DOCSLIB.ORG

Lism伽誠thquakes加theunimsta" Fromwikipedia,Thefifeeencyclopedia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lism伽誠thquakes加theunimsta ListofearthquakesintheUnitedStates-Wikipedia,theficeencyclopediaj" 1/7ページ V Lism伽誠thquakes加theUniMsta" FromWikipedia,thefifeeencyclopedia Thefbllowingisalistofnotableearthquakesand/ortsunamiswhichhadtheirepicenterinareasthat arenowpaltoftheUnitedStateswiththelatteraffbctingareaSoftheUnitedStates.Thoseini""cs werenotpartoftheUSAwhenthequakehit. ｡ U Ⅱ 』 』 守巴■ ８ Ｌ日▲ワ コロプｒ■ ＦＪ h が 0 や ■■ Pj 畦！ 痴今←?”901F”轌皿M1”ｲ赫参c8d亭洵邑鈴”f冗蛎呼創犀琳炉幽1仙鈍罰歯寸癖i函 Two-percentprobabnityofexceedancem50yearsmapof peakgroundaccelerationfromtheUnitedStatesGeological SurvW,releasedJmyl7,2014 1,十+nc･//Pn、x向瞳泡P砺働八了｡/,x711ri/T.iq十nF停久,-thm'丸陀PQinf･hPTTnil･P刷只ナョfP＆ ワnlR/n4/ｸワ ListofearthquakesintheUnitedStates-Wikipedia,the廿eeencyclopedia 3/7ページ 毛ー Date State(s) Magnitudematalities Furtherinhrmation Washington, January26,1700 8.7-9.2UnknownI700C"cM"e〃肋9"αﾙ巴 Oregon,Califbmia i 1万5α邸ﾌeA"〃 Novemberl8,1755Massachusetts 5.9 :Unknown e""9"αkg 1811-1812NewMadrid Decemberl6,1811Missouri 7．2-8.1;Unknown earthquakes 一一●■ー今一 I812冊妙rwood December8,1812Cal肋加a 6.9 40＋ e""9"αﾙE 7.9 2 1857FortTqon |Januamy9,1857Califbrnia earthquake 1867Manhattan,Kansas April24,1867 Kansas 5.1 0 earthquake ７３０７０ I868HQwα〃e""9zdake 7．9 Apdl2,1868Hawaii α"‘おz"mm October21,1868Califbma 6．8－7．0 1868Haywardearthquake 1872NolthCascades Decemberl4,1872Washington 6．5-7.0 earthqUake 11 1872LonePine March26,1872Califbma 7.6-8.0＋ 27 earthquake 1886Charleston 7.3 60-110 August31,1886SouthCarolina earthquake 1906SanFrancisco 7.9 I3000+ Aprill8,1906Califbmia ea曲qUake 1909WabashRiver 5.1 10 September27,19091ndiana earthquake 1915PleasantValley October3,1915Nevada 7.1 '0 earthqUake － －６－５’８’８ 争一._｡._－4一一一寺-..口＝巳司酋.寸一､｡一一_ﾏｭ｡a,=凸,－－Fで-－－－－－_､凸一毛-一一_b4..-△－，.-■,.､.守凸-~』‘, 1925SantaBarbara 13 JUne29,1925Califbmia earthquake['] Augustl6,1931Texas 0 1931Valentineearthquake' ６６５４９３ 1933LongBeach MarchlO,1933Califbmia 120 ９０ eanhquake Mayl8,1940Califbmia !1940HCemmearthqUakel 1940NewHampshire December20,1940NewHampshire earthquakes l 1940NewHampshire 5.5 0 December24,1940NewHampshire earthquakes ＃ １０６５ ,1946AleutianIslands Alaska '8．6 Aprill,1946 earthqUakeandtsunami |1947Wisconsin Unknown nmay6,1947'Wisconsin eanhquake December4,1948Califbmia 6．0－6．5 0 1,什,､便.〃△価、画f階可､口甜nnfrT人xriM/Tip十ハFPQ,-HTm,肉しPQinfITPTTni+PfiQ+ﾛ十P昼 ワnlR/n4/ﾜﾜ ListofearthquakesintheUnitedStates-Wikipedia,thefreeencyclopedia 4/7ページ D認睡 State(s) Magnitude Fatalities Furtherinhrmation 1948DesertHotSplings ８１ earthquake Aprill3,1949 Washington 7.1 194901ympiaearthquake ４ 1952KemComty July21,1952 Cali允加a 7.5 earthquake il957Andreanoflslands March9,1957 Alaska :8．6 iO earthqUakeandtsunami 1958LituyaBay JUly9,1958 Alaska 8.3 5(tsunami) earthquakesand megatsunami 1959HebgenLake Momana,Wyoming7.3-7.5 28＋ |AuguStl7,1959 earthqUake Alaska 9.2 143 !1964Alaskaearthquakei March27,1964 andtslmami ０３ 1965RatIslands Febmary4,1965 Alaska 8-7 earthquakeandtsunami Aplil29,1965 Washin"on 6.5 196501ympiaearthqUake Roc"Moumain August9,1967 Colorado 5.3 0 Arsenal#Deepiniection well RoclWMountain November26,1967Colorado 5.2 0 Arsenal#Deepiniection well November9,1968mlinois 5．