select search filters
briefings
roundups & rapid reactions
Fiona fox's blog
Scientists comment on an 8.8 magnitude earthquake off Russia which has led to tsunami warnings across the Pacific.
Commenting on reports that the Fukushima nuclear site has been evacuated due to the Tsunami:
Prof Malcolm Sperrin, Fellow of the Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine (IPEM), Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine (IPEM), said:
“The earthquake this morning has understandably raised concerns about the effects that it may cause in the region, especially in relation to nuclear facilities. The facility at Fukushima is not power producing and has protective elements such as a wall designed to deflect likely tsunamis; whilst accurate details are currently difficult to obtain, the reported wave amplitude is less that the height of the protective measures. If further damage were to occur, then the likely outcome would be damage to passive infrastructure rather that explosive release such as that seen in 2011, but there is nothing to suggest that such damage has occurred or is even likely.
“It should be remembered that the Kamkatcha peninsular forms part of the Ring of Fire and earthquakes and other seismic activity is common although an earthquake of this magnitude was last noted in 1952. The warning and reporting in the region is well developed with populations as far as the US Pacific coast being alerted. This is entirely consistent with the requirement to ‘play safe’ since the size of tsunamis is extremely difficult predict but it should be borne in mind that such earthquakes will have devastating effects leading to destroyed infrastructure as well as landslides all of which will lead to loss of life.
“Any concerns about damage to Fukushima is understandable but the coming hours and days will reveal effects on the broader regional population which is to be lamented.”
Paddy Regan, NPL Professor of Nuclear Metrology at the University of Surrey, said:
“Tsunamis of near to this magnitude are not uncommon around the Pacific rim and are caused by very powerful underwater earthquakes. The reported evacuation from the remains of the Fukushima nuclear plant on the East Coast of Japan is a sensible and standard precaution and the likelihood of significant damage to the plant directly from the Tsunami is limited.
“It is standard safety procedure for Japanese (and other Pacific rim-based) power reactors to shutdown in the event of such powerful and potentially devastating naturally-occurring events. The evacuation protocols are also standard in terms of the risk to life being more from the large tidal waves than from nuclear / radiation releases. At the present time, I am not aware of any issues regarding nuclear reactor shutdown associated with this particularly large tsunami, however the wider health and safety situation needs monitoring very carefully with regards to the potentially devastating impact of these metre-high waves hitting the Pacific Seaboards and surrounding islands.
“I am not aware of any reports at present of any radioactive material released from any nuclear sites associated with the this particular tsumani, but the ongoing situation will be monitored carefully with arial surveys and international radiation measurement stations, which are able to identify any key radioactive materials releases (such as radioxenon, and iodine and caesium isotopes) immediately if there was a problem.
Dr Mark Foreman, Associate professor of Nuclear Chemistry / Industrial Materials Recycling, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden, said:
“If a large tidal wave was to hit the Fukushima site, the consequences would be far less than the accident which was over ten years ago.
“A loss of electric power or other utilities (services) would not be able to provoke a new core melt (meltdown) in the reactors. Also there is far less radioactivity at the site now than there was years ago when it happened in 2011.
“There are tanks of liquid waste at the site, if these tanks were damaged and started to leak then it is possible that radioactivity could be released into the sea. It is impossible to know exactly what will happen if a tidal wave was to hit the site. But I suspect that the site is better protected against tidal waves than it was in 2011.
“Also much of the radioactive inventory which is on the site is in the form of cesium and strontium which are bound to zeolites and other solid sorbants. These are chemicals which are designed to remove radioactivity from water. If the site was flooded then this fact would reduce the fraction of the radioactivity which would escape. Also much of the radioactivity in the tank farm (collection of tanks) at the site is tritium.
“Tritium when compared with other radioisotopes has a very low toxicity.”
