Two more AGU special sessions: GC09 and T29

Announcing two more AGU special sessions in which SCEC researchers may be interested:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

From Dave Jackson, Lucy Jones, and John Filson:

Dear Colleagues,

If you have been involved in construction or using natural disaster scenarios, please submit an abstract to the following special session of the American Geophysical Union fall meeting, Dec. 11-15, 2006, San Francisco:

GC09: Natural Disaster Scenarios: Accuracy, Relevance, and Effectiveness Sponsor: Global Environmental Change

CoSponsor: Public Affairs
Atmospheric Sciences
Geodesy
Hydrology
Ocean Sciences
Seismology
Tectonophysics

Convener: David D. Jackson
Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA
595 Charles E. Young Dr.
Los Angeles, CA, USA 90095-1567
310-825-1475
djackson@ucla.edu

Lucille Jones
Earthquake Hazards Team, U. S. Geological Survey
USA
626-583-7817
jones@usgs.gov

John R. Filson
U. S. Geological Survey
USA
703-648-6785
jfilson@usgs.gov

Index Terms: Index Terms: 7914 8488 0468 1821 7212 .

Description: Scenario planning can help to identify possible natural phenomena that disrupt human activities, identify likely consequences, and allow official and other decision makers prepare for response and recovery. In this session we will review how past scenarios have been developed and implemented, how effective they have been in mitigating losses and speeding recovery, how expensive the plans have been. The session will cover physical, economic, and social consequences of earthquakes, tsunami, storms, volcanic eruptions, floods, landslides, fires, and other potential natural hazards. Speakers are requested to comment on the adequacy of the science incorporated in the models, and needs for future scientific progress.

------------------------------ also... -----------------------------------

From Ramon Arrowsmith, ASU:

Please consider submitting abstracts to this session:

T29: From Displacements and Dates to Rates: How Do We Measure Fault-Slip Histories at Timescales of 1 kyr to 1 Myr?

Sponsor: Tectonophysics

CoSponsor: Seismology

Convener: Eric Cowgill
Geology, University of California, Davis
One Shields Ave.
Davis, CA, USA 95616
530-754-6574
cowgill@geology.ucdavis.edu

J Ramón Arrowsmith
Geological Sciences, Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ, USA 85287
480-965-3541
ramon.arrowsmith@asu.edu

John Gosse
Earth Sciences, Dalhousie University
Edzell Castle Circle
Halifax, NS, CAN B3H 4J1
902-494-6632
jcgosse@Dal.Ca

Ryan Gold
Geology, University of California, Davis
One Shields Ave.
Davis, CA, USA 95616
530-754-8452
gold@geology.ucdavis.edu

Index Terms: 7221 1130 1824 8002 8163 .

Description: Although it remains uncertain exactly why faults slip at variable rates over timescales of a few thousand years or more, it is increasingly clear that secular variation in slip is an important aspect of fault behavior. Measuring accurate Quaternary slip histories is critical for obtaining observational constraints on mechanical models seeking to explain such behavior, discriminating between conflicting rheological models of the continental crust, and accurately assessing seismic hazards. The ongoing debate over the interpretation of cosmogenic nuclide data from offset markers along the Karakoram and Altyn Tagh Faults within the Indo-Asian collision zone serves as just one example of a lack of consensus on how such data are best generated and interpreted. This session aims to engage Quaternary geochronologists, geomorphologists, and neotectonic geologists in a discussion of how cosmogenic nuclide, U-series, luminescence, or radiocarbon techniques are best combined with geomorphic and structural measurements to determine fault-slip histories over timescales of 1 kyr to 1 Myr. How do the landforms that are commonly used to measure fault displacement form, how long does this take, and how does episodic or protracted formation affect our ability to accurately reconstruct the time at which landform offset begins? How do sedimentological and surface processes both before and after landform abandonment affect the application of various Quaternary dating techniques? Is it necessary to use several geochronologic techniques in concert to constrain slip histories? How well do the slip rates determined from displaced geomorphic markers compare with slip-per-event and timing of paleoearthquakes along the same fault section? Our hope is to make progress on such questions by pairing new advances in the theoretical aspects of Quaternary geochronology, landform evolution, and fault mechanics with case-studies in which such techniques are used to determine slip histories.