Observations and Impacts from the 2010 Chilean and 2011 Japanese Tsunamis in California (USA)
Observations and Impacts from the 2010 Chilean and 2011 Japanese Tsunamis in California (USA)
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00024-012-0527-z
复制
发表时间：
2013-06
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Richard K. Wilson;A. Admire;J. Borrero;L. Dengler;M. Legg;P. Lynett;T. Mccrink;K. M. Miller;A. Ritchie;K. Sterling;P. Whitmore
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Richard K. Wilson;A. Admire;J. Borrero;L. Dengler;M. Legg;P. Lynett;T. Mccrink;K. M. Miller;A. Ritchie;K. Sterling;P. Whitmore
加利福尼亚州海岸受到近期两起远程海啸事件的严重影响，其中一场于 2010 年 2 月 27 日在智利海岸引发，另一场于 2011 年 3 月 11 日在日本海域引发。这些海啸在各自震源地区的海岸造成了大范围的洪水和破坏。对于 2010 年海啸，NOAA 西海岸/阿拉斯加海啸预警中心根据预测海啸振幅范围为 0.18 至 1.43 m 发布了全州范围内的海啸警报，其中预计振幅最高的是加利福尼亚州中部和南部。对于 2011 年海啸，Point Conception 以北发布了海啸警报，并在该地点以南发布了海啸警报，预计震级为 0.3 至 2.5 m，是新月城的最高震级。由于两次远程海啸都是在低潮期间到来的，因此两次事件期间旱地被严重淹没的可能性都大大降低了。然而，这两起事件都造成了港口内和海滩沿岸的水位快速波动和强劲水流，对许多港口造成了广泛破坏，给沿海管辖区的应急管理人员带来了挑战。每次海啸发生前都会部署现场人员来观察和测量海岸的物理影响。事件后调查小组和调查问卷用于从物理影响和应急响应的角度收集信息。 2010 年海啸期间，皮斯莫海滩观测到的最大海啸振幅为 1.2 m，近十几个港口的船只和码头遭受了价值超过 300 万美元的损失，其中最严重的是圣克鲁斯、文图拉、使命湾和圣地亚哥湾的谢尔特岛北部。 2011 年海啸期间，新月城港口的最大振幅为 2.47 m，造成 20 个港口损失超过 5,000 万美元。受影响最严重的是新月城、诺约河、圣克鲁斯、莫斯兰丁和谢尔特岛南部。在这两次事件中，码头和海洋附近的人们都面临受伤的风险，2011 年克拉马斯河口海啸期间造成一人死亡。对最大预测海啸振幅的评估表明，2010 年和 2011 年海啸事件的平均百分比误差分别为 38% 和 28%。由于最近发生的这些事件，加州海啸计划正在开发有助于：(1) 海事界更好地了解其港口内的海啸危险，以及船只是否应离岸以及在何处避险以确保安全；(2) 应急管理人员为不需要大规模疏散的相对较小的“警告”级事件制定疏散计划。由于海啸引发的海流是造成这两起事件的大部分损害的原因，因此建模的海流速度估计应纳入预警中心未来的预测产品中。
The coast of California was significantly impacted by two recent teletsunami events, one originating off the coast of Chile on February 27, 2010 and the other off Japan on March 11, 2011. These tsunamis caused extensive inundation and damage along the coast of their respective source regions. For the 2010 tsunami, the NOAA West Coast/Alaska Tsunami Warning Center issued a state-wide Tsunami Advisory based on forecasted tsunami amplitudes ranging from 0.18 to 1.43 m with the highest amplitudes predicted for central and southern California. For the 2011 tsunami, a Tsunami Warning was issued north of Point Conception and a Tsunami Advisory south of that location, with forecasted amplitudes ranging from 0.3 to 2.5 m, the highest expected for Crescent City. Because both teletsunamis arrived during low tide, the potential for significant inundation of dry land was greatly reduced during both events. However, both events created rapid water-level fluctuations and strong currents within harbors and along beaches, causing extensive damage in a number of harbors and challenging emergency managers in coastal jurisdictions. Field personnel were deployed prior to each tsunami to observe and measure physical effects at the coast. Post-event survey teams and questionnaires were used to gather information from both a physical effects and emergency response perspective. During the 2010 tsunami, a maximum tsunami amplitude of 1.2 m was observed at Pismo Beach, and over $3-million worth of damage to boats and docks occurred in nearly a dozen harbors, most significantly in Santa Cruz, Ventura, Mission Bay, and northern Shelter Island in San Diego Bay. During the 2011 tsunami, the maximum amplitude was measured at 2.47 m in Crescent City Harbor with over $50-million in damage to two dozen harbors. Those most significantly affected were Crescent City, Noyo River, Santa Cruz, Moss Landing, and southern Shelter Island. During both events, people on docks and near the ocean became at risk to injury with one fatality occurring during the 2011 tsunami at the mouth of the Klamath River. Evaluations of maximum forecasted tsunami amplitudes indicate that the average percent error was 38 and 28 % for the 2010 and 2011 events, respectively. Due to these recent events, the California tsunami program is developing products that will help: (1) the maritime community better understand tsunami hazards within their harbors, as well as if and where boats should go offshore to be safe, and (2) emergency managers develop evacuation plans for relatively small “Warning” level events where extensive evacuation is not required. Because tsunami-induced currents were responsible for most of the damage in these two events, modeled current velocity estimates should be incorporated into future forecast products from the warning centers.