USGS Revises Magnitude of Toride Earthquake to 5.8 After Review
The United States Geological Survey has updated the magnitude of the August 22 earthquake near Toride, Japan, following a review.
3 reports on this incident · first at Aug 24, 2026, 8:20 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Aug 24, 2026, 8:22 p.m. ET
USGS Estimates Low Impact for Magnitude 5.8 Earthquake Near Toride, Japan
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has assessed the estimated impact level of the magnitude 5.8 earthquake that struck 4 km north of Toride, Japan, on August 22, 2026, as green, meaning no significant casualties or damage are estimated to be likely. The assessment is an estimate, not a final count.
The earthquake occurred at 17:00:39 UTC at a shallow depth of 61 km. The USGS recorded an instrument intensity of 4.6 and received 144 felt reports. The magnitude has been reviewed by the USGS. A tsunami evaluation was not flagged.
Aug 24, 2026, 8:20 p.m. ETFirst report
Magnitude 5.8 Earthquake Strikes Near Toride, Japan
A magnitude 5.8 earthquake occurred at 17:00:39 UTC on August 22, 2026, 4 km north of Toride, Japan, according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS). The quake was shallow, with a depth of 61 km, and the magnitude has been reviewed by the USGS.
The USGS recorded an instrument intensity of 4.6 and received 144 felt reports. The agency's estimated impact level is green, meaning no significant casualties or damage are estimated to be likely. No tsunami evaluation has been flagged.
The event is still developing, and further information may be released as it becomes available.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 125 Aug 2026, 00:22current
First published.
- Version 125 Aug 2026, 00:20current
First published.
- Version 125 Aug 2026, 00:52current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.