<div>The presence of Pliocene marine sediments in the Myponga and Meadows basins within the Mt Lofty Ranges south of Adelaide is testament to over 200&nbsp;m of tectonic uplift within the last 5 Myr (e.g., Sandiford 2003, Clark 2014). The spatiotemporal distribution of uplift amongst the various faults within the range and along the range fronts is poorly understood. Consequently, large uncertainties are associated with estimates of the hazard that the faults pose to proximal communities and infrastructure.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>We present the preliminary results of a paleoseismic investigation of the southern Willunga Fault, ~40 km south of Adelaide. Trenches were excavated across the fault to examine the relationships between fault planes and sedimentary strata. Evidence is preserved for 3-5 ground-rupturing earthquakes since the Middle to Late Pleistocene, with single event displacements of 0.5 – 1.7 m. Dating of samples will provide age constraints on the timing of these earthquakes. This most recent part of the uplift history may then be related to the longer-term landscape evolution evidenced by the uplifted basins, providing an enhanced understanding of the present-day seismic hazard.</div> This abstract was presented at the Australian & NZ Geomorphology Group (ANZGG) Conference in Alice Springs 26-30 September 2022. https://www.anzgg.org/images/ANZGG_2022_First_circular_Final_V3.pdf

The 10% in 50 year seismic hazard map is the key output from the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Assessment for Australia (NSHA18) as required for consideration by the Standards Australia earthquake loading committee AS1170.4

This ecat record refers to the data described in ecat record 123048. The data, supplied in shapefile format, is an input to the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Assessment for Australia (NSHA18) product (ecat 123020) and the 2018 Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard Assessment for Australia (PTHA18) product (ecat 122789).

This Geoscience Australia Record contains technical data and input files that, when used with the Global Earthquake Model’s (GEM’s) OpenQuake-engine probabilistic seismic hazard analysis software (Pagani et al., 2014), will enable end users to explore and reproduce the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Assessment (NSHA18) of Australia (Allen et al., 2018a). This report describes the NSHA18 input data only and does not discuss the scientific rationale behind the model development. These details are provided in Allen et al. (2018a) and references therein.

Located within an intraplate setting, continental Australia has a relatively low rate of seismicity compared with its surrounding plate boundary regions. However, the plate boundaries to the north and east of Australia host significant earthquakes that can impact Australia. Large plate boundary earthquakes have historically generated damaging ground shaking in northern Australia, including Darwin. Large submarine earthquakes have historically generated tsunami impacting the coastline of Australia. Previous studies of tsunami hazard in Australia have focussed on the threat from major subduction zones such as the Sunda and Kermadec Arcs. Although still subject to uncertainty, our understanding of the location, geometry and convergence rates of these subduction zones is established by global tectonic models. Conversely, actively deforming regions in central and eastern Indonesia, the Papua New Guinea region and the Macquarie Ridge region are less well defined, with deformation being more continuous and less easily partitioned onto discrete known structures. A number of recently published geological, geodetic and seismological studies are providing new insights into present-day active tectonics of these regions, providing a basis for updating earthquake source models for earthquake and tsunami hazard assessment. This report details updates to earthquake source models in active tectonic regions along the Australian plate boundary, with a primary focus on regions to the north of Australia, and a subsidiary focus on the Puyesgur-Macquarie Ridge-Hjort plate boundary south of New Zealand. The motivation for updating these source models is threefold: 1. To update regional source models for the 2018 revision of the Australian probabilistic tsunami hazard assessment (PTHA18); 2. To update regional source models for the 2018 revision of the Australian national seismic hazard assessment (NSHA18); and 3. To provide an updated database of earthquake source models for tsunami hazard assessment in central and eastern Indonesia, in support of work funded through the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) DMInnovation program.

One of the key challenges in assessing earthquake hazard in Australia is understanding the attenuation of ground-motion through the stable continental crust. There are now a handful of ground-motion models (GMMs) that have been developed specifically to estimate ground-motions from Australian earthquakes. These GMMs, in addition to models developed outside Australia, are considered in the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Assessment (NSHA18; Allen et al., 2017). In order to assess the suitability of candidate GMMs for use in the Australian context, ground-motion data forom small-to-moderate Australian earthquakes have been gathered. Both qualitative and quantitative ranking techniques (e.g., Scherbaum et al., 2009) have been applied to determine the suitability of candidate GMMs for use in the NSHA18. This report provides a summary of these ranking techniques and provides a discussion on the utility of these methods for use in seismic hazard assessments in Australia; in particular for the NSHA18. The information supplied herein was provided to participants of the Ground-Motion Characterisation Expert Elicitation workshop, held at Geoscience Australia on 9 March 2017 (Griffin et al., 2018).

