Quake Watch 2012

Earthquake Details

This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.
Magnitude
6.3
Date-Time
Thursday, November 08, 2012 at 02:01:51 UTC
Wednesday, November 07, 2012 at 06:01:51 PM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location
49.185°N, 128.528°W
Depth
16.6 km (10.3 miles)
Region
VANCOUVER ISLAND, CANADA REGION
Distances
186 km (115 miles) SSW of Port Hardy, Canada
255 km (158 miles) WSW of Campbell River, Canada
262 km (162 miles) W of Courtenay, Canada
271 km (168 miles) W of Port Alberni, Canada
Location Uncertainty
horizontal +/- 18 km (11.2 miles); depth +/- 8.2 km (5.1 miles)
Parameters
NST=329, Nph=332, Dmin=128 km, Rmss=0.6 sec, Gp=144°,
M-type=regional moment magnitude (Mw), Version=7

Source

A 6.3M at 40km depth just off the coast of Vancouver Island.

I didn't feel anything on the mainland.

ETA - it looks like this one fell between the fault lines in the subduction zone but I'm still going to have my b.o.b ready at the door.

I don't think many of us were surprised by the Central American earthquake. Central America has been very active for months. If we take into account the Haida Gwaii earthquake as well, it would appear the spine of North America is moving and adjusting. Maybe this is from the Pacific spread and in reaction to Japan's movement. Cascadia lies between these two lastest large earthquakes. I'm becoming more convinced that all this is related and part of a cluster which will eventually lead to the mega-thrust. And let's not forget it wasn't all that long ago we had South America with a 8.8M in Chile.

A large earthquake in Cascadia in the very near term seems very likely. Even the Cascadian mega-thrusts came in clusters of about three in quick succession and then a longer gap before the next cluster interval.

I mean why wouldn't be consider this part of a cluster. It has come within 10 hours. The webi/helicorders are a mess.

I went back and watched a BBC Horizon Documentary on the Japanese Earthquake. Listen to the description of how little force it took to trigger the mega-thrust. it's all about stress. These stresses are released and built at the same time.

hold on



www.youtube.com...

If you want to skip ahead to the really neat part, it's 18:35. a gentle handshake

I have a grave concern for fellow members(ATS) on the west coast of America..I mean everyone on the west coast.

Amen, Ericblair !! I feel that all the large activity on the north and south end of cascadia has raised the stakes dramatically for a very large quake.

I do not want to come across as a slut of fear, however, I feel that the moderate number of 4 and 5 mags in this area over the last 6 months could be warning us gently of something catastrophic to come.

You folks along the coast can never be too prepared. Just a heads up from a green horn quaker.

I am having a hard time finding a map of the epicenters off the w. coast for the last 6-8 months(putertard)

Maybe one of our very own Yoda's can make one appear in 90 seconds....that is, when they get a chance

CNN is reporting 48 dead in the Guatemala quake today.

Is that the official report ya think? I guess we wait...

www.cnn.com... source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582" target="_blank" class="postlink">48 Dead

reply to post by ericblair4891

Something to pay attention to for sure.
How cool is that video? Besides the info.
I mean watching an earthquake & tsunami in Japan,
narrated by someone who sounds like Billy Connolly!!!
Priceless! I love watching Billy!!!
Sorry...got side tracked...again!

Was wilfing in your other post:

blogs.smithsonianmag.com...


Found this at the bottom:

1.At deep sites, because sand crushes from the pressure of the earths
mantle fullerenes ( diamond 60) are substituted for sand. Buckminsterfullerenes Are
nanomaterials only a few time the size of a hydrogen molecule;
used in enormous volumes in the Barnett Shale gas mines, they
are never reported as proppants like sand, but they are manufactured to be used
as proppants. We are responsibly warned not to breathe the toner
dust in printer ink because these fullerenes are catagorized as cytotoxics,
meaning deadly to cells.They are perfect lubricants and can make rock surfaces underground.
Accordingly, NIOSH cites that fullerenes are able to cause mesothelioma
and can injure fishes. Regulators must force fullerenes to be declaired.


And these two links too:

Two companies want to frack slopes of volcano:

blogs.smithsonianmag.com...
They may be in for more than they bargained for!


NC Rep pushes wrong button & approves fracking in the state:

blogs.smithsonianmag.com...
Talk about having a bad day!!!

