Could New England face a major earthquake?'

February 4, 2015 by Kevin Stacey, Brown University
Terry Tullis and earthquake simulator. “The current frequency of magnitude 3 events in all of New England is a few every year, suggesting that a few events of magnitude 6 might occur every 1,000 years.”

A recent series of small earthquakes in Connecticut posed the question. Geologist Terry Tullis, an earthquake specialist, says the chances of a damaging quake are remote, but they are not zero. This commentary appeared in the Providence Journal on Tuesday, Feb. 2, 2015.

It always surprises the scientist and layperson alike when earthquakes occur in New England. After all, earthquakes typically occur at the sliding boundaries between tectonic plates, and the closest to us is along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, halfway between North America and Europe.

So what are we to make of events like the recent quakes near Plainfield, Connecticut? Do they presage some kind of a change, a possible "big one" coming to the East Coast?

No, that's not likely.

The last 300 years of history show that such small earthquakes—the biggest Plainfield event was about magnitude 3 on the Richter scale—occur in New England from time to time. The earthquakes do, in fact, result from sliding on small sections of typically unrecognized faults, places of weakness in the Earth's crust left over from hundreds of millions of years ago when New England was an active plate boundary.

Most of these faults are not active now, and they don't connect to each other as they do in other parts of the country, particularly the West Coast. Without such an extensive network of interconnected faults, an cannot become large enough to be called a "big one"—a magnitude 8 or higher event.

That doesn't mean, however, that the chance of a damaging earthquake in New England is zero.

In 1755, a quake estimated to be a magnitude 6 event occurred near Cape Ann, just northeast of Boston. The probability of larger earthquakes in New England is not zero, but is small. A handy relationship that works in all tectonic settings is that, on average, for every 10 earthquakes of a given magnitude, there will be only one of the next largest magnitude. This means that magnitude 6 earthquakes are about 1,000 times less frequent than are magnitude 3 events. The current frequency of magnitude 3 events in all of New England is a few every year, suggesting that a few events of magnitude 6 might occur every 1,000 years.

A Cape Ann-sized earthquake every few hundred years is within reasonable expectations. A 6 earthquake near Boston or Providence would cause some buildings to fall, especially since areas of Boston and Providence have old buildings constructed on man-made fill above former bay sediments. During the 1989 World Series Loma Prieta Earthquake, much of the damage occurred in the Marina District of San Francisco built on fill, and most of the deaths occurred on a collapsed section of the Nimitz freeway in Oakland, which was also built on fill.

Should the residents of Providence and Boston worry about the possibility of such an earthquake-induced disaster here? Well, yes. Should we do anything about it? That is much less clear and would require an exhaustive and expensive cost-benefit analysis. Even if such a study were made, the inherent uncertainty of a possible earthquake's size, location, and timing would make further action questionable.

What might be worthwhile is to ask whether building codes are up to date. Recent studies have shown the surprising result that if wind-induced stresses are included in design criteria, including modern earthquake code standards adds only a very small additional cost to a new building.

It might be time to take a look at this.

Explore further: Scientists record five small earthquakes in Connecticut

Related Stories

Scientists record five small earthquakes in Connecticut

January 12, 2015

Five small earthquakes were recorded within a 5½-hour span in eastern Connecticut on Monday, including a 3.1-magnitude quake that was felt in parts of Rhode Island and Massachusetts, according to the Weston Observatory at ...

Calculating tsunami risk for the US East Coast

April 19, 2013

The greatest threat of a tsunami for the U.S. east coast from a nearby offshore earthquake stretches from the coast of New England to New Jersey, according to John Ebel of Boston College, who presented his findings today ...

Recommended for you

Oceans of garbage prompt war on plastics

December 15, 2018

Faced with images of turtles smothered by plastic bags, beaches carpeted with garbage and islands of trash floating in the oceans, environmentalists say the world is waking up to the need to tackle plastic pollution at the ...

A damming trend

December 14, 2018

Hundreds of dams are being proposed for Mekong River basin in Southeast Asia. The negative social and environmental consequences—affecting everything from food security to the environment—greatly outweigh the positive ...

The long dry: global water supplies are shrinking

December 13, 2018

A global study has found a paradox: our water supplies are shrinking at the same time as climate change is generating more intense rain. And the culprit is the drying of soils, say researchers, pointing to a world where drought-like ...

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Nik_2213
not rated yet Feb 04, 2015
Unhappy experience from other areas suggests it isn't the quake itself that's the big threat, but a 'slump' on the Continental Shelf. IIRC, such 'slumps' were discovered when one infamously 'took out' a succession of Atlantic telegraph cables.

And, yes, the prehistoric Storegga slide may or may not be relevant...
http://en.wikiped...ga_Slide

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.