Report on the Recent Prediction of a M 6.0-6.8 Earthquake in South Iran Made by Guangmeng Guo on 9 January, 2015 Prepared as an Advisory Document for Iranian officials Written by Daniel S. Helman Doctoral Student, Prescott College danielhelmanteaching@yahoo.com Date of Writing: January 13, 2015
Report on the Recent Prediction of a M 6.0-6.8 Earthquake in South Iran Made by Guangmeng Guo on 9 January, 2015: Prepared as an Advisory Document for Iranian officials Table of Contents Introduction...2 Reliability...7 Recommendations...10 Strongly Recommended...10 Possible...11 References...12 List of Figures 1. Linear cloud over South Iran, visible inside the red circle...3 2. Map showing the location of the five M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes as gold stars, with a scale of 50 miles...5 3. Map showing the location of the five M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes as gold stars, with a scale of 10 miles...5 4. Map showing the location of the five M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes as gold stars, with a scale of 5 miles...6 5. Map showing the location of the five M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes as gold stars, with a scale of 2 miles...6 List of Tables 1. Earthquakes between N27º E51º and N30º E54º from December 1, 2014 to January 12, 2015 of magnitude 2.5 or greater...4 2
Introduction On January 7, 2015, Guangmeng Guo posted the following note on a listserv run by a working group of the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG), electromagnetic studies of earthquakes and volcanoes (emsev): "According to the satellite data, south Iran will have a M6.0-6.8 earthquake from 20150110 to 20150210. A possible area is E51-54, N27-30. Please use your data to reduce the error." The satellite data are actually from images showing a linear cloud pattern that persists in a region and is sometimes associated with earthquake events. Here is an image Guo sent. Figure 1. Linear cloud over South Iran, visible inside the red circle. (image: Guo). 3
The appearance of a cloud such as this is not enough to pinpoint where an earthquake will appear, nor whether conclusively a large earthquake will occur at all. It is suggestive, and gives researchers a chance to look at other data, to make an assessment. If there will be an earthquake, other signs will be present. There will be (1) increased seismicity. There may or may not be: (2) changes in strain as measured by strainmeters, (3) thermal anomalies of the Earth surface, (4) radon gas emissions, (5) changes to groundwater levels, (6) anomalous cloud phenomena, (7) electromagnetic anomalies, (8) changes to ionospheric total electron count, (9) atmospheric phenomena, such as lights or shimmer, and (10) other non-seismic precursors. The USGS reports that five earthquakes have occurred in the region within the past month, with magnitudes ranging from 4.7 to 5.3 and localized to an area about 100 km southwest of Shiraz. Here are the earthquake data. Table 1. Earthquakes between N27º E51º and N30º E54º from December 1, 2014 to January 12, 2015 of magnitude 2.5 or greater (Source: USGS Earthquake Archive Search) time latitude longitude mag magtype 2015-01-10T17:03:07.620Z 28.6967 51.8316 5 mb 2015-01-07T16:26:04.390Z 28.7835 51.8964 4.7 mb 2015-01-05T13:42:36.810Z 28.6276 51.8508 4.9 mb 2015-01-01T08:49:54.090Z 28.7102 51.8881 5.1 mb 2014-12-30T04:19:35.160Z 28.7226 51.9014 5.3 mb depth place 10 km 73km WSW of Firuzabad, Iran 10 km 66km W of Firuzabad, Iran 10 km 74km WSW of Firuzabad, Iran 10 km 68km WSW of Firuzabad, Iran 10 km 66km WSW of Firuzabad, Iran Figures 2-5 on the following pages show these earthquakes on map projections with different scales. 4
Figure 2. Map showing the location of the five M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes as gold stars, with a scale of 50 miles. (Source: USGS Data mapped using Google Maps). Figure 3. Map showing the location of the five M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes as gold stars, with a scale of 10 miles. (Source: USGS Data mapped using Google Maps). 5
Figure 4. Map showing the location of the five M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes as gold stars, with a scale of 5 miles. (Source: USGS Data mapped using Google Maps). Figure 5. Map showing the location of the five M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes as gold stars, with a scale of 2 miles. (Source: USGS Data mapped using Google Maps). 6
