In 2017 Queensland Fire and Emergency Services (QFES) completed the State Natural Hazard Risk Assessment which evaluated the risks presented by seven in-scope natural hazards. The risks presented by earthquakes were evaluated as part of this assessment in broad terms. The assessment highlighted a number of key vulnerabilities and risks presented by earthquakes to the communities of Queensland requiring further analysis. As QFES matures the Queensland Emergency Risk Management Framework (QERMF) by working with Local and District Disaster Management Groups (LDMGs/DDMGs), opportunities have arisen whereby QFES, in collaboration with relevant Federal and State Government and industry partners, are in a position to provide State-level support to LDMGs and DDMGs, through the development of in-depth risk assessments. The State Natural Hazard Risk Assessment 2017 and the State Disaster Management Plan 2018 note that the QERMF, as the endorsed methodology for the assessment of disaster related risk, is intended to: • Provide consistent guidance in understanding disaster risk that acts as a conduit for publicly available risk information. This approach assists in establishing and implementing a framework for collaboration and sharing of information in disaster risk management, including risk informed disaster risk reduction strategies and plans. • Encourage holistic risk assessments that provide an understanding of the many different dimensions of disaster risk (hazards, exposures, vulnerabilities, capability and capacities). The assessments include diverse types of direct and indirect impacts of disaster, such as physical, social, economic, environmental and institutional. The assessment and its intended audience This risk assessment was developed using the QERMF to undertake a scenario-based analysis of Queensland’s earthquake risk. It is intended to complement and support LDMGs and DDMGs in the completion of their risk-based disaster management plans. The development of the State Earthquake Risk Assessment 2018 was supported by Geoscience Australia (GA) through the provision of expert advice, relevant spatial datasets and the development of the scenarios used through this assessment. Input has been sought from GA to help contextualise the findings of the National Seismic Hazard Assessment 2018 for Queensland. Consultation with the University of Queensland has been sought to provide the ‘Queensland Context’, capitalising on the 80-year history of earthquake research and study undertaken by the university. A robust scientific basis enhances the assessment and enables disaster management groups to inform their local level planning. Overall, the assessment and associated report seeks to complement and build upon existing Local and District earthquake risk assessments by providing updated and validated information relating to the changes in understanding Queensland’s earthquake potential.

<p>The 2018 Australian Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard Assessment (PTHA18) was developed by Geoscience Australia to better understand Australia’s tsunami hazard due to earthquakes in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. The PTHA18 contains over a million hypothetical earthquake-tsunami scenarios, with associated return periods which are constrained using historical earthquake data and long-term plate tectonic motions. The tsunami propagation is modelled globally for 36 hours, and results are stored at thousands of sites in deep waters offshore of Australia. Average Return Interval (ARI) estimates are also provided, along with a representation of the associated uncertainties. ARI uncertainties tend to be large because of fundamental limitations in current scientific knowledge regarding the frequency of large earthquakes on global subduction zones. <p>The PTHA18 provides a nationally consistent basis for earthquake-tsunami scenario design, as required for inundation hazard assessments. The results and source-code are also freely available. The current paper aims to provide a short and accessible introduction to the PTHA18 methodology and results, while deliberately limiting technical details which are covered extensively in the associated technical report and code repository.

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 6th Generation Seismic Hazard Model of Canada (CanadaSHM6) provides the basis for seismic design values proposed by Natural Resources Canada for the 2020 edition of the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC 2020). This Open File includes OpenQuake compatible source model files that will generate seismic hazard values as currently being proposed. Once NBCC 2020 is finalized, this report will be superseded by a subsequent Open File, to document the final model used to generate seismic hazard values using CanadaSHM6 for NBCC 2020.

