Christchurch Earthquake Risk Assessment Stage1 Report

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study
Part 1 - Review of Risk Assessment Methodologies and Development of a Draft Risk Assessment Methodology for Christchurch
Report No. U04 / 108 : Final
Earthquake Hazard and Risk Assessment Project
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study

Part 1 - Review of Risk Assessment Methodologies and Development of a Draft Risk Assessment Methodology for Christchurch
Report No. U04 / 108 : Final
Prepared by P. Brabhaharan, Robert Davey, Francis ORiley, and Leonard Wiles Reviewed by Dr David Prentice
Opus International Consultants Limited Wellington Office Level 9, Majestic Centre 100 Willis Street, PO Box 12-003 Wellington, New Zealand Telephone: Facsimile: Report No Date: Reference: Status: +64 4 471 7000 +64 4 471 1397 SPT 2004 / 28 August 2005 5C0542.00 Final
This document is the property of Opus International Consultants Limited. Any unauthorised employment or reproduction, in full or part is forbidden.
Disclaimer
Opus has used the best available information in preparing this report and has interpreted this information exercising all reasonable skill and care. Nevertheless, neither Environment Canterbury nor Opus accepts any liability, whether direct, indirect or consequential, arising out of the provision of information in this report. All rights reserved. This publication may not be reproduced or copied in any form without the permission of Environment Canterbury (the client). Such permission is to be given only in accordance with the terms of the clients contract with Opus. This copyright extends to all forms of copying and any storage of materials in any kind of information retrieval system. The copyright for the data, maps, figures, and tables contained in this report is held by Opus.
Opus International Consultants Limited 2005
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1
Contents
Executive Summary..................................................................................................................................... iii 1 2 3 Introduction...........................................................................................................................................1 Scope of Study ......................................................................................................................................2 Key Components of Earthquake Risk Assessment and Applications.......................................3 3.1 Objectives .....................................................................................................................................3 3.2 Risk Assessment..........................................................................................................................3 3.3 Socio-economic Consequences..................................................................................................5 3.4 Outcomes .....................................................................................................................................5 3.5 Applications.................................................................................................................................6 Literature Review.................................................................................................................................7 4.1 Scope of Review ..........................................................................................................................7 4.2 General Earthquake Risk Assessment .....................................................................................7 4.3 Earthquake Hazards.................................................................................................................13 4.4 Damage and Loss Modelling ..................................................................................................15 4.5 Earthquake Risk Studies Undertaken for Christchurch and Canterbury.........................24 4.6 Summary of Literature Review...............................................................................................25 Inventory Data ....................................................................................................................................27 5.1 General Approach.....................................................................................................................27 5.2 Buildings ....................................................................................................................................27 5.3 Roads ..........................................................................................................................................29 5.4 Water Supply Networks ..........................................................................................................30 5.5 Telecommunications Assets ....................................................................................................30 5.6 Electricity Assets .......................................................................................................................31 5.7 Demographic Information .......................................................................................................33 5.8 Geographical Information Systems Data Format.................................................................33 5.9 Summary of Asset Inventory Data .........................................................................................33 Earthquake Hazard Information Review ......................................................................................35 6.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................................................35 6.2 Earthquake Hazard Literature ................................................................................................35 6.3 Discussion of Hazard Information .........................................................................................43 6.4 Additional Hazard Information .............................................................................................43 Development of Risk Assessment Methodology for Christchurch .........................................45 7.1 Objectives ...................................................................................................................................45
5C0542.00 August 2005: Final