Prof Jim Smith, Professor of Environmental Science, University of Portsmouth, said:
“There are no currently operating reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear site and the remaining nuclear fuel is no longer generating large amounts of heat. This means that it can’t overheat and cause an explosion like the 2011 disaster. No significant consequences of the current tsunami are expected – maximum wave height on the Japanese coast is expected to be 3m. For comparison, the Great Tohoku Earthquake of 2011 which caused the Fukushima disaster has been estimated at over 10m.
“People in coastal areas in the north and east of Japan have been recommended to evacuate; this includes personnel at the Fukushima nuclear site.
“There is no reason to be concerned about nuclear risk. There are a number of nuclear sites along the Eastern coast of Japan, but Fukushima and other nuclear sites in Japan have protective walls which should easily cope with a 3 m tsunami wave.”
Commenting on climate change induced sea levels rises and potential impact on Tsunamis:
Dr Alison MacLeod, associate professor and researcher in abrupt past climatic and environmental change, in the Department of Geography and Environmental Science at the University of Reading, said:
“From a climate perspective, we are projected to experience rising sea levels in the future, as a result of both warming of the oceans, known as thermal expansion, and contribution from melting ice in the polar regions.
“Sea level rise will have an impact generally, particularly for communities in low-lying coastal areas, but when considering the impact of a tsunami on top of higher sea levels, there is the potential for an enhanced impact on people, infrastructure and the wider environment. Higher sea levels cause tsunami to have higher run-up heights and potentially higher energy waves.
“Wave height in a tsunami is partly controlled by the intensity and type of event that triggered it, and the shape of the coastline. Trying to fit a large amount of water into a shallow or narrow bay will increase the height of the wave compared to that experienced in areas with deeper coastal waters, due to the way the water is focused.
“The effectiveness of the integrated early warning systems and maintaining education about the potential impacts of these events across the Pacific will play a significant role in protecting populations, and may influence planning and how infrastructure projects are implemented. In the future, some communities will be able to adapt better than others, as some island communities for example lack the resources and the alternatives to living beside the coast.”
Commenting on the earth and tsunami generally:
Dr Jess Neumann, associate professor of hydrology at the University of Reading, said:
“Early warning systems so far appear to have been effective allowing for timely evacuations. However, unusual waves and potentially dangerous coastal activity is expected to continue for many hours even once the main tsunami waves pass. People are urged to take the risk to life seriously, remain vigilant, follow all evacuation orders and stay away from coastal areas.
“The 8.8 magnitude earthquake that hit off Russia’s Kamchatka Peninsula triggered tsunami warnings across the Pacific coast. Tsunami heights of up to 3m above sea level were expected across coastal areas including Japan, Hawaii, Chile, Ecuador and the Pacific Islands and with heights of around 1m anticipated in areas such as Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and Mexico.
“Tsunami waves are not individual events, but can cause a series of waves that can surge inland along coastal areas and wrap around islands. Tsunami waves are not like normal surface waves, they are movements through the whole water column that travel over long distances. Even seemingly small waves carry tremendous force and can cause substantial damage and destruction.”
Dr. Martin Möllhoff, Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, Geophysics Section, said:
“We know a large earthquake occurred off the coast of the Kamchatka Peninsula in Eastern Russia on the 29th of July 2025, at 23:24:50 (UTC) (11:24:50 on 30 July local time). The measured magnitude of M8.8 makes it one one the largest earthquakes ever recorded. According to news reports no casualties have been reported so far.”
“The epicentre was offshore and a tsunami travelling through the Pacific was triggered. Maximum tsunami amplitudes of 4m were observed in Kamchatka and around 1.5m in Japan and Hawai. At time of writing the tsunami is still travelling towards Mexico, Ecuador, New Zealand with wave height in these regions still unknown. For more details please see https://www.insn.ie/2025-07-29-m8-8-kamchatka/”
“For earthquakes, the key factors include:
Magnitude: The size or strength of the earthquake.
Depth: The depth at which the earthquake occurs.
Population Density: The number of people living in the nearby areas.
Infrastructure Resilience: The ability of buildings and other structures to withstand seismic activity.
