Magnitude 2.2 earthquake rattles parts of New York metro area

[Kamaji]

Magnitude 2.2 earthquake rattles parts of New York metro area

By Richard Pollina
May 19, 2023

Shake and wake!

A 2.2 magnitude earthquake struck the New York metropolitan area early Friday morning, Fox Weather confirmed to The Post, leaving many around the city jostled awake by the temblor.

The quake hit south of Hastings-on-Hudson in Westchester County around 2 a.m., while the rumbling seemed to be concentrated in White Plains, Yonkers, and parts of northeast New Jersey, according to Fox meteorologist Christopher Tate.

There were no immediate reports of damage in the area.

One resident claimed to have felt the minor earthquake as far away as Danbury, Conn, according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS).

*  *  *

Source:  https://nypost.com/2023/05/19/new-york-metro-area-hit-with-2-2-magnitude-earthquake/

[PeteS in CA]

A lot of people felt a 2.2? If I feel a magnitude 3.x, i.e. 10X the energy of a 2.x, my wife, who works on the other side of the valley, probably won’t feel it. That’s been the case several times in the past 7 years. A 2.2 in the low mountains east of San Jose (close to where I work) I might not feel.

[Kamaji]

A lot of people felt a 2.2? If I feel a magnitude 3.x, i.e. 10X the energy of a 2.x, my wife, who works on the other side of the valley, probably won’t feel it. That’s been the case several times in the past 7 years. A 2.2 in the low mountains east of San Jose (close to where I work) I might not feel.

That probably has to do a lot with the underlying geology of NYC versus Calif.  As I understand it, the geology in Calif. is much more fractured than it is in NYC, where the rock is fairly monolithic.  As a result, a small earthquake quickly dissipates its energy jostling the fragments underneath Calif. whereas that same energy is transmitted much greater distances in NYC.

That is, in fact, one of the big risks for NYC earthquake-wise:  earthquakes are few and far between, but if a big-ish one ever hits NYC, most of the city will be destroyed, particularly the older brick and masonry buildings.

[bigheadfred]

When I saw this I thought it must be that immense horde of paparazzi still charging around looking for Harry and his sidekick. 

[Kamaji]

When I saw this I thought it must be that immense horde of paparazzi still charging around looking for Harry and his sidekick. 

[Free Vulcan]

A lot of people felt a 2.2? If I feel a magnitude 3.x, i.e. 10X the energy of a 2.x, my wife, who works on the other side of the valley, probably won’t feel it. That’s been the case several times in the past 7 years. A 2.2 in the low mountains east of San Jose (close to where I work) I might not feel.

Different geology - the waves carry more in the eastern part of the country

If New Madrid ripped off again like last time, it'd take down most everything all the way up to Chicago and who knows how far east and west. Last time it rang church bells in Boston.

[Kamaji]

Different geology - the waves carry more in the eastern part of the country

If New Madrid ripped off again like last time, it'd take down most everything all the way up to Chicago and who knows how far east and west. Last time it rang church bells in Boston.

Pretty much.  A New Madrid event would probably level all of NYC to the ground.

[GtHawk]

That probably has to do a lot with the underlying geology of NYC versus Calif.  As I understand it, the geology in Calif. is much more fractured than it is in NYC, where the rock is fairly monolithic.  As a result, a small earthquake quickly dissipates its energy jostling the fragments underneath Calif. whereas that same energy is transmitted much greater distances in NYC.

That is, in fact, one of the big risks for NYC earthquake-wise:  earthquakes are few and far between, but if a big-ish one ever hits NYC, most of the city will be destroyed, particularly the older brick and masonry buildings.

I don't know according to this article quite a bit of New York is garbage, er, landfill so it seems to me there may be risk just like parts of California of liquefaction or a garbage type synonym.

https://gizmodo.com/5-parts-of-nyc-built-on-garbage-and-waste-1682267605

[Kamaji]

I don't know according to this article quite a bit of New York is garbage, er, landfill so it seems to me there may be risk just like parts of California of liquefaction or a garbage type synonym.

https://gizmodo.com/5-parts-of-nyc-built-on-garbage-and-waste-1682267605

That's just a little bit of icing on the cake in terms of geology.  The underlying geology is relatively intact, unlike in much of California.

Buildings that are built on infill would, of course, run the risks of liquefaction; however, most of Manhattan has solid bedrock underneath it, and in midtown and central park, the bed rock comes close to the surface or, in the park, even breaks through the surface.

[PeteS in CA]

The Santa Clara Valley in which Mrs. PeteS and I live and work is pretty homogeneous. Where I work in NE San Jose is west of the Calaveras or Hayward Fault. Where Mrs. PeteS works in west San Jose is east of the San Andreas. So while CA geography is pretty chopped up, and that can attenuate the waves of shaking, we live and work in between two faults. We are also 10 or more miles from each of the two faults. So if a 4.x quake happens on either fault, we’ll both feel it.

My understanding is that the geography east of the Mississippi is not broken up, so a fairly high quake on the New Madrid fault would test the earthquake resistance of many East Coat buildings.