Strong earthquake strikes central Australia, no damage

2012-03-24 19:40:02 GMT+7 (ICT)

ERNABELLA, Australia (BNO NEWS) -- The central region of Australia was struck by the country's largest earthquake in nearly 15 years on Friday evening, seismologists said, but there were no reports of damage or casualties.

The 6.1-magnitude earthquake at 7:55 p.m. local time (0925 GMT) on Friday was centered about 27.4 kilometers (17 miles) northwest of Ernabella Airport, a tiny airstrip near the border with South Australia and the Northern Territory. It struck about 3 kilometers (1.8 mile) deep, making it a shallow earthquake, according to Geoscience Australia.

The region near Ernabella is home to hundreds of indigenous Australians, but police said there were no reports of injuries or damage. The United States Geological Survey (USGS), which measured the strength of the earthquake at 5.6 on the body wave magnitude (Mb) scale, estimated that some 5,000 people in the sparsely populated region may have felt the quake.

Friday's earthquake was the largest to hit mainland Australia since August 1997, when a 6.3-magnitude earthquake was recorded off Collier Bay on West Australia's far north coast. It was widely felt but no serious damage was reported, and there were no injuries.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2012-03-24

"The United States Geological Survey .......... estimated that some 5,000 people in the sparsely populated region may have felt the quake."

I doubt it, unless it shook the Alice ~400km away. Ernabella had a population of 332 in the 2006 census.

If the tinnies fell off logs they mighta noticed...

If the tinnies fell off logs they mighta noticed...

You just made me think of this brilliant advertisement from 1986

Edited March 24, 201214 yr by midas

"The United States Geological Survey .......... estimated that some 5,000 people in the sparsely populated region may have felt the quake."

I doubt it, unless it shook the Alice ~400km away. Ernabella had a population of 332 in the 2006 census.

If you don't believe the USGS, perhaps your very own Geoscience Australia is more to your liking.

This was a shallow earthquake (focus at 10.7 kms) and GA estimates it could have been felt up to 507kms away. Underlying geology usually determines the level of perceived ground movement.

Alice Springs is 317kms away from the epicentre so an estimate of 5000 people is probably not far off the mark. Unless of course you know better.

Good thing this quake didn't hit in a populated area, the result could have been very different, who remembers Mekkering or Newcastle.

Good thing this quake didn't hit in a populated area, the result could have been very different, who remembers Mekkering or Newcastle.

Spot on. Shallow earthquakes are the most dangerous and if it occurs near urban areas the results can be significant.

Meckering WA in 1968, was a 6.9 magnitude (Australia's strongest in recorded history) at 7kms, and while it caused substantial property/infrastructure damage (see iconic railtrack photo below) killed no one.

The Newcastle NSW quake in 1989 was a 5.6 magnitude at 11.5kms and due to the proximity to the urban area killed 13.

The Christchurch quake of Feb 2011 was a 6.3 at only 5kms depth and its epicentre was only 10kms SE of central Christchurch, hence the 185 deaths and substantial impact.

The impact of quakes is largely the sum of:

magnitude of the earthquake

its depth

the underlying geology (landfill or poorly consolidated underlayers are deadly)

proximity to populated areas

time of day

levels of preparation/response

frequency of such events.

As there are several million earthquakes a year, with some 1.5million greater than magnitude 2.0, we actually get off pretty lightly with the occasional large scale disaster.

"The United States Geological Survey .......... estimated that some 5,000 people in the sparsely populated region may have felt the quake."

I doubt it, unless it shook the Alice ~400km away. Ernabella had a population of 332 in the 2006 census.

If you don't believe the USGS, perhaps your very own Geoscience Australia is more to your liking.

This was a shallow earthquake (focus at 10.7 kms) and GA estimates it could have been felt up to 507kms away. Underlying geology usually determines the level of perceived ground movement.

Alice Springs is 317kms away from the epicentre so an estimate of 5000 people is probably not far off the mark. Unless of course you know better.

Definitely, considering the Alice has a population of over 26,000. I've sent an SMS to a buddy of mine in the Alice to see if he felt the shock last night.

