Editing San Andreas Fault (section)

=== The next "Big One" ===
[[File:NASA Radar 3-D View of San Andreas Fault.jpg|thumb|[[Radar]] generated 3-D view of the San Andreas Fault, at [[Crystal Springs Reservoir]] near [[San Mateo, California]]<ref>{{cite web |date=June 23, 2009 |author=NASA |url=http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=39018&src=eoa-iotd |title=NASA Radar Provides 3-D View of San Andreas Fault |publisher=[[National Aeronautics and Space Administration]] |access-date=2012-02-17}}</ref>]]

A study published in 2006 in the journal ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' by Yuri Fialko, an associate professor at the Cecil H. and Ida M. Green Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics at [[Scripps Institution of Oceanography]],<ref name="Eurekalert2006">{{cite web |date=June 21, 2006 |url=https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/727709 |title=New Scripps study reveals San Andreas fault set for the 'Big One' |publisher=[[University of California]] – San Diego |access-date=2022-03-19}}</ref> found that the San Andreas fault has reached a sufficient stress level for an earthquake of magnitude greater than 7.0 on the [[moment magnitude scale]] to occur.<ref name="Yuri">{{cite journal |url=http://sioviz.ucsd.edu/~fialko/papers/fialkoNature06.pdf |title=Interseismic strain accumulation and the earthquake potential on the southern San Andreas fault System |journal=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]] |volume=441 |pages=968–971 |year=2006 |doi=10.1038/nature04797 |author=Fialko, Yuri |pmid=16791192 |issue=7096 |bibcode = 2006Natur.441..968F|s2cid=4432269 }}</ref>
This study also found that the risk of a large earthquake may be increasing more rapidly than scientists had previously believed. Moreover, the risk is currently concentrated on the southern section of the fault, i.e. the region around Los Angeles, because strong earthquakes have occurred relatively recently on the central ([[Fort Tejon earthquake|1857]]) and northern ([[1906 San Francisco earthquake|1906]]) segments of the fault, while the southern section has not seen any similar rupture for at least 300 years. According to this study, a major earthquake on that southern section of the San Andreas fault would result in major damage to the [[Palm Springs, California|Palm Springs]]–[[Indio, California|Indio]] metropolitan area and other cities in [[San Bernardino County, California|San Bernardino]], [[Riverside County, California|Riverside]] and [[Imperial County, California|Imperial]] counties in California, and [[Mexicali Municipality]] in [[Baja California (state)|Baja California]]. It would be strongly felt (and potentially cause significant damage) throughout much of [[Southern California]], including densely populated areas of [[Los Angeles County]], [[Ventura County]], [[Orange County, California|Orange County]], [[San Diego County]], [[Ensenada Municipality]] and [[Tijuana Municipality]], Baja California, [[San Luis Rio Colorado]] in [[Sonora]] and [[Yuma, Arizona]]. Older buildings would be especially prone to damage or collapse, as would buildings built on unconsolidated gravel or in coastal areas where water tables are high (and thus subject to [[soil liquefaction]]). Of the study, Fialko stated:

{{blockquote|All these data suggest that the fault is ready for the next big earthquake but exactly when the triggering will happen and when the earthquake will occur we cannot tell. It could be tomorrow or it could be 10 years or more from now.<ref name="Eurekalert2006"/>}}

Nevertheless, in the {{Age|2006|06|22}} years since that publication there has not been a substantial quake in the Los Angeles area, and two major reports issued by the [[United States Geological Survey]] (USGS) have made variable predictions as to the risk of future seismic events. The ability to predict major earthquakes with sufficient precision to warrant increased precautions has remained elusive.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Geller |first1=Robert J. |date=Dec 1997 |title=Earthquake prediction: a critical review |journal=[[Geophysical Journal International]] |volume=131 |issue=3 |pages=425–450 |doi= 10.1111/j.1365-246X.1997.tb06588.x |bibcode=1997GeoJI.131..425G|doi-access=free }}</ref>

The U.S. Geological Survey's most recent forecast, known as [[UCERF3]] (Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast 3), released in November 2013, estimated that an earthquake of magnitude 6.7 M or greater (i.e. equal to or greater than the [[1994 Northridge earthquake]]) occurs about once every 6.7 years statewide. The same report also estimated there is a 7% probability that an earthquake of magnitude 8.0 or greater will occur in the next 30 years somewhere along the San Andreas Fault.<ref>{{cite web |title=New Long-Term Forecast for California |url=https://www.usgs.gov/news/state-news-release/new-long-term-earthquake-forecast-california |publisher=United States Geological Survey}}</ref> A different USGS study in 2008 tried to assess the physical, social and economic consequences of a major earthquake in southern California. That study predicted that a magnitude 7.8 earthquake along the southern San Andreas Fault could cause about 1,800 deaths and $213&nbsp;billion in damage.<ref>{{cite web |title=The ShakeOut Scenario |url=http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1150/ |publisher=United States Geological Survey}}</ref>