This poster presents a summary of discussion topics following the 2018 Lake Muir, WA, Earthquake Sequence Community Engagement Workshop held in Frankland River, WA, on 28 November 2018

While damaging earthquakes are less frequent in Australia when compared to other weather related events, when they do occur close to communities they can cause major damage and injury. This community risk to life, property, social fabric and the local economy is significant. The risk also presents associated challenges for government agencies with a role in emergency response, health care and community recovery both in the short and longer term. For some communities recovery to pre-event conditions may never be fully realised due to the destruction of heritage value that may be central to local business activity. Resources for building resilience to earthquakes need to be prioritised against those needed for other hazards. What are the benefits of earthquake retrofit of high risk buildings to communities and what exemplars of risk management driven from government exist? What resources exist for a business case to be articulated for limited resources and for motivating investment by property owners to reduce their individual risk? This document seeks provide useful answer these questions. It presents information that explains the nature of earthquake hazard in Australia, the risk it presents and vulnerability factors behind it. It also provides information on the effectiveness of retrofit in reducing the impact of earthquakes, emergency management logistics and recovery needs. It further provides links to resources that can be used to advance local programs for building community resilience. The primary focus is the most vulnerable building construction type, unreinforced masonry, but the principles are informative to the address of other high risk building types in communities.

Damaging earthquakes are less frequent in Australia when compared to other weather-related events, but when they do occur close to a community they can cause major damage and injury. This risk to property and life exists for building owners, particularly if the building is of vulnerable construction. The good news is that your building can be retrofitted to improve its earthquake resilience within a sensible budget without compromising its heritage value. This document seeks to show you how. It explains the nature of earthquake risk and provides resources for building owners on how the risk can be reduced for the most vulnerable building construction type: unreinforced masonry.

There has been a long-identified need in New Zealand for a community-developed three-dimensional model of active faults that is accessible and available to all. Over the past year, work has progressed on building and parameterising such a model – the New Zealand Community Fault Model (NZ CFM). The NZ CFM will serve as a unified and foundational resource for many societally important applications such as the National Seismic Hazard Model, Resilience to Natures Challenges Earthquake and Tsunami programme, physics-based fault systems modelling, earthquake ground-motion simulations, and tsunami hazard evaluation. Version 1.0 of the NZ CFM is nearing finalisation and release. NZ CFM v1.0 provides a simplified 3D representation of New Zealand’s crustal-scale active faults (including some selected potentially active faults) compiled at a nominal scale of 1:500,000 to 1:1,000,000. NZ CFM faults are defined based on surface traces, seismicity, seismic reflection profiles, wells, and geologic cross sections. The model presently incorporates more than 800 objects (i.e., faults), which include triangulated surface representations of those faults and associated parameters such as dip and dip direction, seismogenic rupture depth, sense of movement, slip direction, and net slip rate. Presented at the 2021 New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering (NZSEE) Conference (https://www.nzsee.org.nz/event/2021-nzsee-conference/)

Here we undertake a statistical analysis of local magnitudes (ML) calculated using the two real-time earthquake monitoring software platforms use by Geoscience Australia (GA) since 2005, Antelope and Seiscomp. We examine a database of just over 10 years duration, during a period in which both systems were in operation and over 4000 earthquakes were located and magnitudes estimated. We examine the consistency of both single-station and network ML estimates of both systems, with a view toward determining guidelines for combining them into a single catalogue, as well as for determining best practice in the for the estimation of local magnitudes for regions of sparse seismic networks. Once this guidance has been developed, it is the intention of GA to re-process magnitudes for all earthquakes using a consistent approach where digital data are available and can be integrated within the currently-used SeisComP system. This paper was presented at the Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2021 Virtual Conference, Nov 25 – 26.

Public concerns have been raised about the potential for induced seismicity as state and territory governments lift moratoriums on hydraulic stimulation activities for the exploration and extraction of unconventional hydrocarbons. The Scientific Inquiry into Hydraulic Fracturing in the Northern Territory articulated the need for a traffic-light system “to minimise the risk of occurrence of seismic events during hydraulic fracturing operations” within the Beetaloo Sub-basin. A temporary seismic network (Phase 1) was deployed in late 2019 to monitor baseline seismic activity in the basin. Based on the data analysed herein (November 2019 – April 2021), no seismic events were identified within the area of interest suggesting that the Beetaloo Sub-basin is largely aseismic. Observations to date indicate that there is potential to identify events smaller than ML=1.5 within the basin. The recent installation of ten semi-permanent stations for continuous real-time monitoring will contribute to ongoing baseline monitoring efforts and support the implementation of an induced seismicity traffic-light system. The outcome of this study will be used to build knowledge about potential human-induced seismic activity in the region that may be associated with unconventional hydrocarbon recovery. This paper was presented at the Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2021 Virtual Conference, Nov 25 – 26.