Identifying and Eliminating Earthquake Vulnerabilities in Built Environments

1. THE ART AND SCIENCE OF IDENTIFYING AND ELIMINATING VULNERABILITIES TO EARTHQUAKES IN A COMMUNITY’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT Walter Hays, Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction, University of North Carolina, USA

2. OUR WORLD IS AT RISK • FLOODS • SEVERE WINDSTORMS • EARTHQUAKES • TSUNAMIS • DROUGHTS • VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS • LANDSLIDES • WILDFIRES

3. HAZARDS EXPOSURE VULNERABILITY LOCATION VULNERABILITIES IN A COMMUNITY’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT CONTROLS THE RISK RISK

4. A COMMUNITY’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT: BUILDINGS AND INFRASTRUCTURE

5. WHAT HISTORY TEACHES • CITIES AND MEGACITIES EXIST BY GEOLOGIC, HYDROLOGIC, AND ATMOSPHERIC CONSENT AND MAN’S CAPACITY TO ELIMINATE THE VULNERABILITIES

6. INADEQUATE SEISMIC DESIGN PROVISIONS (I.E., BUILDING CODES AND LIFELINE STANDARDS) MEAN 1) INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO HORIZONTAL GROUND SHAKING 2) COLLAPSE OF BUILDINGS AND LOSS OF FUNCTION OF LIFELINES

7. INJURIES AND DEATHS DAMAGE AND COLLAPSE LOSS OF FUNCTION ECONOMIC LOSS CONSEQUENCES OF COMMUNITY VULNERABILITIES RISK

8. SOME VULNERABILITIES ARE OBVIOUS

9. SOME VULNERABILITIES ARE OBVIOUS

10. SOME VULNERABILITIES ARE OBVIOUS

11. SOME VULNERABILITIES ARE OBVIOUS • A UTILITY CORRIDOR IS VULNERABLE TO LOSS OF FUNCTION WHEN ROUTED THROUGH SOILS THAT ARE SUSCEPTIBLE TO LIQUEFACTION.

12. THE REALITY CHECK PROVIDED BY PAST DISASTERSSource: Munich Re and many others

13. CAUSES OF VULNER-ABILITIES INADEQUATE BUILDING CODES INADEQUATE LIFELINE STANDARDS SITING IN LOCATIONS OF SURFACE FAULTING & GROUND FAILURE IRREGULARITIES IN ELEVATION AND PLAN EARTHQUAKES INADEQUATE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS “DISASTER LABORATORIES” SITING ON SOFT SOILS INADEQUATE ANCHORAGE OF NON-STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS

14. SAN FRANCISCO 1906 EARTHQUAKE & FIRE 3,000 CASUALTIES $ 524 MLOSS (ORIGINAL VALUES) $ 180 MINSURED LOSS NOTABLE PAST DISASTERS

16. TOKYO 1923 EARTHQUAKE & FIRE 142,807 CASUALTIES $ 2,800 MLOSS(ORIGINAL VALUES) $ 590 MINSURED LOSS NOTABLE PAST DISASTERS

18. MANAGUA 1972 EARTHQUAKE 11,000 CASUALTIES $ 800 MLOSS (ORIGINAL VALUES) $ 100 MINSURED LOSS NOTABLE PAST DISASTERS

20. TANGSHAN 1976 EARTHQUAKE 240,000 + CASUALTIES $ 5,600 MLOSS(ORIGINAL VALUES) $ ---0 MINSURED LOSS PAST NOTABLE DISASTERS

22. MEXICO CITY 1985 EARTHQUAKE 9,500 CASUALTIES $ 4,000 MLOSS(ORIGINAL VALUES) $ 275 MINSURED LOSS PAST NOTABLE DISASTERS

25. LOMA PRIETA (SAN FRANCISCO) 1989 EARTHQUAKE 61 CASUALTIES $ 5,000 MLOSS(ORIGINAL VALUES) $ 1,000 MINSURED LOSS PAST NOTABLE DISASTERS

29. NORTHRIDGE, CALIFORNIA 1994 EARTHQUAKE 61 CASUALTIES $ 44,000 MLOSS (ORIGINAL VALUES) $ 15,300 MINSURED LOSS PAST NOTABLE DISASTERS

35. KOBE, JAPAN 1995 EARTHQUAKE 6,400 CASUALTIES $ 100,000 MLOSS (ORIGINAL VALUES) $ 3,000 MINSURED LOSS PAST NOTABLE DISASTERS

40. IZMET, TURKEY 1999 EARTHQUAKE 17,200 CASUALTIES $ 12,000 MLOSS (ORIGINAL VALUES) $ 600 MINSURED LOSS PAST NOTABLE DISASTERS

42. BAM, IRAN 2003 EARTHQUAKE 40,000 CASUALTIES $ ?000 MLOSS(ORIGINAL VALUES) $ --00 MINSURED LOSS PAST NOTABLE DISASTERS

43. 2003 Bam, Iran Earthquake

44. BANDA ACHE, INDONESIA 2004 EARTHQUAKE & TSUNAMI 240,000 CASUALTIES $ 4,000 MLOSS(ORIGINAL VALUES) $ ?--00 MINSURED LOSS PAST NOTABLE DISASTERS

45. 2004 BANDA ACHE EARTHQUAKE AND TSUNAMI

46. 2004 BANDA ACHE EARTHQUAKE AND TSUNAMI

47. SICHUAN PROVINCE, CHINA 2008 EARTHQUAKE 80,000 CASUALTIES $ 13,300 MLOSS(ORIGINAL VALUES) $ --00 MINSURED LOSS PAST NOTABLE DISASTERS

48. SICHUAN, CHINA EARTHQUAKE INADEQUATE BUILDING CODE

49. 45,690,000people were affected by the disaster. TWENTY-ONE DAYS LATER

50. HAITI EARTHQUAKE: INADEQUATE BUILDING CODE; JANUARY 12, 2010