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 8 9 10 Risk Assessment Context.........................................................................................................45 Scenario and Probabilistic Approaches .................................................................................46 Spatial Assessment Approach.................................................................................................47 Modelling Uncertainty.............................................................................................................47 Risk Assessment Model ...........................................................................................................48 Risk Assessment Outputs ........................................................................................................56
Conclusions .........................................................................................................................................58 Recommendations..............................................................................................................................60 Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................63
List of Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Mesh Blocks and Statistical Area Units for Christchurch Example Risk Assessment Outputs for Lifelines
ii
Executive Summary
Environment Canterbury (ECan) needs to know the likely impact and consequences of a major earthquake on Christchurch, to fulfil its hazard mitigation and emergency management functions. Opus International Consultants Limited (Opus) was commissioned by ECan to review risk assessment methodologies and develop a draft risk assessment methodology for Christchurch. A comprehensive review of literature relating to earthquake risk assessment has been completed. Key features of significant relevant literature are presented. Sources of asset data for the study have been explored by contacting the relevant Councils and organisations. This indicates that the information required for the risk assessment is generally available. The inventory would be collected from a variety of organisations, and would include information on critical facilities. There is good hazard information available from previous research and studies. Some additional microzoning information would need to be derived, including a map showing ground class to modify ground shaking, liquefaction ground damage hazards for the earthquake scenarios, and slope hazards for the Port Hills. These can be incorporated into the risk assessment. The tsunami risk could be considered in a separate study. A spatial approach should be used for the risk assessment using a geographical information system (GIS) platform, and the results of the study be presented as maps and accompanying tables and charts, so that the information can be readily used by stakeholders. A methodology has been developed to undertake an earthquake risk assessment for Christchurch. The approach has been based on generating risk information that meets the objectives of Environment Canterbury and provides a basis for organisations to undertake risk management actions. It is proposed that the risk assessment be carried out for four earthquake scenarios, rather than using probabilistic uniform hazard levels. This would provide information most suitable for emergency management and meeting functionality requirements for lifelines. Risk assessment has considerable uncertainty and loss estimates could be derived using probability distributions so that the uncertainty is explicitly presented. The risk assessed should focus on direct losses. The socio-economic consequences may be considered later in follow-on studies.
iii
Introduction
Environment Canterbury (ECan) needs to know the likely impact and consequences of a major earthquake on Christchurch, to fulfil its hazard mitigation and emergency management functions. ECan considers that the earthquake hazard information currently available is generally of a standard and scale suitable for an earthquake risk assessment. The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and more recently the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 require local authorities to identify, assess and mitigate the effects of natural hazards and other technological hazards. An assessment of the risk from earthquakes to Christchurch will assist with the management of the risk, through reduction, readiness, response and recovery planning. Opus International Consultants Limited (Opus) has been commissioned by ECan to review risk assessment methodologies and develop a draft risk assessment methodology for Christchurch as part of the Earthquake Risk Assessment Study: Part 1. This report presents the results of this study, and recommends a methodology for use in carrying out a risk assessment for Christchurch.
Scope of Study
The scope of the study required by ECan comprises the following steps: 1. Describe in detail the key components of earthquake risk assessment methodologies, and in particular the outputs and their applications. Review in detail the available literature on (any) specific earthquake risk assessments carried out for Canterbury and/or Christchurch, and methodologies and approaches developed in New Zealand and internationally for assessing earthquake risk. This review will include: (a) A description of the approach used to complete the literature review. (b) A full bibliographic reference for each report, paper, map or other publication reviewed. (c) Details of where each report, paper, map or other publication can be obtained. (d) A detailed summary of the relevant details of each report, paper, map or publication. (e) A discussion on the implications of the literature review findings for the development of an earthquake risk assessment model for Christchurch. 3. Investigate the source, availability and nature of building (residential, industrial and commercial), engineering lifeline infrastructure (water supply, telecommunications, electricity distribution and roading only) and demographic information for Christchurch, and provide a summary of the information in the report. Investigate the source, availability and nature of earthquake hazard information for Canterbury and Christchurch, and provide a summary of the information in the report. Identify (if appropriate), the need for, and nature of, any additional earthquake hazard information and/or investigations for the purpose of better assessing the earthquake risk in Christchurch. Based on the literature review findings and the nature of the existing earthquake hazard information available for Canterbury and Christchurch, and the existing available building, engineering lifeline infrastructure and demographic information, develop a draft risk assessment methodology for Christchurch.
2.
4.
5.
6.
ECan required that this study include the lifelines of water supply, telecommunications, electricity distribution and roading only. However, this may be extended to include other key lifelines in the city such as wastewater, ports and rail infrastructure.
