You may not realise it but, on average, Australia is rattled every few days by an earthquake of magnitude 3 or above. We don’t feel every small tremor that happens, but the larger earthquakes are powerful enough to cause serious damage to buildings and infrastructure, putting our community’s safety at risk.

The preliminary 6th Generation seismic hazard model of Canada (CanadaSHM6-trial) provides the basis for design values proposed for the 2020 edition of the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC2020). Seismic hazard values at a probability level of 2% in 50 years for 679 Canadian localities are provided in an accompanying spreadsheet to supplement the public review of the seismic hazard portion of NBCC2020 scheduled from January to March 2020. The spreadsheet tool provides the ability to select a Canadian locality and visualize seismic hazard values for any value of VS30 (140 - 3000 m/s) and Site Class (E-A). In this document we provide detailed instructions on the use of this spreadsheet. This work will be superseded by a forthcoming Open File, once NBCC2020 is finalized to reflect the final seismic hazard values calculated using CanadaSHM6.

Geoscience Australia and the NSW Department of Industry undertook seismic monitoring of the NSW CSG extraction area in Camden as well as baseline monitoring in the region between 2015 and 2019. Geoscience Australia established and maintained seismic stations to identify of events of greater than ML2.0 within the CSG fields. Three new seismic stations were located near Camden CSG area with two baseline stations in North-West Sydney. This poster details the station builds and seismic monitoring of both the Camden CSG production area and the wider region during the project.

<p>As part of the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Assessment (NSHA), we compiled the geographic information system (GIS) dataset to enable end-users to view and interrogate the NSHA18 outputs on a spatially enabled platform. It is intended to ensure the NSHA18 outputs are openly available, discoverable and accessible to both internal and external users. <p>This geospatial product is derived from the dataset generated through the development of the NSHA18 and contains uniform probability hazard maps for a 10% and 2% chance of exceedance in 50 years. These maps are calculated for peak ground acceleration (PGA) and a range of response spectral periods, Sa(T), for T = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0 and 4.0 s. Additionally, hazard curves for each ground-motion intensity measure as well as uniform hazard spectra at the nominated exceedance probabilities are calculated for key localities.

One-dimensional shear-wave velocity (VS ) profiles are presented at 50 strong motion sites in New South Wales and Victoria, Australia. The VS profiles are estimated with the spectral analysis of surface waves (SASW) method. The SASW method is a noninvasive method that indirectly estimates the VS at depth from variations in the Rayleigh wave phase velocity at the surface.

The Philippine archipalego is tectonically complex and seismically hazardous, yet few seismic hazard assessments have provided national coverage. This paper presents an updated probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for the nation. Active shallow crustal seismicity is modeled by faults and gridded point sources accounting for spatially variable occurrence rates. Subduction interfaces are modelled with faults of complex geometry. Intraslab seismicity is modeled by ruptures filling the slab volume. Source geometries and earthquake rates are derived from seismicity catalogs, geophysical datasets, and historic-to-paleoseismic constraints on fault slip rates. The ground motion characterization includes models designed for global use, with partial constraint by residual analysis. Shallow crustal faulting near metropolitan Manila, Davao, and Cebu dominates shaking hazard. In a few places, peak ground acceleration with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years on rock reaches 1.0 g. The results of this study may assist in calculating the design base shear in the National Structural Code of the Philippines.

