Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Geological Magazine”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

23 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2009

Report from Ground Zero: How geoscientists aid in the aftermath of environmental disasters

People around the world remember when they first learned of the attacks on New York City’s World Trade Center towers on Sept. 11, 2001. For me, the memories are vivid — my feelings of shock, horror and sadness were similarly etched on the faces of all the attendees of a mining and the environment workshop in Buenos Aires, Argentina, where I was speaking. At that time, I had no idea that our small research group at the U.S. Geological Survey in Denver, Colo., would soon be called upon to help public officials understand the potential health and environmental implications of the disaster and the ensuing rescue, recovery and cleanup efforts.

Earth Magazine↗
USGS2013

US Topo–A new national map series, 2012 update

The U.S. Geological Survey's Larry Moore provides an update on the US Topo effort, the Survey’s general purpose, digital, quadrangle map series. He outlines the successes thus far and the obstacles still ahead in 2013.

Directions Magazine↗
USGS1997

Digital shaded-relief image of Alaska

One of the most spectacular physiographic images of the conterminous United States, and the first to have been produced digitally, is that by Thelin and Pike ( USGS I-2206, 1991 ). The image is remarkable for its crispness of detail and for the natural appearance of the artificial land surface. Our goal has been to produce a shaded-relief image of Alaska that has the same look and feel as the Thelin and Pike image. The Alaskan image could have been produced at the same scale as its lower 48 counterpart (1:3,500,000). But by insetting the Aleutian Islands into the Gulf of Alaska, we were able to print the Alaska map at a larger scale (1:2,500,000) and about the same physical size as the Thelin and Pike image. Benefits of the 1:2,500,000 scale are (1) greater resolution of topographic features and (2) ease of reference to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (1987) Alaska Map E and the statewide geologic map (Beikman, 1980), which are both 1:2,500,000 scale. Manually drawn, shaded-relief images of Alaska's land surface have long been available (for example, Department of the Interior, 1909; Raisz, 1948). The topography depicted on these early maps is mainly schematic. Maps showing topographic contours were first available for the entire State in 1953 (USGS, 1:250,000) (J.H. Wittmann, USGS, written commun., 1996). The Alaska Map E was initially released in 1954 in both planimetric (revised in 1973 and 1987) and shaded-relief versions (revised in 1973, 1987, and 1996); topography depicted on the shaded-relief version is based on the 1:250,000-scale USGS topographic maps. Alaska Map E was later modified to include hypsometric tinting by Raven Maps and Images (1989, revised 1993) as copyrighted versions. Other shaded-relief images were produced for The National Geographic Magazine (LaGorce, 1956; 1:3,000,000) or drawn by Harrison (1970; 1:7,500,000) for The National Atlas of the United States. Recently, the State of Alaska digitally produced a shaded-relief image of Alaska at 1:2,500,000 scale (Alaska Department of Natural Resources, 1994), using the 1,000-m digital elevation data set referred to below. An important difference between our image and these previous ones is the method of reproduction: like the Thelin and Pike (1991) image, our image is a composite of halftone images that yields sharp resolution and preserves contrast. Indeed, the first impression of many viewers is that the Alaskan image and the Thelin and Pike image are composites of satellite-generated photographs rather than an artificial rendering of a digital elevation model. A shaded-relief image represents landforms in a natural fashion; that is, a viewer perceives the image as a rendering of reality. Thus a shaded-relief image is intrinsically appealing, especially in areas of spectacular relief. In addition, even subtle physiographic features that reflect geologic structures or the type of bedrock are visible. To our knowledge, some of these Alaskan features have not been depicted before and so the image should provide earth scientists with a new "look" at fundamental geologic features of Alaska.

Alaska↗
USGS2011

US Topo - A new national map series

In the second half of the 20th century, the foundation of the U.S. Geological Survey's national map series was the handcrafted 7.5-minute topographic map. Times change, budgets get squeezed and currency expectations become ever more challenging. The USGS's Larry Moore, who oversees data production operations at two National Geospatial Technical Operations Centers, provides an introduction to the new US Topo quadrangle maps.