3
3.1
Key Components of Earthquake Risk Assessment and Applications

Objectives Risk may be defined as the chance of something happening that will have an impact upon objectives. It is measured in terms of consequences and likelihood [AS/NZS 4360:2004]. The objective of an earthquake risk assessment is to quantify the potential damages and losses due to future earthquakes (the consequences) and their probabilities of occurrence in a given period (the likelihood).
3.2
Risk Assessment The basic steps in an earthquake risk assessment are: Hazard Analysis: Identification of earthquake sources. Modelling of the occurrence of earthquakes from these sources. Estimation of the attenuation of earthquake motions between these sources and the study area. Evaluation of the site effects of soil amplification, liquefaction, landslide and surface fault rupture. Inventory Collection: Identification of infrastructure (buildings and lifelines) that are exposed to damage. Classification of the buildings and lifelines according to their vulnerability to damage. Classification of the occupancy of the buildings and facilities. Damage Modelling : Modelling of the performance of the inventory classes under earthquake shaking and consequent effects such as ground damage. Development of damage functions (relationship between levels of damage and corresponding levels of shaking). Estimation of the damage to the inventory from the earthquake motion at the inventory locations. Estimation of the damage caused by post earthquake fires. Loss Estimation : Estimation of direct losses due to damage repair costs. Estimation of indirect losses due to loss of function of the inventory. Estimation of casualties caused by the damage.
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 These steps are illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1 - Basic Steps in Earthquake Risk Assessment [King and Kiremidjian, 1994] The regional risk assessment process is further illustrated in Figure 2, and the risk assessment process with the aid of a Geographical Information System (GIS) is illustrated in Figure 3.
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 3.3 Socio-economic Consequences The social and economic consequences of earthquake damage are also important. However, the assessment of the social and economic effects is more complex and there isnt a well defined process to assess these outcomes. Usually these have been assessed as a multiplier of the direct losses to indicate an order of magnitude of such losses. A number of researchers have considered the economic impact of earthquakes (Cochrane, 1995). More research is continuing to assess such effects. For example, Gordon et al (1997) outlined a framework for assessing the total economic impact from the effect of earthquakes on transportation (bridges only considered), using input/output models. They included changes in traffic demand after the earthquake. However, the practical use of this model for risk assessment of a road network was not demonstrated (Brabhaharan et al, 2001). The Multi-disciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER) in the USA has an objective to develop a model for assessing the economic effects of damage to transportation networks. Research into the social impacts of earthquakes is currently being carried out by Opus International Consultants, under a 4 year research programme. It would be prudent to consider assessment of the socio economic effects of earthquakes as a future extension of the earthquake risk assessment. 3.4 Outcomes The primary outcomes of a risk study are summaries and maps highlighting the spatial distribution of damage and casualties. A typical summary for an asset would include an overall damage rating, the number of casualties, the number of people affected by the damage, timeframe for basic reinstatement and likely repair costs. Key assets covered by the summaries include: Commercial, industrial and residential buildings; Critical facilities including hospitals, police stations and fire stations; Lifelines, including: Electrical and communication lifelines including exchanges, underground and overhead lines; Roading network including bridges; Water assets including reservoirs, pump stations and key water mains. For lifelines, the consequential effects (such as availability / disruption to road users) would also be assessed. Maps are used to highlight the spatial distribution of damage to assets. substations, telephone
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 3.5 Applications The outcomes from a risk assessment study have many applications. Such applications may include: Consider the impact of earthquakes and development of appropriate policy on earthquake risk reduction initiatives (for example Earthquake Risk Buildings Policy development); Earthquake risk reduction initiatives through a detailed understanding of the extent and distribution of damage, critical elements and redundancies; Prioritisation and justification for founding of earthquake risk, based on a detailed understanding of the damage and consequences; Understand and act on the interdependencies and relationships between various lifelines and emergency response and recovery; Emergency response planning by the Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups and Civil Defence Personnel; Understand the post-earthquake recovery resources requirements based on the understanding of the extent of damage to buildings and other infrastructure (including lifelines). Such a study was carried out for the Wellington Region and the results were published in a number of papers presented in Wellington After the Quake The Challenge of Rebuilding Cities (Earthquake Commission, 1995). An earthquake risk assessment for the Greater Wellington Area was undertaken by Works Consultancy Services (1995) for the Wellington Regional Council. This study has been used extensively in the understanding of the risks to the region, earthquake risk policy development, and planning for emergency preparedness. As illustrated above, it has also provided the basis for understanding the resource requirements for recovery after large events. An application of comprehensive assessment of the risk to lifelines, is the risk assessment of key roads in the Wellington City Road network and development of risk management strategy undertaken by Opus International Consultants for Wellington City Council (Brabhaharan, 2004), and this has provided the framework for prioritising, funding and implementation of key vulnerable roads in the Wellington City, starting with Ngaio Gorge Road. This illustrates the usefulness of the results of earthquake risk assessment studies for earthquake preparedness planning and for developing strategies to minimise the risk from earthquakes.