“For tsunamis, the primary factors are:
Seafloor Rupture: Whether the earthquake caused a rupture in the seafloor.
Water Displacement: The extent to which the earthquake displaced water.
International Coordination: The effectiveness of international information sharing regarding tsunami warnings and observed wave heights.
Population Density: The number of people in the affected areas.
Infrastructure Preparedness: The readiness of infrastructure to handle the impact of a tsunami.”
Ziggy Lubkowski, Associate Director and Arup’s seismic expert, said:
“The magnitude 8.8 megathrust earthquake on 30th July was at a depth of approximately 18km and occurred at the plate boundary between the Pacific Plate and the Okhotsk Plate. This is known as a subduction zone, where the denser Pacific Plate passes underneath the lighter Okhotsk Plate. This movement would have caused the uplift of the seafloor resulting in the tsunami wave.
“In the Pacific the water depth is approximately 4km and the tsunami wave travels at about 700km/h, meaning it would take several hours for the waves to pass across the Pacific to Hawaii. As these waves approach land, they slow down and grow in size. The size of wave depends on the size of the initial sea-bed dislocation (the distance the wave travels and changes in bathymetry – the underwater depth of the ocean floor).
“This same plate boundary generated a magnitude 7.4 earthquake 10 days ago and previously last August, a magnitude 7.1 event. Neither of these resulted in a noticeable tsunami. The region has experienced several major events including a magnitude 9.3 in 1737, magnitude 9.0 in 1841, magnitude 8.5 in 1923 and magnitude 9.0 in 1952.
“Tsunami can be caused by other phenomena including underwater volcanic eruptions (e.g. Krakatoa eruption in 1883), massive sub-sea landslides (e.g. Grand Banks earthquake in 1929) and large impacts from meteorites, though the latter are extremely rare.”
Dr Roger Musson, Honorary Research Fellow, British Geological Survey (BGS), said:
“The Kamchatka seismic zone is one of the most active subduction zones around the Pacific Ring of Fire, and the Pacific Plate is moving westwards at around 80 mm per year. The largest known event here in modern times was a magnitude 9 event on 5 November 1952 (the Severo-Kurilsk earthquake) but similarly great earthquakes also occurred on 4 November 1737 and 17 May 1841. All three events caused strong tsunamis; that in 1952 wiped out the town of Severo-Kurilsk and also caused extensive damage in Hawaii. Today’s earthquake has also caused a tsunami which has been severe in Kamchatka and has also reached Japan and Hawaii where tsunami warnings are in force.
“It is as well to be aware when reading reports of tsunamis that measurement of tsunami height refer to the maximum extent it reaches above sea level – not the how tall the wave is.
“The Pacific subducts (slides under) the over-riding plate but in this case there is a divergence of opinion as to what to call this plate. According to different authorities it may be the North American Plate or the Okhotsk microplate. Tectonics is not an exact science!
“The subduction zone moves in segments, and today’s earthquake seems to have occurred between the segments that ruptured in 1952 and an earlier great event in 1923. Further work is needed on how this affects the stress regime, but certainly many aftershocks are expected (and are occurring). Aftershocks can be large – an aftershock of the 1737 earthquake on 17 December was around 7.5 in magnitude and also caused a tsunami.”
Dr Jonathan Dale, lecturer in physical geography and coastal scientist at the Department for Geography and Environmental Science, University of Reading, said:
“The tsunami is a major concern due to both the location of earthquake and the magnitude. A considerable amount of water will have been displaced by the movement during the earthquake, with the resulting wave then able to spread across the entire Pacific Ocean, which is the world’s largest and deepest ocean. As a result, a large geographical area is considered to be a risk.
“Hawaii’s location in the middle of the Pacific Ocean means it is extremely vulnerable to the tsunami waves caused by this earthquake, but there are also densely populated areas on both sides of the Pacific Ocean that could be at affected. These include parts of Japan, and America’s west coast.
