DOCSLIB.ORG

Commonlit | the Quake That Shook up Geology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Commonlit | the Quake That Shook up Geology Name: Class: The Quake That Shook Up Geology A huge earthquake in Alaska 50 years ago triggered a shift in what geologists know about Earth By Beth Geiger 2018 On March 27, 1964, the second most powerful earthquake recoded in world history struck south-central Alaska. In this informational text, Beth Geiger discusses the effects of the earthquake felt around the nation and what scientists were able to learn from this event. As you read, take notes on what happens with the Earth’s plates during earthquakes. [1] March 27, 1964, was a quiet day in Alaska. Yet as dusk approached on this Good Friday, just two days before Easter, a major upheaval1 was in store. At 5:36 p.m., the ground began shaking violently. Alaskans are familiar with earthquakes. Indeed, the state averages some 60 each day — about 22,000 a year. But this was no ordinary tremor. This was the Big One. In Anchorage, roads buckled and sank. Houses pulled apart. Railroad tracks warped. In Valdez, the ground beneath the harbor slumped — and nearly swallowed a ship docked there. "AlaskaQuake-FourthAve" by U.S. Army is in the public domain. Most earthquakes rattle the ground for just seconds. Maybe even for a half or full minute. But 50 years ago, that now infamous2 Alaska quake shook steadily and terrifyingly for almost five solid minutes. “It was so large that it caused the entire Earth to ring like a bell,” observes seismologist3 Tom Brocher and his colleagues from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in a recent publication. [5] Then, as Alaska’s shaking ceased, things got worse — much worse. The earthquake had uplifted large sections of seafloor. That movement generated huge and fast- moving waves in the open ocean, called tsunamis. In bays and inlets, the quake also triggered underwater landslides. These unleashed more tsunamis. Together, these destructive waves swept Alaska’s coastline with devastating speed and power. In places, the waves towered as high as a 20-story building. They washed away everything in their immediate path — buildings, docks and people. 1. Upheaval (noun): a violent or sudden change 2. Infamous (adjective): well-known for something bad 3. a scientist who studies earthquakes 1 No Alaskan who survived would ever forget this day. By midnight, 131 people were dead. Most had been killed by the tsunami waves that raked not just the coast of Alaska, but Oregon and California too. Indeed, like ripples in a pond, a tsunami travels outward in all directions. Quake effects were felt in nearly every state. In Washington, Seattle’s Space Needle swayed like a tree in the wind. Lakes sloshed back and forth in Texas. Similar sloshing swamped fishing boats in Louisiana. [10] The Great Alaskan Earthquake was a magnitude-9.2 event. The only stronger trembling ever recorded was a magnitude-9.5 monster that shook Chile in May 1960. Now, a full half-century after Alaska’s gigantic quake, geologists are still feeling its effects. The reason: This quake opened a new era in geology. And it has forever changed what scientists understand about the constant remodeling of Earth’s surface. A new worldview In 1964, plate tectonics still was just an emerging — if unproven — concept. It held that Earth’s uppermost layer, called the lithosphere, is broken into enormous pieces. Each giant slab was expected to be moving slowly. Now, 50 years later, plate tectonics is no longer a clever hypothesis. It’s a well-documented certainty. Like a jigsaw puzzle, Earth’s lithosphere is divided into interlocking pieces, called plates. (The lithosphere is Earth’s outer solid layer. It includes the crust and uppermost mantle.) Depending on how you count them, there are about 12 main tectonic plates, and numerous smaller ones. Their thickness ranges from 80 to 200 kilometers (50 to 124 miles). Plates beneath the oceans are much thinner than those under continents. These tectonic plates move gradually, bumping and grinding against each other. [15] As Alaska’s state seismologist, Mike West studies earthquakes. It was only after the 1964 quake, he says, that scientists could definitively point to the effects of plate movements on Earth’s surface. “Before the 1964 quake,” he recalls, “you could look at features and say ‘Yes, these could be explained by plate tectonics. But they could also be explained by other things.’” Back then, he points out: “There was no smoking gun4 yet.” Scientists now classify the bumping and grinding between plates in three different ways. Along convergent boundaries, neighboring plates either collide head-on or a denser ocean plate dives beneath a lighter continental plate. Along other, divergent boundaries, plates move away from each other. At still others, known as transform boundaries, plates slide past each other. The friction between these massive plates means they don’t move fast. Some start and then stop, only to start again much later. Earth definitely moved with a start during the 1964 quake. But it took some geological sleuthing5 to determine how and why. 4. something that serves as conclusive evidence 5. to carry out a search or investigation 2 Finding proof Geologist George Plafker worked for the USGS near San Francisco, Calif. He and two of his colleagues flew up, landing at an Air Force base outside Anchorage, Alaska, just a day after the main shaking stopped. Their mission: Figure out what had just happened. They knew earthquakes develop when shifts occur along underground fractures, called faults. They still had many questions to answer. One was figuring out why some parts of Alaska had risen as much as 11.5 meters (38 feet), while the ground