4
4.1
Literature Review
Scope of Review A review has been undertaken of New Zealand and international literature on earthquake risk assessment and of specific earthquake risk assessments carried out for Canterbury or Christchurch. This literature review has involved: 1. 2. 3. 4. A review and collation of earthquake hazard and risk reports held by ECan; A search of library databases by Opus Information Centre; Sourcing of literature from various sources; Review of information collated.
Search of relevant information for the study was carried out Opus Information Centre, which has access to a variety of databases and search facilities which allowed it to search a variety of papers and reports in journals, conference proceedings, research publications and studies. The seminal paper Engineering seismic risk analysis by Cornell [1986], set the scene for the considerable advances that have been made in earthquake risk assessment over the past two decades. Many thousands of papers and other publications have been published on the subject since that time. This review has therefore been limited to those publications that are particularly relevant to a regional earthquake risk assessment as proposed for Christchurch. The review is structured as follows: General Earthquake Risk Assessment. Earthquake Hazards. Damage and Loss Modelling. Earthquake Risk Studies undertaken for Christchurch and Canterbury. 4.2 General Earthquake Risk Assessment King SA and Kiremidjian, A (1994). geographic information systems. Regional seismic hazard and risk analysis through
This report describes the development of a geographic information system (GIS) based methodology for a regional seismic hazard and risk analysis, and illustrates this with a case study. It is particularly useful as it provides a good framework for a GIS based risk assessment. A flow chart of the basic procedure that was developed for this risk assessment is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2 - Flowchart Showing the Basic Regional Risk Assessment Process [King and Kiremidjian. 1994] The data and models that are the fundamental building blocks of regional risk assessments referred to in Figure 2 are: Models Seismicity Bedrock motion (attenuation) Local site effects (amplification, liquefaction) Motion-damage (fragility) Repair cost Loss of use (repair time) Non-monetary loss (casualties)
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Inventory Data Facility (building, lifelines) structural characteristics Facility occupancy characteristics Regional population distribution The GIS mapping process for the seismic risk analysis is illustrated in Figure 3.
Figure 3 - GIS Mapping Process for Regional Seismic Risk analysis [King and Kiremidjian, 1994] Maps representing regional geological and geographical data are overlaid and their attributes are combined to produce intermediate maps of regional seismic hazards. These hazard maps are then overlaid and combined with structural inventory maps to produce maps predicting regional damage distributions. Combining the map of damage distributions with a map of population distributions for the area results in final estimates of direct loss (damage repair costs, etc), indirect loss (business interruption costs, etc) and casualties. FEMA (2001). Earthquake loss estimation methodology, HAZUS99. HAZUS is a comprehensive earthquake loss estimation methodology that was developed for the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It is designed for use by state, regional and local governments in planning for earthquake loss mitigation, emergency preparedness planning and response and recovery.
