Geology topics

D. Oppenheimer

Publications and source records attributed to D. Oppenheimer.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2008

NOAA/West Coast and Alaska Tsunami Warning Center Pacific Ocean response criteria

New West Coast/Alaska Tsunami Warning Center (WCATWC) response criteria for earthquakes occurring in the Pacific basin are presented. Initial warning decisions are based on earthquake location, magnitude, depth, and - dependent on magnitude - either distance from source or precomputed threat estimates generated from tsunami models. The new criteria will help limit the geographical extent of warnings and advisories to threatened regions, and complement the new operational tsunami product suite. Changes to the previous criteria include: adding hypocentral depth dependence, reducing geographical warning extent for the lower magnitude ranges, setting special criteria for areas not well-connected to the open ocean, basing warning extent on pre-computed threat levels versus tsunami travel time for very large events, including the new advisory product, using the advisory product for far-offshore events in the lower magnitude ranges, and specifying distances from the coast for on-shore events which may be tsunamigenic. This report sets a baseline for response criteria used by the WCATWC considering its processing and observational data capabilities as well as its organizational requirements. Criteria are set for tsunamis generated by earthquakes, which are by far the main cause of tsunami generation (either directly through sea floor displacement or indirectly by triggering of slumps). As further research and development provides better tsunami source definition, observational data streams, and improved analysis tools, the criteria will continue to adjust. Future lines of research and development capable of providing operational tsunami warning centers with better tools are discussed.

Science of Tsunami Hazards↗

USGS2000

Rapid distribution of earthquake information for everybody

No matter who you are, seismologist or regular person on the street, when you feel the Earth move you want to know what's going on. Was it an earthquake? Where was the earthquake? How big was it? As a grad student, many moons ago, when the Earth moved, the Electronic Seismologist (ES) was known to immediately turn on the “AM/FM-Automatic-Earthquake-Locator.” Before the seismograms could be pulled off the photographic drums, developed, and read and an “official” hypocenter determined (using a large map and a piece of string to swing arcs), the radio would usually have reported a location. Individuals feeling the earthquake would have called radio and TV stations (not to mention the police, newspapers, and sometimes the seismograph station), reported feeling something, and described what it was like. Reporters taking these calls got pretty good at estimating roughly where the event was, and they sometimes came up with a fairly good estimate of the magnitude. This seat-of-the-pants radio-seismology is fast becoming a lost art. Reporters now race to their computers and point their Web browsers at the nearest seismic network where they can count on finding, within minutes, an automatic but “official” location and magnitude for the earthquake.

Seismological Research Letters↗

USGS1994

Block versus continuum deformation in the Western United States

The relative role of block versus continuum deformation of continental lithosphere is a current subject of debate. Continuous deformation is suggested by distributed seismicity at continental plate margins and by cumulative seismic moment sums which yield slip estimates that are less than estimates from plate motion studies. In contrast, block models are favored by geologic studies of displacement in places like Asia. A problem in this debate is a lack of data from which unequivocal conclusions may be reached. In this paper we apply the techniques of study used in regions such as the Alpine-Himalayan belt to an area with a wealth of instrumental data-the Western United States. By comparing plate rates to seismic moment release rates and assuming a typical seismogenic layer thickness of 15 km it appears that since 1850 about 60% of the Pacific-North America motion across the plate boundary in California and Nevada has occurred seismically and 40% aseismically. The San Francisco Bay area shows similar partitioning between seismic and aseismic deformation, and it can be shown that within the seismogenic depth range aseismic deformation is concentrated near the surface and at depth. In some cases this deformation can be located on creeping surface faults, but elsewhere it is spread over a several kilometer wide zone adjacent to the fault. These superficial creeping deformation zones may be responsible for the palaeomagnetic rotations that have been ascribed elsewhere to the surface expression of continuum deformation in the lithosphere. Our results support the dominant role of non-continuum deformation processes with the implication that deformation localization by strain softening must occur in the lower crust and probably the upper mantle. Our conclusions apply only to the regions where the data are good, and even within the Western United States (i.e., the Basin and Range) deformation styles remain poorly resolved. Nonetheless, we maintain that block motion is the deformation style of choice for those continental regions where the data are best.

Earth and Planetary Science Letters↗

USGS1993

The Cape Mendocino, California, earthquakes of April 1992: Subduction at the triple junction

The 25 April 1992 magnitude 7.1 Cape Mendocino thrust earthquake demonstrated that the North America—Gorda plate boundary is seismogenic and illustrated hazards that could result from much larger earthquakes forecast for the Cascadia region. The shock occurred just north of the Mendocino Triple Junction and caused strong ground motion and moderate damage in the immediate area. Rupture initiated onshore at a depth of 10.5 kilometers and propagated up-dip and seaward. Slip on steep faults in the Gorda plate generated two magnitude 6.6 aftershocks on 26 April. The main shock did not produce surface rupture on land but caused coastal uplift and a tsunami. The emerging picture of seismicity and faulting at the triple junction suggests that the region is likely to continue experiencing significant seismicity.

California↗

USGS1992

Preliminary seismological results

On April 25 and April 26, 992, three earthquakes with magnitude (M) equal to or greater than 6.6 occurred near Cape Mendocino, California. the sequence began with a relatively shallow earthquake (M=7.1) on Saturday, April 25, at 11:06 a.m. local time. The two most most powerful aftershocks has magnitudes of 6.6 and 6.7. They occurred at 00:41 a.m. and 4:18 a.m. local times, respectively, on Sunday, April 26. The mainshock had a focal depth of about 10 km and the hypocenters of the strong afterschokcs were about 20 km deep. During the next three weeks, approximately 1500 aftershocks were recorded by the seismographic networks of the U.S Geological Survey. Some 200 of these events had M ≥3.0.

California↗

USGS1987

New evidence on the state of stress of the San Andreas fault system

Contemporary in situ tectonic stress indicators along the San Andreas fault system in central California show northeast-directed horizontal compression that is nearly perpendicular to the strike of the fault. Such compression explains recent uplift of the Coast Ranges and the numerous active reverse faults and folds that trend nearly parallel to the San Andreas and that are otherwise unexplainable in terms of strike-slip deformation. Fault-normal crustal compression in central California is proposed to result from the extremely low shear strength of the San Andreas and the slightly convergent relative motion between the Pacific and North American plates. Preliminary in situ stress data from the Cajon Pass scientific drill hole (located 3.6 kilometers northeast of the San Andreas in southern California near San Bernardino, California) are also consistent with a weak fault, as they show no right-lateral shear stress at ∼2-kilometer depth on planes parallel to the San Andreas fault.

California↗