PREDICTION Paleoseismology: Documenting and evaluating past events. 1.) Usually done with looking at...
-
Upload
randolf-parrish -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of PREDICTION Paleoseismology: Documenting and evaluating past events. 1.) Usually done with looking at...
PREDICTION
Paleoseismology: Documenting and evaluating past events.
1.) Usually done with looking at offset layers in sediments in trenches
2.) Calculate recurrence interval by using radiometric dating Carbon14.
ND pg. 111 Fig. 4.21/4.22
PREDICTION
E-W patterns: Consider Bay area earth quakes.
*A given EQ is usually followed by another inthe near future to the east or west.
Fig. 4.27
PREDICTION
Seismic Gap: Areas of fault that seem tobe stuck for periods of time.
*Recall Elastic Rebound Theory*Consider areas of specific fault-(Fig. 4.14)*Consider general geographic area-(ND pg. 118/fig. 4.32)
PREDICTION and WARNING
Some other interesting techniques that we can use…*US and JAPAN utilize this technology
1.) Stainmeters measure the amount of “bend” in rocks
2.) Tilt measurements - is the tilt of the surrounding rock changing?
3.) Radon-crystals fracture and release radon gas
Earth and Environmental fig. 1.4.2
While these all provide insight
there is NO OBVIOUS/FORMULAIC pattern to
perfect prediction/warning
4.) Groundwater-level and temperature fluctuations
5.) Electrical conductivity - as rocks compress they loseresistance (conductivity increases)
6.) Leveling surveys and lasers - are different sides of thefault changing up,down,side to side
Earth and Environmental fig. 1.4.2
PREDICTION and WARNING continued
PREDICTION
Intermediate- Long-Term Predictions: Can we do it?
Faults can be characterized into 3 main groups:
1.) Quasi-Periodic: Major events or events of certain magnitude happen at nearly regular intervals
2.) Clustered Movements: movements occur for periodsof time (decades) the quiet for periods of time (centuries)
3.) Random- Well just that. We got nothin’. San Andreas?
PREDICTION
BUT!!!!!!!
Haicheng China, Winter of 1975
Precursors:1.) land elevation changed (laser and satellite data collection)2.) water level changed unexpectedly (ground and surface)3.) minor foreshocks increased in frequency
Action:1.) An evacuation was ordered2.) On Feb. 4 a 7.3 hit.3.) killed 2,041 injured 27,5384.) potential fatalities could have been 150,000