February's earthquake was forecast
MICHAEL DALY
Relevant offers
Christchurch Earthquake 2011
A day for Christchurch to remember
Modelling completed a week before the February earthquake gave a 25 per cent chance such a tremor would hit the area within a year, new research says.
In a paper published in the New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, scientists said time-dependent earthquake forecast models such as the short-term earthquake probability (Step) model were implemented after the magnitude-7.1 September 2010 Darfield quake.
In the week before the February 22, 2011, quake, Step estimated a 25 per cent chance of a magnitude-6.0 or greater quake occurring in the general aftershock zone of the Darfield quake in the next year.
The shallow quake that struck at 12.51pm on February 22 had a magnitude of 6.3, with its epicentre six kilometres southeast of the city centre.
It resulted in the deaths of 182 people and many serious injuries.
Much of the loss of life was in the collapsed Canterbury Television (CTV) and Pyne Gould Corporation (PGC) multi-storey office buildings.
Another 42 people died as the result of building failures within the central area bounded by the four avenues or outside but near that area.
The issue of whether scientists should have given more warning about the risks of further quakes after the September 2010 Darfield quake arose in October at the royal commission of inquiry into the Canterbury quakes.
Kelvin Berryman, of GNS Science, told the inquiry that the GNS team had grappled with the merits of making a public warning before the February quake.
"It wasn't really a reasonable approach to try to do that at that time because of the range of places where that magnitude 6 might occur. We didn't want to alarm unnecessarily," he said at the time.
There were five or six obvious scenarios about where a future quake might occur.
The new paper, with GNS Science seismologist Anna Kaiser as lead author, noted that time-dependent earthquake forecast models were now providing hazard input to the planning and design associated with the rebuild of Christchurch.
- © Fairfax NZ News
Sponsored links
Newest First
Oldest First
Chris #21 - you are absolutely right. Complete sensationalism, but amazingly it works. Look how angry some of these commentators are.
Of course the fact that GNS science are advising oil companies on fracking in canterbury and across new zealand shows just how impartial and unexposed to political and corporate pressure they really are. They confiscated the data gathered by Geo dept of Canterbury University the same week as the $400 million irriagation corporate welfare subsidy was announced for upland canty. They have sought to silence the inconvenient theory that the massive extraction of water from Canterburys aquifer has provoked a seismic reaction in the shallow layers of shale in this highly geothermally active region. These same layers of shale they wish to advice and encourage the fracking of. Yeah GNS you are real pure scientists...NOT
@ Michael Daly
Ask Brownlee's office via OIA request what communincations it had with GNS before Feb 2011 regarding accurate forecasts vs public confidence. Ask if Brownlee has apologised for attempting to influence GNS forecasts.
I find it amusing how people like Sally @24 rewrite history. She would have us believe that scientists warned of a quake under Christchurch but scientists have said the faults under that part were not previously known.
If it was known and there was a 25% chance the John Key and Gerry Brownlee people in charge should have taken steps to evacuate. If it wasn't known fair enough. But Sally, you can't have it both ways. Wendy, I'm sorry for your loss.
Martin, entomology is about insects not earthquakes mate. Immmm. So much for your expertise.
P#9, fact is this is what was said a few days before the quake. Noone expected this at that time or place, but I agree we should all just be prepared.
Christchurch, New Zealand... where everyone seems to have a geology degree...
The man behind the nextearthquake.com website:
"Reg Roberts holds a PhD in Entomology from the University of Illinois (1962) and a D.I.C. (Diploma of Imperial College, London (1972). Before his retirement he was a Principal Research Scientist in CSIRO Australia where he studied the population dynamics of pasture insects. Reg is an expert on pattern recognition."
Since when was Entomology a branch of Earth Science??
Samuel #20: "Its time the GNS boys with the high price toys be held to account. They need to eat humble pie and start consulting with Ken Ring and the people that run www.nextearthquake.com"
From the quoted website: "(2) Christchurch - "Southern Region"- within ≈500 km radius* of Christchurch, at Lat -43.527 and Lon 172.622."
Is this guy for real??? When he predicts an earthquake for Christchurch it could actually happen anywhere within _500km_ of Christchurch?? That pretty much covers most of the South Island and up into the lower North Island.
25% is no more a forecast than anything Ken Ring put up.
To call GNS accurate with a 25% chance is rubbish. I was more accurate with a 100% chance of a 6+ than they were because at least I said it would be within 6 months and what do I know?
GNS is a joke.
By the way the best earthquake site is 'quakemap nz' not GeoNet
Engineer denies 'conflict of interest'
Three charged over pharmacy robberies
Climber dies in Fiordland fall
Blenheim wife killer denied freedom
Man jailed for crossbow, machete incident
Hairdresser who stole cash claims sacking unfair
If in doubt, get a second opinion
Carterton tragedy: Safety chief would refuse balloon ride
Major courts overhaul proposed
Foreign Affairs Ministry confirms 305 jobs to go
Mob cancels star's performance
Kiwis not up with online security
Helena Bonham Carter 'honoured'
New hope for kiwifruit growers
Gender non-conformity linked to abuse
Nelsen cleared to lead NZ against Jamaica
Robinson starts for Chiefs against old team
Man's childhood comic collection fetches $4.2m
GNS Science is proving to be the masters of "we told u so" but so long after the fact is laughable... I would hate to think of how much taxpayers money is being wasted on these useless so called scientists. science is no closer to being able to predict events than they were a 100 years ago, and i feel insulted by them everytime we get the guesses thrown at us following the event. a 25% chance of a mag 6 happening within 12 months on a newly formed fault line which by that time had produced a couple of thousand aftershocks.. not really rocket science to make a guess about that...