Downloaded 22 times
7.2 Magnitude Earthquake Strikes Just North of Acapulco Mexico on 18 April 2014
A 7.2 magnitude earthquake struck near Acapulco, Mexico, on April 18, 2014, impacting buildings as far as Mexico City but resulting in no reported deaths or injuries. The document discusses Mexico's seismic risks due to the subduction of the Cocos plate beneath the North American plate and emphasizes the importance of disaster resilience and preparedness against future earthquakes. It also highlights the lessons learned from past earthquakes, particularly the 1985 Mexico City earthquake, and stresses the need for effective planning, infrastructure protection, and community response strategies.
More Related Content
Similar to 7.2 Magnitude Earthquake Strikes Just North of Acapulco Mexico on 18 April 2014
More from Professor Eric K. Noji, M.D., MPH, DTMH(Lon), FRCP(UK)hon
7.2 Magnitude Earthquake Strikes Just North of Acapulco Mexico on 18 April 2014
- 1. 7.2 Magnitude EarthquakeStrikes Just North of Acapulco Mexico on 18 April 2014
- 2.
- 3.
- 4. The quake struckaround 9:28 a.m. local time (10:28 a.m. ET), 39 kilometers east of Petatlan, Mexico, in the southwestern state of Guerrero, north of the resort city Acapulco
- 5. INITIAL REPORTS Buildings inMexico City shook for 30 minutes No Deaths; No Injuries
- 6.
- 7. NATURAL HAZARDS THATHAVE CAUSED DISASTERS IN MEXICO FLOODS STORMS EARTHQUAKES DUST STORMS ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE HIGH BENEFIT/COST FROM BECOMING DISASTER NRESILIENT GOAL: PROTECT PEOPLE AND COMMUNITIES
- 8. Mexico has along historical record of earthquakes
- 9. CAUSE OF SEISMICITY •The ongoing interaction of the Cocos and North American plates is the causative factor for the seismicity of Mexico.
- 10.
- 11. THE COCOS PLATEIS SUB- DUCTING BENEATH THE NA PLATE
- 12. ELEMENTS OF RISKAND DISASTER
- 13.
- 14.
- 16.
- 17. EXPOSURE MODEL LOCATION OF STRUCTURE IMPORTANCE AND VALUEOF STRUCTURE AND CONTENTS
- 18. EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS (the potentialdisaster agents) SURFACE FAULT RUPTURE, GROUND SHAKING, GROUND FAILURE (LIQUEFACTION, LANDSLIDES), AFTERSHOCKS
- 19. TECTONIC DEFORMATION EARTHQUAKE TSUNAMI GROUND SHAKING FAULT RUPTURE FOUNDATION FAILURE SITE AMPLIFICATION LIQUEFACTION LANDSLIDES AFTERSHOCKS SEICHE DAMAGE/LOSS DAMAGE/ LOSS DAMAGE/LOSS DAMAGE/ LOSS DAMAGE/ LOSS DAMAGE/ LOSS DAMAGE/ LOSS DAMAGE/ LOSS DAMAGE/ LOSS DAMAGE/LOSS
- 20.
- 21.
- 22. VULNERABILITY MODEL QUALITY OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ADEQUACYOF LATERAL-FORCE RESISTING SYSTEM
- 23. INTENSITY V VI VIIVIII IX 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 MEANDAMAGERATIO, %OFREPLACEMENTVALUE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS HAVE DIFFERENT VULNERABILITIES TO GROUND SHAKING
- 24. INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO HORIZONTALGROUND SHAKING EARTHQUAKES SOIL AMPLIFICATION PERMANENT DISPLACEMENT (SURFACE FAULTING & GROUND FAILURE) IRREGULARITIES IN ELEVATION AND PLAN FIRE FOLLOWING RUPTURE OF UTILITIES LACK OF DETAILING AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INATTENTION TO NON- STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS CAUSES OF DAMAGE “DISASTER LABORATORIES”
- 25. A DISASTER CANHAPPEN WHEN THE POTENTIAL DISASTER AGENTS OF AN EARTHQUAKE INTERACT WITH MEXICO’S COMMUNITIES (INCLUDING THE CAPITAL)
- 26. A DISASTER is--- --- the set of failures that overwhelm the capability of a community to respond without external help when three continuums: 1) people, 2) community (i.e., a set of habitats, livelihoods, and social constructs), and 3) complex events (e.g., earthquakes, floods,…) intersect at a point in space and time.
- 27. Disasters are causedby single- or multiple-event natural hazards that, (for various reasons), cause extreme levels of mortality, morbidity, homelessness, joblessness, economic losses, or environmental impacts.
- 28. THE REASONS ARE. . . • When it does happen, the functions of the community’s buildings and infrastructure will be LOST because they are UNPROTECTED with the appropriate codes and standards.