Ahhhhh The Alice.......brings back memories.....'a baby's got my Dingo'....

Hmmm interesting, anyone heard of "HAARP" in Pine Gap Aus?

Hmmm interesting, anyone heard of "HAARP" in Pine Gap Aus?

please spare us the 2012 end of the world, Area 51, etc etc, conspiracy BS.

oh are they testing again ??

"The United States Geological Survey .......... estimated that some 5,000 people in the sparsely populated region may have felt the quake."

I doubt it, unless it shook the Alice ~400km away. Ernabella had a population of 332 in the 2006 census.

If you don't believe the USGS, perhaps your very own Geoscience Australia is more to your liking.

This was a shallow earthquake (focus at 10.7 kms) and GA estimates it could have been felt up to 507kms away. Underlying geology usually determines the level of perceived ground movement.

Alice Springs is 317kms away from the epicentre so an estimate of 5000 people is probably not far off the mark. Unless of course you know better.

Definitely, considering the Alice has a population of over 26,000. I've sent an SMS to a buddy of mine in the Alice to see if he felt the shock last night.

Alice a little closer than I thought - let us know if there are any reports of tremblings.

@folium My point was that the area has very few people, hence the "...UNLESS it shook the Alice..."

Good thing this quake didn't hit in a populated area, the result could have been very different, who remembers Mekkering or Newcastle.

Not me. Sure, I know about the pacific ring of fire, but for someone like me blissfully unaware of Australia's plates and risk zones, this comes as a bit of a surprise. I never thought Australia was prone to quakes. Rather ignorant, especially if one considers the size of the continent, I know, but still, it's a shocker for me. Are Australians themselves as prepared as the Japanese, or are they as complacent as their Canadian cousins in British Columbia?

Good thing this quake didn't hit in a populated area, the result could have been very different, who remembers Mekkering or Newcastle.

Not me. Sure, I know about the pacific ring of fire, but for someone like me blissfully unaware of Australia's plates and risk zones, this comes as a bit of a surprise. I never thought Australia was prone to quakes. Rather ignorant, especially if one considers the size of the continent, I know, but still, it's a shocker for me. Are Australians themselves as prepared as the Japanese, or are they as complacent as their Canadian cousins in British Columbia?

Well I doubt anyone is as prepared as the Japanese, as they face quakes on a very regular basis. I imagine Australia is as prepared as the UK....so it's not! Seems like we must be on a par with the cousins in BC.

An inflammatory post has been removed.

Good thing this quake didn't hit in a populated area, the result could have been very different, who remembers Mekkering or Newcastle.

Not me. Sure, I know about the pacific ring of fire, but for someone like me blissfully unaware of Australia's plates and risk zones, this comes as a bit of a surprise. I never thought Australia was prone to quakes. Rather ignorant, especially if one considers the size of the continent, I know, but still, it's a shocker for me. Are Australians themselves as prepared as the Japanese, or are they as complacent as their Canadian cousins in British Columbia?

Well I doubt anyone is as prepared as the Japanese, as they face quakes on a very regular basis. I imagine Australia is as prepared as the UK....so it's not! Seems like we must be on a par with the cousins in BC.

Talking of BC a few images to bring the situation into the spotlight.

Without getting too geeky, BC has a subduction zone around Vancouver Island as the Juan de Fuca plate passes beneath the N. American plate. This is the northward continuation of the boundary that produced Rainier, St. Helens, Hood etc Earthquakes are fairly common with the occasional large event (1918 7.0mag, 1946 7.3 mag).

To the north the J de F and Explorer plates are grinding in a NW direction alongside the N.American plate, both moving in same direction but N. Am plate moving slower by about 2-3cm p.a. This is a similar situation to California and there are frequent small quakes and the occasional larger one, the most recent being a 8.1 mag on Queen Charlotte Island in 1949, and a 7.4 in 1970.

I talked to my buddy in the Alice and he tells me that they felt nothing. Supposedly, the only shaking he had that night was on the nest with the missus

Let's stick to the topic. Clue: Australia: Earthquake.

If you want more details on earthquakes in Australia, this link will give you chapter and verse:

http://www.ga.gov.au/earthquakes/