
The next ‘Big One' on the San Andreas fault might not be the earthquake we expect, researchers say
Would it be a repeat of 1857, when an earthquake estimated at magnitude 7.7 to 7.9 ruptured the fault from Monterey County all the way through Los Angeles County? Would it be more akin to the great 1906 San Francisco earthquake, which began just offshore of the city and ruptured in two directions, toward Humboldt County and Santa Cruz County?
Don't bet on an identical sequel.
That's the implication of a study published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The report, coauthored by scientists at Caltech in Pasadena, studied a massive earthquake that ruptured in the southeast Asian country of Myanmar on March 28 — on a fault known for being eerily similar to the San Andreas.
The earthquake ended up rupturing a much longer section of the fault than scientists expected, given the seismology of the region.
The implications of this study are that 'earthquakes never come back exactly the same way,' Solene L. Antoine, a postdoctoral fellow at Caltech and the study's lead author, said in an interview.
'It came as a surprise that you could get such a long rupture,' said Jean-Philippe Avouac, a coauthor of the study and a professor of geology and mechanical and civil engineering at Caltech.
March's Mandalay earthquake devastated Myanmar, killing at least 3,791 people and an additional 63 people in Thailand. High-rise buildings were damaged as far away as Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam and homes were damaged in the Ruili area of China. Damage was estimated at $1.9 billion, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.
It was the most powerful earthquake in Myanmar in at least 79 years.
The magnitude 7.7 earthquake ruptured an astonishing 317 miles of the Sagaing fault, a finding based on Antoine's analysis of satellite data showing earth movement after the quake. That's the longest seismic rupture ever documented on a continent.
By comparison, California's 1906 earthquake ruptured 296 miles of the San Andreas fault; and the 1857 earthquake, 225 miles. Longer seismic ruptures have been found only on subduction megathrusts deep underneath the ocean.
What's clear from the study is that while California's next 'Big One' may share some characteristics of previously documented devastating quakes, it's unlikely to be an exact replay. As the recent experience in Myanmar shows, even well-documented faults can behave in surprising ways.
The next step is to develop a model simulating earthquakes over many millennia for the San Andreas fault, which the authors plan to do in the future. But the San Andreas fault 'is far more complex,' Avouac said. 'It's not going to come soon, because it's quite a heavy calculation.'
Still, such simulations would provide a model of 'all possible scenarios so that we have a better view of the range of possible ruptures that could happen.'
For instance, maybe the San Andreas fault will rupture in smaller, separate earthquakes, Avouac said.
Or it could be a much larger earthquake — rupturing the fault not just from Monterey to Los Angeles counties, but perhaps all the way into San Bernardino, Riverside and Imperial counties, which would possibly exceed magnitude 8. Such a quake would be the largest simultaneous disaster in modern California history, with huge swaths of the state wracked by powerful seismic shaking all at once.
By comparison, the 1994 Northridge earthquake's footprint was relatively constrained, severely affecting only a portion of Los Angeles County, especially the San Fernando Valley — related to its relatively smaller magnitude of 6.7.
But while modeling previous activity on the San Andreas fault will provide a glimpse into the wide range of possible outcomes, it will not pinpoint precisely when the next great quake will strike.
'We can't just expect the exact same thing to happen,' Antoine said. 'It is a matter of just showing what scenarios are possible, the diversity of scenarios and seeing what are the consequences of each of those scenarios.'
Sometimes, Avouac said, 'it's quiet for a long time, nothing happens ... stress is building up, the fault is locked for a long time, nothing happens, and then, boom, you have a large earthquake.'
'And then you have other periods during which you have a lot of [seismic] activity, but these earthquakes are all smaller,' Avouac said.
But 'smaller' earthquakes, in the minds of researchers, are still big to the layperson. In the study's simulations, there are periods where earthquakes around magnitude 7.7 are common. In other periods, earthquakes max out at magnitude 7.5 or so, but are more frequent.
The entire length of the Sagaing fault — including areas that didn't rupture in the March earthquake — is 750 miles, north to south, from the Himalayas to the Andaman Sea, and helps accommodate the northward push of the Indian tectonic plate.
The fact that 317 miles of the Sagaing fault ruptured in March was surprising to scientists. Only about 170 miles had been quiet seismically for more than a century, having last ruptured in 1839.