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Use of the methodology will generate an estimate of the consequences to a city or region of a "scenario earthquake", i.e., an earthquake with a specified magnitude and location. The resulting "loss estimate" generally will describe the scale and extent of damage and disruption that may result from a potential earthquake. The following information can be obtained: Quantitative estimates of losses in terms of direct costs for repair and replacement of damaged buildings and lifeline system components; direct costs associated with loss of function (e.g., loss of business revenue, relocation costs); casualties; people displaced from residences; quantity of debris; and regional economic impacts. Functionality losses in terms of loss-of-function and restoration times for critical facilities such as hospitals, and components of transportation and utility lifeline systems and simplified analyses of loss-of-system-function for electrical distribution and potable water systems. Extent of induced hazards in terms of fire ignitions and fire spread, exposed population and building value due to potential flooding and locations of hazardous materials. To generate this information, the methodology includes: Classification systems used in assembling inventory and compiling information on the building stock, the components of highway and utility lifelines, and demographic and economic data. Methods for evaluating damage and calculating various losses. Databases containing information used as default (built-in) data that are useable in the calculation of losses. A flow chart illustrating this methodology is shown in Figure 4. These systems, methods, and data have been coded into user-friendly software based on a GIS platform. GIS technology facilitates the manipulation of data on building stock, population, and the regional economy. The software can be run under two different GIS platforms, MapInfo and ArcView. The software makes use of GIS technology for displaying and manipulating inventory, and permits losses and consequences to be portrayed on both spreadsheets and maps. Collecting the required information and entering it in an analysis program are the major tasks involved in generating a loss estimate. The HAZUS methodology permits estimates to be made at several levels of sophistication, based on the level of data input into the analysis (i.e., default data versus locally enhanced data). The better and more complete the inventory information, the more meaningful the results. A new version of the software, HAZUS-MH (i.e. HAZUS Multi-Hazard), includes losses from floods and hurricane winds as well as earthquakes.
10
Potential Earth Science Hazards
4. Ground Motion
4. Ground Failure
Direct Physical Damage
5. General Building Stock
6. Essential and High Potential Loss Facilities
7. LifelinesTransportation Systems
8. LifelinesUtility Systems
Induced Physical Damage
Direct Economic/ Social Losses
9. Inundation
10. Fire 11. HazMat 12. Debris
13. Casualities
14. Shelter
15. Economic
16. Indirect Economic Losses
Figure 4 - Flow Chart of the HAZUS Loss Estimation Methodology
Most of the models that form the basis of the HAZUS methodology are documented in detail in the HAZUS Technical Manual, which is freely available from the FEMA website (http://www.fema.gov/hazus). These models can therefore be adopted and adapted for use in other methodologies. The GIS based HAZUS software is also freely available, but it can only be used for the geographical regions that the software has been customised for, i.e. the US and a few other countries. The HAZUS software has not been customised for New Zealand.
11
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 In a simplified form, the steps in applying the methodology are: Select the area to be studied. This may be a city, a county or a group of municipalities. It is generally desirable to select an area that is under the jurisdiction of an existing regional planning group. Specify the magnitude and location of the scenario earthquake. In developing the scenario earthquake, consideration should be given to the potential fault locations. Provide additional information describing local soil and geological conditions, if available. Using formulas embedded in HAZUS, probability distributions are computed for damage to different classes of buildings, facilities, and lifeline system components and loss-of-function estimates are made. The damage and functionality information is used to compute estimates of direct economic loss, casualties and shelter needs. In addition, the indirect economic impacts on the regional economy are estimated for the years following the earthquake. An estimate of the number of ignitions and the extent of fire spread is computed. The amount and type of debris is estimated. If an inundation map is provided, exposure to flooding can also be estimated. The user plays a major role in selecting the scope and nature of the output of a loss estimation study. A variety of maps can be generated for visualising the extent of the losses. Numerical results may be examined at the level of the census tract (equivalent to statistical area unit / mesh block in New Zealand) or may be aggregated by county or region. McGuire, RK (2004). Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis. McGuire is one of the pioneers of seismic risk analysis, and his monograph provides a general introduction to methods of seismic hazard and risk analysis. He pays particular attention to one of the most important aspects of seismic risk analysis, that is, how to deal with the associated large uncertainties. There are two types of uncertainty: 1. Aleatory (or random) uncertainty: uncertainty that is inherent in a random phenomenon and cannot be reduced by acquiring additional data: Examples include future earthquake locations, future earthquake magnitudes, ground motions at a site given the median value, damage state for a class of buildings given the median value. Epistemic (or knowledge) uncertainty: the uncertainty that stems from lack of knowledge about some model or parameter. This type of uncertainty can be reduced (at least conceptually) by additional data. Examples include maximum magnitude for a source, median value of ground motion given the source properties, median damage state for a class of buildings given the ground motion.