Reliability This section aims to answer the question of how reliable Guo's prediction is, for an earthquake of M6.0 - M6.8 in the area between N27º E51º and N30º E54º between January 10 and February 10, 2015. Here are the facts: (1) The cloud phenomena are associated with significant seismicity in a small area. The increase in seismicity is suggestive. If an earthquake of this magnitude were to occur in the coming days or weeks, the seismicity also suggests that it will be here, in the area where these M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes have occurred. On the other hand, the cloud phenomena could simply have been the result of this increased seismicity. There may be no greater earthquake coming. Likewise, it's unclear as to the rationale for the monthlong timeframe for the prediction. Perhaps it would be in two months. One cannot be certain. The study of earthquake clouds is not well-developed, and the method of Guo has not been replicated exactly by other researchers. There are a few other scientists who work with cloud predictions of earthquakes (Harrington & Shou, 2005; Tan et al, 2014; Thomas, Masci & Love, 2014). (2) Guo has been successful previously making earthquake predictions based on cloud phenomena. Guo published a prediction for South Iran previously based on cloud phenomena, that there would be a M5.0 - M6.0 earthquake in south Iran in April, 2009. There was (Brahic, 2009). Guo has also published a paper looking back at Iranian earthquakes, and showing that satellite data predated major earthquakes there by 60-70 days (Guo & Wang, 2008). Related articles also show earthquakes in 7
other regions preceded by these anomalous clouds (Guangmeng & Jie, 2013). Historically, the most famous successful earthquake prediction was in Haicheng, China, in 1975 (Wang et al, 2006). Tens of thousands of lives were saved, or more. The authorities had the presence of mind to evacuate when the seismicity increased, after a warning had been issued by scientists noting an increased possibility of a major earthquake. (3) The mechanism of cloud formation associated with earthquake phenomena is unknown. It is unclear why these clouds might form. Hypotheses range from (1) thermal phenomena to (2) seismic electrical phenomena to (3) the breakdown of pre-seismic release of radon gas to (4) mere coincidence. For more information, see Harrison, Aplin & Rycroft (2014); Liu (2012). (4) Earthquake prediction differs from forecasting. Prediction aims to be specific with regards to place, time and magnitude. Forecasting simply relates an increased likelihood of events. The cloud phenomena are not very specific in their predictive qualities. Seismic sensors offer a much clearer picture, and have been used successfully to predict earthquake events, notably, in Iceland (Stefánsson, 2011). There, the ability to monitor very small earthquakes was facilitated with a network of very sensitive seismometers. Iceland is a volcanic setting, and the methods they employed may be specific to that setting. 8
To Summarize: It is impossible to say for certain that the prediction is false or valid. It may be seen as implying an increased risk in the region. The seismic data suggest that the area of increased risk is restricted to the area where the M4.7 - M5.3 quakes have occurred. 9
Recommendations The following are recommendations for the Iranian authorities. The aim is to make an organized response that leads to a harmonious outcome. They are listed in two sections: Strongly Recommended, and Possible. Strongly Recommended: (1) The government ought to move emergency personnel and supplies to the region of the M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes. These should remain here for a few months. (2) A survey of the occupants of the area where these earthquakes were felt should be undertaken, to assess how much shaking occurred in nearby areas. A Shake Map should be generated with these data. This information should be used to determine the geographical extent of the project. (3) The government ought to survey the area affected by the M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes, looking at practical considerations, such as: (a) a census of the population potentially affected, (b) the locations of potentially unsafe buildings, (c) threats to water supply from seismic damage, (d) potential evacuation routes and staging areas for emergency relief, (e) other practical and logistical considerations. (4) The government ought to practice earthquake safety drills with the residents of the area near the M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes, according to the shake survey. These can include practice evacuations. (5) The government ought to assign the duty of issuing warnings and an evacuation notice to one official or several, for the area affected by the M4.7 - M5.3 earthquakes. (6) Scientists ought to install strainmeters in wells in the area, if possible. (7) Scientists ought to install more seismometers in the area, if possible. 10