4 0 1968nlinoisearthquake 1969SantaRosa October2,1969.Califbmia 5．6－5．7 1 earthquakes 1971SanFemando 6.6 64 Febmary9,1971'Califbmia earthqUake 1973Knoxville Octoberl973 Tennessee 4.6 0 earthqUake |1975NearIslands February2,1975Alaska 7.6 0 ４７６６２５ ０２０ earthquake July9,1975 Mnnesota 1975MomsearthqUake November29,1975 Hawaii 1975HawaiiearUlquake May2,1983 Califbmia 1983Coalingaearthquake 1983BoahPeak IOctober28,1983IIdaho 7．3 2 l iearthquake 1984MorganHll Califbmia '6．2 0 IApril24,1984 earthquake ＣＣ釧副●ｄ■■一●勺■品伽伽、ｍ●。■＆●。■ユａａ ８６ !1987WhinierNarrows! IOctoberl,1987 I5.9 earthquake ３ 10ctoberl7,1989 6．9 h什冠画･"Pn、函,iMnP紺釦ハ,･fr/亜浦し§/Ti昼十nFParfITmnnirP画i両十ITaTTnifPJ1RfnfPp ヮnlR/n4ﾉﾜﾜ ListofeaIthquakesintheUmtedStates-Wikipedia,thefifeeenWclopedia 5/7ページ Date state(s) Magnitude matalities murtherinhrmation 1989LomaPrieta earthquake 1991SienaMadre Jime28,1991 Califbmia 5.6 2 earthquake 1992CapeMendocino April25-26,1992Califbrnia 6．5－7．2 0 earthquakes １１ＣＣ鋤副●。■ユ●ｑ■ユ允允。、。ｍａａ ７６３５ 『。 JUne28,1992 1992LandersearthqUake ;June28,1992 0 1992BigBearearthquake 1993ScottsMills IMarch25,1993 Oregon 5.6 0 earthquake 1993KlamathFalls September20,19930regon 6.0 2 eamhqUakes 1994Northridge JanuaIyl7,1994Califbmia 6.7 57 eartilquake ００ Apli114,1995 Texas 5.7 1995Marathonearthquake May2,1996 Washington 5.6 1996Duvallearthquake 1998Pymammng September25,1998PennWlvania 5.2 0 ！ earthquake 1999HectorMne Octoberl6,1999Califbma 7.1 0 earthqUake ＷＮ－ＮⅥ伽伽伽一剛獣ａａｏｎ １０００ Febmary28,2001 '6.8 2001Nisquallyearthquake November3,2002 7．9 2002DenaliearthqUake April29,2003 4．6 2003AlabamaearthqUake December9,2003 ，4．5 2003VirgimaearthqUake I 2003SanSimeon December22,2003Califbmia 6.5 2 ea曲quake ００－０００００《０００2006GulfofMexico 5.8 SeptemberlO,2006IFlorida eanhquake OctOberl5,2006Hawaii '6．7 2006HawaiiearthqUake |2007AlumRock OctOber30,2007Califbmia ；5．6 lea曲qUake 2007Andreanoflslands Decemberl9,2007.Alaska 7．2 |ealtllqUake I Apxill8,2008minois 5．4 ,2008nlinoisearthqUake ；､ 日１０→■０７１１‐炉巳１ｈ．・・ｌ■曲冒Ｐ４①甲０‐ｃＩｌｌ‐ＩＩＰ‐ｒ'2008ChinoHills 5．5 Jilly29,2008℃alifbrnia !earthquake 6.5 2010EurekaearthqUake iJanuary9,2010Califbmia ４１１１申■９９１１４。』１１１匹’ FebmarylO,2010nlinois 13.8 2010IllinoisearthqUake 2010BorregoSprings 5.4 JUly7,2010Califbmia ,earthquake December30,20101ndiana 3．8 '20101ndianaearthqUake 1句汁np･/わ洞駆7ilrin=柵③ハγ介入弧r拙;〃；｡+ハF.n"+1QrinwウレP｡§”+h･TT9勺§十-AQ+Q+op ワnlA/n4ﾉワワ ListofearthquakesintheUnitedStates-Wikipedia,thefiFeeenq/clopedia 6/7ページ Date Smte(s) Magnitude Fntalities００００００Furtherinhrmation August22,2011Colorado 5､3 2011Coloradoealthquake August23,2011Virginia 5.9 2011Vilgimaearthquake September2,2011AlaSka 6.8 2011Alaskaearthquake 20110klahoma November5,20110klahoma 5.6 earthqUake JanuaIy5,2013Alaska 7.5 2013Craigearthquake 2014Aleutianlslands June23,2014Alaska 7.9 earthquake 2014SOutheastAlaska