WOQ

reply to post by wasobservingquietly


shh, you weren't supposed to read the fracking volcanoes stuff. i'm still chewing on that. the tests are underway

www.vcstar.com...

i was going to maybe start a thread, because. umm, i know it's a "old" volcano but.

the trigger for eruptions is temperature differential. so...

1+1=2

So, they're going to blast the hot rock, with cold water.

www.laboratoryequipment.com...

Guatemala has had eight quaks in the last 15 hours earthquake.usgs.gov...

reply to post by PuterMan


Thanks for the links.

I was going to give it one more occurance, before I started researching.

Got one today.
2.9 in Puerto Rico at 2:16 pm UTC
4.1 in Qeen Islands at 3:04 pm UTC

I will let you know what I come up with.

So this recent 6.3 off the coast of Vancouver Island. Do we classify this as a new quake or could it still be considered an aftershock of the 7.7 weeks ago?

Originally posted by TheSparrowSings
So this recent 6.3 off the coast of Vancouver Island. Do we classify this as a new quake or could it still be considered an aftershock of the 7.7 weeks ago?

Sorry I have been following quite a few threads and forums tonight on this quake and I don't have a link just yet, but i do remember reading that tonights 6.3 is on or near the cascadia zone whereas haida gwai's eq of 7.7 10 days ago was on or near the juan de fuca. i'll search around a little more for this quote!

reply to post by TheSparrowSings

No, this was approx 194km south of the southernmost aftershock recorded in the first 154 hours after the 7.7 by usgs
this one is on/in the Juan de Fuca Plate.
Could have been triggered by the 7.7 though

updated mag 7+ quakes for 2012
goo.gl...

I still haven't put the July NZ 7.148ML in yet, just realized now, too late for tonight.

thats 3 mag 7+ quakes offshore Central America this year, actually quite a while since the last one before 2012, ( I don't class Mexico as part of Central America)

Date/Time: 1992/9/2 0:16:1.6
Lat: 11.742 Long: -87.34
Region: Nicaragua
Mw: 7.7 Ms: 7.2
Mb: 5.3 ML: n/a
Depth: 45 km
Deaths: 116 Injuries: n/a
significant earthquake archives 314-2012

reply to post by muzzy

Hi Muzzy,

I'd have to agree with you on that call. This morning's (UTC) mag 6.3 Mw was a bit too far away from the likely rupture zone of the 7.7 Mw of Oct 28. The aftershocks around the main Oct 28 shock were within a very well-defined area and seemed to indicate a fault length rupture of perhaps 200 km. Today's event is about 450 km SSE from the 7.7 and that's pushing the limits for any sort of defined aftershock event within about one fault length rupture distance of the "defined" region of aftershock activity.

So, I'd go along with the idea that it was separate but possibly triggered -- and perhaps even by the combined actions of the 7.7 and also yesterday's M 7.4 Mw Guatemala event. In fact, over on the "Experiment" thread yesterday when I did a write-up of the Guatemala quake I asked members to keep an eye on the PNW region (and down to SoCal) in case there were events there as a possible consequence of those two M 7-plus quakes.

The reason I wrote it up in detail was because some members (self included) have been getting increasingly "ansty" in the past couple of weeks and the PNW is one of the zones we are focused on. And also because one of our members made a post that she was expecting something "massive" very soon -- and even with the M 7.4 that occurred 25 minutes after she posted, she (and others) feel that this was not the "massive" one.

In this post on Nov 7 (after the M 7.4) I said:

Between the two, we have the sections we have been eyeing with some nervousness, from Cascadia all the way down to SoCal. (The San Andreas Fault, however, is not a subduction zone. Different forces at work there, for the most part.)

The question is whether these two jolts will have any serious repurcussions on either the CSZ of the SAF.

Time will tell.

EDIT: just a note: where I have "CSZ of the SAF", it should read "CSZ or the SAF". END EDIT

I elaborated a bit more in some following posts but that's the gist. So this M 6.3 within the Juan de Fuca plate is a bit of a worry. Yes, they've had plenty of them in the past over many years, but its co-incidental timing to these two larger events has me wondering.

And Muzzy, do you happen to know when was the last time there were two M 7-plus quakeson that side of the ring of fire within a (say) two-week period? Seems to me it had to be a while ago.