“Given that the earthquake occurred on a major tectonic plate boundary, there is always a probability that an earthquake could occur. What is noteworthy with this event is the magnitude of the earthquake. Whilst the magnitude of 8.8 is lower than both earthquakes that caused the Boxing Day tsunami in 2004, and the tsunami which resulted in the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan in 2011, it is still likely the joint sixth largest earthquake on record.”
Dr Stephen Hicks, NERC Independent Research Fellow and Lecturer in Environmental Seismology, UCL, said:
“Last night’s magnitude 8.8 earthquake on the Kamchatka Peninsula (in the far east of Russia) is the largest earthquake on Earth since the 2011 Magnitude 9.0 Tohoku, Japan earthquake, and is within the top 10 largest earthquakes ever recorded by seismometers.
“Such events are called “megathrust” earthquakes. They cause some of the world’s largest ruptures and trans-ocean tsunamis. These earthquakes result from the collision and sinking (“subduction”) of two tectonic plates. In this case, the Pacific Plate beneath North American plate. Where these two plates collide, the megathrust fault becomes stuck and locked, storing up the accumulated plate motion (~9 cm per year) for hundreds of years. This stored energy suddenly gets released in great earthquakes, causing the fault to slip by tens of metres over just a couple of hundred seconds.
“When we typically think about earthquakes, we imagine an epicentre as a small point on a map. However, for such large earthquakes, the fault will have ruptured over many hundreds of kilometres. It is this vast amount of slip and area of the fault that generates such a high earthquake magnitude.
“These shallow subduction megathrust events cause large tsunamis because the portion of fault that moves during the earthquake reaches close to, if not directly penetrates, the seafloor, displacing vast volumes of water in the sea above.
“Such large earthquakes can generate strong ground shaking up to hundreds of kilometres away from the epicentre, which can cause buildings to collapse, landslides, and liquefaction (i.e., soil instability). Although the Kamchatka region is relatively unpopulated at the global scale, the United States Geological Survey estimates that ~200,000 people will be subject to “severe” (Intensity Level 8) ground shaking.
“This segment of the Kamchatka subduction zone also hosted a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and a large tsunami in 1952.
“On 20 July this year, there was a magnitude 7.4 earthquake in the same location, as well as a M7.1 event in August 2024. With the benefit of hindsight, these earlier earthquakes can now be called “foreshocks” of today’s massive rupture. Detailed scientific research over the coming months and years will help to disentangle this precursory slip sequence.
“With such large earthquakes, long-period surface waves will continue travelling around the world for several days, with the planet continuing to resonate and ring like a large bell.”
Prof David Rothery, Professor of Planetary Geosciences, Open University, said:
“This earthquake occurred where the Pacific ocean plate is being pushed below the Kamchatka peninsula in Russia’s far east, in a plate tectonic process called subduction. This is similar to what happened on 11 March 2011 below the east coast of Japa (the ‘Great Tohuku Earthquake’). Then the earthquake was magnitude 9.0, whereas today it was ‘only’ magnitude 8.8, which is still very large and probably associated with a sudden, jerk-like, displacement of around 30 metres along at least a 200 km length of the subduction zone. The rupture began at a depth of about 21 km, whereas the ‘Great Tohuku’ rupture initiated slightly deeper, at about 29 km.
“There will have been structural damage onshore in Kamchatka caused by the earthquake shaking, but a much bigger threat is the tsunami waves in the ocean, cased by the sudden displacement of the seabed. These waves travel across the surface of the deep ocean at the speed of a jet aircraft, but slow down and become steeper when they reach shallower water. They seem to have passed Japan and Hawaii without causing much damage, but there remains a threat on the Pacific coast of north America. I am not anticipating anything disastrous, but wave height can be magnified locally by local details of the shoreline.
“The tsunami warning systems across the Pacific seem to have functioned well.
