This hiatus for Eruptions lead me to do one thing I said I would never do ... but strange times call for strange measures. Eruptions has opened up a Twitter account (and I feel a little dirty about it), so if you want to follow the sporadic posts that might show up there, you can follow the blog - eruptionsblog. Now, I can't guarantee a lot of tweets, but for now, if something comes up, you can look there ... and we'll see where it goes from there.
This may have been mentioned before, but there was a 5.4 quake today south of Palm Springs in the area where the Coyote and San Jacinto faults come together. It was about 8 miles deep so I know it rattles a few nerves. Seems the quakes are moving north, but it may not be related to the 7.2 in Baja, but it could be because there were a lot of small quakes in the area after the one in Baja. I guess we will see if there are any more larger quakes that travel north.
Erik, why not do the same on Facebook?
@Diane #1 I was just reading the summary on this one at USGS. It seems that fault activity in CA is not ceasing. Scary...
..."The Elsinore fault has not hosted a major earthquake in more than 100 years. The occurrence of these earthquakes along the San Jacinto fault and continued aftershocks demonstrates that the earthquake activity in the region remains at an elevated level."
And there's just been a 5.3 52 miles NNW of Anchorage. Could they possibly be related? I don't think so. Lurking?
A relationship between 5.4 and 5.2 quakes 2500 miles apart? Probably not. ;-)
#5 I thought so too, but we must admit that N. America west coast has been pretty busy lately. Hope it stops by now.
They gave to the CA EQ at first a 5.9 magnitude
Magnitude : 5.9 Ml
Time : 7 Jul 2010 04:53:33 PM PDT
: 7 Jul 2010 23:53:33 UTC
Coordinates : 33 deg. 25.05 min. N, 116 deg. 28.96 min. W
13 mi. ( 21 km) NNW of Borrego Springs, CA
28 mi. ( 44 km) S of Palm Springs, CA
Event ID : 10736069
You can always move back to Wordpress if things get too bad.
Meanwhile, it's been a busy microquake day in Washington State.
>You can always move back to Wordpress.
It's a vastly preferred choice to opening Twit-wit account as a stop-gap. Your readers will follow you back there.
Personally, I find this fence-sitting to be cowardly. Man-up: either you are tolerant and let the PepsiCo blog do it's thing, with a mind to the 'Terms' fine-print that prohibits commercial peddling.
Or you leave on principle. When you stop providing posts here, you're only hurting us.
Scienceblogs will only take action if you violate the terms of their *contract to provide authoring service for payment*.
A lawyer would be a good idea.
Yes, PepsiCo peddles soft drinks and some junk food. But it also has divested itself of the more questionable acquisitions: KFC, Taco Bell and several Pizza chains.
They're the first to trot to totally compost-savvy packaging - the wave of the future. PepsiCo claims to be closing in on their goal of zero net environmental impact. Plus they're finally setting up bottle- and can-recycling centers, because the States lack the balls to do it. Pepsi donates recycling proceeds to US Veterans groups.
If they are up to a challenge, I may be able to persuade them to take on providing potable water for rural Afghanistan, where 70% have virtually zero access to fresh water supply.
@Passerby (#9) That's a very good example! Environmentalism utterly reeks of vain righteous self-blinding hypocrisy.
tr.v. twitÂ·ted, twitÂ·ting, twits
To taunt, ridicule, or tease, especially for embarrassing mistakes or faults. See Synonyms at ridicule.
1. The act or an instance of twitting.
2. A reproach, gibe, or taunt.
3. Slang A foolishly annoying person.
@Renato I Silveira 
Related? Well, they both are due to interactions with the North American and Pacific Plates... sort of like me being related to any number of small furry critters since we are all mammals. As for that weird "stress wave" thing I was yammering about a while back, that would require the "wave" to travel pretty fast... somewhere on the order of 1177 kph (731 mph). Too fast in my reckoning. Also, what I was tracking was moving at about 135 miles every two months... it also seemed to slow in the SoCal area, likely due to the large number of chunks of crust that are all wedged in there tight. Even at that, I could be totally wrong.
The Quake was on the San Jacinto fault, and there are a large number of quakes that traverse the Elsinore and then sporadicly migrate across to the San Jacinto starting about 32.962059N 116.364810W. North of there (on the other side of the mountains) is the San Gorgonio Pass where the San Andreas turns back to the west and the definition of which fault is the actual San Andreas is a bit murky. Just west of the San Gorgonio area, a lot of faults come together and this marks the northern extent of at least three of the large "blocks" defined by the Elsinore/San Jacinto/San Andreas. Going back to that stress wave idea, it all fits with that (though a bit slower than I was tracking) and with stress migrating north after crossing the Yuha Wells fault. (where we have been seeing thousands of aftershocks from the 7.2 Mex quake).