at other sites had dropped, or subsided. They also sought to locate the quake’s epicenter. The epicenter is that X-marks-the-spot site where the tremors commenced. [20] Plafker’s team mapped all the changes triggered by the quake that they could find. They were scouting for patterns. In particular, “We were looking for evidence of surface faulting,” he recalled at a press briefing earlier this week. Lucky for this team, 70 new seismographs (SIZE moh grafs) had recently been installed all over the world. These instruments detect and record earthquakes. By recording the size, direction and arrival times of the different seismic waves from a quake, seismographs help pinpoint its size and epicenter. “It was the first global seismic network,” West tells Science News for Students. “So this was the first earthquake to be recorded around the world.” In the days and weeks that followed, dozens of smaller earthquakes continued to rattle Alaska. The seismographs recorded these aftershocks as well. Those instruments also helped identify the shape of the fault responsible for all the shaking. Plafker studied all of these data. Eventually he arrived at a very important conclusion. The fault was not vertical. It wasn’t a break cutting straight down through deep rock, as many geologists had assumed. Like a descending ramp, the fault instead sloped at an angle, deep beneath Alaska. Scientists next had to fit this finding to their understanding of plate tectonics. It turned out that the ramp’s shape was very, very significant. Plafker had confirmed that the earthquake occurred in a subduction zone. That’s a type of convergent plate boundary where one plate dives beneath another. Alaska’s long southern coastline marks where the Pacific Plate, moving north, dives beneath the North American Plate. And as the Pacific Plate dives, it slopes downward. [25] “George’s interpretation of this as a subduction zone was a real key,” says Gary Fuis. He’s a geophysicist with the USGS who recently co-authored a study looking back at the 1964 earthquake. Explains Fuis: “This was some of the first clear evidence that plate tectonics was right.” Sticky situation The dynamics of a subduction zone explained why the 1964 earthquake was so massive. Tectonic plates constantly push against each other. They tend to subtly creep along. When a fault actually slips, the motion is both sudden and exaggerated. It’s like opening a sticky window or door. You push and push. Then suddenly, it pops open. 3 On a gigantic scale, that’s what happened in Alaska. The Pacific Plate had been creeping north about 6 centimeters (2.5 inches) per year. Then, all at once, the Pacific Plate thrust forward. It slipped as much as 18 meters (60 feet) under the North American plate, the geologists learned. That motion was “huge,” West says. East to west, nearly 960 kilometers (600 miles) of fault had ruptured6 at once. Plafker named this event a megathrust earthquake. These occur directly along subduction zones. And they are powerful. (For example, the 2011 magnitude-9.0 earthquake off the eastern coast of Japan that unleashed a huge tsunami also was a megathrust earthquake.) In fact, megathrust events are the largest type of earthquake on the planet, notes Peter Haeussler. He’s a research geologist with USGS and its Alaska coordinator of earthquake hazards research. [30] Natasha Ruppert at the Alaska Earthquake Center in Fairbanks is another seismologist. She now estimates that it takes at least 500 years of plate motion to set the stage for such big earthquakes. The land that was uplifted — and sometimes dropped — by the Great Alaskan Quake also fits with the plate-tectonics model. As convergent plates collide, the overriding — or top — plate gets slowly pushed up. It’s a bit like a rug wrinkling. When the fault finally slips, it’s like a rug flattening out. Also just like a rug, the land spreads out as it flattens. In Alaska, the flattening caused some of the impacted land to drop.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "Tectonic Deformation Re Great Subduction Zone Earthquakes
    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ ._ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . 3 TECTONIC DEFORMATION RELATED TO GREAT SUBDUCTION ZONE EARTliQUAKES George Plafker, U.S. Geological Survey Abstract Vertical and horizontal displacements associated with plate convergence at consuming plate margins are the algebraic sum of interseismic, coseismic, and transient deformat- ions through a complete earthquake cycle on a time scale of tens to thousands of years. Elastic and permanent deformations accumulated during the interseismic period are a function of coupling across the megathrust interface between the underthrusting oceanic crust and the upper plate, and of the direction, rate, and duration of relative plate motions. Coseismic deformations result frbm seaward thrusting of the upper plate and depend upon dip of the megathrust, displacement along the megathrust, and the dip and displacements along subsidiary faults that may break through the upper plate. Transient postseismic displacements may occur that result from relatively slow elastic strain i release or creep deformation following an earthquake, | i Coseismic regional vertical displacements typically involve a central broad asymmetric downwarp elongate parallel to the arc with a flanking zone of marked uplift on the sea- | t ward side, and a zone of relatively minor uplift on the landward side. The major zones I of uplift and subsidence may extend from the trench to its associated volcanic are. In the 1960 Chile earthquake (Mw=9.5] deformation occurred for about 1,050 km parallel to the are over an area of 85,000+ km with shoreline vertical displacements to +5.7 m and -2.3 m.
