1. Was the January 26th, 1700 Cascadia Earthquake Part of a Rupture Sequence?
- Subjects
- *
CASCADIA Earthquake, 1700 , *EARTHQUAKE zones , *SEISMOLOGY , *EARTH movements , *PLATE tectonics - Abstract
Coastal subsidence, dating of plant remains and tree rings, and evidence for tsunami inundation point to coseismic activity on a sizable portion of the Cascadia subduction zone around three centuries ago. A tsunami of remote origin in 1700 C.E., probably from Cascadia, caused flooding and damage in Japan. In previous modeling, this transpacific evidence was found most simply explained by one Cascadia rupture about 1,000 km long. Here I model tens of thousands of ruptures and simulate their subsidence and tsunami signals and show that it is possible that the earthquake was part of a sequence of several events. Partial rupture of ∼400 km offshore southern Oregon and northern California in one large M ≥ 8.7 earthquake can explain the tsunami in Japan without conflicting with the subsidence. As many as four more earthquakes with M ≤ 8.7 can complete the subsidence signal without their tsunamis being large enough to be recorded in Japan. The purpose of this study is not to find a single, most likely, scenario or disprove the single‐rupture hypothesis favored by alternative evidence such as turbidites. Rather, it demonstrates that a multiple rupture sequence may explain part of the available data, and therefore cannot be discounted. Given the gaps in the presently available estimates of subsidence it is also possible that segments of the megathrust, for example from Copalis to the Strait of Juan de Fuca, did not rupture in 1700. The findings have significant implications for Cascadia geodynamics and how earthquake and tsunami hazards in the region are quantified. Plain Language Summary: There is significant evidence from geology and historical documents of a tsunami in Japan that a very large earthquake occurred in the Pacific Northwest of the U.S. on the "Cascadia Subduction Zone." To this day it has been believed that this earthquake spanned more than 1000 km from California to British Columbia. In this paper the evidence is re‐examined with new techniques to model earthquake ruptures and tsunamis. I find that it is possible to explain the geology and historical data with a "rupture sequence." That is, instead of a single very large earthquake, a series of earthquakes. This series would still include a large event in 1700 but it could be followed or preceded by as many as 4 other smaller events in the decades around 1700. This is important because whether Cascadia produces only extremely long ruptures or several shorter ones helps us to understand how to plan for the next big earthquake. Key Points: As many as five, serial ruptures may explain evidence previously ascribed to a long Cascadia ruptureThe proposed serial ruptures accord with estimates of Cascadia subsidence and Japanese tsunami heightsThese findings are based on 37,500 rupture simulations in the range M7.8–M9.6 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF