Part 1 The Case For A Major Paradigmn Shift Towards Disaster Resiliency During 2014 And Beyond

974 views

Published on

It will require new thinking and a strategic concentration of limited national and global resources to move from the current status quo of depending upon almost all emergency response operations to cope with almost all natural hazards to a wise mix of anticipation of what will likely happen, and implementation of the five integrated disaster resiliency policies to cope with the expected and unexpected that happen all the time a natural hazard occurs in our chaotic world. Who can provide the leadership for this kind of major paradigm shift? Presentation courtesy of Dr. Walter Hays, Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
974
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
33
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Part 1 The Case For A Major Paradigmn Shift Towards Disaster Resiliency During 2014 And Beyond

  1. 1. OUR WORLD IS AT RISK • FLOODS • SEVERE WINDSTORMS • EARTHQUAKES • TSUNAMIS • DROUGHTS • VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS • LANDSLIDES • WILDFIRES
  2. 2. THE CASE FOR A MAJOR PARADIGMN SHIFT FROM RESPONSE TO ANTICIPATION AND DISASTER RESILIENCY DURING 2014 AND BEYOND PART 1
  3. 3. OUR WORLD IS AT RISK • FLOODS • SEVERE WINDSTORMS • EARTHQUAKES • TSUNAMIS • DROUGHTS • VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS • LANDSLIDES • WILDFIRES
  4. 4. LIVING WITH NATURAL HAZARDS NO DISASTERS: DEMANDS ON COMMUNITY CAPABILITIES OF COMMUNITY
  5. 5. LIVING WITH NATURAL HAZARDS A DISASTER: INSUFFICIENT CAPABILITIES OF COMMUNITY INCREASED DEMANDS ON COMMUNITY
  6. 6. DISASTER RISK •ALL HAZARDS MAPS •INVENTORY •VULNERABILITY •LOCATION ACCEPTABLE RISK RISK UNACCEPTABLE RISK TOWARDS ALL HAZARDS DISASTER RESILIENCE DATA BASES AND INFORMATION YOUR COMMUNITY POLICY OPTIONS HAZARDS: GROUND SHAKING GROUND FAILURE SURFACE FAULTING TECTONIC DEFORMATION TSUNAMI RUN UP AFTERSHOCKS • PPREPAREDNESS • PROTECTION •EARLY WARNING •EMERGENCY RESPONSE •RECOVERY and RECONSTRUCTION
  7. 7. RESILIENCY MEASURES • PREPAREDNESS (ANTICIPATE EVERYTHING) • PROTECTION (BUILD TO WITHSTAND) • EARLY WARNING (GET OUT OF HARM’S WAY)
  8. 8. RESILIENCY MEASURES • EMERGENCY RESPONSE (SAVE LIVES & PROTECT PROPERTY) • RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION (RESTORE & NORMALIZE SERVICES)
  9. 9. LET’S TALK ABOUT BENEFIT-TO-COST RATIOS JUST FOR FOR EARTHQUAKES NOTE: Actual B/C Ratios Are A Function Of Each National Effort; These Are Illustrative
  10. 10. DISASTER RESILIENCE HAS A VERY HIGH BENEFIT/COST 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 1,000,000 THE PAYOFF IS A BETTER, SAFER, AND MORE SECURE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR EVERYONE
  11. 11. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE PUBLIC AWARENESS ENABLES ALL SECTORS OF THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THEIR RISKS AND HOW TO LIVE WITH THEM 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 1,000
  12. 12. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE PROPERTY CASUALTY INSURANCE SPEEDS RECOVERY & RECONSTRUCTION; CAN PROMOTE PROTECTION 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 1,000
  13. 13. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE BUILDING CODE PREVENTS COLLAPSE; REDUCES LOSS OF LIFE AND DAMAGE 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 1,000
  14. 14. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE LIFELINE STANDARDS PROTECTS COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 1,000
  15. 15. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE NON-STRUCTURAL PROTECTION PROTECTS CONTENTS AND EQUIPMENT 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 1,000
  16. 16. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE DEMOLITION OF COLLAPSE-HAZARD BUILDINGS PREVENTS ALMOST CERTAIN LOSS OF LIFE 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 1,000
  17. 17. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE SEISMIC ZONATION IDENTIFIES LOCATIONS SUSCEPTIBLE TO SURFACE FAULTING, SOIL AMPLIFICATION, AND SOIL FAILURE 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 100
  18. 18. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE RETROFIT, STRENGTHENING, & REHABILITATION ELIMINATES VULNERABILITIES; REDUCES DAMAGE 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 100
  19. 19. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE EDUCATION AND TRAINING EXPANDS PROFESSIONAL AND POLITICAL CAPACITY 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 100
  20. 20. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE SOIL REMEDIATION PREVENTS LIQUEFACTION, LANDSLIDES, AND LATERAL SPREADS 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 1000
  21. 21. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE PERFORMANCE BASED DESIGN PREVENTS LOSS OF FUNCTION AND USE OF IMPORTANT STRUCTURES 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 100
  22. 22. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE URBAN PLANNING CONTROLS DENSITY AND USE OF LAND; PROMOTES AVOIDANCE STRATEGIES 1 < BENEFIT/COST < 10
  23. 23. BENEFIT/COST OF BECOMING EARTHQUAKE RESILIENT DISASTER SCENARIOS FACILITATES COMMUNITY PREPAREDNESS FOR THE KNOWN AND UNKNOWN 1< BENEFIT/COST < 10
  24. 24. A BENEFIT/COST OF EARTHQUAKE RESILIENCE RELOCATION AND REROUTING REDUCES LIKELIHOOD OF DAMAGE AND LOSS 1< BENEFIT/COST < 10
  25. 25. OVERVIEW OF THE EARTHQUAKE EXPERIENCE
  26. 26. SEISMICITY: USA
  27. 27. SEISMICITY
  28. 28. SEISMICITY
  29. 29. Schematic Diagram of the Earthquake Mechanism WEST NORTH
  30. 30. Schematic Diagram of the Earthquake Mechanism WEST NORTH
  31. 31. EARTHQUAKE VIBRATION DAMAGE/LOSS DAMAGE/ LOSS REGIONAL DEFORMATION DAMAGE/ LOSS DAMAGE/ LOSS AMPLIFICATION DAMAGE/LOSS TSUNAMI FOUNDATION FAILURE FAULT RUPTURE DAMAGE/ LOSS LIQUEFACTION DAMAGE/ LOSS LANDSLIDE DAMAGE/ LOSS AFTERSHOCKS DAMAGE/ LOSS SEICHE DAMAGE/ LOSS
  32. 32. EARTHQUAKE HAZARD CHARACTERIZATION • • • • WHERE? WHEN? HOW BIG? SEVERITY OF GROUND SHAKING? • SEVERITY OF OTHER EFFECTS? • UNCERTAINTY?
  33. 33. ITALY: MMI MAP
  34. 34. PUERTO RICO: PGA MAP
  35. 35. SITUATION: SURFACE FAULT RUPTURE
  36. 36. SITUATION: LIVING IN AN ACTIVE FAULT ZONE
  37. 37. SITUATION: SURFACE FAULT RUPTURE
  38. 38. A TSUNAMI • TSUNAMIS TRAVEL AT 800 KM/ HOUR, SLOWING TO 50-500 KM/HR AS SHORE IS REACHED • WAVE HEIGHTS CAN REACH 30 M OR MORE • WAVES CAN TRAVEL 2 KM OR MORE INLAND
  39. 39. LOCATIONS • TSUNAMIS OCCUR MOST FREQUENTLY IN THE CIRCUM-PACIFIC REGION • OTHER LOCATIONS INCLUDE: INDIAN OCEAN, HAWAII, CARIBBEAN, PUERTO RICO, VIRGIN ISLANDS, GUAM, WESTERN USA, AND MEDITERRANEAN
  40. 40. SITUATION:TSUNAMI WAVE RUNUP
  41. 41. SITUATION: TSUNAMI WAVE RUNUP - HAWAII
  42. 42. SITUATION: AFTER TSUNAMI WAVE RUN UP
  43. 43. SITUATION: GROUND SHAKING DAMAGE The Kocaeli (Turkey) Earthquake of 17 August 1999
  44. 44. SITUATION: COLLAPSE OF HIGH-RISE APARTMENT UNIT
  45. 45. SITUATION: FAILURE OF URM BUILDING
  46. 46. SITUATION: DAMAGE TO HOUSING UNIT
  47. 47. SITUATION: DAMAGE TO A HOUSING UNIT
  48. 48. SITUATION: DAMAGE TO HOUSING UNITS
  49. 49. SITUATION: DAMAGE TO HOUSING UNITS
  50. 50. SITUATION: DAMAGE TO HOUSING UNITS
  51. 51. SITUATION: COLLAPSE OF HOUSING UNITS
  52. 52. SITUATION: GROUND FAILURE-LIQUEFACTION
  53. 53. SITUATION: GROUND FAILURE-LANDSLIDE
  54. 54. SITUATION: LANDSLIDE AT TURNAGAIN HEIGHTS • THE 1964 PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND EARTHQUAKE TRIGGERED A LARGE VOLUME LANDSLIDE AT TURNAGAIN HEIGHTS • MILLIONS OF CUBIC METERS OF SOIL AND ROCK WERE DIS[LACED
  55. 55. SITUATION: LOSS OF POWER AND AN URBAN FIRE
  56. 56. THE CASE FOR A MAJOR PARADIGMN SHIFT FROM RESPONSE TO ANTICIPATION AND DISASTER RESILIENCY DURING 2014 AND BEYOND GO TO PART 2

×