Geology topics

Chris Massey

Publications and source records attributed to Chris Massey.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Second Integrated Hydro-Terrestrial Modeling (IHTM 2.0) workshop: USGCRP federal agency perspectives

U.S. federal leadership, mobilizing close interagency coordination across sectors, is key to tackling compound climate and human impacts on our nation’s water resources. Recognizing this need, federal agencies and academic collaborators conducted a series of workshops to advance Integrated Hydro-Terrestrial Modeling (IHTM). IHTM is focused on supporting a multiscale framework to accelerate research insights, better integrate operational and planning perspectives, and bridge national-to-regional capabilities to address major interdependent societal water challenges. This framework leverages the capabilities of different agencies and institutional partners across sectors to advance a shared vision for use-inspired modeling and open science. The IHTM conceptual framework has developed over several community workshops in recent years: ● In September 2019, a community coordinating group on IHTM hosted an interagency workshop (“IHTM 1.0”) with support from NSF, DOE, and USGS. The resulting report identified the need for agencies to invest resources in designing pilot use cases, setting the stage for an integrated national IHTM capability. ● In November 2020, the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) held a virtual Coastal-IHTM (C-IHTM) workshop in collaboration with the MultiSector Dynamics Community of Practice, which engages researchers across universities and national labs. Building on IHTM 1.0, this workshop aimed to identify coastal modeling capabilities and appropriate coastal applications of the IHTM framework. The workshop report detailed needs for open science, geographical or topical use cases, integrated modeling frameworks, and linking communities of practice. ● From October 31 to November 2, 2023, USGCRP hosted a hybrid IHTM 2.0 community workshop that brought together 160 scientists and managers from nine federal departments/agencies (DHS-FEMA, DOC-NOAA, DoD-USACE, DOE, DOI [U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), USGS], EPA, NASA, NSF, USDA [ARS, FS, NRCS]) and 32 non-federal academic, non-profit, and private institutions and consortiums. The workshop was organized by a federal Interagency Steering Committee with representatives from DOE, USGS, NSF, NASA, and NOAA, as well as a Scientific Organizing Committee comprising experts from academia and additional federal agency technical experts. The IHTM 2.0 workshop focused on moving the IHTM 1.0 concepts to action by making advances in designing national and regional integrated modeling experiments in five geographic testbeds. These modeling testbeds seek to facilitate collaborative water resources research and assessment that responds to societal needs, extending from basic research to resource management operations, including the assessment of water quantity, quality, and use at national and regional scales. Ultimately, we envision that the IHTM testbeds will improve our ability to provide water resources assessment scenarios to decision-makers and the public. This document summarizes USGCRP and member agencies’ perspectives of the IHTM 2.0 workshop. Sections 2 and 3 build on the work of the IHTM 2.0 workshop Scientific Organizing Committee to outline the importance of IHTM, summarize the workshop, and propose near- and medium-term IHTM priorities. Section 4 presents select ongoing and potential interagency activities that could help realize the IHTM 2.0 vision and align with three of USGCRP’s strategic goals for this decade: Advancing Science, Informing Decisions, and Engaging the Nation. Finally, Section 5 summarizes this report and offers information about how to connect with USGCRP’s IHTM activities. USGCRP and its member agencies are well-positioned to coordinate federal efforts to enhance IHTM capabilities in the coming years.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2024

Projections of multiple climate-related coastal hazards for the US Southeast Atlantic

Faced with accelerating sea level rise and changing ocean storm conditions, coastal communities require comprehensive assessments of climate-driven hazard impacts to inform adaptation measures. Previous studies have focused on flooding but rarely on other climate-related coastal hazards, such as subsidence, beach erosion and groundwater. Here, we project societal exposure to multiple hazards along the Southeast Atlantic coast of the United States. Assuming 1 m of sea level rise, more than 70% of the coastal residents and US \ $ 1 trillion in property are in areas projected to experience shallow and emerging groundwater, 15 times higher than daily flooding. Storms increase flooding exposure by an order of magnitude over daily flooding, which could impact up to ~50% of all coastal residents and US \ $ 770 billion in property value. The loss of up to ~80% of present-day beaches and high subsidence rates that currently affect over 1 million residents will exacerbate flooding and groundwater hazard risks.

Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, ↗

USGS2024

Tropical or extratropical cyclones: What drives the compound flood hazard, impact, and risk for the United States Southeast Atlantic coast?

Subtropical coastlines are impacted by both tropical and extratropical cyclones. While both may lead to substantial damage to coastal communities, it is difficult to determine the contribution of tropical cyclones to coastal flooding relative to that of extratropical cyclones. We conduct a large-scale flood hazard and impact assessment across the subtropical Southeast Atlantic Coast of the United States, from Virginia to Florida, including different flood hazards. The physics-based hydrodynamic modeling skillfully reproduces coastal water levels based on a comprehensive validation of tides, almost two hundred historical storms, and an in-depth hindcast of Hurricane Florence. We show that yearly flood impacts are two times as likely to be driven by extratropical than tropical cyclones. On the other hand, tropical cyclones are 30 times more likely to affect people during rarer 100-year events than extratropical cyclones and contribute to more than half of the regional flood risk. With increasing sea levels, more areas will be flooded, regardless of whether flooding is driven by tropical or extratropical cyclones. Most of the absolute flood risk is contained in the greater Miami metropolitan area. However, several less populous counties have the highest relative risks. The results of this study provide critical information for understanding the source and frequency of compound flooding across the Southeast Atlantic Coast of the United States.

Natural Hazards↗

USGS2018

Improving near‐real‐time coseismic landslide models: Lessons learned from the 2016 Kaikōura, New Zealand, earthquake

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is developing near‐real‐time global earthquake‐triggered‐landslide products to augment the USGS Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response (PAGER) system. The 14 November 2016 M w "> M w Mw 7.8 Kaikōura, New Zealand, earthquake provided a test case for evaluating the performance and near‐real‐time response applicability of three published global seismically induced landslide models. All three models obtain shaking estimates from the USGS ShakeMap, which is updated and sometimes changes significantly in the hours to days after an earthquake. The Kaikōura earthquake is a particularly valuable event that helps us better understand how changes to the ShakeMap affect the landslide models because the ShakeMap evolved significantly over several weeks as multifault rupture and seismic data were incorporated. We used the detailed landslide inventory available for this event for qualitative landslide model evaluation. We found that once a point source was replaced with an approximate rupture extent in ShakeMap, the landslide models were all successful at roughly identifying the area of highest hazard. This is notable, given that the models are relatively simple, coarse in resolution, and are based solely on input proxies that are globally available. However, all of the models dramatically overpredicted the hazard level, which indicates that improvements can be made. Subsequent updates to the ShakeMap resulted in improvements to model performance by some metrics and declining performance by others. In all cases, details of the ShakeMap strongly controlled the spatial pattern, even when those details were erroneous, such as the inclusion of a fault segment that did not rupture. If maps of landslide hazard are to be used effectively for rapid response, then we need to understand and clearly communicate the control that ShakeMap has over the models and how that typically evolves with time and is (or is not) reflected in reported uncertainties.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