Directions Magazine↗
USGS2024

Developing and implementing an International Macroseismic Scale (IMS) for earthquake engineering, earthquake science, and rapid damage assessment

Executive Summary Macroseismic observations and analysis connect our collective seismological past with the present and the present to the future by facilitating hazard estimates and communicating the effects of ground shaking to a wide variety of audiences across the ages. Invaluable ground shaking and building damage information is gained through standardized, systematic approaches for assigning intensities and, importantly, sharing and archiving those assignments in a reproducible form. The applications for these assignments are far reaching. Traditional macroseismic surveys provide vital constraints on critical aspects of earthquakes and their effects on society, whereas internet-based macroseismic datasets are extremely valuable for real-time earthquake situational awareness, and they contribute to later engineering loss and risk analyses. These important applications of macroseismic observations would be helped by revisiting traditional macroseismic surveys for modern environments, standardizing internet-based collection strategies, and ensuring compatibility between traditional and internet-based approaches of macroseismic data collection. Even with best practices, we have identified several limitations with modern macroseismic data collection approaches, particularly from the U.S. Geological Survey's perspective. First, whereas crowdsourced, internet-based intensities such as “Did You Feel It?” are robust and definitive for lower intensities, they are poorly defined above intensity VII, where damage observations may require expert knowledge of each building’s structural system. Second, in the United States, we use the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale, which is consistent with—yet inferior to—the more recently developed European Macroseismic Scale (EMS–98; Grünthal and others, 1998). Similarly, New Zealand uses the New Zealand MMI Scale (Dowrick and others, 2008), which lacks detail on how to assign intensities above MMI VIII. The EMS–98 fundamentally advanced the science of macroseismic intensity assignment by requiring quantitative assessments at each location through consistent application on statistical ranges of well-defined damage grades to building-specific vulnerability classes. Lastly, the United States and New Zealand no longer have professionals dedicated to conducting traditional macroseismic field surveys, so a strategy is needed for allowing postearthquake building inspectors and insurance loss assessors to contribute to intensity assignments. The goals of our International Macroseismic Scale workshop were thus twofold. First, harmonize the MMI Scale with EMS–98 for the United States and New Zealand—which share several similar building types—by considering those structures and associated damage grades that are not well represented in the current EMS–98 building vulnerability class table. Second, begin to formalize the process of augmenting EMS–98 with new regional building classes and damage grades toward the development of a macroseismic scale that can be used globally, beyond the United States and New Zealand. Such an effort necessarily requires reviewing and expanding the original EMS–98 explanatory documents and consideration of any required revisions. We can build on the shoulders of giants in that a few of the original EMS–98 developers and experts participated in and were integral to our workshop. Their background and guidance were key in moving forward toward an international scale. We agreed that additional building vulnerability classes, damage grades, and written and pictorial descriptions are necessary and ideally accompanied by a detailed paper trail for other nations to follow. If we can improve the macroseismic assignment process in both nations, we can also aim to refine the process of collecting postearthquake impact data, a boon to many engineering and financial concerns. The benefits of a truly International Macroseismic Scale are considerable for both the engineering and seismology communities. A modern macroseismic scale requires more deliberate archival damage data collection, motivating more consistent and accessible postevent datasets that would have applications beyond the specific event. Applying field-collected building damage data toward macroseismic assignments would allow for increased coordination between engineering reconnaissance teams and local inspectors in collecting such data for official purposes. In addition, rapid and consistent intensity assignments globally would enable more accurate ShakeMaps—and thus improved earthquake engineering and geotechnical forensics, loss and risk estimates, and correlations between macroseismic intensity and ground motion parameters. A brief summary of the Powell Center IMS workshop was published by Wald and others (2023) in the magazine Eos. This Open-File Report describes the workshop, its discussions, and its outcomes in detail. In summarizing the workshop, we have added important background material and reflections for proper context.

Open-File Report↗