Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Georisk”

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.

2 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2009

Probabilistic estimation of numbers and costs of future landslides in the San Francisco Bay region

We used historical records of damaging landslides triggered by rainstorms and a newly developed Probabilistic Landslide Assessment Cost Estimation System (PLACES) to estimate the numbers and direct costs of future landslides in the 10-county San Francisco Bay region. Historical records of damaging landslides in the region are incomplete. Therefore, our estimates of numbers and costs of future landslides are minimal estimates. The estimated mean annual number of future damaging landslides for the entire 10-county region is about 65. Santa Cruz County has the highest estimated mean annual number of damaging future landslides (about 18), whereas Napa, San Francisco, and Solano Counties have the lowest estimated mean numbers of damaging landslides (about 1 each). The estimated mean annual cost of future landslides in the entire region is about US $14.80 million (year 2000 $). The estimated mean annual cost is highest for San Mateo County ($3.24 million) and lowest for Solano County ($0.18 million). The annual per capita cost for the entire region will be about $2.10. Santa Cruz County will have the highest annual per capita cost at $8.45, whereas San Francisco County will have the lowest per capita cost at $0.31. Normalising costs by dividing by the percentage of land area with slopes equal to or greater than 17% indicates that San Francisco County will have the highest cost per square km ($7,101), whereas Santa Clara County will have the lowest cost per square km ($229). These results indicate that the San Francisco Bay region has one of the highest levels of landslide risk in the United States. Compared with landslide cost estimates from the rest of the world, the risk level in the Bay region seems high, but not exceptionally high.

Georisk↗
USGS2022

A study on the effect of site response on California seismic hazard map assessment

Prior studies have repeatedly shown that probabilistic seismic hazard maps from several different countries predict higher shaking than that observed. Previous map assessments have not, however, considered the influence of site response on hazard. Seismologists have long acknowledged the influence of near-surface geology, in particular low-impedance sediment layers, on earthquake ground-motion at frequencies of engineering concern. Although the overall effects of site response are complex, modern ground-motion models (GMMs) account for site effects using terms based on V S30 , the time-averaged shear-wave velocity in the upper 30 m of the Earth’s surface. In this study, we consider general implications of incorporating site terms from modern GMMs using site-specific V S30 as a proxy in probabilistic seismic hazard maps for California. At the long periods (1–5 s) that affect tall buildings, site terms amplify the mapped hazard by factors of 1–3 at many sites relative to maps calculated for the standard reference soft-rock site condition, V S30 = 760 m/s. However, at the short periods of ground-motion that are the main contributors to peak ground acceleration (PGA) and thus affect smaller structures, only negligible effects occur due to nonlinear deamplification of strong ground-motion at high frequencies. Nonlinear deamplification increases as the shaking level increases. For very strong shaking, deamplification can overcome the linear amplification, yielding net deamplification. We explore the implications of these results for the evaluation of hazard maps. Because site effects do not change the maps appreciably at short periods, we can exclude site response as an explanation for why the maps overpredict historically observed shaking as captured by the California Historical Intensity Mapping Project (CHIMP) dataset. The results are expected to be generalizable to regions that are comparable to California in terms of structure and seismicity rates. In low-to-moderate-seismicity regions where the hazard reflects weaker shaking, nonlinear site response is expected to be less important for the hazard.

California↗