    [Show full text]
  • Seismic Rate Variations Prior to the 2010 Maule, Chile MW 8.8 Giant Megathrust Earthquake
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Seismic rate variations prior to the 2010 Maule, Chile MW 8.8 giant megathrust earthquake Benoit Derode1*, Raúl Madariaga1,2 & Jaime Campos1 The MW 8.8 Maule earthquake is the largest well-recorded megathrust earthquake reported in South America. It is known to have had very few foreshocks due to its locking degree, and a strong aftershock activity. We analyze seismic activity in the area of the 27 February 2010, MW 8.8 Maule earthquake at diferent time scales from 2000 to 2019. We diferentiate the seismicity located inside the coseismic rupture zone of the main shock from that located in the areas surrounding the rupture zone. Using an original spatial and temporal method of seismic comparison, we fnd that after a period of seismic activity, the rupture zone at the plate interface experienced a long-term seismic quiescence before the main shock. Furthermore, a few days before the main shock, a set of seismic bursts of foreshocks located within the highest coseismic displacement area is observed. We show that after the main shock, the seismic rate decelerates during a period of 3 years, until reaching its initial interseismic value. We conclude that this megathrust earthquake is the consequence of various preparation stages increasing the locking degree at the plate interface and following an irregular pattern of seismic activity at large and short time scales. Giant subduction earthquakes are the result of a long-term stress localization due to the relative movement of two adjacent plates. Before a large earthquake, the interface between plates is locked and concentrates the exter- nal forces, until the rock strength becomes insufcient, initiating the sudden rupture along the plate interface.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreshock Sequences and Short-Term Earthquake Predictability on East Pacific Rise Transform Faults
    NATURE 3377—9/3/2005—VBICKNELL—137936 articles Foreshock sequences and short-term earthquake predictability on East Pacific Rise transform faults Jeffrey J. McGuire1, Margaret S. Boettcher2 & Thomas H. Jordan3 1Department of Geology and Geophysics, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, and 2MIT-Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Joint Program, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543-1541, USA 3Department of Earth Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089-7042, USA ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... East Pacific Rise transform faults are characterized by high slip rates (more than ten centimetres a year), predominately aseismic slip and maximum earthquake magnitudes of about 6.5. Using recordings from a hydroacoustic array deployed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, we show here that East Pacific Rise transform faults also have a low number of aftershocks and high foreshock rates compared to continental strike-slip faults. The high ratio of foreshocks to aftershocks implies that such transform-fault seismicity cannot be explained by seismic triggering models in which there is no fundamental distinction between foreshocks, mainshocks and aftershocks. The foreshock sequences on East Pacific Rise transform faults can be used to predict (retrospectively) earthquakes of magnitude 5.4 or greater, in narrow spatial and temporal windows and with a high probability gain. The predictability of such transform earthquakes is consistent with a model in which slow slip transients trigger earthquakes, enrich their low-frequency radiation and accommodate much of the aseismic plate motion. On average, before large earthquakes occur, local seismicity rates support the inference of slow slip transients, but the subject remains show a significant increase1. In continental regions, where dense controversial23.
