Acta Geophysica

, Volume 67, Issue 2, pp 423–429 | Cite as

Estimated casualties in possible future earthquakes south and west of the M7.8 Gorkha earthquake of 2015

  • Max WyssEmail author
  • Deepak Chamlagain
Research Article - Solid Earth Sciences


The 2015 M7.8 Gorkha earthquake has moved the upper, unbroken, part of the Main Himalayan Thrust (MHT) and the neighboring sections of this fault closer to failure. Using the program and data set of QLARM, which has been correct in fatality estimates of past Himalayan earthquakes, we estimate quantitatively the numbers of fatalities, injured and strongly affected people when assumed ruptures along these two sections will happen. In the Kathmandu up-dip scenario with M8.1, we estimate that more than 100,000 people may perish, about half a million may be injured, and 19 million are likely to be affected strongly, if we assume the high virtual attenuation observed for the 2015 Gorkha earthquake exists here also. Likewise, if the 100 km underthrusting segment west of Gorkha ruptures, we quantitatively estimate that 12,000–62,000 people may perish and 4 million to 8 million will be strongly affected, in a down-dip (lower half of the thrust plane) and an up-dip rupture (upper half) scenario, respectively. If the up-dip part of the MHT cannot rupture by itself, and greater earthquakes are required to generate the several meters of displacement observed in trenches across the MHT, then our estimates are minima.


Himalayan earthquakes Earthquake risk Earthquake losses in Nepal 


  1. Avouac J-P, Meng L, Wei S, Wang T, Ampuero J-P (2015) Lower edge of locked Main Himalayan Thrust unzipped by the 2015 Gorkha earthquake. Nat Geosci. Google Scholar
  2. Bilham R, Gaur VK, Molnar P (2001) Himalayan seismic hazard. Science 293:1442–1444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bilham R, Mencin D, Bendick R, Bürgmann R (2017) Implications for elastic energy storage in the Himalaya from the Gorkha 2015 earthquake and other incomplete ruptures of the Main Himalayan Thrust. Q Int XXX:1–19Google Scholar
  4. Brune JN (1996) Particle motions in a physical model of shallow angle thrust faulting. Proc Indian Acad Sci 105:L197–L206Google Scholar
  5. Brune JN (2001) Shattered rock and precarious rock evidence for strong asymmetry in ground motions during thrust faulting. Bull Seismol Soc Am 91:441–447. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bungum H, Lindholm CD, Mahajan AK (2017) Earthquake recurrence in NW and central Himalaya. J Asian Earth Sci 138:25–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dal Zilio L, van Dinther Y, Gerya T, Avouac J-P (2019) Bimodal seismicity in the Himalaya controlled by fault friction and geometry. Nat Commun 10(48):1–11. Google Scholar
  8. Gabuchian V, Rosakis AJ, Bhat HS, Madariaga R, Kanamori H (2017) Experimental evidence that thrust earthquake ruptures might open faults. Nature 545(7654):336–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hayes GP et al (2015) Rapid characterization of the 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake sequence and its seismotectonic context. Seismol Res Lett 86(6):1557–1567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kaneda H et al (2008) Surface rupture of the 2005 Kashmir, Pakistan, earthquake and its active tectonic implications. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98(2):521–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kumar S, Wesnousky SG, Rockwell TK, Briggs RW, Thakur VC (2006) Paleoseismic evidence of great surface rupture earthquakes along the Indian Himalaya. J Geophys Res 111(B3):B03304. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lave J, Yule D, Sapkota S, Basant K, Madden C, Attal M, Pandey R (2005) Evidence for a great medieval earthquake (~ 1100 A.D.) in the central Himalayas, Nepal. Science 307:1302–1305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Li JW, Wyss M, Wu ZL, Zhou SY (2018) Estimated casualty risk for six scenario great earthquakes in Sichuan-Yunnan region, China, for disaster preparation. In: International conference on the decade memory of the Wenchuan earthquake, edited, Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of China, Chengdu, China, p 109Google Scholar
  14. Martin SS, Hough SE, Hung C (2015) Ground motions from the 2015 M7.8 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake constrained by a detailed assessment of macroseismic data. Seism Res Letts 86(6):1524–1532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ministry of Home Affairs (2016) The 2015 Gorkha earthquake: experience and learning. Government of Nepal, p 268Google Scholar
  16. Pathier E, Fielding EJ, Wright TJ, Walker R, Parsons BE, Hensley S (2006) Displacement field and slip distribution of the 2005 Kashmir earthquake from SAR imagery. Geophys Res Letts 33(20):L20310. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rajendran CP, John B, Rajendran K (2015) Medieval pulse of great earthquakes in the central Himalaya: viewing past activities on the frontal thrust. J Geophys Res 120:1623–1641. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sapkota SN, Bollinger L, Klinger Y, Tapponnier P, Gaudemer Y, Tiwari D (2012) Primary surface ruptures of the great Himalayan earthquakes in 1934 and 1255. Nat Geosci. Google Scholar
  19. Shebalin NV (1985) Regularities of the natural disasters. Nauki o zemle, Znanie 11:48 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  20. Trendafiloski G, Wyss M, Rosset P (2011) Loss estimation module in the second generation software QLARM. In: Spence R, So E, Scawthorn C (eds) Human casualties in earthquakes: progress in modeling and mitigation. Springer, Berlin, pp 381–391Google Scholar
  21. Wells DL, Coppersmith KJ (1994) New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area and surface displacement. Bull Seismol Soc Am 84(4):974–1002Google Scholar
  22. Wesnousky SG, Kumahara Y, Chamlagain D, Pierce IK, Karki A, Gautam D (2017) Geological observations on large earthquakes along the Himalayan frontal fault near Kathmandu, Nepal. Earth Planet Sci Lett 457:366–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wyss M (1979) Estimating expectable maximum magnitude of earthquakes from fault dimensions. Geology 7:336–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wyss M (2005) Human losses expected in Himalayan earthquakes. Nat Hazards 34:305–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wyss M (2006) The Kashmir M7.6 shock of 8 October 2005 calibrates estimates of losses in future Himalayan earthquakes. Paper presented at proceedings of the conference of the international community on information systems for crisis response and management, NewarkGoogle Scholar
  26. Wyss M (2014) Ten years of real-time earthquake loss alerts. In: Wyss M (ed) Earthquake hazard, risk, and disasters. Elsevier, Waltham, pp 143–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wyss M (2017) Four loss estimates for the Gorkha M7.8 earthquake, 25 April 2015, before and after it occurred. Nat Hazards 86:141–150. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wyss M, Trendafiloski G (2011) Trends in the casualty ratio of injured to fatalities in earthquakes. In: Spence R, So E, Scawthorn C (eds) Human casualties in natural disasters: progress in modeling and mitigation. Springer, London, pp 267–274Google Scholar
  29. Wyss M, Zuniga R (2016) Estimated casualties in a possible great earthquake along the Pacific coast of Mexico. Bull Seismol Soc Am 106(4):1867–1874. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wyss M, Gupta S, Rosset P (2018) Casualty estimates in repeat Himalayan earthquakes in India. Bull Seismol Soc Am 108(5A):2877–2893. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zare M, Karimi-Paridari S, MonaLisa (2009) An investigation on Balakot, Muzaffarabad (Pakistan) earthquake, 8 Oct. 2005, Mw 7.6; geological aspects and intensity distribution. J Seismol 13:327–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences & Polish Academy of Sciences 2019
corrected publication 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Centre for Earth Simulation FoundationGenevaSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of GeologyTrichandra M. Campus, Tribhuvan UniversityKathmanduNepal

Personalised recommendations