Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

43
Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (

description

Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not). N coast of E. Moloka‘i. WHAT CAUSED THE HUGE PALI? FAULTING? MARINE EROSION? VALLEY EROSION? SOME COMBINATION OF THESE?. Dana (1890) “Thus such precipices are rather the rule in the Hawaiian group; and if seashore - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Page 1: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Page 2: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

N coast of E. Moloka‘i

Page 3: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Dana (1890) “Thus such precipices are rather the rule in the Hawaiian group; and if seashoreerosion is not the origin, - as many facts from the islands of the Pacific appear to show, -fractures and subsidence must be.

WHAT CAUSED THE HUGE PALI? FAULTING? MARINE EROSION?VALLEY EROSION? SOME COMBINATION OF THESE?

Page 4: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Formation of a cliff (that might be, or has been, mistaken for a fault or avalanche scarp) by coalescence of amphitheater-headed valleys

(Modified from Stearns & Vaksvik 1935)

Page 5: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)
Page 6: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

“Topographic evidence indicates thepresence of two large submarinelandslides on the slope of the Hawaiianridge northeast of Oahu. One slide ismore than 150 km long and moved on aslope with an overall gradient of about2 degrees.” (Moore 1964)

“However, recent detailed work on the topo-graphy of the region…does not support thishypothesis. The undersea hills are very largeas compared with the bumps on known land-slides, and some of them have forms charac-teristic of volcanic cones. The Tuscaloosa(also called Tuscarora) Seamount, for example,has a height of about 6,000 feet above thesurrounding sea floor, and its general form…suggests that it is probably a guyot…” (Macdonald and Abbot 1970)

Page 7: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

(Moore 1964)

Page 8: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

(Moore et al. 1989)

GLORIA side-scansonar data (smoothsurfaces show up as dark,rough surfaces show upas bright)

Page 9: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

(Moore et al. 1989)

Page 10: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

17 large landslides in principal Hawai‘i region

Represents ~6 million yrs (= 1 every 350,000 yrs)

Two Kinds: slumps (prolonged, progressive formation) and catastrophic debris avalanches

Off-shore failure accelerates on-shore erosion

Debris avalanches are likely to produce huge tsunami locally, butWould they be Pacific-wide?

Page 11: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Wailau Slide

Wai‘anae Slump

Ka‘ena Slump

Nu‘uanuDebrisAvalanche

(slide by John Sinton)

Page 12: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

after Moore (1964)

obvious cliffs

actual avalanchescarps

Page 13: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Profiles through E. O‘ahu showing landslide blocks (~3x vertical exaggeration)

E. O‘ahu - restored

Diagrams by Moore and Clague [2002], slide by John Sinton

Wai‘anae

Landslide headwall

Page 14: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

potential giant avalancheslide-plane?

Page 15: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

A deposit of coral and basalt boulders resting ~conformablyon basalt flows, ~100 m above sea level, S. coast of Lana‘i-

Page 16: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Moore and Moore (1988): the Hulopoe Gravel was deposited by giant waves (megatsunami) generated by large submarine landslides.

Moore and Moore (1988) also speculated that other high-level deposits elsewhere in Hawai‘i might also be explained with this mechanism

(slide by John Sinton)

Page 17: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Rubin et al. (2000) dated carbonates from the deposit:

-Age correlates with stratigraphic height

-None of the clasts indicate a 105 ka “event”

(slide by John Sinton)

Page 18: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

The deposit is too old to have been produced from the Alika Slide

The presence of internal stratigraphy indicates it is not the product of a singe event (or wave)

These results favor deposition from rising and falling sea level over a period of more than 100,000 years (scenario B).

Rubin et al. [2000]

(slide by John Sinton)

Page 19: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Felton et al. [2000] recognized up to 14 different beds in the unit, and 8 different disconformities in the 9-m thick type section.

Three of the disconformities are associated with truncated paleosols

The deposition of the Hulopoe Gravel was not continuous.

At least one bed is clearly alluvial

(slide by John Sinton)

Page 20: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

The boulders are sortedby age: Different sea levels?Multiple tsunami?Enough time between eventsTo develop soil?

~1 m

Page 21: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)
Page 22: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Photo by Peter Mouginis-Mark, HIGP/SOEST

Page 23: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Ward SN (2001) Landslide Tsunami. J Geophys Res 106: 11201-11215

Page 24: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

War

d S

N (

200

1) L

and

slid

e T

suna

mi.

J G

eop

hys

Res

106

:

112

01-1

121

5

Page 25: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

War

d S

N (

200

1) L

and

slid

e T

suna

mi.

J G

eop

hys

Res

106

:

112

01-1

121

5

Page 26: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Ward SN, Day S (2001) Cumbre Vieja Volcano – Potential collapse and tsunami at La Palma, Canary Islands. Geophys Res Lett 28:3397-3400

Page 27: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

http://geology.com/news/images/canary-islands-la-palma.jpg

Ward & Day (2001)

Page 28: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

http

://w

ww

.geo

.ariz

ona.

edu/

%7E

andy

f/L

aPal

ma/

1949

-Fau

lts.jp

g

Page 29: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)
Page 30: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

http://geology.com/news/2005/09/atlantic-ocean-tsunami-threat.html

Page 31: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

http

://w

ww

.lapa

lma-

tsu

nam

i.com

/rea

ctio

ns.h

tml

Page 32: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

http://www.drgeorgepc.com/TsunamiMegaEvaluation.html

A web version of this is at

Page 33: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

http://www.tsunamisociety.org/PressReleases.html

Page 34: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

(Lamb et al. 2007)

Page 35: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Giant avalanches as a mechanism to give a head start to large amphitheater-headed valleys: KohalaThe giant avalanche speeds up erosion and thereby enhances stream piracy.

(Lamb et al. 2007)

Page 36: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

(Lamb et al. 2007)

Page 37: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

CREATION OF A SUBMERGED TERRACE REPRESENTING THE END OF THE THOLEIITE SHIELD

Page 38: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)
Page 39: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)

Clague & Moore (2002)

Coastline when tholeiiteshield stopped erupting(~1.5 million years ago)

Coastal terrace:wave-cut platform +reef, from pre-Kalaupapa low sea-levelTime (~420,000 or~350,000 years ago)

Avalanche scar (shortly beforethe end of tholeiite shield-building)

Kalaupapa (rejuvenation)~350,000 years old

Page 40: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)
Page 41: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)
Page 42: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)
Page 43: Giant Avalanches and Mega-tsunami (not)