Note that all of the previous are reasonable things to do for the welfare of the people there, even if there were no imminent threat of a major earthquake. Politicians are expert at organization of this kind. Perhaps the potential earthquake event will be an opportunity to develop leadership skills even more, and thereby save lives. Again, whether the larger event happens, these seven recommendations have the potential to save lives regardless. Possible: (8) A tent city can be set up. (9) An evacuation notice can be issued if there is rapid rise in seismicity or strain. This is a judgement call. The call to issue warnings and evacuations ultimately rests with the civil authorities. As with the 1975 Haicheng earthquake in China, it may simply be a matter of going through the practices, and then issuing the warning in earnest if seismicity or strain increase rapidly. In Conclusion: It is hoped that this report has given enough information to prove useful in developing an intelligent response to Guo's prediction. Science is a collaborative effort. Other experts ought to give their opinions, and a plan of action shoiuld be worked out and adopted. 11
References Brahic, C. (2009). Quake scientist predicts Iran will shake in late April. New Scientist. http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/04/ quake-scientist-says-iran-will.html Electromagnetic Studies of Earthquakes and Volcanoes (emsev). http://www.emsev-iugg.org/emsev/ Google Maps. https://www.google.com/maps/ Guangmeng, G., & Jie, Y. (2013). Three attempts of earthquake prediction with satellite cloud images. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 13(1), 91-95. http://www.nat-hazards-earth-systsci.net/13/91/2013/nhess-13-91-2013.pdf Guo, G., & Wang, B. (2008). Cloud anomaly before Iran earthquake. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 29(7), 1921-1928. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01431160701373 762 Harrington, D., & Shou, Z. (2005). Bam Earthquake prediction & space technology. In SEMINARS of the United Nations Programme on Space Applications (Vol. 16, pp. 39-63). http://www.unoosa.org/pdf/sap/2004/iran/presentations/harringt on.pdf Harrison, R. G., Aplin, K. L., & Rycroft, M. J. (2014). Brief Communication: Earthquake cloud coupling through the global atmospheric electric circuit. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 14(4), 773-777. http://www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/14/773/2014/nhess- 14-773-2014.pdf International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG). http://www.iugg.org/ Liu, X. (2012). Conjecture on imminent earthquake prediction---from shaving foam to cloud patterns. arxiv preprint arxiv:1206.3010. http://arxiv.org/abs/1206.3010 Stefánsson, R. (2011). Advances in Earthquake Prediction: Research and Risk Mitigation. Springer. http://www.amazon.com/advances- Earthquake-Prediction-Mitigation- Geophysical/dp/3540475699/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1 12
421139531&sr=8-1- fkmr0&keywords=advances+in+earthquake+prediction+iceland Tan, X., Ma, Y. Z., Jiao, J. N., Su, L. L., Ma, A. N., Hou, J. J., & Yan, L. (2014, June). Modeling pre-earthquake cloud shape from remotesensing images. In Earth Observation and Remote Sensing Applications (EORSA), 2014 3rd International Workshop on (pp. 470-474). IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/EORSA.2014.6927935 Thomas, J. N., Masci, F., & Love, J. J. (2014). On a report that the 2012 M= 6.0 earthquake in Italy was predicted after seeing an unusual cloud formation. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 2(9), 5889-5902. USGS Earthquake Archive Search. http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/search/ Wang, K., Chen, Q. F., Sun, S., & Wang, A. (2006). Predicting the 1975 Haicheng earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 96(3), 757-795. http://image.sciencenet.cn/olddata/kexue.com.cn/upload/blog/file /2008/6/200861418434216280.pdf 13