Keep in mind my stress wave idea is not science. Just conjecture. It has a high SWAGâ¢ factor.
Something interesting about this one, was that it had a dip angle of like 89 degrees. If I read the beach ball right, that's almost like pure lateral movement. I'm no geologist so those that know can chime in and correct me if I'm wrong.
Now... if you zoom in tight on the quake, and look at everything that has happened from the quake until now, this is what you get (add the http: bit to the front of the URL)
View North West
CAVEAT: I'm just a guy on a computer. This is not a prediction and this is certainly not bona fide analysis.
CAVEAT: I'm just a guy on a computer. This is not a prediction and this is certainly not bona fide analysis.
Posted by: Lurking | July 8, 2010 2:14 AM
NASA isn't so modest, lol
Goddard has actually been doing climate research for quite some time. However, with the recent shift in NASA mission goals and the help from a $5million grant from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Goddard is taking the next big step.
The computing resources at NCCS are critical to our ability to use NASA satellite data in our model-based analyses, which help us characterize and understand Earthâs changing climate,â said Michele Rienecker, Global Modeling and Assimilation Office [GMAO] head. âMoreover, NCCS enables us to undertake climate simulations and predictions and to share the results with our fellow scientists and other users.â
For twitter twats ...
98 Following 460,820 Followers 20,348 Listed
* 9,023 Tweets
Lurking, your graphs are a goldmine. The concept of coulomb stress transfer is a bit of a hot topic in the field. Ross Stein is the man you want:
This quake looks like static triggering to me in response to the build up of stress in the region and to be honest, I don't think it bodes too well for the San Andreas, but hey, what's new.
BTW a friend of mine posted a classic comment on the quake:
I was outside when it hit, and looking down our street, you could see the friendly pavement waving at you. lol
"providing potable water for rural Afghanistan, where 70% have virtually zero access to fresh water supply."
Fertilizer from the US and Australia is typically exported to Pakistan where it is repackaged and then exported to Afghanistan.
The potential market in Afghanistan is about 1,000,000 metric tons, but at the moment it would be about 500,000 metric tons
Hmm, .,..upwards of 33 kg of NH4NO3 usage per captia per year where 70% of the rural populace have zero fresh water supply?
Maybe Coke would be more interested in the development opportunity.
There are your 'ethical' considerations eh.
Quite a swarm, Lurking. Quite a swarm. I'm glad I'm not there now.
Erik, I love you enough to join Twitter for you. Damn it.
The ScienceBlogs overlords have a lot to answer for...
oh ye gods... Twitter?
I'll wait a bit and look if the withdrawl symptoms become too much. Maybe, but just maybe, I'll join Twitter.....
I am a bit torn about the Pepsi-blog, and for good reasons I think.
It is a strange venue for Pepsi to produce an ad-campaign in to beginn with. But that is not what I am thinking about.
This is a conflict that has been in the brewing for some time, and has nothing really to do with Scienceblogs. What?
Let me explain.
For quite some time companies, large and small, have performed more research than the universities and the coveted "free research" institutes. That is not so surprising since the companies have larger wallets than the universities.
We are living in an age where even ph.d. stugents are commonly paid for by companies directly to do work in the companies fields of interest, normaly leading up to them being hired. Pepsi probably have a lot of these industrial ph.d. students hanging around. Why wouldn't they? The five companies I am a board-member in have a few of them, they are really handy.
There is one problem though, very little of the research done in companies are ever published in any way. Which is bad for the company employed scientists since they get sidelined in the carreer. Who would want to hire a scientist who hasn't published for ten years?
And it is bad for the research in it self since a lot of nice things are never circulated out to the "free research comunity".
So what am I going on about?
Well, if this is a pure ad-gimmick to give credibility to Pepsi-cola as a good nutrient provider, ie. a place where they can say that you get healthy by drinking a lot of cola, then it is bad in so many ways.
But if it is a place where the researchers of Pepsico inc can write about what they have discovered in a fairly free environment, then it could be a good thing.
But, if it is the last thing that is intended it of course should be labelled "Science provided by Pepsi" so that everyone can have that in the back of their heads. In the beginning I think people would be very critical, but if Pepsico really are ernest and keap up publishing credible research it might actually strengthen their company credibility.
I think therefore that the pressure should be put to forcing them to clearly label company-driven scienceblogs than banning them altogether.
Another thought, if it had been IBM or Rank Xerox who ran a scienceblog I think the screaming would have been less, most of us are probably curious about what they are doing now. And yes, they often publish in Nature without writing that it is company driven research they are publishing.
