Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Seismological  Research Letters Don't get GSW? Talk to your librarian.
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Seismological Research Letters; July/August 2008; v. 79; no. 4; p. 491-493; DOI: 10.1785/gssrl.79.4.491
© 2008 Seismological Society of America
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ebel, J. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

OPINION

The Importance of Small Earthquakes

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

Regional and local seismic networks have become ubiquitous throughout the world to study local seismotectonics, to provide immediate hypocentral and magnitude information following felt or damaging earthquakes, to create ShakeMaps of the ground shaking due to earthquakes, and to form the sensing backbone of incipient early warning systems of earthquake shaking. They also provide data for earthquake forecasting research, nuclear test monitoring, and analyses of nonearthquake events such as explosions, intense storms, mine collapses, etc. Some seismic networks are aimed at detecting and recording seismic events down to the lowest possible magnitude, while others are strong-motion networks that aim to properly record the strongest possible ground shaking that can take place. Significant resources are invested annually in regional and local seismic monitoring, and such networks have become a permanent fixture in many areas of the world.


Is it important to record and process seismograms of all earthquakes down to magnitude 3? Magnitude 2? Magnitude 1? Magnitude 0 or below?

 

My purpose in writing this opinion piece is not to question the intrinsic need for regional and local networks. On the other hand, I do feel it is important that there should be a full and informed public discussion about the importance of the small earthquakes that we record. Is it important to record and process seismograms of all earthquakes down to magnitude 3? Magnitude 2? Magnitude 1? Magnitude 0 or below? Informed discussions on these issues sometimes take place when a decision must be made about a particular site, such as whether to put a high-level radioactive waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. But for the most part, regional and local seismic networks, once they have been initiated, tend to grow based on a "more is better" philosophy as funding is available. I believe that the existence and . . . [Full Text of this Article]

John E. Ebel

Weston Observatory of Boston College
ebel@bc.edu







JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Seismological Society of America