Comments on: Earthquake blogging

By: A re-post for SF Quake Day « Clastic Detritus

A re-post for SF Quake Day « Clastic Detritus — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:31:22 +0000

[...] 1989. It was also the strongest earthquake I’ve personally experienced (and the first one I’ve blogged [...]

By: Sea-Floor Sunday #6: Hudson Shelf Valley « Clastic Detritus

Sea-Floor Sunday #6: Hudson Shelf Valley « Clastic Detritus — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 19:04:00 +0000

[...] The submarine area colored in reds, greens, and light blue is the continental shelf. The first general aspect to point out is how broad this shelf is compared to the west coast of the US. At this location, the shelf is 180 km (110 mi) wide; along much of California it is on the order of 15 km (9 mi) wide, more-or-less. This is a function of a “passive” continental margin vs. an active margin. Along the east coast, the continental to oceanic crust transition is an old rifted margin. The active spreading center (the Mid-Atlantic Ridge) is now 2,800 km (1,700 mi) away. In this area, the rifting of continents started in the Triassic (225 million years ago). In other words, this margin has been relatively quiet (tectonically) since then, hence the “passive” adjective. In contrast, the west coast is an active margin…the plate boundary (i.e., San Andreas Fault system) is right there and moving now. [...]

By: Mental preparedness « Clastic Detritus

Mental preparedness « Clastic Detritus — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:49:17 +0000

[...] Disclaimers « Earthquake blogging [...]

By: BrianR

BrianR — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 20:09:13 +0000

Miguel…your coverage of that much bigger quake was really good…although I hope you don’t have to do it again very soon.

By: Miguel Vera

Miguel Vera — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 20:00:35 +0000

Ahh.. earthquake blogging, one of my specialties heh. Nice job Brian, good thing it was only 5.6. After the recent 8.0 earthquake in Peru I went into earthquake blogging mode, and it took me 10 days to get out of it. It was all worth it though, many people was thankful for the information. Sadly, most take interest about it after the disaster, but that's another story. Cheers.

By: BrianR

BrianR — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:12:32 +0000

Kim…your thoughts:
1: thanks (Alessia too)
2: I’ll leave that up to someone else to figure out
3: they did miss it, this was the strongest i’ve ever felt…just enough to remind me I live on a plate boundary, but not enough to wreak havoc
4: I don’t know if I like that thought, but perhaps
5: thanks

By: Kim

Kim — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:28:39 +0000

First thought: cool blogging.

Second thought: now I want to see an estimate of the stress changes on the adjacent faults from a M 5.6 on the Calaveras Fault. I think the Hayward Fault would be in the quadrant that would be stabilized, but I’ve only just started reading papers on earthquake triggering and they haven’t filtered into my intuition yet.

Third thought: heh. The GSA Structure/Tectonics division meeting was going on during that earthquake… but in Denver. And there were a lot of grad students and post-docs who study seismogenic fault structures there, between two theme sessions on the subject and a symposium on the San Andreas. And they missed this earthquake.

Fourth thought: I wonder if the M5-ish earthquake during the summer before Loma Prieta changed the stresses enough to make Loma Prieta more likely?

Fifth thought: good luck finishing the dissertation!

By: Alessia

Alessia — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 09:26:47 +0000

Hi Brian,

nice real-time earthquake blogging!