MELBOURNE (AFP) — Australia's second-largest city, Melbourne, was shaken by an earthquake Friday, but police said there were no immediate reports of damage or casualties.
Residents reported buildings shaking across the metropolitan area and other parts of southeastern Victoria state, recently ravaged by wildfires which killed 210 people.
"Being so close to the fire areas and having been on alert the last two to three weeks, our only thought was 'oh my God, what now?'" said Kate Bruce of Doreen.
"My kids thought that the roof was coming off, that's how loud it was here."
The United States Geological Survey said the 4.7 magnitude quake struck about 96 kilometres (59 miles) southeast of Melbourne shortly before 9.00 pm (1000 GMT) at a depth of 10 kilometres.
"We were just sitting down watching the TV and then the whole house absolutely shook," James Sandman of Drouin town told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
"The foundations shook, the walls moved, they wobbled, and myself and my wife just looked at each other and we both then looked at the exits wondering 'do we need to get out?'"
Seismologist Phil Cummins at Geoscience Australia, which monitors earthquake activity, told the national AAP news agency the quake "is unlikely to have caused any damage, except possibly some minor damage near the epicentre."
"We are in Gippsland in Krowera, and the earth tremor sounded like an explosion here," another resident said.
"[It] felt like something very big had hit the house. Our power also went out for about eight to 10 minutes."
Victorian State Emergency Service spokesman Allen Briggs said the service had been inundated with phone calls from the public but there had been no reports of any damage immediately after the tremor.
"It was certainly enough to rattle windows and we've had reports it was felt in metropolitan Melbourne and as far down as Warragul and Leongatha in Gippsland," Briggs said.
Just three Australian earthquakes are known to have caused fatalities, the University of Western Australia says on its website, with the worst being in 1989 in Newcastle in New South Wales state, which killed 13 people.
Showing posts with label australian earthquake. Show all posts
Showing posts with label australian earthquake. Show all posts
Friday, March 6, 2009
Earthquakes are to blame for the current global warming
New study says earthquakes cause global warming Alarmists have some serious explaining to do about man-made global warming, according to a new study. The study makes a strong, if unusual, argument that global warming is connected to earthquakes. Diandong Ren of the University of Texas claims that carbon dioxide (the greenhouse gas vilified by everyone from James Hansen to Al Gore) is released into the atmosphere by earthquake activity.
The study, published in Geophysical Research Letters, cites mudslides as the reason behind the release of CO2. Mudslides scour plants and topsoil away from the surface in large swaths. The buried plants then decompose, releasing carbon dioxide. The study uses the May 2008 earthquake in Wenchuan, China as an example. The earthquake that killed nearly 70,000 people could have released an amount of CO2 equal to “2% of the annual global emissions from fossil fuel combustion of the new few decades.” The climatologist has also designed a computer model to predict CO2 release from post-earthquake mudslides.
The study, however, creates something of a chicken-or-the-egg debate among global warming critics. In a 2006 report published in The Wall Street Journal, author Sharon Begley argued that melting glaciers actually spur volcanic activity and trigger earthquakes. Begley cites the geologic record and claims that the link between glaciers and earth processes has clear throughout history:
[The link between glaciers and earth processes] has reared its ugly head in the past, especially during periods of rapid climate change such as the end of ice ages. When ice sheets retreated 10,000 years ago, for instance, Iceland experienced a surge in volcanic eruptions. Volcanoes in the Mediterranean, Antarctica and eastern California also seem to have been awakened by retreating ice.
Begley’s argument has been picked up and echoed by many publications, including a recent LiveScience article that says Earth’s rebounding crust is to blame:
One particular feature that can change the balance of forces in Earth's crust is ice, in the form of glaciers and ice sheets that cover much of the area around Earth's poles plus mountains at all latitudes. The weight of ice depresses the crust on which it sits.
The tension between Diandong Ren’s study and the articles blaming earthquakes on man-made global warming is difficult to reconcile. Both cannot be right. If so, the scientific community is trying to wrap its head around a massive vicious circle. If everyone’s claims are correct, earthquakes not only release a high percentage of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, but they effectively cause themselves. I have a hard time believing that any natural process starts and ends with itself. However, studies like Ren’s help quiet claims about man-made global warming and force alarmists to better explain themselves.
http://www.examiner.com/x-3420-Cleveland-Weather-Examiner~y2009m3d5-Earthquakes-to-blame-for-global-warming-study-says
The study, published in Geophysical Research Letters, cites mudslides as the reason behind the release of CO2. Mudslides scour plants and topsoil away from the surface in large swaths. The buried plants then decompose, releasing carbon dioxide. The study uses the May 2008 earthquake in Wenchuan, China as an example. The earthquake that killed nearly 70,000 people could have released an amount of CO2 equal to “2% of the annual global emissions from fossil fuel combustion of the new few decades.” The climatologist has also designed a computer model to predict CO2 release from post-earthquake mudslides.