July25,2014 Alaska 5.9 0 earthquake 2014SouthNapa August24,2014Califbma 6.0 1 ;earthquake ■ 2014SouthernAlaska 6.2 0 iSeptember25,2014Alaska |earthquake 201601dniamna 7.1 0 .January24,2016Alaska earthquake EarthquakeswarmswhichaffbctedtheUnitedStates: ■1962-71DenverearthquakeswannI2][31[41[51 ■Enolaearthquakeswann ■2008Renoealthquakes ■Guy-Greenbrierearthquakeswann ■2009-presentOklahomaearthquakeswarms EarthqUakeswhichafFPectedtheUmtedStatesbutwhoseepicenterswereoutsidetheUnitedStates borders: nl925Charlevoix-KamouraskaearthqUake-magnimde6.2earthquake,noiniuriesorfatalities anywhere n2010BajaCalifbmiaearthquake"exiconearSCalifbmia)-magnimde7.2earthqUake,4 fatalitiesandlOOinjuries,noneintheUnitedStates EarthquakeswhichdidnotaffecttheUnitedStatesdirectly,butcausedtsunamiswhichdid: ■1960Valdiviaearthquakeandtsunami-magnimde9.5earthquake,between2200-6000 fatalities,mcluding61inmlo,m n2006Kurillslandsearthquakeandtsunami-magnimde8.3earthquake,noinjuriesor fatalitiesanywhere ■2009Samoaearthquakeandtsunami-magnimde8.0earthquakewithanepicenterl20miles (190km)SouthweStofAmericanSamoageneratedtsunamiwavesuptol6feet(5m),killing 34peopleinAmericanSamoaandcausingextensivedamage[61 ■2010Chileearthquakeandtsunami-magnimde8､8earthquake,～525fatalitiesandunknown numberofiniuries,noneintheUnitedStates n2011TohokueaIthqUakeandtSunami-mgnimde9.0ealthquake,15,850-28,000fatalities and6,011iniured,onefatalityandunknownnumberofiniuriesintheUnitedStates 1旬十十毎句.〃－勺冠置,;し;毎凸剖;口ハチ症人面,;し&/T;c+nF｡回汁hnm画し今回in十hpTT卸汁PJIQ十②十｡＠ '7nlR/n4/'ﾌ'フ ListofearthquakesintheUnitedStates-Wikipedia,thefieeencyclopedia 7/7ページ B2012HaidaGwaiiearthquake-magmmde7.8earthquakewithanepicenteronMoresbylsland inBritishColumbia,thesecondlalgestCanadianearthquakeeverrecordedbyaseismometer, overlOO,000peoplewereevacuatedtohighergroundinthestateofHawai'i Seealso nListofhistoricaltsunamis ■Listsofealthquakes References 1 IIHistoricEarthqUakes:SantaBarbara,Califbmia''.U.S・Departmentofthelnterior.Retrievedl3April 2012. 2． Healy,J.H.;Rubey,W.W.;Griggs,D.T.;Raleigh,C.B・(27Septemberl968).i'TheDenverEarthqUakes: disposalofwasにⅡmdsbyinjectionintoadeepweUhasmggeredearthquakesnearDenver, Colorado!'｢DF).Mie"cel61(3848):1301-1310.doi:10.1126/science.161.3848.1301.RetIievedl3July ３４量2015. IIEarthqUakes''.αん""Geo/りgcqI動"･Vay.Remevedl3JUly2015. ‘℃olorado:EarthquakeHistory''.UMRemevedl3JUly2015. Calhoun,Patricia(24August2011).''DenverEarthquakes40YearsAgoWereCausedbyUncleSam, NotMotherNaturei'."esrwo)dRemevedl3July2015. 6 GibbonS,Helen(November2009).''USGSScientistsRcspondtoDeadlySamoaTsunann".U>I"edames Geologic"ﾉ醜""vey・Retrieved5May2015. Externallinks aListofhistoricU.S.eaIthquakes(http:"earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states/historical.php) at theUnitedStatesGeologicalSuIv" DEa曲qu*edata(http://Www.ngdc.noaa.gov/hazard/earthqk.shtml)attheNational GeophysicalDataCenter Retrievedfifom''https:"en.wikipedia,org/W/index・php？ 