Damaging earthquakes in Australia and other regions characterised by low seismicity are considered low probability but high consequence events. Uncertainties in modelling earthquake occurrence rates and ground motions for damaging earthquakes in these regions pose unique challenges to forecasting seismic hazard, including the use of this information as a reliable benchmark to improve seismic safety within our communities. Key challenges for assessing seismic hazards in these regions are explored, including: the completeness and continuity of earthquake catalogues; the identification and characterisation of neotectonic faults; the difficulties in characterising earthquake ground motions; the uncertainties in earthquake source modelling, and the use of modern earthquake hazard information to support the development of future building provisions. Geoscience Australia recently released its 2018 National Seismic Hazard Assessment (NSHA18). Results from the NSHA18 indicate significantly lower seismic hazard across almost all Australian localities at the 1/500 annual exceedance probability level relative to the factors adopted for the current Australian Standard AS1170.4–2007 (R2018). These new hazard estimates have challenged notions of seismic hazard in Australia in terms of the recurrence of damaging ground motions. Consequently, this raises the question of whether current practices in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) deliver the outcomes required to protect communities and infrastructure assets in low-seismicity regions, such as Australia. This manuscript explores a range of measures that could be undertaken to update and modernise the Australian earthquake loading standard, in light of these modern seismic hazard estimates, including the use of alternate ground-motion exceedance probabilities for assigning seismic demands for ordinary-use structures. The estimation of seismic hazard at any location is an uncertain science, particularly in low-seismicity regions. However, as our knowledge of the physical characteristics of earthquakes improve, our estimates of the hazard will converge more closely to the actual – but unknowable – (time independent) hazard. Understanding the uncertainties in the estimation of seismic hazard is also of key importance, and new software and approaches allow hazard modellers to better understand and quantify this uncertainty. It is therefore prudent to regularly update the estimates of the seismic demands in our building codes using the best available evidence-based methods and models.

Geoscience Australia is currently drafting a new Australian Earthquake Hazard Map (or more correctly a series of maps) using modern methods and models. Among other applications, the map is a key component of Australia’s earthquake loading code AS1170.4. In this paper we provide a brief history of national earthquake hazard models in Australia, with a focus on the map used in AS1170.4, and provide an overview of the proposed changes for the new maps. The revision takes advantage of significant improvements in both the data sets and models used for earthquake hazard assessment in Australia since the original map was produced. These include:  Earthquake observations up to and including 2010  Improved methods of declustering earthquake catalogues and calculating earthquake recurrence  Ground-motion prediction equations (i.e. attenuation equations) based on response spectral acceleration rather than peak ground velocity, peak ground acceleration or intensity-based relations.  Revised earthquake source zones  Improved maximum magnitude earthquake estimates based on palaeoseismology  The use of open source software for undertaking probabilistic seismic hazard assessment which promotes testability and repeatability The following papers in this series will address in more detail the changes to the earthquake catalogue, earthquake recurrence and ground motion prediction equations proposed for use in the draft map. The draft hazard maps themselves are presented in the final paper.

The 2018 National Seismic Hazard Assessment of Australia incorporated 19 alternative seismic-source models. The diversity of these models demonstrates the deep epistemic uncertainty that exists with regards to how best to characterize intraplate seismicity. A complex logic tree was developed to incorporate the alternative models into a single hazard model. Similarly, a diverse range of ground-motion models were proposed for use and incorporated using a logic tree. Expert opinion was drawn upon to weight the alternative logic tree branches through a structured expert elicitation process. This process aims to transparently and reproducibly characterize the community distribution of expert estimates for unknown parameters and thereby quantify the epistemic uncertainty around estimates of seismic hazard in Australia. We achieve a multi-model rational consensus where each model, and each expert, is, in accordance with the Australian cultural myth of egalitarianism, given a ‘fair go’. Yet despite this process, we find that the results are not universally accepted. A key issue is a contested boundary between what is scientifically reducible and what remains epistemologically uncertain, with a particular focus on the earthquake catalog. Furthermore, a reduction, on average, of 72% for the 10% in 50 years probability of exceedance peak ground acceleration levels compared with those underpinning existing building design standards, challenges the choice of metrics upon which design codes are based. As questions of epistemic uncertainty are quantified or resolved, changes in our understanding of how the hazard behaves should inform dialogue between scientists, engineers and policy makers, and a re-appraisal of the metrics used to inform risk management decisions of societal importance.

The Earthquake Scenario Selection is an interactive tool for querying, visualising and downloading earthquake scenarios. There are over 160 sites nationally with pre-generated scenarios available. These represent plausible future scenarios that can be used for earthquake risk management and planning (see https://www.ga.gov.au/about/projects/safety/nsha for more details).