New
#21
While I can see the validity of seismic monitoring around volcanoes, if safety alerts are not the objective of monitoring, what is the point of doing so, particularly in a volcano free, non-earthquake prone area?
Oklahoma Earthquake?
-
-
New #22
Felt it here in Van Buren, Arkansas (just east of Fort Smith). Was sitting here playing Solitaire, minding my own business...
I felt my chair shaking and items on the shelves rattled for about 15 to 20 seconds.
Kent
-
New #23
There are two reasons:
1. On-going research to determine if smaller quakes can be used to predict larger ones. Currently, we don't have a reliable method, nor do we clearly understand the dynamics between smaller and larger quakes.
2. Hazard mapping. Whilst many areas are non-earthquake prone, these areas are built on bedrock that are subject to faulting. Even minor earthquakes on small faults in younger age sediments pose significant hazards (e.g failure of dam walls, weakening of building foundations).
Regards,
Golden
-
New #24
While I can understand the academic interest, and considerations involved in planning structures as you mentioned, I'm tight enough to feel that it is a waste of tax dollars to create and man a vast monitoring network for this purpose. I think that a simple historic record would be sufficient to aid in building plans.
-
New #25
I agree with you. Unfortunately, a lot of academia have self-serving interests....."its dangerous so we better monitor it"......but on the other its hard to argue that we shouldn't invest in research that could potentially give us longer warnings of cataclysmic events such as what happened in Japan. Its difficult to say at what point the money isn't well spent.
In many cases, old fashioned geological mapping of major fault structures is sufficient to give enough information about siting major development, but despite that, some areas that are more hazardous than others still have large populations despite the risk (ie. San Francisco).
Regards,
Golden
-
New #26
It seems to me, that monitoring in quake prone areas would serve the interests of increasing knowledge sufficiently. Perhaps when they have learned enough to make it of greater use in reliable predictions elsewhere, the complete monitoring network would be warranted.
-
New #27
My experience here in Cal. is as Golden mentioned. The big ones give no warning, they just let loose. There are usually aftershocks, but almost always lesser quakes. Of course here, we are between 2 plates, but in OK it's no doubt a whole other scenario. A Guy
-
New #28
According to the news they had another in Oklahoma at 5:00am CST. About an hour and a half before this post.
-
New #29
Apparently, they have been having a series of quakes in that general area, but of lesser magnitude:
Map Centered at 36°N, 97°W
-
New #30
I'm curious, because they have had ~23 quakes in the last 48 hours within a circle of ~ 20 miles or less of each other. Does that continuation of activity indicate an increased or decreased chance of greater activity being in the offing.
Quote
Related Discussions