Thursday, August 08, 2019

The 2019 Ridgecrest CA Earthquake Pair

Two large earthquakes rocked California in July 2019.  On July 4th a large M6.4 moved a NE-SW trending fault that parallels the Garlock left-lateral fault system and a major (10x larger) M7.1 occurred on July 6 (June 5 local time) along the NW-SE East California Shear Zone that parallels the right-lateral plate boundary to the East.



Displacement from the larger quake are on the order of meters over a fault length of several tens of kilometers.  Offsets are captured by updated images on Google Earth.


The distance from populated areas limited their impact, but local shaking was severe and damaging.  The earthquake magnitudes are equivalent in energy to ~4 (M6.4) and ~45 (M7.1) Hiroshima-type atomic bombs.  There are typically ~15 M7+ earthquakes around the world and it was two decades ago when one occurred in California.  Large M7 aftershock earthquakes are not likely in the area, but many smaller will continue along the two fault trends, with more M5+ certainly possible.

The use of technical terms mainshock and aftershock is confusing semantics.  The largest earthquake in a cluster is called the mainshock and earthquakes recently (hours/days) before are called foreshocks.  Earthquakes days (and weeks) after the main shock are called aftershocks.  Here, some aftershocks are related to the M6.4 on the NE-SW fault system, and others to the M7.1 on the NW-SE system.  The shocks were recorded by Ann Arbor RaspiShakes, illustrated by the M7.1 event.


Westerly movement from the M6.4 may have primed the M7.1 by releasing sliding resistance on the latter's fault system,  Both are ultimately the result of regional strain from plate movement with a relative displacement of the Pacific plate of ~5cm/year, which accumulates stresses that are released periodically.

The area has historic seismic activity, with the larger reflecting continuing northwesterly motion of the Pacific plate along the N American plate margin (represented by the San Andreas Fault trace to the west). Over the past 40 years, 8 other M5+ earthquakes have occurred within 50 km of the July 6th, 2019 earthquake. The largest was a M 5.8 event on September 20, 1995, just 3 km west. The M7.1 Hector Mine event of Oct 16, 1999 occurred ~150km to the SE, and was similar lateral slip fault movement as the Ridgecrest M7.1.

Do these earthquakes change the potential for the Big One? No, because continuing Pacific-North America relative plate movement in western California means that a large quake along the San Andreas Fault system must occur in the near future. These recent California earthquakes to the east do nothing to reduce that threat.

Thursday, May 16, 2019

#ExxonKnew - #WeKnew

From Twitter

In 1982, #Exxon predicted 400-420ppm #CO2 and ~1.1C warming (since 1960) for today in proprietary report.  They were right, but did not share.  Also, predicting ~3C increase for 21st Century. 
12:20pm · 14 May 2019 



Read the report!  It assesses the (published) climate science of the day and inserts consumption predictions, all of which was public knowledge.  No conspiracy here; society decided to ignore that knowledge.
11:54am · 15 May 2019



Those upset by #ExxonKnew, here is prior year spot-on Hansen etal analysis using basic energy balance calculation and similar fast growth projection. New hashtag #WeKnew.
Paper at:
7:52am · 16 May 2019

Coda  

Read the 2018 NYT Magazine article "Losing Earth: The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change", By Nathaniel Rich.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html

Friday, May 10, 2019

Road to a Resilient Global Society

Daily news reports bring harrowing testimonials by communities, aid organizations and local officials of rapid environmental changes that are underway.  Yet, our society’s response to these changes is slow, and, in many cases, remains non-existent.  This inaction may reflect the perception that change is inherently slow and gradual, such as climate warming over several decades. 


The meaning of long-term change is embodied in the concept of sustainability, defined as a world where human needs are met equitably without harm to the environment, and without sacrificing the ability of future generations to meet their needs.  However, changes are impacting human society more quickly in many areas, affecting wealthy nations and poor nations alike.  This is captured by the complementary concept of resilience, which examines the ability of human society to prepare for, to absorb, to recover from, and to adapt to adverse events.  Societal resilience forms the foundation of a connected set of scientific perspectives by Susan Anenberg, Andrea Dutton, Christine Goulet, and Daniel Swain that explore the changing domains of air quality, sea level rise, earthquakes, and extreme weather in a long-form commentary in the science journal Earth's Future (https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EF001242).

Society’s progress along the four corners of prepare, adsorb, respond and adapt resilience square is uneven, in spite of our understanding of the foundational science and a growing sense that urgent action is needed.  The resilience vignettes describe the meaning and impact of current and near-term change in four major domains: human health impacts from air pollution, coastal inundation from sea-level rise, damaging earthquakes in populated areas, and impacts from extreme precipitation. 

Given our understanding of the scientific principles, societal action, from preparation to adaption, will be critical in minimizing the negative impacts of today’s changes.  The unprecedented rates of change in today's Earth system argue for urgent action in support of a resilient global society.

Toward a Resilient Global Society: Air, Sea Level, Earthquakes, and Weather, by Susan C. Anenberg, Andrea Dutton, Christine Goulet, Daniel L. Swain, Ben van der Pluijm.
Earth's Future, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EF001242

Wednesday, March 27, 2019

The Long and Winding Road: Making Resilience Real

More than 40 years ago the economist John Kenneth Galbraith remarked that the world had arrived at the “Age of Uncertainty.” Fast forward to 2019 and human society’s pace of change is ever more rapid. Artificial intelligence, the internet of things, climate change, the rise of China and India, among other factors, have multiplied the challenges and risks. We cannot get back to a less connected world, nor can we dismiss concerns about the major challenges we face. Indeed, technological, social and environmental drivers will transform our world into an even riskier place in 2050 than it already is today. 

Human society faces many challenges ahead;
creating a sustainable and resilient world
will not be a straightforward journey.
Credit: Free-Photos (public domain)

In other words, to ensure that we are on track toward a sustainable future, we urgently need decision-making that allows social-ecological-economic systems to ‘bounce back’ or to become transformed, such that our planet maintains desirable (from a human and planetary perspective) properties.

Several major insights emerge from theoretical, model and empirical considerations:

  • Integrated modelling, robust decision-making, methods from the nexus and proven practices offer innovations that can transform ‘business as usual’ into responses to risks.
  • In the decades to come, a failure to integrate new approaches into the decision-making of public and private sectors could be catastrophic. 
  • To successfully face our world’s challenges, we cannot return to a world that no longer exists.

We urgently need to transform our decision-making, and use innovative and proven methods to deliver a sustainable and resilient world for tomorrow. This will be a long and winding road, but a journey we must make together.


R. Quentin Grafton (The Australian National University) and Ben van der Pluijm (University of Michigan)

Citation: Grafton, R. Q., and B. van der Pluijm (2019), The long and winding road: Making resilience real, Eos, 100, https://doi.org/10.1029/