- 29. THE REASONS ARE. . . • The community is UN- PREPARED for what will likely happen, not to mention the low-probability of occurrence— high-probability of adverse consequences event.
- 30. THE REASONS ARE. . . • The community has NO DISASTER PLANNING SCENARIO or WARNING SYSTEM in place as a strategic framework for early threat identification and coordinated local, national, regional, and international countermeasures.
- 31. THE REASONS ARE. . . • The community LACKS THE CAPACITY TO RESPOND in a timely and effective manner to the full spectrum of expected and unexpected emergency situations.
- 32. THE REASONS ARE. . . • The community is INEFFICIENT during recovery and reconstruction when it HAS NOT LEARNED from either the current experience or the cumulative prior experiences.
- 33. EXAMPLES OF MEXOCO’S PASTEARTHQUAKE DISASTERS THE 7:19 AM, M8.1 EARTHQUAKE OF SEPTEMBER 19, 1985
- 34. 1985 MEXICO EARTHQUAKE •SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 • M8.1 • A SUBDUCTION ZONE QUAKE • ALTHOUGH LARGER THAN USUAL, THE EARTHQUAKE WAS NOT A ―SURPRISE‖ • A MODERN BUILDING CODE ADOPTED AND IMPLEMENTED BEFORE THE EARTHQUAKE WAS INADEQUATE
- 35. 1985 MEXICO EARTHQUAKE •EPICENTER LOCATED 240 KM FROM MEXICO CITY • 412 BUILDINGS COLLAPSED IN OLD LAKE BED ZONE OF MEXICO CITY • 2 SECOND PERIOD SOIL-STRUCTURE RESONANCE IN OLD LAKE BED ZONE WAS A MAJOR FACTOR IN COLLAPSES
- 36. 1985 MEXICO EARTHQUAKE: SOILAMPLIFICATION
- 37.
- 38.
- 39.
- 40.
- 41.
- 42.
- 43.
- 44.
- 45.
- 46. IMPACTS • Although theepicenter was located far from Mexico city, the soft soil of the old lake bed the city is sited on amplified the ground shaking in Mexico City, damaging 3,124 buildings, collapsing 412 of them and killing between 10,000 – 40,000 people.
- 47. IMPACTS • The economicloss was between $3-4 billion.
- 48. LARGE MAGNITUDE EARTHQUAKESIN MEXICO ARE INEVITABLE • ---SO, DON’T WAIT FOR ANOTHER REMINDER OF THE IMPORTANCE OF BECOMING EARTHQUAKE DIS- ASTER RESILIENT.
- 49. THE ALTERNATIVE TOAN EARTHQUAKE DISASTER IS EARTHQUAKE DISASTER RESILIENCE
- 50. TURKEY’S COMMUNITIES DATA BASES AND INFORMATION HAZARDS: GROUNDSHAKING GROUND FAILURE SURFACE FAULTING TECTONIC DEFORMATION TSUNAMI RUN UP AFTERSHOCKS • EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS •INVENTORY •VULNERABILITY •LOCATION EARTHQUAKE RISK RISK ACCEPTABLE RISK UNACCEPTABLE RISK EARTHQUAKE DISASTER RESILIENCE •PREPAREDNESS •PROTECTION •FORECASTS/SCENARIOS •EMERGENCY RESPONSE •RECOVERY and RECONSTRUCTION POLICY OPTIONS
- 51. LESSONS LEARNED ABOUT DISASTERRESILIENCE ALL EARTHQUAKES PREPAREDNESS FOR ALL OF THE LIKELY AND UNLIKELY HAZARDS AND RISKS IS ESSENTIAL FOR DISASTER RESILIENCE
- 52. LESSONS LEARNED ABOUT DISASTERRESILIENCE ALL EARTHQUAKES PROTECTION OF BUILDINGS AND INFRASTRUCTURE AGAINST COLLAPSE AND LOSS OF FUNCTION IS ESSENTIAL FOR DISASTER RESILIENCE
- 53. LESSONS LEARNED ABOUT DISASTERRESILIENCE ALL EARTHQUAKES TECHNOLOGIES THAT FACILITATE PREPARATION OF DISASTER SCENARIOS ARE ESSENTIAL FOR DISASTER RESILIENCE
- 54. LESSONS LEARNED ABOUT DISASTERRESILIENCE ALL EARTHQUAKES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE IS ESSENTIAL FOR DISASTER RESILIENCE
- 55. STRATEGIC COLLABORATION (I.E., WORKINGTOGETHER ON A COMMON GOAL) FOR BECOMING EARTHQUAKE DISASTER RESILIENT
- 56. QUESTION • WHAT DOESA CITY OR A MEGACITY DO TO MAKE ITS BUILDINGS LESS VULNERABLE TO EARTHQUAKES?