伽ea,isLofLearthquakeS_in=the=Umted_States&oldid=715754362'! Categories!EarthquakesintheUnitedStatesIListsofearthquakesbycountxy IListsofdisastersintheUnitedStatesIUnitedStatesgeology-relatedlists ITsunamisintheUnitedStates －－－－凸一一一心*せ－-－－－P早屯ゴロ中一一口▼守宅－古●pむら－ず寺かｰ←÷毎.一一や一ヶ■一'才,ｰ奇毎夕■ｰ今い一ローﾛQGー阜埜F-f凹蓉一一幻も一口･'勺凸壷q●~や今●鉤ターーー『も■~ﾛｰｰ酵凸少寺…一①一等ワークやFF…ー｡～ー一々~ ■Thispagewaslastmodifiedonl7April2016,at20:09. ETextisavailableundertheCreativeCommonsAttribution-ShareAlikeLicense;additional tennsmayapply.Byusinghssite,youagreetotheTennsofUseandPIivacyPolicy. Wikipedia@isaregisteredtrademarkoftheWikimediaFoundation,Inc.,anon-profit organization. h什nc･//Pnxx向しinP砺働nro/,xriM/TicinFP鈍廿hn,,兜しPQinthPTThi十PJR十nfP便 '7nlR/naﾉワワ 甲号証(ListofearthquakeintheUnitedStates)の訳 ｢アメリカ合衆国の地震一覧」 以下は、現在アメリカ合衆国の一部になっている地域に近年アメリカ合衆国に影響を与 えている地域を加えた範囲内に震源がある、主要な地震と津波の一覧表です。 イタリック文字で書かれているものは、地震当時はアメリカ合衆国領ではなかったこと を意味しています。 前略 、 1811年12月16日 ミズーリ州M7.2-8．1死者数不明1811-1812二 1－・マドリッド地震 中略 ●1973年10月テネシー州M4.6死者数01973ノツクスビル地震 中略 ●2003年4月29日アラバマ州M4.6死者数02003アラバマ地震 後略.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Review of Geological Records of Large Tsunamis at Vancouver Island, British Columbia, and Implications for Hazard John J
    Quaternary Science Reviews 19 (2000) 849}863 A review of geological records of large tsunamis at Vancouver Island, British Columbia, and implications for hazard John J. Clague! " *, Peter T. Bobrowsky#, Ian Hutchinson$ !Depatment of Earth Sciences and Institute for Quaternary Research, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5A 1S6 "Geological Survey of Canada, 101 - 605 Robson St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V6B 5J3 #Geological Survey Branch, P.O. Box 9320, Stn Prov Govt, Victoria, BC, Canada V8W 9N3 $Department of Geography and Institute for Quaternary Research, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada BC V5A 1S6 Abstract Large tsunamis strike the British Columbia coast an average of once every several hundred years. Some of the tsunamis, including one from Alaska in 1964, are the result of distant great earthquakes. Most, however, are triggered by earthquakes at the Cascadia subduction zone, which extends along the Paci"c coast from Vancouver Island to northern California. Evidence of these tsunamis has been found in tidal marshes and low-elevation coastal lakes on western Vancouver Island. The tsunamis deposited sheets of sand and gravel now preserved in sequences of peat and mud. These sheets commonly contain marine fossils, and they thin and "ne landward, consistent with deposition by landward surges of water. They occur in low-energy settings where other possible depositional processes, such as stream #ooding and storm surges, can be ruled out. The most recent large tsunami generated by an earthquake at the Cascadia subduction zone has been dated in Washington and Japan to AD 1700. The spatial distribution of the deposits of the 1700 tsunami, together with theoretical numerical modelling, indicate wave run-ups of up to 5 m asl along the outer coast of Vancouver Island and up to 15}20 m asl at the heads of some inlets.
