stable during the three decades. The dominant style of faulting is high angle strike-slip faulting with the most likely P axis centered at N5°E. For earthquakes of M<2:5, there are more normal-faulting events than reverse-faulting events, while the opposite holds for M>2:5 events. Using the 210 moment-tensor solutions in Tape et al. (2010) as benchmarks, we compare the focal plane rotation angles of common events in the catalog.
  • NEPEC) Wednesday and Thursday, September 10-11, 2008

    NEPEC) Wednesday and Thursday, September 10-11, 2008

    Meeting Agenda (Draft) National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council (NEPEC) Wednesday and Thursday, September 10-11, 2008. Boardroom, Hilton Palm Springs Resort 400 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, CA Wednesday, September 10 2:00 pm Introductions, review agenda Jim Dieterich 2:15 Earthquake Rupture Forecasts: UCERF wrap-up and looking forward Ned Field Ned will begin with a summary of how the Working Group wrapped up work on UCERF2 and how those results were transmitted to the public and for use by the CEA and National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project. He will then give his thoughts on research required to improve future time-dependent rupture forecasts and hazard assessments. 3:15 Break 3:30 Update on SCEC-sponsored activities Terry Tullis Terry will brief the Council on the suite of research supported under SCEC’s focus group on Earthquake Forecasting and Predictability, and on the coordination of development of earthquake simulator software. 3:45 Research funding: CEA Tom Jordan, Ned Field Tom and Ned will give an update on the status of discussions between CEA, USGS, CGS and SCEC on continued CEA support of UCERF development. 4:00 CSEP: Status and plans Tom Jordan, Danijel Schorlemmer Tom will brief the Council on development of an international Colaboratory for Study of Earthquake Predictability, international and domestic activities, tests already underway, and potential for expansion to a broader suite of prediction types. Danijel will report on work to establish testing centers in California, Zurich, Japan, New Zealand and elsewhere. 5:00 NEPEC discussion 5:30 Adjourn Thursday, September 11 8:30 Continental breakfast (in the meeting room) 9:00 Administrative updates Mike Blanpied 9:15 Science updates: M8/MSc, GEM, others Council, guests 9:45 Analysis of Accelerated Moment Release (AMR) method Jeanne Hardebeck Jeanne will describe results from a suite of observational tests applied to the Accelerating Moment Release earthquake prediction hypothesis.
  • Seismic Triggering of Eruptions in the Far Field: Volcanoes and Geysers

    Seismic Triggering of Eruptions in the Far Field: Volcanoes and Geysers

    ANRV273-EA34-09 ARI 26 April 2006 20:33 Seismic Triggering of Eruptions in the Far Field: Volcanoes and Geysers Michael Manga1 and Emily Brodsky2 1Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720-4767; email: [email protected] 2Department of Earth Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, California 95060 Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci Key Words 2006. 34:263–91 First published online as a rectified diffusion, advective overpressure, magma chamber Review in Advance on convection, liquefaction, mud volcanoes, triggered seismicity January 16, 2006 Abstract The Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Science Approximately 0.4% of explosive volcanic eruptions occur within a few days of large, is online at earth.annualreviews.org distant earthquakes. This many “triggered” eruptions is much greater than expected by chance. Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain triggering through doi: 10.1146/ annurev.earth.34.031405.125125 changes in magma overpressure, including the growth of bubbles, the advection of large pressures by rising bubbles, and overturn of magma chambers. Alternatively, Copyright c 2006 by Annual Reviews. All rights triggered eruptions may occur through failure of rocks surrounding stored magma. by University of California - Berkeley on 05/02/06. For personal use only. reserved All these mechanisms require a process that enhances small static stress changes 0084-6597/06/0530- caused by earthquakes or that can convert (the larger) transient, dynamic strains into 0263$20.00 permanent changes in pressure. All proposed processes, in addition to viscoelastic Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 2006.34:263-291. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org relaxation of stresses, can result in delayed triggering of eruptions, although quanti- fying the connection between earthquakes and delayed, triggered eruptions is much more challenging.
  • Annual Meeting 2012