2.
12
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 McGuire describes risk analysis methodologies that include allowance for uncertainty based on probability theory. The probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA) method is described, along with methods to convert seismic hazard into seismic risk or loss. 4.3 Earthquake Hazards 4.3.1 General Approaches
Reiter, Leon (1990). Earthquake Hazard Analysis. Reiter provides an introduction to the subject of identification of earthquake sources and modelling of the occurrence of earthquakes on these sources. Models for the occurrence of future earthquakes are based on historical seismicity, crustal geology and tectonic processes. There are two sources of earthquake: 1. Area sources are geographical areas within which an earthquake of a given magnitude is equally likely to occur at any time or location, where the local geological features that cause the earthquakes have not been identified. Fault sources are usually individual faults where the tectonic and geological features causing earthquakes have been identified. New Zealand Data
2.
4.3.2
Active fault and historic earthquake data for New Zealand are available in the following databases. Environment Canterbury Active Faults Database http://www.ecan.govt.nz/EcanGIS/ecanpro/viewer.htm The Environment Canterbury database keeps an up to date record of the active faults in the Canterbury Region. Active Faults Database of New Zealand. http://www.gns.cri.nz/store/databases/indexb.html#Faults The Active Faults Database of New Zealand is maintained by the Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences. It has been designed to hold all data collected from investigations of active faults. Along with the locations of active faults, the Active Faults Database contains the results from field measurements of offset features, trenching, and dating. It also stores interpretation of these results in the form of the fault recurrence interval, slip rate, single event displacement and date of last movement. National Earthquake Information Database http://www.gns.cri.nz/store/databases/indexb.html#Earthquake
13
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 The National Earthquake Information Database is maintained by the Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences. It contains summary information of New Zealand earthquakes including epicentres, depths, magnitudes, and felt information for more than 160,000 earthquakes. This includes pre-instrumental shocks, but not all information is available for all events. The database also contains over 1,000,000 analogue and digital seismograms recorded by the short-period National Seismograph Network, of which the digital archive is held on-line. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (2000). Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment of New Zealand: New Active Fault Data, Seismicity Data, Attenuation Relationships and Methods This report provides details of the fault sources and area sources that were used for a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) for New Zealand. Seismological Society of America (1997). Seismological Research Letters, No. 68. Attenuation relationships are used to calculate the ground shaking at a site given the earthquake location and magnitude. They are derived from recorded earthquake ground motions. This publication provides a good state-of-the-art summary of the development of these relationships. McVerry GH, et al. (2000). Crustal and Subduction Zone Attenuation Relations for New Zealand Earthquakes. McVerry et al developed attenuation relationships from a dataset of New Zealand earthquake records, supplemented by overseas data. The attenuation model takes account of different tectonic types of earthquake (crustal and subduction zone) and their range of depths. The attenuation expressions for crustal earthquakes have further subdivisions for different types of fault rupture (strike-slip, normal, oblique reverse and reverse). The model takes account of site soil amplification through a range of site soil classes. The ground motions are given in terms of peak ground acceleration (PGA) and spectral acceleration. Dowrick D.J., Rhoades D.A. (1999). Attenuation of Modified Mercalli Intensity in New Zealand Earthquakes. Dowrick and Rhoades developed Modified Mercalli (MM) intensity attenuation relationships from observed intensities in New Zealand earthquakes. The MM intensity (MMI) scale measures the earthquake effects at a site in terms of the effect it has on the natural and built environment. The advantage of using the MMI scale as a measure of earthquake intensity is that there is more historical earthquake consequence data available that is correlated to MMI than there is to peak ground accelerations (PGA).