    [Show full text]
  • Validation of a Geospatial Liquefaction Model for Noncoastal Regions Including Nepal
    USGS Award G16AP00014 Validation of a Geospatial Liquefaction Model for Noncoastal Regions Including Nepal Laurie G. Baise and Vahid Rashidian Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Tufts University 200 College Ave Medford, MA 02155 617-627-2211 617-627-2994 [email protected] March 2016 – September 2017 Validation of a Geospatial Liquefaction Model for Noncoastal Regions Including Nepal Laurie G. Baise and Vahid Rashidian Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Tufts University, Medford, MA. 02155 1. Abstract Soil liquefaction can lead to significant infrastructure damage after an earthquake due to lateral ground movements and vertical settlements. Regional liquefaction hazard maps are important in both planning for earthquake events and guiding relief efforts. New liquefaction hazard mapping techniques based on readily available geospatial data allow for an integration of liquefaction hazard in loss estimation platforms such as USGS’s PAGER system. The global geospatial liquefaction model (GGLM) proposed by Zhu et al. (2017) and recommended for global application results in a liquefaction probability that can be interpreted as liquefaction spatial extent (LSE). The model uses ShakeMap’s PGV, topography-based Vs30, distance to coast, distance to river and annual precipitation as explanatory variables. This model has been tested previously with a focus on coastal settings. In this paper, LSE maps have been generated for more than 50 earthquakes around the world in a wide range of setting to evaluate the generality and regional efficacy of the model. The model performance is evaluated through comparisons with field observation reports of liquefaction. In addition, an intensity score for easy reporting and comparison is generated for each earthquake through the summation of LSE values and compared with the liquefaction intensity inferred from the reconnaissance report.
    [Show full text]
  • California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies
    California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies Overview of Geological Hazards This report was prepared by Mark A. Hemphill-Haley, Eileen Hemphill-Haley, and Wyeth Wunderlich of the Humboldt State University Department of Geology. It is part of the California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies collection, edited by Mark Severy, Zachary Alva, Gregory Chapman, Maia Cheli, Tanya Garcia, Christina Ortega, Nicole Salas, Amin Younes, James Zoellick, & Arne Jacobson, and published by the Schatz Energy Research Center in September 2020. The series is available online at schatzcenter.org/wind/ Schatz Energy Research Center Humboldt State University Arcata, CA 95521 | (707) 826-4345 California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies Disclaimer This study was prepared under contract with Humboldt State University Sponsored Programs Foundation with financial support from the Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment. The content reflects the views of the Humboldt State University Sponsored Programs Foundation and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment. This report was created under Grant Agreement Number: OPR19100 About the Schatz Energy Research Center The Schatz Energy Research Center at Humboldt State University advances clean and renewable energy. Our projects aim to reduce climate change and pollution while increasing energy access and resilience. Our work is collaborative and multidisciplinary, and we are grateful to the many partners who together make our efforts possible. Learn more about our work at schatzcenter.org Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Please cite as follows: Hemphill-Haley, M.A., Hemphill-Haley, E. and Wunderlich, W. (2020).