Mike

reply to post by ericblair4891


10 million stars my friend. That is an excellent documentary - one of the best I have seen from Auntie Beeb. I am staggered that it only had 790 views! That should be compulsory viewing in all schools in Geography and Geology lessons, and in Universities/

Credit where credit is due you are an expert at seeking out articles and videos.

reply to post by PuterMan

Couldn't agree more. Most definitely worth the time to watch it.

Many thanks to Eric for bringing this to our attention.

Mike

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by ericblair4891

 

10 million stars my friend. That is an excellent documentary - one of the best I have seen from Auntie Beeb. I am staggered that it only had 790 views! That should be compulsory viewing in all schools in Geography and Geology lessons, and in Universities/

Credit where credit is due you are an expert at seeking out articles and videos.

Agreed! I let the toddler loose to run amuck while I sat and watched it all, I don't think I'll ever be able to fully comprehend the true size of that tsunami!

Also noticed the Irish eq expert named John, anything your not telling us PM? Doing some moonlighting in some bbc docos? :p

Originally posted by JustMike
reply to post by PuterMan

 

Couldn't agree more. Most definitely worth the time to watch it.

Many thanks to Eric for bringing this to our attention.

Mike

Add me to the list! Thanks so much Eric, for posting the link to this video. Excellent. The ferocity of that event is still so unbelievable.
I'm going to have my family watch it this evening.

Moment for Tensor for the Mag 6.3 offshore Vancouver Island quake looks to show a strike-slip motion: more ripping and tearing of the Juan de Fuca plate? Or does the depth put this in the mantle below the crustal rock?
In any event, it makes me wonder how much more strain the area can take before the subduction zone proper can take no more.

Guatemala quake killed at least 48 people and trapped others under rubble destroying roads and forcing evacuations as far away as Mexico City.

Originally posted by JustMike
reply to post by muzzy

 

And Muzzy, do you happen to know when was the last time there were two M 7-plus quakeson that side of the ring of fire within a (say) two-week period? Seems to me it had to be a while ago.

Mike

edit on 8/11/12 by JustMike because: (no reason given)

looking at ANSS for that as its the easiest format to use
my edit_ match to within 2 weeks/ 14days

catalog=ANSS
start_time=1800/01/01,00:00:00
end_time=2012/10/27,00:00:00
minimum_latitude=2
maximum_latitude=60
minimum_longitude=-137
maximum_longitude=-76
minimum_magnitude=7.0
maximum_magnitude=10
event_type=E

1982/06/07 10:59:40.16 16.5580 -98.3580 33.80 7.00 Ms El Salvador
1982/06/19 06:21:58.00 13.3130 -89.3390 81.60 7.00 Unk Near Coast Of Guerrero. Mexico

there were a couple of others but I classed those as main and aftershock.
aw heck heres the whole list of the results