14
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 4.4 Damage and Loss Modelling 4.4.1 General
Rojahn, C and Sharpe, R L (1985). Earthquake Damage Evaluation Data for California, ATC-13. In the mid-1980s, the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) undertook a comprehensive programme to estimate the economic impacts of a major California earthquake. This included estimates of damages to all types of facilities, the associated losses and casualties. Because the required earthquake damage and loss data were not available in the literature, FEMA and Applied Technology Council (ATC) agreed that the best way to develop the required data was to draw on the experience and judgement of seasoned earthquake engineers. Accordingly a panel of senior level specialists in earthquake engineering was established to develop consensus damage and loss estimates. The expert panel estimated the probability of damage to a range of structure types. The standard damage descriptions used and the associated damage factors are shown in Table 1. The damage factor (also commonly known as damage ratio) is the ratio of the cost of repairing the damage to cost of replacing the structure. Table 1 - ATC-13 Damage States and Damage Factors (Rojahn and Sharpe, 1985)
The outputs of the ATC-13 study included damage probability matrices, an example of which is shown in Table 2. By using such matrices, it is possible to estimate the probability of a structure being in a particular damage state for a given MMI ground shaking intensity, and to estimate the expected dollar loss by multiplying the damage factors for the structure by the estimated replacement value. Estimates were also made of the repair times for given damage states, and number of casualties for given damage states and occupancy rates. The data produced by this project remains the most comprehensive source of damage data, and form the basis of many subsequent loss studies and methodologies.
15
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Table 2 - ATC-13 Damage Probability Matrix
FEMA (2001). Earthquake loss estimation methodology, HAZUS99 Damage models are provided in HAZUS for the full range of building types and other infrastructure. In HAZUS, damage models are in the form of lognormal fragility curves that relate the probability of being in, or exceeding, a damage state for a given earthquake demand parameter (e.g., response spectrum displacement, PGA). Northridge Earthquake Losses Studies have been carried out by Mary Comerio and others on loss ratios from the Northridge earthquake 1994 in California, USA. Some of these results may be of relevance to risk assessment for buildings in Christchurch. These studies also considered contents losses, and are based on insurance claims. In considering these results for New Zealand, care should be taken to recognise differences in insurance industry and the types of buildings. 4.4.2 Buildings and Casualties
HAZUS Figure 5 provides an example of building fragility curves for the four damage states used in the HAZUS methodology. These have been derived by analysing the earthquake response of model building types. Descriptions of structural and non-structural damage states are provided for all of the model building types in HAZUS. Examples for one building type (reinforced concrete moment resisting frames) are given below :
16
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Slight Structural Damage : Flexural or shear type hairline cracks in some beams and columns near joints or within joints. Moderate Structural Damage : Most beams and columns exhibit hairline cracks. In ductile frames some of the frame elements have reached yield capacity indicated by larger flexural cracks and some concrete spalling. Non-ductile frames may exhibit larger shear cracks and spalling. Extensive Structural Damage : Some of the frame elements have reached their ultimate capacity indicated in ductile frames by large flexural cracks, spalled concrete and buckled main reinforcement; non-ductile frame elements may have suffered shear failures or bond failures at reinforcement splices, or broken ties or buckled main reinforcement in columns which may result in partial collapse. Complete Structural Damage : Structure has collapsed or is in imminent danger of collapse due to brittle failure of non-ductile frame elements or loss of frame stability. Approximately 20% (low-rise), 15% ( mid-rise) or 10% (high-rise) of the total area of the building with complete damage is expected to have collapsed.
Figure 5 - Example HAZUS Fragility Curves for Reinforced Concrete Framed Buildings
17
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 The estimated damage (i.e., damage state for model building type for a given level of ground shaking) is used in conjunction with other models that are provided in the methodology to estimate : 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. casualties due to structural damage, including fatalities; monetary losses due to building damage (i.e. cost of repairing or replacing damaged buildings and their contents); monetary losses resulting from building damage and closure (e.g., losses due to business interruption); social impacts (e.g., loss of shelter); and other economic and social impacts.