“There is an excellent map of recent earthquakes in the source region here: M 8.8 – 2025 Kamchatka Peninsula, Russia Earthquake [1]”
[1] https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us6000qw60/executive
Prof Lisa McNeill, Professor of Tectonics at the University of Southampton, said:
“The earthquake ruptured part of the Kuril-Kamchatka subduction zone. A subduction zone is where one tectonic plate collides with and slides under another and this generates the largest earthquakes on Earth. The earthquakes happen on large faults that form between the two plates – the energy is built up and stored over 100’s of years (or potentially shorter or longer timescales depending on how fast the plates are moving relative to each other) and then released very quickly (seconds, minutes) in an earthquake. As these earthquakes occur mostly under the sea they also can generate tsunami.
“For this earthquake the Pacific plate is subducting beneath the North American plate in the NW Pacific. The magnitude is 8.8 which is a very large earthquake and is in the top 10 largest earthquakes since 1900. It is the same tectonic scenario as the 2011 Japan and 2004 Indian Ocean earthquakes. The Kuril-Kamchatka subduction zone has had large earthquakes in the past, including a very large (magnitude 9.1) earthquake in 1952, not far from the 2025 earthquake. There have also been a number of smaller earthquakes in the Kamchatka subduction zone in the last weeks.
“What we don’t know yet is exactly how this earthquake rupture today relates in space to these previous large earthquakes, such as the one in 1952, but it appears to be filling in a gap on the fault zone releasing the energy stored there. We will know more with more data collection.
“Although we can use how fast the plates are moving, GPS to measure current movements and when previous earthquakes occurred, we can only use this information to make forecasts of probability of an earthquake. But this is important and can be used for preparing local populations and building safely. We can’t predict earthquakes on a timescale useful for humans because there are many factors that control exactly what will happen and when.
“The earthquake size is controlled by how much of the fault ruptures and how much it slips. The shaking and impact on buildings and people is then related to how far away the earthquake is and whether you are on soft soil or rock for example. Then how well the buildings are built and what they are made of affects how stable they are to a certain level of shaking.
“For the tsunami the main control is the size of the earthquake and how much of the seafloor moves and how it moves. Some fault movements don’t move the seafloor much and so there is no tsunami. In the case of this earthquake, it had a very large rupture and slip (which make the earthquake large) and so a tsunami has been generated. The waves travel across the ocean – they are small at sea but traveling fast and it is when they reach shallow water that they build in height again. The waves arriving in Kamchatka have been recorded and in Hawaii and Japan they are up to 2 m so far (with ~1-3 m waves being predicted). This wave height is significant but with the advanced warnings that can be given in the Pacific, and people evacuating, they hopefully should be manageable. The height of the tsunami wave is also affected by local shapes of the seafloor near the coast and the morphology of the land where it arrives and these factors, along with how populated the coast is (how many people live there), affects how serious the impact is. So the tsunami can have varied heights on one coastline, and it could generate surprisingly large wave heights. The other important factor is whether there is a warning system. This has been established in the Pacific since the 1960’s and people therefore receive warnings about the tsunami and can evacuate. It is harder for those living close to the earthquake as they have less time – but the earthquake is their warning of a tsunami and prompt to move to higher ground.”
Dr Jonathan Paul, from the Department of Earth Sciences at Royal Holloway, University of London, said:
“The Pacific coast of Russia is part of the highly tectonically active ‘Ring of Fire.’
“In this case, the Pacific plate is sliding underneath Russia and the motion is not continuous; it occurs in fits and starts, such as this morning’s exceptionally powerful and deep-seated earthquake.
“The sudden upward movement of the seafloor at Kamchatka displaced a huge volume of ocean water, which is spreading outwardly from the earthquake epicentre at roughly the speed of a jet aircraft.
“Although significant, the tsunami height is nowhere near as big as 2011 in Japan; about one metre to around 40m.
“Earthquake activity at Kamchatka, and elsewhere, is very difficult to predict accurately, but tremors had been recorded locally in the morning that leading up to this morning’s major earthquake.
“Besides aftershocks, another earthquake in the same area is unlikely in the immediate future (months). The immediate effects of the tsunami are likely to be felt throughout Wednesday.