Scientists call these 'seismic gaps' — particular areas of a fault that haven't recently ruptured.
Generally, scientists would've expected only this long-dormant 170-mile piece of the Sagaing fault to rupture, Avouac said, but not more recently ruptured sections. That includes a 100-mile stretch that ruptured in large earthquakes in 1929 and 1930, and a 50-mile stretch that went off in a pair of quakes in 1946 and 1956.
Instead, even those fault segments ruptured in the big March earthquake.
So what gives?
A possible explanation is the Sagaing fault's extraordinary smoothness. 'And people have observed that when the fault is very smooth, the rupture ... tends to propagate at a velocity' so fast that it results in an 'extremely elongated rupture,' Avouac said.
The study also published the results of a computer model simulation looking at how earthquakes might rupture along sections of the entire 750-mile long Sagaing fault. The code, developed by study coauthor Kyungjae Im of Caltech, suggests that over a hypothetical 1,400-year period, there would be no repeatable patterns.
In other words, earthquakes didn't seem to re-occur like clockwork, rupturing the same stretch of fault in a repeatable, predictable pattern.
'There is complexity here. And this is because each time you have an earthquake, it redistributes the stress on the fault, which is going to influence the next earthquake,' Avouac said. 'There's a self-induced complexity in the process, and that leads to a bit of randomness.'
There is one certainty, which is bound to disappoint anyone who shares the hope that a 'Big One' simply won't ever strike California again.
'There will be an earthquake at some point,' Antoine said. 'If there is stress building up on the fault, the fault won't hold forever.'
Further research and observations are essential to refine models of future possible earthquakes, including from the Sentinel satellites, which are operated by the European Space Agency, the authors said.
The other coauthors of the study are Rajani Shrestha and Chris Milliner of Caltech; Chris Rollins of Earth Sciences New Zealand; Kang Wang of the Washington-based EarthScope Consortium; and Kejie Chen of the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, China.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 hours ago
- Yahoo
The next 'Big One' on the San Andreas fault might not be the earthquake we expect, researchers say
What could the next mega-earthquake on California's notorious San Andreas fault look like? Would it be a repeat of 1857, when an earthquake estimated at magnitude 7.7 to 7.9 ruptured the fault from Monterey County all the way through Los Angeles County? Would it be more akin to the great 1906 San Francisco earthquake, which began just offshore of the city and ruptured in two directions, toward Humboldt County and Santa Cruz County? Don't bet on an identical sequel. That's the implication of a study published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The report, coauthored by scientists at Caltech in Pasadena, studied a massive earthquake that ruptured in the southeast Asian country of Myanmar on March 28 — on a fault known for being eerily similar to the San Andreas. The earthquake ended up rupturing a much longer section of the fault than scientists expected, given the seismology of the region. The implications of this study are that "earthquakes never come back exactly the same way," Solene L. Antoine, a postdoctoral fellow at Caltech and the study's lead author, said in an interview. "It came as a surprise that you could get such a long rupture," said Jean-Philippe Avouac, a coauthor of the study and a professor of geology and mechanical and civil engineering at Caltech. March's Mandalay earthquake devastated Myanmar, killing at least 3,791 people and an additional 63 people in Thailand. High-rise buildings were damaged as far away as Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam and homes were damaged in the Ruili area of China. Damage was estimated at $1.9 billion, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. It was the most powerful earthquake in Myanmar in at least 79 years. The magnitude 7.7 earthquake ruptured an astonishing 317 miles of the Sagaing fault, a finding based on Antoine's analysis of satellite data showing earth movement after the quake. That's the longest seismic rupture ever documented on a continent. By comparison, California's 1906 earthquake ruptured 296 miles of the San Andreas fault; and the 1857 earthquake, 225 miles. Longer seismic ruptures have been found only on subduction megathrusts deep underneath the ocean. What's clear from the study is that while California's next "Big One" may share some characteristics of previously documented devastating quakes, it's unlikely to be an exact replay. As the recent experience in Myanmar shows, even well-documented faults can behave in surprising ways. The next