Earthquakes and Earthquake Predictions - Essay Example

?Insert Insert Grade Insert 8th November Earthquakes and Earthquake Predictions Earthquakes are ground movements that happen from under the earth and result into vibrations on the surface of the earth. These vibrations occur with different magnitude and cause serious damages to features in the ground and on the earth’s surface. In the ancient world, earthquakes were believed to be caused by underground waves that are resultant of the spirits that fight against each other while ancient Greek scholars who were seeking to give a physical explanation attributed it to forces of the winds that happen on the underground. Earthquakes are believed to be caused by different occurrences that include glacial rebounding, sliding of tectonic plates that lie over each other, and by sudden discharge of stored strain that is accumulated along a fault line. The severity of a shake from an earthquake is usually as a result of three factors i.e. its magnitude attenuation of a wave that causes the earth quake as it moves through the earth’s surface and the possible disruption caused by different rock structure (Hough par 9-12). These vibrations can be predicted before they happen in a place. When these vibrations happen also, they result in major disruptions to physical features. However, the major cause of investigation has resulted from the threat these vibrations cause to people. The ability to predict great causes of damaging events that are likely to face an area in future time is a basic element of risk reduction development practices. It becomes an important element when it is facing emergency and lead to development of a good planning for such emergency (Albarello and Meletti 1-2). Earthquakes are caused by seismic waves. The intensity of these waves is measured with a machine known as a seismometer. The depth of the earthquake is another determiner of its intensity. Earthquakes are a major threat to life because if they happen with great magnitude, they lead to destruction of properties in which people live. When they happen on the water, they result to tsunamis that are likely to result in disruption of waters and seizing of ships. The commotion caused on the water also is extended to the coast, which causes major deaths of people at such coastal lands and destruction of property. Before the 1970s and 1980s, prominent scientists were optimistic that reliable prediction of earthquakes was possibly going to come. This was facilitated and motivated by the ground breaking prediction event of Soviet Union prediction of an earthquake and the successfully accomplished prediction of Chinese earthquake that happened in Haicheng. However, even with those optimistic achievements, there was a lot of pessimism because still many predictions were not reliable by then (Hough 34). Today, prediction of earthquakes is possible by scientists who agree that the understanding of ground motion attenuation relationships is an important aspect of predicting possibility of there being an earthquake. In March 2009, an Italian technician observed the radon and noticed some abnormalities and predicted that a great magnitude earthquake would be experienced. Although seismologists did not concur with that laboratory scientist, a fatal earthquake was experienced in L’Aquila barely a month after the prediction. The earthquake claimed many lives and were injured while a lot of property was destroyed and many were displaced from their places. Forecasting of earthquakes is faced with many debates about their occurrence once they have happened. For example, when it happened in city of L’Aquila a lot of questions and debates followed; scientists were fiercely faced by contradiction basing on their ability to forecast such dangers. This earthquake was so destructive such that everyone affected by it rose against the people who are responsible for predicting (Albarello and Meletti 3). Currently, there are many prediction methods for earthquakes developed such that one does not have to ask whether it is possible to predict an earthquake but rather which method they can apply from a list of recent innovations of seismologists. There are many issues that are prevailing in the minds of people. This is because damage continues to happen as a result of destructive earthquakes. There are many places that have received the effects of earthquakes in the last decade. These include destruction of property and deaths. For example, this happened in Sumatra-Andaman earthquake which happened on 26th December 2004, L’Aquila, Italy earthquake of April 2009, Japan, Tohoku area earthquake in the year 2011 among others. These earthquakes continue to cause deaths and destruction of property. The question that arises is whether there is a method that can be reliably used to give information that can be accepted by all people that are totally capable of predicting earthquakes. This question is raised because during the Italian earthquake of the year 2009, seismologists doubted any truth in the results of the analysis of abnormalities that were noted in the radon that was inferred as a sign of possible earthquake (Hough par 35-37). For example, one thing that was not really understood some years ago but is now becoming more and more established is that earthquakes tend to happen in clusters. You can look at a particular area and see a pattern whereby you get a number of strong earthquakes in a relatively short period of time, and there is a long gap before the next one. So when you are trying to assess what is going to be the future in that particular place, it depends rather on whether you are in the middle of a cluster. In that case it’s a short time interval, or if you have reached the end of a cluster, it is going to be a long time before the next one is due. Whether you can actually take advantage of that is another matter. It would be rather dangerous to say, "I’m out of a cluster now and I don’t have to worry about earthquake," because you might find that you are wrong. But from that sort of observation we might be able to gradually put together a better idea of why earthquakes happen in the patterns that they do. There is a lot we still do not understand about the mechanics of earthquakes. Earthquakes occur when rocks fracture from one side to another of a fault. Large earthquakes start just like small earthquakes. A small earthquake triggers a bigger earthquake and that triggers even a greater-impact earthquake. From the smallest earthquake, forces are transmitted through the rocks of the earth until they produce a large earthquake. This implies that large earthquakes start with small forces that transmit the forces to produce a high magnitude earthquake. This has been unveiled to be true by high quality monitoring of earthquakes that has been done in the past year. However, seismologists are not able to explain why faults