    [Show full text]
  • Significant Aspects of Geotechnical and Seismic Engineering and Management of Bridges and Structures in the U.S
    SIGNIFICANT ASPECTS OF GEOTECHNICAL AND SEISMIC ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT OF BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES IN THE U.S. M. Myint Lwin1 Abstract It is important to integrate the knowledge and experience of geotechnical and seismic engineering and management of bridges to make sound decisions to reduce earthquake damages to highways, bridges and structures. Research continues to play important roles in developing modern bridge seismic design criteria, detailing practices and seismic retrofit strategies for reducing structural damages and casualties. Bridge management systems can be used effectively to incorporate seismic assessment data for prioritizing seismic retrofit needs. Introduction Major earthquakes, such as the 1964 Alaska Earthquake, Anchorage, Alaska; the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, California; the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, California; the 1995 Kobe Earthquake, Japan; and so on, have taken thousands of lives, caused billions of dollars in damages, and incurred other indirect costs as a result of damage to bridges and structures, highways, and other public facilities. It is necessary to integrate the knowledge and experience in geotechnical and seismic engineering, and the management of bridges and structures, and other public facilities to mitigate seismic hazards. The important seismic hazards are strong ground shaking, ground failures (such as, liquefaction, lateral spread, differential settlement, landslides), soil-structure interaction, and other indirect effects caused by ground shaking and failures, such as, tsunamis, seiches, floods and fires. The engineers and code writers must take these seismic hazards into account in developing earthquake-resistant design, construction and management. Seismologic and Geologic Aspect of Earthquakes When an earthquake occurs, seismic waves traveled from the source to the earth’s surface through body waves and surface waves.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Potential for Induced Seismicity at the Cavone Oilfield: Analysis of Geological and Geophysical Data, and Geomechanical Modeling
    July, 2014 ON THE POTENTIAL FOR INDUCED SEISMICITY AT THE CAVONE OILFIELD: ANALYSIS OF GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL DATA, AND GEOMECHANICAL MODELING BY Luciana Astiz - University of California San Diego James H. Dieterich - University of California Riverside Cliff Frohlich - University of Texas at Austin Bradford H. Hager - Massachusetts Institute of Technology Ruben Juanes - Massachusetts Institute of Technology John H. Shaw –Harvard University 1 July, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ……………………………………………………….... 5 INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………….9 1. TECTONIC FRAMEWORK OF THE EMILIA-ROMAGNA REGION .................... 11 1.1 SEISMOTECTONIC SETTING ............................................................................................................................ 11 1.1.1 HISTORICAL SEISMICITY IN THE EMILIA‐ROMAGNA REGION .................................................................... 12 1.2 CAVONE STRUCTURE ....................................................................................................................................... 19 1.3 GEOLOGIC EVIDENCE FOR TECTONIC ACTIVITY OF STRUCTURES IN THE FERRARESE‐ROMAGNOLO ARC ..................................................................................................................... 24 1.4 SEISMOTECTONIC ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................... 26 1.5 GPS CONSTRAINTS ON TECTONICS — PRE‐EARTHQUAKE REGIONAL DEFORMATION RATES ............ 30 1.6 CONCLUSIONS OF
    [Show full text]
  • The Housing Market Impacts of Wastewater Injection Induced Seismicity Risk
    The Housing Market Impacts of Wastewater Injection Induced Seismicity Risk Haiyan Liu Ph.D. Candidate Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics University of Georgia [email protected] Susana Ferreira Associate Professor Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics University of Georgia [email protected] Brady Brewer Assistant Professor Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics University of Georgia [email protected] Selected Paper prepared for presentation at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association’s 2016 AAEA Annual Meeting, Boston, MA, July 31- August 2, 2016. Copyright 2016 by Haiyan Liu, Susana Ferreira, and Brady Brewer. All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided this copyright notice appears on all such copies. Abstract Using data from Oklahoma County, an area severely affected by the increased seismicity associated with injection wells, we recover hedonic estimates of property value impacts from nearby shale oil and gas development that vary with earthquake risk exposure. Results suggest that the 2011 Oklahoma earthquake in Prague, OK, and generally, earthquakes happening in the county and the state have enhanced the perception of risks associated with wastewater injection but not shale gas production. This risk perception is driven by injection wells within 2 km of the properties. Keywords: Earthquake, Wastewater Injection, Oil and Gas Production, Housing Market, Oklahoma JEL classification: L71, Q35, Q54, R31 1. Introduction The injection of fluids underground has been known to induce earthquakes since the mid-1960s (Healy et al. 1968; Raleigh et al. 1976). However, few cases were documented in the United States until 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Hazards on Whidbey Island