step is to develop a model simulating earthquakes over many millennia for the San Andreas fault, which the authors plan to do in the future. But the San Andreas fault "is far more complex," Avouac said. "It's not going to come soon, because it's quite a heavy calculation." Still, such simulations would provide a model of "all possible scenarios so that we have a better view of the range of possible ruptures that could happen." For instance, maybe the San Andreas fault will rupture in smaller, separate earthquakes, Avouac said. Or it could be a much larger earthquake — rupturing the fault not just from Monterey to Los Angeles counties, but perhaps all the way into San Bernardino, Riverside and Imperial counties, which would possibly exceed magnitude 8. Such a quake would be the largest simultaneous disaster in modern California history, with huge swaths of the state wracked by powerful seismic shaking all at once. By comparison, the 1994 Northridge earthquake's footprint was relatively constrained, severely affecting only a portion of Los Angeles County, especially the San Fernando Valley — related to its relatively smaller magnitude of 6.7. But while modeling previous activity on the San Andreas fault will provide a glimpse into the wide range of possible outcomes, it will not pinpoint precisely when the next great quake will strike. "We can't just expect the exact same thing to happen," Antoine said. "It is a matter of just showing what scenarios are possible, the diversity of scenarios and seeing what are the consequences of each of those scenarios." Sometimes, Avouac said, "it's quiet for a long time, nothing happens ... stress is building up, the fault is locked for a long time, nothing happens, and then, boom, you have a large earthquake." "And then you have other periods during which you have a lot of [seismic] activity, but these earthquakes are all smaller," Avouac said. But "smaller" earthquakes, in the minds of researchers, are still big to the layperson. In the study's simulations, there are periods where earthquakes around magnitude 7.7 are common. In other periods, earthquakes max out at magnitude 7.5 or so, but are more frequent. The entire length of the Sagaing fault — including areas that didn't rupture in the March earthquake — is 750 miles, north to south, from the Himalayas to the Andaman Sea, and helps accommodate the northward push of the Indian tectonic plate. The fact that 317 miles of the Sagaing fault ruptured in March was surprising to scientists. Only about 170 miles had been quiet seismically for more than a century, having last ruptured in 1839. Scientists call these "seismic gaps" — particular areas of a fault that haven't recently ruptured. Generally, scientists would've expected only this long-dormant 170-mile piece of the Sagaing fault to rupture, Avouac said, but not more recently ruptured sections. That includes a 100-mile stretch that ruptured in large earthquakes in 1929 and 1930, and a 50-mile stretch that went off in a pair of quakes in 1946 and 1956. Instead, even those fault segments ruptured in the big March earthquake. So what gives? A possible explanation is the Sagaing fault's extraordinary smoothness. "And people have observed that when the fault is very smooth, the rupture ... tends to propagate at a velocity" so fast that it results in an "extremely elongated rupture," Avouac said. The study also published the results of a computer model simulation looking at how earthquakes might rupture along sections of the entire 750-mile long Sagaing fault. The code, developed by study coauthor Kyungjae Im of Caltech, suggests that over a hypothetical 1,400-year period, there would be no repeatable patterns. In other words, earthquakes didn't seem to re-occur like clockwork, rupturing the same stretch of fault in a repeatable, predictable pattern. "There is complexity here. And this is because each time you have an earthquake, it redistributes the stress on the fault, which is going to influence the next earthquake," Avouac said. "There's a self-induced complexity in the process, and that leads to a bit of randomness." There is one certainty, which is bound to disappoint anyone who shares the hope that a "Big One" simply won't ever strike California again. "There will be an earthquake at some point," Antoine said. "If there is stress building up on the fault, the fault won't hold forever." Further research and observations are essential to refine models of future possible earthquakes, including from the Sentinel satellites, which are operated by the European Space Agency, the authors said. The other coauthors of the study are Rajani Shrestha and Chris Milliner of Caltech; Chris Rollins of Earth Sciences New Zealand; Kang Wang of the Washington-based EarthScope Consortium; and Kejie Chen of the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, China. Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.