break at that particular time or how they produce a small or large earthquake. Through this it is possible to deduce the reason why earthquakes start but it is not easy to explain what can cause them to end. There are also limited explanations given as to why earthquakes are not of the same magnitude. The radon method of predicting earthquakes involves the measuring of radon gas levels in the environment. Radon gas is produced as a result of radioactive decay of uranium. The uranium from below the earth crust releases radon, which comes out from below the earth crust through faults. When radon gas is released on the earth surface it implies a possible growing fault line. The more the radon gas sensed, the more the magnitude of the earthquake to be experienced (Palmer par 3-6). This method was used by an Italian laboratory scientist to predict the great earthquake that befell Italy in the year 2009. However, this method is questioned by very many scientists because of some possible inconsistence that has been noted when using it. Radon method is criticized because scientists argue that the gas is sensed from very far from where they happen. There is another problem pointed out by scientists and geologists that this method has an error in predicting time. For example, when used to predict Italian earthquake it had an error of one week (Palmer par 6-8). The heat that is spiking noted during the use of this method, according to geologists, could be as a result of weather change. According to Elkin (par 7-9), it is difficult to predict earthquakes because there are no bases for being confident in the results that are obtained in prediction. He argues that there is no existent method of earthquake prediction that is fully reliable to predict a possible time of an earthquake. He points that the best way to ensure safety is to know that there are risky times that may come and therefore, people should take caution from that information. He continues that the caution that people that are touched by the possibility of there being an earthquake should be to evacuate the place or any asset that they could think important to them. According to Hough (par 44), historical records cannot be an explanation reliable enough to predict earthquakes. This is because it is very short and that variability of earthquake cycle is related to the plate boundaries of the rocks that are involved. The information acquired through geological analysis is limited and present high uncertainties. Hough concludes that peoples’ expectation for a high magnitude earthquakes are guided by the general understanding of the history of that place. According to Khan et al (669-670), although natural calamities are investable, they pose a threat because they are never predictable. These authors have analyzed the methods of predicting earthquakes without success. The kinds of results that are obtained do not offer any solution for the problem. There were many researches that have yielded a lot of information about relationship between seismic events and electromagnetic emissions. However, there are still doubts that these methods are reliably useful to predict any possibility of occurrence of earthquakes. Because of the perceived possibility of prediction of earthquakes, the methods of predicting are being advanced daily. Since 1975 when an earthquake prediction was exact, a lot of optimism is presented that one day there will be invented a method that will be reliable to predict earthquakes. The radon method has been used but has been criticized by scientists who have opposed it on the reason of its inability to predict the time (Khan et al 672). Advancement of technology has led to provision of department of dealing with prediction of earthquakes. In Italy, scientists have been assigned responsibilities to use their knowledge to predict possibility of an earthquake. After the end of the 2009 earthquake, six scientists and a government official were convicted for failing to have predicted the possibility of a large earthquake. They were accused for falsely assuring citizens that there were no major risks they would undergo during the earthquake. The government of Italy blamed them for they even opposed the predictions that were given by a laboratory scientist (Whiting par 2-5; Elkin par 8). Scientists have however declared that as per now, there are no specific methods that can be used to measure the risk posed by an earthquake by predicting. This is because the methods that are now in use are subject to influence by the environment. Expecting a lot of help for predicting earthquakes from scientists would be very unreasonable. None of predictions that are obtained through any method can be validated by scientists or geologists. The studies which were previously done suggest that environment gives hints for making triumphant earthquake predictions. The earthquakes do give mark but the field is relatively broad. All earthquakes do not release one kind of sign. There is evidence, however, that seismic precursors exist but scientists will have to experiment more to isolate a common way that can be used to predict earthquakes (Khan et al 672). Earthquakes are inevitable calamities that can happen any time of the year and any place on the surface of the earth. It can be proven beyond doubts that there are efforts that are done to develop a means to predict occurrence of earthquakes. However, even with many experiments done by scientists, there still are a lot of things that have not been established. No method that can be used to predict a possibility of an earthquake in future. The scientist advices all the people to respond to any suggestions of an earthquake by taking caution of anything they need to do and preserving the assets they need to secure because the prediction cannot be validated or be overlooked. Mostly, predictions that have been given about the intensity of an earthquake are not majorly as a result of scientific validation but as a result of historical knowledge of the kinds of earthquakes that have been happening. Works Cited Albarello, D. and Meletti, C. “Earthquake Forecasting and Hazard Assessment: A Preface.” Bollettino di Geofisica Teorica ed Applicata, Mar2012, Vol. 53 Issue 1, p1-5. 5p. DOI: 10.4430/bgta0058 Elkin, Larry. “Earthquakes: Predicting the Unpredictable.” Wallstreetpit, 2012. Web. 8th Nov 2012 Hough, Susan. “Earthquakes” New Scientist, 02624079, 1/7/2012, Vol. 213, Issue 2846 Khan, Parvaiz; Tripathi, Sharad; Mansoori, Azad; Bhawre, Purushottam; Purohit, P.K.; and Gwal, A.K. “Scientific efforts in the direction of successful Earthquake Prediction” International Journal of Geomatics & Geosciences, 2011, Vol. 1 Issue 4, p669-677. Palmer, Roxanne. “Radon to Predict Earthquakes?” Ibtimes, 2012. Web. 8th Nov 2012 Whiting, Geoff. “NAS Protests Jailing of Italian Scientists over Earthquake.” Fierce Markets, 2012. Web. 8th Nov 2012. Read More