“With regards to wave heights when it reaches the western US, it will most likely be around 30-50 cm, so like a normal tide.”
Prof Dan Faulkner, Lecturer in Rock Mechanics, University of Liverpool, said:
“The M 8.8 Kamchatka earthquake on 29 July 2025 is the fourth largest earthquake to have occurred this century. Earthquakes of this size are not uncommon in the in this region, with similar size events having happened in 1923 and 1952 very close to where yesterday’s earthquake occurred. The fault line is on the Pacific ‘Ring of Fire’ where the Pacific Ocean crust is being pushed around 8 cm each year northwest underneath eastern Russia.
“Earthquakes this large suddenly move the seafloor by tens of metres over several hundreds of kilometres. This results in a huge volume of seawater being displaced which then migrates away from the region of the earthquake leading to tsunamis when it reaches shore. The depth of the earthquake is important as shallow events can lead to a greater displacement of the seafloor, more displaced water, and larger tsunamis. This earthquake was centred at a relatively shallow depth (~20 km) so significant seafloor displacement will have occurred.
“Earthquakes this size can only occur on very large faults in subduction zones, where ocean crust is pushed downwards into the earth’s mantle. This process is occurring over a large part of the perimeter of the Pacific Ocean, resulting in the Pacific ‘Ring of Fire’. To produce a huge earthquake like the Kamchatka event, an area of the fault around 150 km by 400 km will have slipped, which is equivalent of almost half the land area of England. This releases an enormous amount of energy equivalent to around 10 trillion tonnes of TNT. In the case of the Kamchatka earthquake, the energy released is in an area that is sparsely populated so that the damage from the earthquake itself may not be as significant a hazard as the resulting tsunami.”
Prof Bill McGuire, Professor Emeritus of Geophysical & Climate Hazards, UCL, said:
“This is one of the biggest earthquakes to strike the Pacific Rim in recent years, and one of the 10 biggest on the planet since 1900, although still smaller than the 2011 quake and tsunami that devastated parts of Japan in 2011, and the colossal Sumatra earthquake and tsunami of 2004. Along with many active volcanoes, such great earthquakes are a feature of the so-called Ring of Fire, each one releasing strain that has accumulated over centuries, as an over-riding tectonic plate snags on the one below, and eventually lets go. Being submarine, such quakes typically trigger tsunamis, which can be catastrophic. This time, however, although locally destructive, tsunami heights at remote locations, such as Hawaii and Japan seem modest, so widespread devastation and loss of life is unlikely”.
Dr Rebecca Bell, Associate Professor in Tectonics, Imperial College London, said:
“The 29 July 2025 M8.8 Kamchatka earthquake occurred on a megathrust fault- these are the largest faults on Earth and are capable of hosting the largest earthquakes on Earth. The shallow parts of megathrust faults are underwater – so they also pose a significant tsunami risk. The 2011 Japan M9 and 2004 Sumatra-Anadaman M9.1 are recent, devastating megathrust earthquake examples. Megathrusts exist at subduction zones, where a denser oceanic tectonic plate sinks below a less dense overriding tectonic plate. At the location of the 29 July 2025 earthquake the Pacific plate is sinking below the North American plate. Megathrust faults allow earthquake rupture along great lengths and given its size the M8.8 is likely to have ruptured over a length of 300-400 km. The depth is reported by USGS to be 20 km, which is quite shallow for megathrust earthquakes. The shallow rupture of the fault means the earthquake has more chance of causing the seabed to move which can cause a tsunami. An earthquake of this size in this area is not a surprise – in 1952 there was a M9.0 earthquake close to this latest rupture. This is a subduction zone well known for being able to produce large earthquakes.”