    Annual Meeting 2012

    Southern California Earthquake Center ANNUAL MEETING 2012 SC EC an NSF+USGS center 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 MEETING PROGRAM September 8-12, 2012 SCEC LEADERSHIP Core Institutions and Board of Directors (BoD) The Board of Directors (BoD) is the USC Harvard UC Los Angeles UC Santa Cruz USGS Pasadena primary decision-making body of SCEC; Tom Jordan* Jim Rice Peter Bird Emily Brodsky Rob Graves it meets three times annually to approve Caltech MIT UC Riverside UNR At-Large Member the annual science plan, management Nadia Lapusta** Tom Herring David Oglesby Glenn Biasi Roland Bürgmann plan, and budget, and deal with major business items. The Center Director acts CGS SDSU UC San Diego USGS Golden At-Large Member as Chair of the Board. The liaison Chris Wills Steve Day Yuri Fialko Jill McCarthy Judi Chester members from the U.S. Geological Columbia Stanford UC Santa Barbara USGS Menlo Park * Chair Survey are non-voting members. Bruce Shaw Paul Segall Ralph Archuleta Ruth Harris ** Vice-Chair The leaders of the Disciplinary Science Working Groups & Planning Committee (PC) Committees and Interdisciplinary Focus Groups serve on the Planning Committee (PC) for three-year terms. The PC Disciplinary Com. Interdisciplinary Focus Groups Special Projects develops the annual Science PC Chair Seismology USR FARM CME Collaboration Plan, coordinates activities Greg Beroza* Egill Hauksson* John Shaw* Judi Chester* Phil Maechling* relevant to SCEC science priorities, and Elizabeth Cochran Brad Aagaard Pablo Ampuero is responsible for generating annual Tectonic Geodesy SoSAFE SDOT CSEP reports for the Center. Leaders of SCEC Jessica Murray* Kate Scharer* Kaj Johnson* Tom Jordan Special Projects (i.e., projects with Dave Sandwell Ramon Arrowsmith Thorsten Becker Danijel Schorlemmer* funding outside the core science program) also serve on the Planning EQ Geology EFP GMP WGCEP Committee.
  • Annual Meeting

    Annual Meeting

    Southern California Earthquake Center 2010Annual Meeting Proceedings and Abstracts, Volume XX September 11-15, 2010 S C E C an NSF+USGS center ANNUAL MEETING of the Southern California Earthquake Center Proceedings and Abstracts, Volume XX Cover Image: Section of the Borrego fault rupture formed during the 4 April 2010 El Mayor-Cucapah earthquake. (Peter Gold, Austin Elliott, Michael Oskin, and Alejandro Hinojosa. Image was generated in LidarViewer software developed by Oliver Kreylos at the W.M. Keck Center for Active Visualization in the Earth Sciences (KeckCAVES) at UC Davis.) Center Organization SCEC ORGANIZATION SCEC ADVISORY COUNCIL Center Director, Tom Jordan Mary Lou Zoback, Chair, Risk Management Solutions Deputy Director, Greg Beroza Jeffrey Freymueller, Chair-Designate, U. Alaska Associate Director for Administration, John McRaney Gail Atkinson, U. Western Ontario Associate Director for Communication, Education, Roger Bilham, U. of Colorado (new member 2010) and Outreach, Mark Benthien Donna Eberhart-Phillips, UC Davis Associate Director for Information Technology, Phil Maechling John Filson, U.S. Geological Survey (Emeritus) Special Projects and Events Coordinator, Tran Huynh Jim Goltz, CalEMA Research Contracts and Grants Coordinator, Steve Mahin, PEER Karen Young Anne Meltzer, Lehigh University Administrative Coordinator, Deborah Gormley Denis Mileti, U. Colorado (Emeritus) Education Programs Manager, Robert de Groot M. Meghan Miller, UNAVCO Digital Products Manager, John Marquis Farzad Naeim, John A. Martin & Associates