Posts in the category »   «  ( 286 Posts )

Geomorphic indices can tell us about the tectonic activity of an area. The idea is that the landscape records the signal of active tectonics, for example in its river network, in its erosion pattern, or in its roughness. Geomorphic indices allow us to quantify this, that is, we can use standard algorithms to calculate numbers from a DEM that say ‘active’ or ‘inactive’. This is very attractive because essentially, all that is needed is a DEM and a GIS (and perhaps MATLAB). The number of papers on geomorphic indices is currently exploding, and I guess the fact that the method is so cheap and easy to apply plays a major role in that. No expensive field work, still meaningful results. But is this always true? In a new open access paper, we argue that without ground checking, probably not, at least in many cases.

Since I can’t go to the field right now, I am stuck with analyzing the amazing LiDAR data from Slovenia. We have 1 m resolution data covering the entire country and oh my god it’s great for active tectonics research. But how do you actually make a DEM from the data? Here’s a quick guide using free software only.

The technical workshop on Internet Macroseismology will take place in beautiful Ljubljana, Slovenia, from 14-15 November, 2017. Please note that the dates have changed.

Deadline for abstract submission is 20 September. Find more information in the second circular (download, pdf, 550 kb), or visit the website for registration: https://form.jotformeu.com/72052334536350

Our colleague Petra Jamšek Rupnik from the Geological Survey of Slovenia sent us this interesting meeting announcement. The conference will focus on geological hazards, including active tectonics in Croatia and adjacent areas. Plus, there will be an interesting field trip to Croatia and Slovenia:

more

The following very interesting mail reached us by Abdelkrim Aoudia from the ICTP in Trieste (Italy):

Three Postdoctoral positions in paleoseismology and seismology

are available at the Earth System Physics (ESP) section of the International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP).  The two first positions (A and B) are funded by the GENERALI Group– a major player in the global insurance industry, in the framework of a research project integrating earthquake fault studies and simulations of the ground-motion.

The third position (C) is funded in the framework of an international collaborative effort following the recent Nepal Gorkha 2015 earthquake. The research topic involves a study of the structure, dynamics and seismicity of Nepal Himalaya.

more

Vanja Kastelic and Michele M. C. Carafa (INGV, L’Aquila, Italy) recently published an article in the Bollettino di Geofisica Teorica e Applicata (an international journal of Earth sciences) entitled “Earthquake rates inferred from active faults and geodynamics: the case of the External Dinarides.” This article covers the area affected by the earthquake of Ml 4.7 (Mw 4.6) occurred on April 22, 2014.

The same authors also wrote a brief seismotectonic report dealing with such an earthquake. They share the report with us under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

A quick seismotectonic report for the 22 April 2014 (Mw=4.6) earthquake in SW Slovenia

Vanja Kastelic¹ and Michele M. C. Carafa¹

more

On 2 Februar, a magnitude 4.5 earthquake occurred in shallow depth (~2-7 km) directly at the border between Austria and Slovenia. USGS reports an oblique-slip focal mechanism and a magnitude of Mw4.0 only. According to the Austrian Zentralanstalt für Meteorologie und Geodynamik the quake was felt widely and even in Vienna. Very light damage has been reported from the epicentral area. more

Three papers published recently caught my eyes. First, Andrej Gosar investigated the earthquake environmental effects (EEEs) of the 12 April 1998 Mw =5.6 Krn Mountains earthquake, Slovenia. The quake measured VII-VIII on the EMS-98 scale, and Andrej found that the intensities reached the same values on the ESI2007 scale. He reports that the intensity distributions for both scales are comparable, but show some differences due to the sparsely populated epicentral area. The research concentrated on rockfalls for EEE determination. It’s a nice example that also moderate events can be characterized using the ESI2007 scale.

more