The 2018 National Seismic Hazard Assessment (NSHA18) aims to provide the most up-to-date and comprehensive understanding of seismic hazard in Australia. As such, NSHA18 includes a range of alternative models for characterising seismic sources and ground motions proposed by members of the Australia earthquake hazard community. The final hazard assessment is a weighted combination of alternative models. This report describes the use of a structured expert elicitation methodology (the ‘Classical Model’) to weight the alternative models and presents the complete results of this process. Seismic hazard assessments are inherently uncertain due to the long return periods of damaging earthquakes relative to the time period of human observation. This is especially the case for low-seismicity regions such as Australia. Despite this uncertainty, there is a demand for estimates of seismic hazard to underpin a range of decision making aimed at reducing the impacts of earthquakes to society. In the face of uncertainty, experts will propose alternative models for the distribution of earthquake occurrence in space, time and magnitude (i.e. seismic source characterisation), and how ground shaking is propagated through the crust (i.e. ground motion characterisation). In most cases, there is insufficient data to independently and quantitatively determine a ‘best’ model. Therefore it is unreasonable to expect, or force, experts to agree on a single consensus model. Instead, seismic hazard assessments should capture the variability in expert opinion, while allowing that not all experts are equally adept. Logic trees, with branches representing mutually exclusive models weighted by expert opinion, can be used to model this uncertainty in seismic hazard assessment. The resulting hazard assessment thereby captures the range of plausible uncertainty given current knowledge of earthquake occurrence in Australia. For the NSHA18, experts were invited to contribute peer-reviewed seismic source models for consideration, resulting in 16 seismic source models being proposed. Each of these models requires values to be assigned to uncertain parameters such as the maximum magnitude earthquake expected. Similarly, up to 20 published ground motion models were identified as being appropriate for characterising ground motions for different tectonic regions in Australia. To weight these models, 17 experts in seismic hazard assessment, representative of the collective expertise of the Australian earthquake hazard community, were invited to two workshops held at Geoscience Australia in March 2017. At these workshops, the experts each assigned weights to alternative models representing their degree of belief that a particular model is the ‘true’ model. The experts were calibrated through a series of questions that tested their knowledge of the subject and ability to assess the limits to their knowledge. These workshops resulted in calibrated weights used to parameterise the final seismic source model and ground motion model logic trees for NSHA18. Through use of a structured expert elicitation methodology these weights have been determined in a transparent and reproducible manner drawing on the full depth of expertise and experience within the Australia earthquake hazard community. Such methodologies have application to a range of uncertain problems beyond the case of seismic hazard assessment presented here.

People in Australia are surprised to learn that hundreds of earthquakes occur below our feet every year. The majority are too small to feel, let alone cause any damage. Despite this, we are not immune to large earthquakes.

<div>In mid-2022 two paleoseismic trenches were excavated across the Willunga Fault at Sellicks Hill, ~40 km south of Adelaide, at a location where range front faulting displaces a thick colluvial apron, and flexure in the hanging wall has produced an extensional graben. Vertical separation between time-equivalent surfaces within the Willunga Embayment and uplifted Myponga Basin indicate an average uplift rate of 40 m/Myr since 5 Ma across the Willunga fault at the trench location, equivalent to a slip rate of 57 m/Myr across a 45° dipping fault. </div><div> The field sites preserve evidence for at least 4-5 large earthquake events involving approximately 6.9 m of discrete slip on fault planes since the Mid to Late Pleistocene. If the formation of red soil marker horizons in the trenches are assumed to relate to glacial climatic conditions then a slip-rate of 26-46 m/Myr since the Mid Pleistocene is obtained. These deformation rate estimates do not include folding in the hanging wall of the fault, which is likely to be significant at this site as evidenced by the existence of a pronounced hanging wall anticline. In the coming months, the results of dating analysis will allow quantitative constraint to be placed on earthquake timing and slip-rate, and a structural geological study seeks to assess the proportion of deformation partitioned into folding of the hanging wall.</div><div> The 2022 trenches represent the most recent of ten excavated across this fault. Integration of the 2022 data with those from previous investigations will allow fundamental questions to be addressed, such as whether the Willunga fault ruptures to its entire length, or in a segmented fashion, and whether any segmentation behaviour is reflected in local slip-rate estimates. Thereby we hope to significantly improve our understanding of the hazard that this, and other proximal Quaternary-active faults, pose to the greater Adelaide conurbation and its attendant infrastructure.</div> This paper was presented to the 2022 Australian Earthquake Engineering Society (AEES) Conference 24-25 November (https://aees.org.au/aees-conference-2022/)

<div>The 1 March 1954 earthquake in South Australia is the most damaging earthquake to impact the densely populated Adelaide region since European settlement. Previous interpretations have associated the event with the Eden-Burnside Fault zone, with a presumed epicentre near Darlington. Surprisingly, comparing macroseismic intensities from the 1954 earthquake with similar modern observational datasets suggests the 1954 event was perhaps larger than previously thought. We assess the validity of this observation by reviewing available macroseismic and instrumental data. We observe damaging shaking extending east from Adelaide into the Adelaide Hills, but without a well-defined locus of higher intensities. The limited teleseismic observations lead us to further speculate that the 1954 earthquake could have been deeper and/or associated with a higher-than-normal stress drop. These new findings question the conventionally assumed location for the 1954 earthquake. Our work highlights the potential seismic hazards faced by large urban centres in Australia such as Adelaide.</div> This paper was presented to the 2022 Australian Earthquake Engineering Society (AEES) Conference 24-25 November (https://aees.org.au/aees-conference-2022/)