The two major earthquakes that struck Venezuela just 39 seconds apart on June 24 had slightly different epicenters in north-central Venezuela. The first (M7.2) struck near San Felipe, and the second (M7.5) near Yumare, leaving thousands dead and thousands more injured, according to government officials. But beyond the devastation, the sequence opened a rare scientific opportunity: Researchers think the unusual “earthquake doublet” could offer new insight into how large fault systems interact and how some of the most destructive earthquakes grow.
Large earthquakes are typically followed by smaller aftershocks. But particularly intense events can also alter stress on nearby faults or along the same fault, triggering another major earthquake.
These scenarios are infrequent but not unprecedented. The 2023 sequence in Kahramanmaraş, Turkey, and the 1997 earthquake doublet in Harnai, Pakistan, are two well-known examples.
The Venezuelan sequence also reinforces an emerging consensus among seismologists: that treating faults as isolated structures may underestimate the destructive power of quakes in regions where multiple tectonic faults meet, as they do both in Venezuela and around California’s San Andreas Fault system. That’s a problem, because many of the seismic hazard models in California do not account for those multi-fault interactions.
A natural laboratory for understanding major earthquakes
The fault system involved in the Venezuelan earthquake — which includes the Boconó, Morón, San Sebastián and El Pilar faults — shares several key characteristics with the San Andreas Fault. Both are right-lateral strike-slip fault systems — in which the crustal blocks slide horizontally past each other — located along the boundary between two tectonic plates: the South American and Caribbean plates in Venezuela, and the Pacific and North American plates in California.
Despite these similarities, researchers caution that the two systems differ in important ways.
“The main difference is that the Venezuelan plate boundary has a much more complex fault architecture,” Julián García Mayordomo, a senior scientist in the Geological Hazards and Climate Change Department at the Geological and Mining Institute of Spain, told Live Science.
Get the world’s most fascinating discoveries delivered straight to your inbox.
The difference stems largely from the Maracaibo block, whose interaction with surrounding faults creates a much more intricate plate boundary than California’s.
“The other difference is the speed at which the plates move,” García Mayordomo pointed out.
In Venezuela, the tectonic plates move past each other at about 0.8 inches (20 millimeters) per year, compared with roughly 1.2 inches (30 millimeters) along the San Andreas Fault. Faster plate motion allows tectonic stress to accumulate more quickly, which influences how often large earthquakes occur over long timescales, but not when the next one will strike.
An aerial view of the San Andreas Fault in California.
(Image credit: Kevin Schafer/Getty Images)
Along the San Andreas Fault, magnitude 7 or larger earthquakes occur, on average every 100 to 200 years, although the frequency of recurrence varies along the fault. The last major rupture in Southern California was the magnitude 7.9 Fort Tejon earthquake in 1857. In Venezuela, estimated slip rates suggest recurrence intervals of one to two centuries. The region experienced two devastating earthquakes in 1812, part of a multiple-rupture sequence that included events of magnitude 7.5, 7.2 and 6.5, and a 2018 study concluded that the Boconó Fault had already accumulated enough strain to generate another major earthquake.
However, these are statistical averages. The recurrence of large earthquakes is highly irregular and depends on a multitude of factors, many of which we still don’t fully understand. So a major event could occur in 100 years — or even tomorrow.
Looking beyond individual faults
This uncertainty is precisely one of the reasons the Venezuelan seismic doublet is generating so much interest among seismologists.
“It is the kind of natural event that can sharpen and test the rupture-interaction concepts that paleoseismic models like ours can only infer indirectly,” said Liliane Burkhard, a geologist and geophysicist at the University of Bern and first author of a recent study suggesting that the junction between the San Andreas and San Jacinto faults in Southern California is experiencing some of its highest tectonic stress levels in the past 1,000 years, told Live Science.
“Our Cajon Pass work relied on centuries of paleoseismic reconstructions to infer how stress evolves and whether ruptures can cross between fault systems,” Burkhard told Live Science. But that doesn’t give geologists real-time data, captured by seismic instruments, showing how different faults interact during quakes, she added.
The Venezuela doublet offers exactly that opportunity. The main lesson for California, Burkhard said, is that interactions between neighboring faults can play an important role in the evolution of large earthquakes.
“Whether it is Cajon Pass where the San Andreas and San Jacinto systems meet or the Boconó-San Sebastián in Venezuela, these are precisely the locations where single-fault hazard models break down because the real behavior depends on how stress is shared and transferred between adjacent structures,” she said.
Many times the winner isn’t the boxer who lands the hardest punch but the one who keeps punching for longer.
Julián García Mayordomo, senior scientist at the Geological and Mining Institute
Still, the two systems are quite different. The Venezuelan sequence represents a different type of cascading rupture than the one described in Burkhard’s research. At Cajon Pass, the “earthquake gate” concept explores whether a single rupture can jump from one fault system to another during the same earthquake, over tens of seconds of rupture propagation along a continuous fault trace. The Venezuelan doublet, by contrast, “looks like two distinct ruptures on what may be two separate fault structures, triggered in close succession,” Burkhard said.
For Burkhard, the Venezuelan earthquake reinforces the need for seismic hazard models to move beyond treating faults as isolated structures and instead represent them as interconnected networks. The challenge is particularly relevant in California, where roughly 300 active faults may interact in ways that traditional hazard models do not capture.
New Zealand has already incorporated this lesson. After the 2016 Kaikōura earthquake ruptured at least 12 faults in a single event, New Zealand revised its National Seismic Hazard Model to include complex multifault ruptures.
García Mayordomo argues that both Venezuela and the United States should incorporate these complex rupture scenarios into seismic hazard assessments and building codes. Earthquakes involving multiple faults can produce longer-lasting shaking that increases structural fatigue and, ultimately, the risk of collapse.
“It’s like a boxing match,” García Mayordomo said. “Many times the winner isn’t the boxer who lands the hardest punch but the one who keeps punching for longer.”
Even so, researchers cautioned against drawing sweeping conclusions from a single earthquake.
“Each earthquake gives us one possible scenario,” Judith Hubbard, an earthquake scientist and structural geologist at Cornell University told Live Science. “The range of earthquake behaviors is wide.”