    Natural Hazards on Whidbey Island Protect and prepare your family and your home — a guide for surviving disasters caused by earthquakes, landslides, wildland fires, tsunamis, and windstorms Island County, Washington Department of Emergency Management Digital elevation map of Island County (Jessica Larson) ii Dealing with Natural Hazards on Whidbey Island This is a guide to the natural hazards that could affect you, your family, and your property. It offers a brief description of the ways you can prepare your home and family to survive disasters caused by earthquakes, landslides, wildland fires, tsunamis, and windstorms. Power outages caused by windstorms during the winter of 2006-2007 — as well as numerous other events in prior and more recent years — have made most residents of Whidbey Island amply aware of the difficulties of being without light, heat, water, and the ability to prepare meals or use health-related equipment. Although most of us have experienced being without power for less than a week, we have still been able to travel to a grocery, a hospital, or the mainland. Friends across the island could help each other. But what if there were a major natural disaster that cut off the island from the mainland and we were entirely on our own for two or three weeks? A truly large storm or an earthquake could destroy or damage docks at the Clinton and Coupeville ferries systems and seriously compromise footings of the Deception Pass bridge, disrupting delivery of food, water, fuel, emergency services, and many other vitally necessary elements of our Island life. These realities are even more evident recently as we have had record rains, experienced more landslides, and observed the damage suffered by the islands of New Zealand and Japan.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Survive Earthquakes and Tsunamis in Oregon
    Living on Shaky Ground How to survive earthquakes and tsunamis in Oregon Copyright 2018, Oregon Office of Emergency Management with help from the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. Originally adapted from Humboldt Earthquake Education Center at Humboldt State University. Reproduction by permission only. Disclaimer: This document is intended to promote earthquake and tsunami readiness. It is based on the best currently available scientific, engineering, and sociological research. Following its suggestions, however, does not guarantee the safety of an individual or of a structure. Contributors • Michael Murphy, Coos County • Patence Winningham, City of Eugene • Justin Ross, Multnomah County • Cynthia Valdivia, Washington County • Bonny Cushman, City of Portland • Barbara Ayers, Hood River County • Curtis Peetz, American Red Cross • John Bowles, Morrow County • Virginia Demaris, Lincoln County • Terri Eubanks, City of Ashland • Althea Rizzo, Oregon Office of Emergency Management • Paula Negele, Oregon Office of Emergency Management ii Oregon Office of Emergency Management Introduction You can prepare for the What do I do? next quake or tsunami an earthquake you should: During Some people think it is not worth preparing for • If you are indoors, DROP and take COVER an earthquake or a tsunami because whether you under a sturdy table or other furniture. HOLD survive or not is up to chance. NOT SO! ON to it and stay put until the shaking stops. Most Oregon buildings will survive even a large • Stay clear of items that can fall and injure you, earthquake, and so will you, especially if you such as windows, fireplaces and heavy furniture. follow the simple guidelines in this handbook • Stay inside.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1964 Prince William Sound Earthquake Subduction Zone Steven C
    Adv. Geophys. ms. Last saved: 2/12/2003 6:lO:OO PM 1 Crustal Deformation in Southcentral Alaska: The 1964 Prince William Sound Earthquake Subduction Zone Steven C. Cohen Geodynamics Branch, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 2077 1 email: Steven.C.Cohen @ .nasa.gov; phone: 301-6 14-6466 Jeffrey T. Freymueller Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775 Outline: 1. Introduction 2. Tectonic, Geologic, and Seismologic Setting 3. Observed Crustal Motion 3.1 Coseismic Crustal Motion 3.2 Preseismic and Interseismic (pre-1964) Crustal Motion 3.3 Postseismic and Interseismic (post-1964) Crustal Motion 4. Models of Southcentral Alaska Preseismic and Postseismic Crustal Deformation 5. Conclusions 6. References Adv. Geophys. ms. Last saved: a1 a2003 6:lO:OO PM 2 1. Introduction The M, = 9.2 Prince William Sound (PWS) that struck southcentral Alaska on March 28, 1964, is one of the important earthquakes in history. The importance of this Great Alaska Earthquake lies more in its scientific than societal impact. While the human losses in the PWS earthquake were certainly tragic, the sociological impact of the earthquake was less than that of is earthquakes that have struck heavily populated locales. By contrast Earth science, particularly tectonophysics, seismology, and geodesy, has benefited enormously from studies of this massive earthquake. The early 1960s was a particularly important time for both seismology and tectonophysics. Seismic instrumentation and analysis techniques were undergoing considerable modernization. For example, the VELA UNIFORM program for nuclear test detection resulted in the deployment of the World Wide Standard Seismographic Network in the late 1950s and early 1960s (Lay and Wallace, 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Dating the 1700 Cascadia Earthquake: Great Coastal Earthquakes in Native Stories
