Progetto SPOT - Sismicità Potenzialmente Innescabile Offshore e Tsunami: Report integrato di fine progetto

Antoncecchi, Ilaria; Ciccone, F.; Dialuce, G.; Grandi, Silvia; Terlizzese, F.; Bucci, Daniela Di; Dolce, M.; Argnani, Andrea; Mercorella, Alessandra; Pellegrini, C.; Rovere, Marzia; Armigliato, Alberto; Pagnoni, Gianluca; Paparo, Maria Ausilia; Tinti, S.; Zaniboni, Filippo; Basili, Roberto; Cavallaro, Danilo; Coltelli, M.; Carlino, Marco Firetto; Lipparini, Lorenzo; Lorito, Stefano; Maesano, Francesco Emanuele; Romano, Fabrizio; Scarfì, L.; Tiberti, Mara Monica; Volpe, M.; Fedorik, Jakub; Toscani, Giovanni; Borzi, Barbara; Faravelli, M.; Bozzoni, F.; Pascale, V.; Quaroni, D.; Germagnoli, F.; Belliazzi, S.; Zoppo, M. Del; Ludovico, Marco Di; Lignola, Gian Piero; Prota, Andrea

doi:10.5281/zenodo.3732887

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The CTS size (∼300 km 2 ) suggests it could host ruptures of up to Mw 6.5 or even larger considering the possible activation with adjacent thrusts. If this were the case, the buried faults of the Adriatic offshore could also generate sizable tsunamis, as observed in the past (Table S1 in Supporting Information S1) and predicted by tsunami scenarios (Antoncecchi et al, 2020;Tiberti et al, 2008). Therefore, this earthquake demonstrated that the CTS is an active and seismogenic fault belonging to a larger fault system extending north and south and toward the Italian coast.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 53%

“…The interpreted seismic profiles were integrated with subsurface maps of the Marne a Fucoidi Fm top horizon (Albian p.p. ; Casero & Bigi, 2013) and 3D fault surfaces mapped in the area (Antoncecchi et al, 2020;Panara et al, 2021).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the elusive nature of buried and blind thrusts hinders their identification and makes it difficult to evaluate their activity, these faults can be the source of significant earthquakes and, if located offshore, tsunamis, (Amadori et al, 2019;Antoncecchi et al, 2020;Casero & Bigi, 2013;Maesano et al, 2013;Panara et al, 2021) available for the study area. CROP M16, B-402, and B-403 seismic profiles in Figure 3.…”

Section: Plain Language Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figure 2. (a) Tracks of seismic reflection profiles, location of well-logs (ViDEPI, CROP), and outline of subsurface maps(Amadori et al, 2019;Antoncecchi et al, 2020;Casero & Bigi, 2013;Maesano et al, 2013;Panara et al, 2021) available for the study area. CROP M16, B-402, and B-403 seismic profiles in Figure3.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Buried Alive: Imaging the 9 November 2022, Mw 5.5 Earthquake Source on the Offshore Adriatic Blind Thrust Front of the Northern Apennines (Italy)

Maesano

Buttinelli

Maffucci

et al. 2023

Geophysical Research Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On 9 November 2022, at 06:07:25 (UTC), an Mw 5.5 earthquake struck offshore Pesaro (central Italy) off the northern Marche coast (Figure 1). Another Ml 5.2 earthquake struck roughly 8 km to the south-southeast 1 min later. The earthquakes referred to as "Costa Marchigiana Pesarese" on the INGV website (http://terremoti.ingv. it) were widely felt but caused only minor damage and few secondary environmental effects in the Pesaro-Urbino and Ancona provinces. We refer to this sequence as "Pesaro Offshore."The two earthquakes occurred offshore the Northern Apennines contractional belt (NA). The NA developed since the Miocene in various NE-verging arcs, reflecting the paleogeography of the underlying Adria monocline

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 53%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Plain Language Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Buried Alive: Imaging the 9 November 2022, Mw 5.5 Earthquake Source on the Offshore Adriatic Blind Thrust Front of the Northern Apennines (Italy)

Maesano

Buttinelli

Maffucci

et al. 2023

Geophysical Research Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We have assumed loss ratios 5 %, 15 %, 45 %, 65 %, 85 %, and 100 % for each of the six damage states proposed by Suppasri et al (2013) and similarly, but starting with 15 %, for the five ones proposed in De Risi et al ( 2017). A similar approach has been recently adopted by Antoncecchi et al (2020). The impact of using more exhaustive approaches (e.g.…”