WHEN, LAT, LONG, DEPTH, MAG, TYPE, WHERE
2012/09/05, 10.099, -85.308, 35, 7.6, Mw, Costa Rica
2012/08/27, 12.139, -88.59, 28, 7.4, Mw, Off Coast Of Central America
2012/04/12, 28.696, -113.104, 13, 7, Mw, Baja California. Mexico
2012/03/20, 16.493, -98.231, 20, 7.4, Mw, Near Coast Of Guerrero. Mexico
2010/04/04, 32.2163, -115.3005, 10, 7.2, Mw, Calif.-Baja Calif. Border Region
2009/05/28, 16.731, -86.217, 19, 7.3, Mw, North Of Honduras
2005/06/15, 41.292, -125.953, 16, 7.2, Mw, Off Coast Of Northern California
2004/11/15, 4.695, -77.508, 15, 7.2, Mw, Near West Coast Of Colombia
2004/10/09, 11.422, -86.665, 35, 7, Mw, Near Coast Of Nicaragua
2003/01/22, 18.77, -104.104, 24, 7.6, Mw, Near Coast Of Jalisco. Mexico
2001/01/13, 13.049, -88.66, 60, 7.7, Mw, El Salvador
1999/10/16, 34.594, -116.271, 0.02, 7.1, Mw, Southern California
1999/09/30, 16.059, -96.931, 60.6, 7.5, Me, Oaxaca. Mexico
1999/06/15, 18.386, -97.436, 70, 7, Me, Central Mexico
1999/03/31, 5.827, -82.616, 10, 7, Me, South Of Panama
1997/01/11, 18.219, -102.756, 33, 7.2, Me, Michoacan. Mexico
1996/02/25, 15.978, -98.07, 21.1, 7.1, Me, Off Coast Of Guerrero. Mexico
1995/10/21, 16.84, -93.469, 159.3, 7.2, Me, Chiapas. Mexico
1995/10/09, 19.055, -104.205, 33, 8, Me, Near Coast Of Jalisco. Mexico
1995/09/14, 16.779, -98.597, 23, 7.4, Me, Near Coast Of Guerrero. Mexico
1994/09/01, 40.402, -125.68, 10, 7, Ms, Off Coast Of Northern California
1992/10/18, 7.075, -76.862, 10, 7.3, Ms, Northern Colombia
1992/09/02, 11.742, -87.34, 44.8, 7.2, Ms, Near Coast Of Nicaragua
1991/11/19, 4.554, -77.442, 21.3, 7, Ms, Near West Coast Of Colombia
1991/04/22, 9.685, -83.073, 10, 7.6, Ms, Costa Rica
1989/10/18, 37.0362, -121.8798, 17.43, 7, ML, Central California
1985/09/21, 17.802, -101.647, 30.8, 7.6, Ms, Near Coast Of Guerrero. Mexico
1985/09/19, 18.19, -102.533, 27.9, 8.1, Ms, Michoacan. Mexico
1983/12/02, 14.066, -91.924, 67.1, 7.1, Unk, Guatemala
1983/04/03, 8.717, -83.123, 37, 7.3, Ms, Costa Rica
1982/06/19, 13.313, -89.339, 81.6, 7, Unk, El Salvador
1982/06/07, 16.558, -98.358, 33.8, 7, Ms, Near Coast Of Guerrero. Mexico
1980/11/08, 41.0842, -124.6157, 14.64, 7.2, Unk, Near Coast Of Northern Calif.
1979/03/14, 17.813, -101.276, 49, 7.6, Ms, Near Coast Of Guerrero. Mexico
1978/11/29, 16.01, -96.591, 18, 7.7, Ms, Oaxaca. Mexico
1978/08/23, 10.204, -85.222, 56, 7, Ms, Costa Rica
1976/07/11, 7.409, -78.127, 3, 7, Ms, Panama
1976/02/04, 15.324, -89.101, 5, 7.5, Ms, Guatemala
1974/07/13, 7.747, -77.688, 12, 7.3, Ms, Panama-Colombia Border Region
1973/01/30, 18.481, -102.996, 43, 7.5, Ms, Michoacan. Mexico
1972/07/30, 56.82, -135.685, 25, 7.6, Ms, Southeastern Alaska
1970/06/24, 51.753, -131.024, 12, 7, Ms, Queen Charlotte Islands Region
1970/04/29, 14.518, -92.603, 33, 7.3, Ms, Near Coast Of Chiapas. Mexico
1968/08/02, 16.588, -97.696, 40, 7.1, Ms, Oaxaca. Mexico
1965/08/23, 16.3, -95.8, 20, 7.25, Unk, Oaxaca. Mexico
1958/07/10, 58.36, -136.34, 0, 7.9, ML, Southeastern Alaska
1954/12/16, 39.5, -118, , 7.1, ML, Nevada
1954/12/16, 39.32, -118.2, , 7.2, ML, Nevada
1952/07/21, 34.9582, -118.998, 6, 7.5, Mw, Southern California
1949/08/22, 53.62, -133.27, 0, 8.1, ML, Queen Charlotte Islands Region
1932/12/21, 38.75, -118, , 7.2, Unk, Nevada
1929/05/26, 51.51, -130.74, 0, 7, ML, Queen Charlotte Islands Region
1927/10/24, 57.5, -137, 25, 7.1, ML, Southeastern Alaska
1923/01/22, 40.5, -124.5, , 7.2, Unk, Near Coast Of Northern Calif.
1922/01/31, 41, -125.5, , 7.3, Unk, Off Coast Of Northern California
1901/01/18, 60, -135, 0, 7.1, ML, Southern Yukon Territory. Canada

map