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252069651 Dating the 1700 Cascadia Earthquake: Great Coastal Earthquakes in Native Stories Article in Seismological Research Letters · March 2005 DOI: 10.1785/gssrl.76.2.140 CITATIONS READS 52 1,359 10 authors, including: R. S. Ludwin Deborah Carver University of Washington Seattle University of Alaska Anchorage 18 PUBLICATIONS 188 CITATIONS 2 PUBLICATIONS 62 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Robert J. Losey John J. Clague University of Alberta Simon Fraser University 86 PUBLICATIONS 648 CITATIONS 458 PUBLICATIONS 11,366 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Sedimentological and Paleomagnetic Study of Glacial Lake Missoula Lacustrine and Flood Sediment View project PALEOECOLOGY OF HAIDA GWAII View project All content following this page was uploaded by Robert J. Losey on 03 June 2014. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Dating the 1700 Cascadia Earthquake: Great Coastal Earthquakes in Native Stories Ruth S. Ludwin1, Robert Dennis2, Deborah Carver3, Alan D. McMillan4, Robert Losey5, John Clague6, Chris Jonientz-Trisler7, Janine Bowechop8, Jacilee Wray9, and Karen James10 INTRODUCTION were killed when their roots were suddenly plunged into salt water. Beneath the surface of these same estuaries, soil cores Although scientific recognition of the earthquake hazard pre- revealed layered deposits showing a repeated cycle of slow sented by the Cascadia subduction zone (CSZ) is relatively uplift and rapid submergence. Preliminary age estimates recent, native peoples have lived on the Cascadia coast for based on radiocarbon dating (Nelson et al., 1995) and tree- thousands of years, transferring knowledge from generation ring studies (Yamaguchi et al., 1989) suggested that the most to generation through storytelling.
    [Show full text]
  • Observed Performance of Dams During Earthquakes Vol. 3
    United States Society on Dams Observed Performance of Dams During Earthquakes Volume III February 2014 United States Society on Dams Observed Performance of Dams During Earthquakes Volume III Volume III February 2014 Prepared by the USSD Committee on Earthquakes U.S. Society on Dams Vision To be the nation's leading organization of professionals dedicated to advancing the role of dams for the benefit of society. Mission — USSD is dedicated to: · Advancing the knowledge of dam engineering, construction, planning, operation, performance, rehabilitation, decommissioning, maintenance, security and safety; · Fostering dam technology for socially, environmentally and financially sustainable water resources systems; · Providing public awareness of the role of dams in the management of the nation's water resources; · Enhancing practices to meet current and future challenges on dams; and · Representing the United States as an active member of the International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD). The information contained in this report regarding commercial products or firms may not be used for advertising or promotional purposes and may not be construed as an endorsement of any product or firm by the United States Society on Dams. USSD accepts no responsibility for the statements made or the opinions expressed in this publication. Copyright © 2014 U. S. Society on Dams Printed in the United States of America ISBN 978-1-884575-65-5 Library of Congress Control Number: 2014932950 U.S. Society on Dams 1616 Seventeenth Street, #483 Denver, CO 80202 Telephone: 303-628-5430 Fax: 303-628-5431 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.ussdams.org FOREWORD In July, 1992, the U. S.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Québécois Literature? Reflections on the Literary History of Francophone Writing in Canada
    What is Québécois Literature? Reflections on the Literary History of Francophone Writing in Canada Contemporary French and Francophone Cultures, 28 Chapman, What is Québécois Literature.indd 1 30/07/2013 09:16:58 Contemporary French and Francophone Cultures Series Editors EDMUND SMYTH CHARLES FORSDICK Manchester Metropolitan University University of Liverpool Editorial Board JACQUELINE DUTTON LYNN A. HIGGINS MIREILLE ROSELLO University of Melbourne Dartmouth College University of Amsterdam MICHAEL SHERINGHAM DAVID WALKER University of Oxford University of Sheffield This series aims to provide a forum for new research on modern and contem- porary French and francophone cultures and writing. The books published in Contemporary French and Francophone Cultures reflect a wide variety of critical practices and theoretical approaches, in harmony with the intellectual, cultural and social developments which have taken place over the past few decades. All manifestations of contemporary French and francophone culture and expression are considered, including literature, cinema, popular culture, theory. The volumes in the series will participate in the wider debate on key aspects of contemporary culture. Recent titles in the series: 12 Lawrence R. Schehr, French 20 Pim Higginson, The Noir Atlantic: Post-Modern Masculinities: From Chester Himes and the Birth of the Neuromatrices to Seropositivity Francophone African Crime Novel 13 Mireille Rosello, The Reparative in 21 Verena Andermatt Conley, Spatial Narratives: Works of Mourning in Ecologies: Urban
    [Show full text]