Los Angeles Times
16 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
The next ‘Big One' on the San Andreas fault might not be the earthquake we expect, researchers say
What could the next mega-earthquake on California's notorious San Andreas fault look like? Would it be a repeat of 1857, when an earthquake estimated at magnitude 7.7 to 7.9 ruptured the fault from Monterey County all the way through Los Angeles County? Would it be more akin to the great 1906 San Francisco earthquake, which began just offshore of the city and ruptured in two directions, toward Humboldt County and Santa Cruz County? Don't bet on an identical sequel. That's the implication of a study published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The report, coauthored by scientists at Caltech in Pasadena, studied a massive earthquake that ruptured in the southeast Asian country of Myanmar on March 28 — on a fault known for being eerily similar to the San Andreas. The earthquake ended up rupturing a much longer section of the fault than scientists expected, given the seismology of the region. The implications of this study are that 'earthquakes never come back exactly the same way,' Solene L. Antoine, a postdoctoral fellow at Caltech and the study's lead author, said in an interview. 'It came as a surprise that you could get such a long rupture,' said Jean-Philippe Avouac, a coauthor of the study and a professor of geology and mechanical and civil engineering at Caltech. March's Mandalay earthquake devastated Myanmar, killing at least 3,791 people and an additional 63 people in Thailand. High-rise buildings were damaged as far away as Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam and homes were damaged in the Ruili area of China. Damage was estimated at $1.9 billion, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. It was the most powerful earthquake in Myanmar in at least 79 years. The magnitude 7.7 earthquake ruptured an astonishing 317 miles of the Sagaing fault, a finding based on Antoine's analysis of satellite data showing earth movement after the quake. That's the longest seismic rupture ever documented on a continent. By comparison, California's 1906 earthquake ruptured 296 miles of the San Andreas fault; and the 1857 earthquake, 225 miles. Longer seismic ruptures have been found only on subduction megathrusts deep underneath the ocean. What's clear from the study is that while California's next 'Big One' may share some characteristics of previously documented devastating quakes, it's unlikely to be an exact replay. As the recent experience in Myanmar shows, even well-documented faults can behave in surprising ways. The next step is to develop a model simulating earthquakes over many millennia for the San Andreas fault, which the authors plan to do in the future. But the San Andreas fault 'is far more complex,' Avouac said. 'It's not going to come soon, because it's quite a heavy calculation.' Still, such simulations would provide a model of 'all possible scenarios so that we have a better view of the range of possible ruptures that could happen.' For instance, maybe the San Andreas fault will rupture in smaller, separate earthquakes, Avouac said. Or it could be a much larger earthquake — rupturing the fault not just from Monterey to Los Angeles counties, but perhaps all the way into San Bernardino, Riverside and Imperial counties, which would possibly exceed magnitude 8. Such a quake would be the largest simultaneous disaster in modern California history, with huge swaths of the state wracked by powerful seismic shaking all at once. By comparison, the 1994 Northridge earthquake's footprint was relatively constrained, severely affecting only a portion of Los Angeles County, especially the San Fernando Valley — related to its relatively smaller magnitude of 6.7. But while modeling previous activity on the San Andreas fault will provide a glimpse into the wide range of possible outcomes, it will not pinpoint precisely when the next great quake will strike. 'We can't just expect the exact same thing to happen,' Antoine said. 'It is a matter of just showing what scenarios are possible, the diversity of scenarios and seeing what are the consequences of each of those scenarios.' Sometimes, Avouac said, 'it's quiet for a long time, nothing happens ... stress is building up, the fault is locked for a long time, nothing happens, and then, boom, you have a large earthquake.' 'And then you have other periods during which you have a lot of [seismic] activity, but these earthquakes are all smaller,' Avouac said. But 'smaller' earthquakes, in the minds of researchers, are still big to the layperson. In the study's simulations, there are periods where earthquakes around magnitude 7.7 are common. In other periods, earthquakes max out at magnitude 7.5 or so, but are more frequent. The entire length of the Sagaing fault — including areas that didn't rupture in the March earthquake — is 750 miles, north to south, from the Himalayas to the Andaman Sea, and helps accommodate the northward push of the Indian tectonic plate. The fact that 317 miles of the Sagaing fault ruptured in March was surprising to scientists. Only about 170 miles had been quiet seismically for more than a century, having last ruptured in 1839. Scientists call these 'seismic gaps' — particular areas of a fault that haven't recently ruptured. Generally, scientists would've expected only this long-dormant 170-mile piece of the Sagaing fault to rupture, Avouac said, but not more recently ruptured sections. That includes a 100-mile stretch that ruptured in large earthquakes in 1929 and 1930, and a 50-mile stretch that went off in a pair of quakes in 1946 and 1956. Instead, even those fault segments ruptured in the big March earthquake. So what gives? A possible explanation is the Sagaing fault's extraordinary smoothness. 