    [Show full text]
  • The Alaska Earthquake Regional Effects
    The Alaska Earthquake March 27,1964: Regional Effects This volume was published as separate chapters A-J GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 543 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY William T. Pecora, Director CONTENTS [Letters designate the separately published chapters] ('1) Slide-induced waves, seiching, and ground fracturing caused by the earthquake of March 27, 1964, at Kenai Lake, Alaska, by David S. McCulloch. (B) Geomorphic effects of the earthquake of March 27, 1964. in the Martin-Bering Rivers area, Alaska, by Samuel J. Tuthill and Wilson M. Laird. (C) Gravity survey and regional geology of the Prince William Sound, epicentral region. Alaska, by J. E. Case, L). F. Barnes, George Plafker, and S. L. Robbins. (D) Geologic effects of the March 1964 earthquake and associated seismic sea waves on Kadiali and nearby islands, Alaska, by George Plafker and Reuben Kachadooria~~. (E) Effects of the earthquake of Marc11 27. 1964, in the Coljl~erRiver Basin area, Alaska, by Oscar J. Ferrians, Jr. (F) Ground breakage and associated effects ill the Cook Inlet area. Alaska, resulting from the JIarch 27, 1964, earthquake, by Helen L. Foster and Thor x. V. Karlstrorn. (G) Surface faults on Montague Island associated with the 1964 Alahka earthquake, by George Plaflter. (13) Erosion and deposition on a beach raised by the 19ki4 earthyuake. Jfontagne Island, Alaska, by 11. J. Kirkby and Anne V. Kirkby. (I) Tectonics d the March 27,1964, Alaska earthquake. by Grorge I'lafker. (J) Effects of the Alaska earbhquake of March 27. 1964, on shore processes and beach ~norphology, by Kirk W.
    [Show full text]
  • Quake News from America Roger Bilham Savours Two Rich Accounts of Seismicity Across the Continent
    SEISMOLOGY Quake news from America Roger Bilham savours two rich accounts of seismicity across the continent. iven recent seismic activity — Quakeland: On the Road to America’s Next years, coinciding with a rise in fracking, political as well as geological — it’s Devastating Earthquake was unlikely to represent a natural process. perhaps unsurprising that two books KATHRYN MILES Miles does not take sides, but it’s difficult Gon earthquakes have arrived this season. Dutton: 2017. for the reader not to. One is as elegant as the score of a Beethoven The Great Quake: How the Biggest She visits New York City, marvelling at symphony; the other resembles a diary of Earthquake in North America Changed Our subway tunnels and unreinforced masonry MICHAEL NICHOLS/NGC conversations overheard during a rock con- Understanding of the Planet almost certainly scheduled for destruction by cert. Both are interesting, and both relate HENRY FOUNTAIN the next moderate earthquake in the vicin- Crown: 2017. recent history to a shaky future. ity. She considers the perils of nuclear-waste Journalist Kathryn Miles’s Quakeland is a storage in Nevada and Texas, and ponders litany of bad things that happen when you personalities, opinions and prejudices tell a the risks to Idaho miners of rock bursts — provoke Earth to release its invisible but story of scientific discovery and engineering spontaneous fracture of the working face ubiquitous store of seismic-strain energy, remedy. when the restraints of many million years of either by removing fluids (oil, water, gas) or Miles poses some important societal confinement are mined away. She contem- by adding them in copious quantities (when questions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Megathrust Earthquake Cycle
    Ocean. A little less than four years later, a similar-sized earthquake strikes the Prince William Sound area of Alaska producing a tsunami that ravages Alaska and the west coast of North America. At the time, it was clear Not My Fault: The megathrust these were very large quakes, registering 8.6 and 8.5 on earthquake cycle the Surface Wave magnitude scale, the variant of the Lori Dengler/For the Times-Standard Richter scale that was in use at the time. But only after Posted: May 24, 2017 theresearch of two more Reid award winners Aki and Kanamori (whose work would replace the Richter scale The Seismological Society of America is the world’s with seismic moment and moment magnitude) would largest organization dedicated to the study of the true size of these earthquakes Become clear. When earthquakes and their impacts on humans. The recalculated in the 70s, 1964 Alaska was upped to 9.2 Society’s highest honor is the Henry F. Reid Award and 1960 Chile Became a whopping 9.5, the largest recognizes the work that has done the most to the magnitude earthquake ever recorded on a seismograph. transform the discipline. This year’s recipient is George Plafker for his studies of great suBduction zone Both of these earthquakes occurred before plate earthquakes. tectonics, the grand unifying theory of how the outer part of the earth works, was well known or accepted. In I mentioned Dr. Plafker in my last column as a pioneer of the sixties, many earth scientists Believed great post earthquake/tsunami reconnaissance.