==== The HayWired Scenario ====
This scenario hypothesizes the potential effects of a 7.0 magnitude earthquake on the San Andreas Fault in the San Francisco Bay Area. It aims to estimate the impacts on urban infrastructures along with the rebuilding efforts to both the landscape and economy. This study combines not only the geological impacts/effects of the event, but also the societal impacts such as property damage, economic rebuilding, and aims at estimating damages if cities increased risk-reduction. It was developed for preparedness geared towards Bay Area residents and as a warning with an attempt to encourage local policy makers to create infrastructure and protections that would further risk reduction and resilience-building.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Wein |first1=Ann |last2=Jones |first2=Jamie L. |last3=Johnson |first3=Laurie A. |last4=Kroll |first4=Cynthia |last5=Strauss |first5=Jennifer |last6=Witkowski |first6=David |last7=Cox |first7=Dale A. |title=Fact Sheet: The HayWired Earthquake Scenario |url=https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2021/3054/fs20213054.pdf |access-date=October 18, 2022 |website=The HayWired Earthquake Scenario}}</ref> This study is a combined effort from experts in the physical sciences, social sciences, and engineering both in the public and private sectors- ranging from urban planners to economists/business professionals. Not only does this study aim to estimate the impacts of the event, but aims to estimate the years of rebuilding and funding needed to recover communities from a potential disaster such as the HayWired Scenario.

The first volume of the HayWired Scenario study was released in 2017, with consistent continuations and contributions by engineers. This continuation was published in the second volume, Engineering Implications, in 2018.<ref>{{Cite journal |date=2000 |title=Landslide Hazards |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/fs07100 |journal=Fact Sheet |doi=10.3133/fs07100 |bibcode=2000usgs.rept...31W |issn=2327-6932 |last1=Water Resources Division |first1=U. S. Geological Survey |page=31 }}</ref>

===== Estimating damages =====
As of the 2021 Fact sheet update, there are several estimates on damages ranging from the approximate people affected at home, work, effects of lifeline infrastructures such as telecommunications, and more. This group of scientists have worked together to create estimates of how hazards such as liquefaction, landslides, and fire ignition will impact access to utilities, transportation, and general emergency services.<ref>{{Cite web |title=HayWired Scenario {{!}} U.S. Geological Survey |url=https://www.usgs.gov/programs/science-application-for-risk-reduction/science/haywired-scenario#overview |access-date=2024-10-23 |publisher=United States Geological Survey |language=en}}</ref>

This study goes into detail about the specific populations to be hardest impacted by a potential earthquake of a 7.0 magnitude, specifically in the San Francisco Bay Area. This includes intensified hardships for those with low-income, racially and culturally-diverse populations, and people with literacy hardships that would significantly "increase their risk of displacement and add to recovery challenges" (Wein et al.).

===== Scientific and economic involvement =====
In addition to societal and landscape impacts, this study looks at potential business interruptions. This portion estimates impacts to the California economy within the first 6 months post-recovery from the event through estimates of "utility outages, property damages, and supply chain disruptions resulting in an estimated $44 billion of gross state product (GSP) losses, or translated at 4% of the California economy"(Wein et al.).<ref>{{Cite report |chapter-url=https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/fs20213054 |chapter=The HayWired Earthquake Scenario—Societal Consequences |last1=Wein |first1=Anne M. |last2=Jones |first2=Joseph L. |date=2021 |publisher=United States Geological Survey |issue=2021–3054 |doi=10.3133/fs20213054 |language=en |last3=Johnson |first3=Laurie A. |last4=Kroll |first4=Cynthia |last5=Strauss |first5=Jennifer A. |last6=Witkowski |first6=David |last7=Cox |first7=Dale A.|title=Fact Sheet |doi-access=free }}</ref> This study also projects the recovery of jobs lost in highly impacted areas, such as Alameda County, could take up to 10 years to fully recover job losses and possible economic recession. Trajectories for economic recovery are improved by reconstruction but also delayed with impacts to the construction industry.