Massive DECREASE in seismic activity in 2011 worldwide!!
Has PuterMan finally lost it? Should he be committed to the funny farm? Probably, but not so fast! This is a very small part of my study of 2011 which
I will release towards the end of January in which I will examine each of the 50 Flinn-Engdahl seismic regions separately.
I realise 2011 is not done yet, but even if we have 2 x mag 7 today or tomorrow it will make very little difference to the figures.
So first of all here are the aggregate global figures for 2001 through to 2011 for earthquakes of Magnitude 5 or greater.
It is plain as a pikestaff that there have been more earthquakes and more energy release than any year in the past decade so PuterMan just WTH are you
As I have said in many threads on ATS since the Tohoku earthquake, this was a pretty unique event in that it was not expected and was way out of the
normal for the area. The area is FE geographic regions 226 to 230 inclusive which are a part of seismic region 19.
The differences between 2011 and the norm, based on the average numbers between 1963 and 2010 inclusive, can be seen here
Magnitde,2011,Av Pre, Diff
Mag 5, 712, 34, 678
Mag 6, 78, 3, 75
Mag 7, 5, 1 (0.3), 4
I have counted Mag 7 as 1 but the average is actually 0.3. Other numbers have also been rounded up.
Ignoring the 9+ for a minute this is a huge energy difference, and 75 mag 6 earthquakes is a substantial proportion of the total number of Mag 6 for
the year (204).
So if Honshu/Tohoku has been so wildly different what would it have looked like if the Mag 9.1 never happened?
What I have done here is remove the Mag nine and all excess values from Japan leaving the average figures. I have also removed the Banda Aceh mag 9
but no other values from that one since the count of mag 6 quakes actually fell after that one. Its effect on figures, other than its own energy was
Obviously, if you subtract Japan and leave the norm, there has been a massive decrease in seismicity in other areas. In terms of Petajoules of energy
released worldwide it would have ranked as bottom against the previous decade.
The magnitude equivalent would have been an 8.246 against the next lowest in 2008 of Mag 8.281
Magnitude equivalent is the Magnitude value if all the energy released in the year had been released as a single earthquake. For the analysis of which
areas saw a big decrease I am afraid you will have to wait for the full report.
Is this subtraction a valid method? Yes it is since each seismic region can be looked at as a separate entity. Interplay between regions as stress
moves along the boundaries is a much more complex subject and may form a part of the fuller study but the effects over these large seismic regions are
Details of how the data is derived and of the Flinn-Engdahl regions can be found here:
2011 Report methodology