Section: Tsunami Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variable-resolution building exposure modelling for earthquake and tsunami scenario-based risk assessment: an application case in Lima, Peru

Zapata

Brinckmann

Harig

et al. 2021

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We propose the use of variable resolution boundaries based on central Voronoi tessellations (CVTs) to spatially aggregate building exposure models for risk assessment to various natural hazards. Such a framework is especially beneficial when the spatial distribution of the considered hazards presents intensity measures with contrasting footprints and spatial correlations, such as in coastal environments. This work avoids the incorrect assumption that a single intensity value from hazards with low spatial correlation (e.g. tsunami) can be considered to be representative within large-sized geo-cells for physical vulnerability assessment, without, at the same time, increasing the complexity of the overall model. We present decoupled earthquake and tsunami scenario-based risk estimates for the residential building stock of Lima (Peru). We observe that earthquake loss models for far-field subduction sources are practically insensitive to the exposure resolution. Conversely, tsunami loss models and associated uncertainties depend on the spatial correlations of the hazard intensities as well as on the resolution of the exposure models. We note that for the portfolio located in the coastal area exposed to both perils in Lima, the ground shaking dominates the losses for lower-magnitude earthquakes, whilst tsunamis cause the most damage for larger-magnitude events. For the latter, two sets of existing empirical flow depth fragility models are used, resulting in large differences in the calculated losses. This study, therefore, raises awareness about the uncertainties associated with the selection of fragility models and spatial aggregation entities for exposure modelling and loss mapping.

show abstract

Tsunami risk management for crustal earthquakes and non-seismic sources in Italy

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Destructive tsunamis are most often generated by large earthquakes occurring at subduction interfaces, but also other “atypical” sources—defined as crustal earthquakes and non-seismic sources altogether—may cause significant tsunami threats. Tsunamis may indeed be generated by different sources, such as earthquakes, submarine or coastal landslides, volcano-related phenomena, and atmospheric perturbations. The consideration of atypical sources is important worldwide, but it is especially prominent in complex tectonic settings such as the Mediterranean, the Caribbean, or the Indonesian archipelago. The recent disasters in Indonesia in 2018, caused by the Palu-Sulawesi magnitude Mw 7.5 crustal earthquake and by the collapse of the Anak-Krakatau volcano, recall the importance of such sources. Dealing with atypical sources represents a scientific, technical, and computational challenge, which depends on the capability of quantifying and managing uncertainty efficiently and of reducing it with accurate physical modelling. Here, we first introduce the general framework in which tsunami threats are treated, and then we review the current status and the expected future development of tsunami hazard quantifications and of the tsunami warning systems in Italy, with a specific focus on the treatment of atypical sources. In Italy, where the memory of historical atypical events like the 1908 Messina earthquake or the relatively recent 2002 Stromboli tsunami is still vivid, specific attention has been indeed dedicated to the progressive development of innovative strategies to deal with such atypical sources. More specifically, we review the (national) hazard analyses and their application for coastal planning, as well as the two operating tsunami warning systems: the national warning system for seismically generated tsunamis (SiAM), whose upstream component—the CAT-INGV—is also a Tsunami Service Provider of the North-eastern Atlantic, the Mediterranean and connected seas Tsunami Warning System (NEAMTWS) coordinated by the Intergovernmental Coordination Group established by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of UNESCO, and the local warning system for tsunamis generated by volcanic slides along the Sciara del Fuoco of Stromboli volcano. Finally, we review the state of knowledge about other potential tsunami sources that may generate significant tsunamis for the Italian coasts, but that are not presently considered in existing tsunami warning systems. This may be considered the first step towards their inclusion in the national tsunami hazard and warning programs.

show abstract

Progetto SPOT - Sismicità Potenzialmente Innescabile Offshore e Tsunami: Report integrato di fine progetto

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Buried Alive: Imaging the 9 November 2022, Mw 5.5 Earthquake Source on the Offshore Adriatic Blind Thrust Front of the Northern Apennines (Italy)

Buried Alive: Imaging the 9 November 2022, Mw 5.5 Earthquake Source on the Offshore Adriatic Blind Thrust Front of the Northern Apennines (Italy)

Variable-resolution building exposure modelling for earthquake and tsunami scenario-based risk assessment: an application case in Lima, Peru

Tsunami risk management for crustal earthquakes and non-seismic sources in Italy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About