'And people have observed that when the fault is very smooth, the rupture ... tends to propagate at a velocity' so fast that it results in an 'extremely elongated rupture,' Avouac said. The study also published the results of a computer model simulation looking at how earthquakes might rupture along sections of the entire 750-mile long Sagaing fault. The code, developed by study coauthor Kyungjae Im of Caltech, suggests that over a hypothetical 1,400-year period, there would be no repeatable patterns. In other words, earthquakes didn't seem to re-occur like clockwork, rupturing the same stretch of fault in a repeatable, predictable pattern. 'There is complexity here. And this is because each time you have an earthquake, it redistributes the stress on the fault, which is going to influence the next earthquake,' Avouac said. 'There's a self-induced complexity in the process, and that leads to a bit of randomness.' There is one certainty, which is bound to disappoint anyone who shares the hope that a 'Big One' simply won't ever strike California again. 'There will be an earthquake at some point,' Antoine said. 'If there is stress building up on the fault, the fault won't hold forever.' Further research and observations are essential to refine models of future possible earthquakes, including from the Sentinel satellites, which are operated by the European Space Agency, the authors said. The other coauthors of the study are Rajani Shrestha and Chris Milliner of Caltech; Chris Rollins of Earth Sciences New Zealand; Kang Wang of the Washington-based EarthScope Consortium; and Kejie Chen of the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, China.


UPI
16 hours ago
- UPI
Central American beaches the most polluted in the Pacific by plastics
Plastic waste accumulaties along the Coastal Strip at Panama City Bay, in Panama City, Panama, on August 5. The country has one of the highest annual per capita pollution rates for plastic in Latin America and the Caribbean. Photo by Carlos Lemos/EPA Aug. 11 (UPI) -- Bottles more than 20 years old -- encrusted with marine organisms and worn from long exposure to the sea -- were among the debris collected by the "Científicos de la Basura, or Trash Scientists, network at Chile's Universidad Católica del Norte for a study aimed at determining the origins of plastic waste on Latin American beaches. After two years of research, the results showed that 59% of the waste analyzed came from the same country where it was found and that Central America's beaches have become the most polluted in the Pacific Ocean by plastic debris -- primarily bottles and loose caps. The study, published in the Journal of Cleaner Production, also found that coastal communities and beaches in Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama had the highest levels of contamination, driven mainly by high domestic beverage consumption and shortcomings in waste management. However, on oceanic islands such as Rapa Nui in Chile and the Galápagos in Ecuador, most plastic bottles came from multiple countries, including Asian brands -- pointing to transoceanic pollution and discharges from vessels such as cruise ships and industrial fishing boats. The study focused on plastic beverage bottles because of their abundance and the ease of tracking and collecting them. They often retain key identifying features -- such as product codes, brand names, manufacturing locations and dates -- that help trace their origin and transport routes. Of all the items analyzed, 26% were manufactured by The Coca-Cola Co., followed by PepsiCo and Grupo Aje, a Peruvian multinational that produces and distributes beverages. "Since local production plants of multinational companies and single-use plastic bottles are the main contributors to this type of pollution, switching to reusable bottles with a standardized format across the region could substantially reduce plastic pollution along the Pacific coast," the report said. The study brought together more than 1,000 volunteers from 10 countries on the eastern Pacific coast of Latin America, from Chile to Mexico. They formed teams that received training and conducted standardized sampling at 145 sites in 38 cities, including 92 mainland beaches and 15 oceanic islands, collecting and cataloging more than 21,000 plastic bottles and caps using rigorous citizen science protocols. "Our results show that plastic bottle pollution is a major environmental challenge that threatens natural ecosystems, and that its reduction and prevention require contributions from governments, producers and communities in all countries, both regionally and globally," said Ostin Garcés Ordoñez, the study's author. Plastic pollution on beaches is not limited to visible waste such as bottles or containers. Much of the problem is made worse by the presence of microplastics -- tiny particles created when this debris breaks down under the effects of sunlight, waves and wind. An estimated 1.5 million to 4.5 million tons of microplastics enter the ocean each year, where they can be ingested by marine organisms, enter the food chain and eventually reach human consumption. These tiny particles have been detected in every ecosystem on the planet -- from the deepest ocean trenches to Arctic ice -- and more recently in the air we breathe, drinking water and everyday foods such as salt and fish.