    [Show full text]
  • Fully-Coupled Simulations of Megathrust Earthquakes and Tsunamis in the Japan Trench, Nankai Trough, and Cascadia Subduction Zone
    Noname manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Fully-coupled simulations of megathrust earthquakes and tsunamis in the Japan Trench, Nankai Trough, and Cascadia Subduction Zone Gabriel C. Lotto · Tamara N. Jeppson · Eric M. Dunham Abstract Subduction zone earthquakes can pro- strate that horizontal seafloor displacement is a duce significant seafloor deformation and devas- major contributor to tsunami generation in all sub- tating tsunamis. Real subduction zones display re- duction zones studied. We document how the non- markable diversity in fault geometry and struc- hydrostatic response of the ocean at short wave- ture, and accordingly exhibit a variety of styles lengths smooths the initial tsunami source relative of earthquake rupture and tsunamigenic behavior. to commonly used approach for setting tsunami We perform fully-coupled earthquake and tsunami initial conditions. Finally, we determine self-consistent simulations for three subduction zones: the Japan tsunami initial conditions by isolating tsunami waves Trench, the Nankai Trough, and the Cascadia Sub- from seismic and acoustic waves at a final sim- duction Zone. We use data from seismic surveys, ulation time and backpropagating them to their drilling expeditions, and laboratory experiments initial state using an adjoint method. We find no to construct detailed 2D models of the subduc- evidence to support claims that horizontal momen- tion zones with realistic geometry, structure, fric- tum transfer from the solid Earth to the ocean is tion, and prestress. Greater prestress and rate-and- important in tsunami generation. state friction parameters that are more velocity- weakening generally lead to enhanced slip, seafloor Keywords tsunami; megathrust earthquake; deformation, and tsunami amplitude.
    [Show full text]
  • Tsunami Hazards
    ISSN 8755-6839 SCIENCE OF TSUNAMI HAZARDS The International Journal of The Tsunami Society Volume 19 Number 3 Published Electronically 2001 SOME OPPORTUNITIES OF THE LANDSLIDE TSUNAMI HYPOTHESIS 126 Phillip Watts Applied Fluid Engineering Long Beach, California 90803, USA A NON-LINEAR NUMERICAL MODEL FOR STRATIFIED TSUNAMI WAVES AND ITS APPLICATION 150 Monzur Alam lmteaz The University of Queensland Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia Fumihiko lmamura Tohoku University Aoba, Sendai 980-8579, Japan MODELING THE LA PALMA LANDSLIDE TSUNAMI 160 Charles L. Mader Mader Consulting Co., Honolulu, HI, USA BOOK REVIEW - The Big One - The Next California Earthquake by George Pararadarayannis copyright @I 2001 THE TSUNAMI SOCIETY P. 0. Box 37970, Honolulu, HI 96817, USA WWW.STHJOURNAL.ORG OBJECTIVE: The Tsunami Society publishes this journal to increase and disseminate knowledge about tsunamis and their hazards. DISCLAIMER: Although these articles have been technically reviewed by peers, The Tsunami Society is not responsible for the veracity of any state- ment , opinion or consequences. EDITORIAL STAFF Dr. Charles Mader, Editor Mader Consulting Co. 1049 Kamehame Dr., Honolulu, HI. 96825-2860, USA EDITORIAL BOARD Dr. Antonio Baptista, Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology Professor George Carrier, Harvard University Mr. George Curtis, University of Hawaii - Hilo Dr. Zygmunt Kowalik, University of Alaska Dr. T. S. Murty, Baird and Associates - Ottawa Dr. Shigehisa Nakamura, Kyoto University Dr. Yurii Shokin, Novosibirsk Mr Thomas Sokolowski, Alaska Tsunami Warning Center Dr. Costas Synolakis, University of California Professor Stefano Tinti, University of Bologna TSUNAMI SOCIETY OFFICERS Dr. Tad Murty, President Mr. Michael Blackford, Secretary Dr. Barbara H. Keating, Treasurer Submit manuscripts of articles, notes or letters to the Editor.