The study, however, creates something of a chicken-or-the-egg debate among global warming critics. In a 2006 report published in The Wall Street Journal, author Sharon Begley argued that melting glaciers actually spur volcanic activity and trigger earthquakes. Begley cites the geologic record and claims that the link between glaciers and earth processes has clear throughout history:
[The link between glaciers and earth processes] has reared its ugly head in the past, especially during periods of rapid climate change such as the end of ice ages. When ice sheets retreated 10,000 years ago, for instance, Iceland experienced a surge in volcanic eruptions. Volcanoes in the Mediterranean, Antarctica and eastern California also seem to have been awakened by retreating ice.
Begley’s argument has been picked up and echoed by many publications, including a recent LiveScience article that says Earth’s rebounding crust is to blame:
One particular feature that can change the balance of forces in Earth's crust is ice, in the form of glaciers and ice sheets that cover much of the area around Earth's poles plus mountains at all latitudes. The weight of ice depresses the crust on which it sits.
The tension between Diandong Ren’s study and the articles blaming earthquakes on man-made global warming is difficult to reconcile. Both cannot be right. If so, the scientific community is trying to wrap its head around a massive vicious circle. If everyone’s claims are correct, earthquakes not only release a high percentage of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, but they effectively cause themselves. I have a hard time believing that any natural process starts and ends with itself. However, studies like Ren’s help quiet claims about man-made global warming and force alarmists to better explain themselves.
http://www.examiner.com/x-3420-Cleveland-Weather-Examiner~y2009m3d5-Earthquakes-to-blame-for-global-warming-study-says
Was that an earthquake? Do you know what an earthquake feels like?
Google may be showing some of its Silicon Valley influence with a new feature that makes it easier to answer a classic California question: “Did you feel that? Was it an earthquake?”
Now you can just type in the words “earthquakes San Francisco” (for example) if you want to see a list of recent earthquakes near (you guessed it) San Francisco. You can also do a general search for “earthquakes” if you just want to know which parts of the world are shaking. The feature also lets you click to see the earthquake epicenter on Google Maps.
On one level, this is a bit underwhelming, since Google isn’t providing any new information or even aggregating a particularly rich set of data — all of the earthquake information comes from the US Geological Survey’s Earthquake Center website. But this makes the information searchable so users don’t have to navigate the USGS’ lists and maps. It also lets you use Google’s tools to find out more — for example, you can Google the local time when the earthquake occurred. Perhaps most importantly, it’s yet another question you can answer without ever leaving Google.
My only real complaint is the fact that the earthquake listings just kind of sit there. Sure, you can map them, but how about a link to the full earthquake profile on the USGS site? Or to relevant stories in Google News?
In his blog post, Google Software Engineer Mike Danylchuk writes, “Traditionally, we’ve had to wait for answers as reporters scrambled to investigate and spread the news.” As someone who’s covered some small earthquakes for the local paper, I like this tool, but it only helps with what was already the easiest part of the job — namely, contacting the USGS (or visiting its website) and confirming that there was an earthquake. A cub reporter still has to tackle the tough task of tracking down some locals and asking, “Did you feel it? Did you feel it?”
http://venturebeat.com/2009/03/05/was-that-an-earthquake-google-it-and-find-out/
Now you can just type in the words “earthquakes San Francisco” (for example) if you want to see a list of recent earthquakes near (you guessed it) San Francisco. You can also do a general search for “earthquakes” if you just want to know which parts of the world are shaking. The feature also lets you click to see the earthquake epicenter on Google Maps.
On one level, this is a bit underwhelming, since Google isn’t providing any new information or even aggregating a particularly rich set of data — all of the earthquake information comes from the US Geological Survey’s Earthquake Center website. But this makes the information searchable so users don’t have to navigate the USGS’ lists and maps. It also lets you use Google’s tools to find out more — for example, you can Google the local time when the earthquake occurred. Perhaps most importantly, it’s yet another question you can answer without ever leaving Google.
My only real complaint is the fact that the earthquake listings just kind of sit there. Sure, you can map them, but how about a link to the full earthquake profile on the USGS site? Or to relevant stories in Google News?
In his blog post, Google Software Engineer Mike Danylchuk writes, “Traditionally, we’ve had to wait for answers as reporters scrambled to investigate and spread the news.” As someone who’s covered some small earthquakes for the local paper, I like this tool, but it only helps with what was already the easiest part of the job — namely, contacting the USGS (or visiting its website) and confirming that there was an earthquake. A cub reporter still has to tackle the tough task of tracking down some locals and asking, “Did you feel it? Did you feel it?”
http://venturebeat.com/2009/03/05/was-that-an-earthquake-google-it-and-find-out/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)