It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The amplification of coastal hazards such as distant-source tsunamis under future relative sea-level rise (RSLR) is poorly constrained. In southern California, the Alaska-Aleutian subduction zone has been identified as an earthquake source region of particular concern for a worst-case scenario distant-source tsunami. Here, we explore how RSLR over the next century will influence future maximum nearshore tsunami heights (MNTH) at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Earthquake and tsunami modeling combined with local probabilistic RSLR projections show the increased potential for more frequent, relatively low magnitude earthquakes to produce distant-source tsunamis that exceed historically observed MNTH. By 2100, under RSLR projections for a high-emissions representative concentration pathway (RCP8.5), the earthquake magnitude required to produce >1 m MNTH falls from ~Mw9.1 (required today) to Mw8.0, a magnitude that is ~6.7 times more frequent along the Alaska-Aleutian subduction zone.
Rising sea level in the next century exposes the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to higher hazards from Alaskan tsunamis. By 2100, waves generated by an M8 Alaskan earthquake cause similar impacts in California to waves from an Alaskan M9 today.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details








1 Department of Geosciences, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, USA (GRID:grid.438526.e) (ISNI:0000 0001 0694 4940); Center for Coastal Studies, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, USA (GRID:grid.438526.e) (ISNI:0000 0001 0694 4940)
2 Rowan University, Department of Environmental Science, Glassboro, USA (GRID:grid.262671.6) (ISNI:0000 0000 8828 4546)
3 Rutgers University, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Piscataway, USA (GRID:grid.430387.b) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8796); Institute of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, USA (GRID:grid.430387.b) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8796)
4 Durham University, Lower Mountjoy, Department of Geography, Durham, UK (GRID:grid.8250.f) (ISNI:0000 0000 8700 0572)
5 U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center, Anchorage, USA (GRID:grid.2865.9) (ISNI:0000000121546924)
6 U.S. Geological Survey, Geologic Hazards Science Center, Golden, USA (GRID:grid.2865.9) (ISNI:0000000121546924)
7 Earth Observatory of Singapore, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore (GRID:grid.59025.3b) (ISNI:0000 0001 2224 0361); Asian School of the Environment, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore (GRID:grid.59025.3b) (ISNI:0000 0001 2224 0361)