Prof Joanna Faure Walker, Head of Department of UCL RDR, Professor Earthquake Geology and Disaster Risk Reduction, UCL, said:
“Tsunami can be generated when there is a large displacement of the ocean or sea floor such as in an earthquake. Large earthquakes can cause many metres of slip on a fault surface and this large displacements of the sea floor. Tsunami travel across the ocean at speeds comparable to jumbo jets so depending where the earthquake occurred, communities can have only minutes warning if the earthquake occurred off the coast, or several hours if located on the other side of an ocean. The height of the tsunami is related to the depth of the water body it is travelling through. Away from the coast across the ocean a tsunami may only be detectable with instrumentation. However, as it approaches the coast, as the water depth shallows, the tsunami slows down which results in the wave height increasing. In the worst cases this can be many metres high. The height of the tsunami and how far in land in penetrates will depend on many factors including the earthquake size as this is dependent on the amount of slip, the displacement of the sea floor, the depth and shape of the coastline, any offshore barriers and physical protective measures, as well as on land obstacles – natural and people-made. Large area of low-lying land can be particularly vulnerable to having large areas destroyed by tsunami.
“Some countries such as Japan have well-developed tsunami warning systems with both the technical and social elements tried and tested. Where there is a known history of tsunami residents tend to be better informed and ready to respond to warnings. However, communities who lack such experience may be less ready to take effective action. Those living by the coast and on low-lying land are among the most vulnerable.
“Following guidance from advisories and warnings will be critical for saving lives. Tsunami can have several waves (not just one as sometimes depicted in movies).”
Dr Mohammad Kashani, Associate Professor of Structural Engineering, University of Southampton, said:
“According to USGS the earthquake registered a magnitude of 8.8 and occurred at a depth of 20.7km, which is considered shallow. Such shallow earthquakes release enormous amounts of energy and, in this case, its location near the coastline triggered a tsunami. The destructiveness of an earthquake largely depends on two key factors: its magnitude and its depth. Earthquakes that strike inland typically do not generate tsunamis; only those occurring along coastlines or beneath the sea have the potential to do so. At this stage, it is too early to accurately assess the extent of structural damage in Russia. Over the coming days, as more information becomes available, we will gain a clearer understanding of the impact.”
Prof Ilan Kelman, Professor of Disasters and Health, UCL, said:
“Following one of the top ten most powerful earthquakes ever recorded and suggestions of tsunamis higher than a bungalow in some places, people around the Pacific should follow advice from their local authorities. The key is to calmly move away from coastlines to higher ground. Some Pacific islands do not have higher ground, so head to locations advised by the authorities.
“The first tsunami wave might not be the largest, meaning that people should wait for the formal all-clear. Aftershocks may have the potential for further tsunamis. Tsunami height, power, and timing can vary locally. Stay alert to message updates and sirens over the coming hours and be ready to evacuate inland and to higher ground.”
Declared interests
Dr Rebecca Bell: “No industry links to disclose.”
Dr Stephen Hicks: “I am funded by a Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) fellowship. I have no interests to declare.”
Prof Joanna Faure Walker: “No conflicting interests.”
Dr Mohammad Kashani: “I can confirm hat there is no conflict of interest.”
Prof Ilan Kelman: “Deputy Director of the UCL Warning Research Centre.”
Prof Dan Faulkner: I have no declarations of interests – my research on earthquake science has been funded by research councils, the Royal Society, ERC and other non-industrial sources.
Prof Lisa McNeill: No conflicts of interest.
Prof Paddy Regan: I receive some funding for research into Nuclear Structure Physics from the Science and Technologies Facilities Council (STFC) and am Deparment Head of Science, Medical, Marine and Nuclear at the UK National Physical Laboratory.
Dr Alison MacLeod: No COI.
Prof Bill McGuire: No COI.
Dr Jess Neumann: “I’m a trustee of the Charity River Mole River Watch and we receive funding from industry.”
Ziggy Lubkowski: I am a committee member of SECED, the UK society of earthquakes and dynamics. I am also the UK national delegate to the IAEE international association of earthquake engineering. I am on the BSi 525/8 committee for Eurocode 8 which deals with seismic design of buildings and infrastructure. I am on PIANC working group 225 for the seismic design of ports.
For all other experts, no reply to our request for DOIs was received.