Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70022816

Reevaluation of tsunami formation by debris avalanche at Augustine Volcano, Alaska

Abstract

Debris avalanches entering the sea at Augustine Volcano, Alaska have been proposed as a mechanism for generating tsunamis. Historical accounts of the 1883 eruption of the volcano describe 6- to 9-meter-high waves that struck the coastline at English Bay (Nanwalek), Alaska about 80 kilometers east of Augustine Island. These accounts are often cited as proof that volcanigenic tsunamis from Augustine Volcano are significant hazards to the coastal zone of lower Cook Inlet. This claim is disputed because deposits of unequivocal tsunami origin are not evident at more than 50 sites along the lower Cook Inlet coastline where they might be preserved. Shallow water (<25 m) around Augustine Island, in the run-out zone for debris avalanches, limits the size of an avalanche-caused wave. If the two most recent debris avalanches, Burr Point (A.D. 1883) and West Island (<500 yr. B.P.) were traveling at velocities in the range of 50 to 100 meters per second, the kinetic energy of the avalanches at the point of impact with the ocean would have been between 1014 and 1015 joules. Although some of this energy would be dissipated through boundary interactions and momentum transfer between the avalanche and the sea, the initial wave should have possessed sufficient kinetic energy to do geomorphic work (erosion, sediment transport, formation of wave-cut features) on the coastline of lowwer Cook Inlet. Because widespread evidence of the effects of large waves cannot be found, it appears that the debris avalanches could not have been traveling very fast when they entered the sea, or they happened during low tide and displaced only small volumes of water. In light of these results, the hazard from volcanigenic tsunamis from Augustine Volcano appears minor, unless a very large debris avalanche occurs at high tide.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C. F. Waythomas. 2000. Reevaluation of tsunami formation by debris avalanche at Augustine Volcano, Alaska. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70022816

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Local variations in broadband sensor installations: Orientations, sensitivities, and noise levels

As seismologists continue to place more stringent demands on data quality, accurately described metadata are becoming increasingly important. In order to better constrain the orientation and sensitivities of seismometers deployed in U.S. Geological Survey networks, the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) has recently begun identifying true north with a fiber optic gyroscope (FOG) and has developed methodologies to constrain mid-band, vertical component sensitivity levels to less than 1% in a controlled environment. However, questions remain regarding the accuracy of this new alignment technique as well as if instrument sensitivities and background noise levels are stable when the seismometers are installed in different environmental settings. In this study, we examine the stability and repeatability of these parameters by reinstalling two high-quality broadband seismometers (Streckeisen STS-2.5 and Nanometrics T-360 Global Seismographic Network (GSN) version) at different locations around the ASL and comparing them to each other and a reference STS-6 seismometer that stayed stationary for the duration of the experiment. We find that even in different environmental conditions, the sensitivities of the two broadband seismometers stayed stable to within 0.1% and that orientations attained using the FOG are generally accurate to within a degree. However, one install was off by 5° due to a mistake made by the installation team. These results indicate that while technology and methodologies are now in place to calibrate and orient a seismometer to within 1°, human error both during the installation and while producing the metadata is often a limiting factor. Finally, we find that background noise levels at short periods (0.1–1 s) become noisier when the sensors are emplaced in unconsolidated materials, whereas the noise levels at long periods (30–100 s) are not sensitive to local geological structure on the vertical components.

Pure and Applied Geophysics

Inter-source interferometry of seismic body waves: Required conditions and examples

Seismic interferometry is widely applied to retrieve wavefields propagating between receivers. Another version of seismic interferometry, called inter-source interferometry, uses the principles of seismic reciprocity and expands interferometric applications to retrieve waves that propagate between two seismic sources. Previous studies of inter-source interferometry usually involve surface-wave and coda-wave estimations. We use inter-source interferometry to estimate the P-waves propagating between two sources rather than the estimation of surface waves and coda waves. We show that the recovered arrival times are dependent on the accuracy of the earthquake catalog of the two sources. Using inter-source interferometry, one can recover the waveform of the direct body waves and potentially reconstruct the waveform of coda waves, depending on the source-receiver geometry. The retrieval of these waveforms is accurate only when the wavefield is sampled with approximately 4 receivers per wavelength in the stationary phase zone. We show that using only receivers inside the stationary phase region for inter-source interferometry introduces the phase error of approximately 0.3 radians. In our study, we show an example of the P-wavefield reconstruction between two earthquakes using the seismic records from an array along San Andreas Fault. The retrieved P waves give a qualitative estimation of the thickness of the low-velocity zone of San Andreas Fault of approximately 4 km.

Pure and Applied Geophysics