    [Show full text]
  • Drilling Into Shallow Interplate Thrust Zone for Understanding of Irregular Rupturing of Megathrust
    Drilling into shallow interplate thrust zone for understanding of irregular rupturing of megathrust Ryota Hino (Tohoku University) * abstract It is generally conceived that the shallowest portion of the megathrsut fault is completely aseismic and allow stable sliding during the interseismic period. However, anomalous tsunami earthquakes sporadically happen in this area, causing disproportionally large tsunami as compared to the radiated seismic energy, release large displacement at the plate boundary. It has not been well understood why and how such the anomalous earthquake occurs irregularly. Also in the rupture propagation of gigantic (M>9) earthquakes involving simultaneous rupturing of multiple asperities, the aseismic plate boundary seems to play an important role. Therefore, the mechanical properties of the most trenchward zone of the subudction plate boundary are very important for understanding mechanisms generating catastrophic earthquakes. I propose here to make long-term monitoring in deep boreholes drilled the shallowest portion of the megathrust fault to clarify how deform this area in the interseismic period. Downhole logging and seismic profiling will provide the answer to the cause of the anomalous rupture process by revealing the internal structure of the fault zone. * Research center for prediction of earthquakes and volcanic eruption Graduate School of Science, Tohoku University [email protected] 1. Introduction The occurrence of the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake (M9.1) showed that an interplate earthquake which ruptures almost entire part of a subduction system can occur, although we only know recurrence history of thrust earthquakes with sizes of M~8 in the system. Recent paleoseismological studies have revealed the occurrence of gigathrust earthquakes, much larger than M8 class megathrust earthquakes, in other subduction zones where only megathrust earthquakes have been known to occur.
    [Show full text]
  • Fault Stressing in the Overriding Plate Due to Megathrust Coupling Along the Nankai Trough, Japan
    EGU2020-18393 https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-18393 EGU General Assembly 2020 © Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Fault stressing in the overriding plate due to megathrust coupling along the Nankai trough, Japan Akinori Hashima1, Hiroshi Sato1, Tatsuya Ishiyama1, Andrew Freed2, and Thorsten Becker3 1Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan 2Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA 3Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, USA The Nankai trough has hosted ~M8 interplate earthquakes with the interval of 100-200 years. The crustal activity in southwest (SW) Japan in the overriding plate was relatively quiet after the last coupled megathrust ruptures occurred in 1944 and 1946. In the recent 20 years, however, SW Japan has experienced ~M7 earthquakes such as the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake. Similar activation of crustal earthquakes in the later stage of the megathrust earthquake cycles can be found in the historical earthquake occurrence based on paleographical studies. Such a change cannot be resolved by the probabilistic approaches, which usually rely on paleo-seismological data on longer timescales. Here, we show a deterministic way to quantify the current stressing state on the source faults due to megathrust coupling at the Nankai trough, making use of the data captured by the dense, modern geodetic network in Japan. We constructed a 3-D finite element model (FEM) around the Japanese islands including the viscoelastic feature in the asthenosphere. The geometry of plate boundary on the Philippine Sea slab is based on earthquake distributions determined by the previous studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Prince William Sound and Kenai Peninsula Region, Alaska
    Geology of the Prince William Sound and Kenai Peninsula Region, Alaska Including the Kenai, Seldovia, Seward, Blying Sound, Cordova, and Middleton Island 1:250,000-scale quadrangles By Frederic H. Wilson and Chad P. Hults Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 3110 View looking east down Harriman Fiord at Serpentine Glacier and Mount Gilbert. (photograph by M.L. Miller) 2012 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Contents Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................1 Geographic, Physiographic, and Geologic Framework ..........................................................................1 Description of Map Units .............................................................................................................................3 Unconsolidated deposits ....................................................................................................................3 Surficial deposits ........................................................................................................................3 Rock Units West of the Border Ranges Fault System ....................................................................5 Bedded rocks ...............................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • USGS Open-File Report 2010-1152
    USGS Tsunami Source Working Group (TSWG) Program and Abstracts of the Second Tsunami Source Workshop: July 19–20, 2010 Compiled by W.H.K. Lee, S.H. Kirby, and M.F. Diggles Open-File Report 2010-1152 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2010 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Suggested citation Lee, W.H.K., Kirby, S.H., and Diggles, M.F., compilers, 2010, Program and abstracts of the Second Tsunami Source Workshop; July 19-20, 2010: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010-1152, 33 p. [http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1152/]. The abstracts by non-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 U.S. Geological Survey or the U.S. government and are published solely as part of the Proceedings volume. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report.
    [Show full text]