Carl Xxxxxxxx, This posting was published by a member of the board in 2 weapons-industry companies and 3 energy-industry companies and should be taken in face value that it might state opinions driven by the direct interest of said industries. (One should live as one teaches)
The point isn't that it's Pepsi - the point is that it's more or less paid corporate advertising *masquerading* as a bona fide science blog and thereby corrupting the intention of useful academic exchange. No more from me here, I'll miss those of you who continue w/o a monitor. Hope you can manage to maintain the integrity established by Erik as to content and cordiality..or there'll be no point in maintaining the name "eruptions' at a later date if Erik chooses to return..
New post ... and going back to blogging:
@ Birdseye, I think Erik is still monitoring here, just not posting for the time being. I am hoping we all don't blow a gasket over this Pepsico thing and sit tight for the moment and see what happens. I believe Erik is looking into it more and we will hear from him about it eventually. I surely would miss the community here because all of us have something to contribute.
Please let's stay and see what happens before we get off the path.
Hi to everybody !
@#21 Diane,HI and hear hear.I also feel very strongly about..... "sponsors".I've just come across from the new thread and all is well for the time being !
@#19 Birdseye,don't quit yet,I'm sure that the best is yet to come.We have all become friends here.
"... the point is that it's more or less paid corporate advertising *masquerading* as a bona fide science blog and thereby corrupting the intention of useful academic exchange. ..."
Industry supported 62% of biomedical research in the United States in 2000, almost double the proportion in 1980, while government support declined. About a quarter of academic investigators have affiliations to industry that could influence research and publication, says a review article in JAMA (2003;289:454-65)
The authors, from Yale University School of Medicine, reviewed 37 studies with original data on financial relationships among industry, investigators, and academic institutions. Partnerships between industry and academia have grown since the 1980 Bayh-Dole act encouraged them. In 1996, 92% of life science companies supported academic research. Quoting a 1999 study, the authors say 68% of US and Canadian institutions held equity in companies that sponsored research done at their institutions. This was an important source of revenue.
The study found that 23% to 28% of academic researchers received funding from industry, 43% received gifts such as biomaterials and discretionary funds, and a third had personal financial ties with industry . . . [Full text of this article]
I,m posting on the new thread. See y'all there.
Shakemap Location coordinates 33.420Â°N, 116.489Â°W
Nearby: geothermal fields on the Salton Sea (Salton View, Heber geothermal field at the south end of the Imperial Valley). Location Coordinates:
Latitude: 33Â° 10' 35.57" N, Longitude: 115Â° 36' 11.23" W, Coord: 33.17655Â°, -115.60312Â°
Obviously, not a root cause of the clustered quakes, but reinjection and hydrofracture development may add to stress-strain on the nearby fault systems.
An indicator of just how connected these fault systems are: the 'sulfurous surface flooding' that resulted from the Apr 4 Baja earthquake near the Cerro Prieto geothermal system.
That Big Sinking Feeling
This informative article also mentions a 5+ Mag EQ that occurred in mid-June 2010 was near the location of our quake-of-interest. USGS geologists said that it was an aftershock. The summary page for yesterday's shock says that it's one of a series of similar magnitude quakes that are indicative of the elevated seismicity of the area.
To understand the larger geological setting for this enhanced earthquake activity, we need to talk about The Salton Trough and historical water use development and it's contribution to seismic loading complexity within the Trough.
Tectonic evolution of the Salton Sea inferred from seismic reflection data. It's abstract-only viewing for those without subscription access, but the accompanying supplement is open-access:
The Salton Trough water development history and geological setting:
Lovely open-access paper:
Sedimentation and crustal recycling along an active oblique-rift margin: Salton Trough and northern Gulf of California. May 2010
Groundwater subsidence monitoring by InSAR, with respect to Coyote Creek segment of the San Jacinto fault, in the Borrego Valley and near the northwest shore of Salton Sea.
and a recent seminar slide presentation and another open-access paper (2004) that suggests that groundwater drafting may be contributing to surface slip in this fault system.
Surface deformation in the Western Salton Trough as observed by InSAR
Forgot to add a key reference that gives a very nice explanatory analysis of the Baja April 2010 EQ geology and aftershocks series plots. Very detailed.
ok everyone what going?
I see lady E is steaming nicely
@leon - business as usual: mentos fountains removed; everybody is at the next topic.
Today, "lady E" seems quiet or at least cloud covered, but over the weekend, it was steaming quite a bit. Also, look at VatnajÃ¶kull which shows some activity with a few tremors today, July 13. Over the weekend that glacier had quite a few tremors near the Bardabunga ice edge. Probably ice settling over the weekend. Any thoughts?