The building damage predictions may also be used to study expected damage patterns in a given region for different scenario earthquakes (e.g., to identify the most vulnerable building types, or the areas expected to have the most damaged buildings). Dowrick, et al. Various Dowrick and his colleagues have analysed insurance claim records for the 1931 Hawkes Bay, 1942 Wairarapa, 1986 Inangahua and 1987 Edgecumbe earthquakes in New Zealand. They have used the data to calculate the damage ratio as a function of MM intensity for a range of building types and ground conditions. The damage ratio is the cost of damage to a building divided by the replacement value of the building. The data from these studies are very important as they provide the most robust empirically derived information from New Zealand data, as opposed to expert opinion (eg ATC-13) or theoretically (eg HAZUS) derived damage or loss models. However, the range of building types covered by the data is limited. Works Consultancy Services (1995). Earthquake Risk Assessment Studies Opus International Consultants (Works Consultancy Services, 1995) assessed the damage and losses to buildings in the Wellington Region, and estimated deaths and injuries, for selected earthquake scenarios. The methodology that was developed for the studies was in accordance with the state-of-the-art of the time including the forerunner of HAZUS (NIBS, 1994). The geographic models for the studies were built up from Valuation Roll Number areas. The analyses were done with spreadsheets, not GIS. The building damage models were specifically developed for New Zealand construction types, based on data from Dowrick, ATC-13 and other sources. The number of buildings, their floor areas and construction types were supplied by Quotable Value (QV) New Zealand (Valuation New Zealand). Replacement costs were calculated from construction
18
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 cost rates. Drive past surveys were undertaken in a sample of suburbs to supplement the QV construction type data. Damages from fire following earthquake were included. Population data used as a basis of the casualty estimates were obtained from Department of Statistics census data. From this data, it was possible to directly calculate the night-time population in each roll area and the daytime population, for over 15 years old, in each area. The under 15years old population was estimated from consideration of the school populations. A table of casualty rates versus building construction type and damage state was developed from NIBS (1994) and University of Cambridge data (Spence, 1994), for estimating injuries, deaths and entrapments. The outputs of the studies were: Numbers of buildings in each damage state (none, light, moderate, extensive, complete). Costs of repairing earthquake damage to buildings. Expected damage to critical facilities (hospitals, police stations, fire stations, CDHQ). Number of casualties. Maps showing the geographical distribution of these damages and losses. The results of these studies have been used extensively, and in particular for earthquake preparedness planning. One limitation with the methodology used is that it produced nominally mean estimates of damage and losses, with only a general indication given of the likely variation from the mean in any particular event due to uncertainty. EQC Minerva Model The Earthquake Commission (EQC) had a computer model developed, to allow it to predict and plan for insurance losses for the portfolio of assets covered by the EQC scheme. The EQC model is known as Minerva, and combines a geographical information system, a hazard model and a dynamic financial analysis model (Middleton, 2002). An outline of the insurance loss model is given by Shephard et al (2002). The model uses an approach similar to that shown on Figure 1, and uses the Quotable Value Database, EQC Building Costs Database and an Aon Soils Database. The earthquake loss system derives losses based on earthquake sources, a variety of attenuation models, and building damage vulnerability models (comprising loss tables for different building types and earthquake intensities and statistical distribution of loss). It should be noted that this primarily covers residential buildings in New Zealand which are covered by EQC.
19
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Estimating Risks from Fire Following Earthquake (2002) The New Zealand Fire Service commissioned GNS to investigate the risk of post earthquake fires. A GIS model containing property and valuation data for Wellington was shown to be a useful platform for modelling the spread of post-earthquake fire in the urban setting. Two approaches were investigated, one static and one dynamic. The static approach relied on a simple buffering technique to define potential burn-zones that are sampled randomly to give estimates of losses. Repeated sampling was used to assess the probability of exceedance of various levels of loss as a function of the number of ignitions and the spacing between buildings. The dynamic approach used a cellular automaton technique for determining both the rate and extent of fire spread in response to a wide range of factors including wind, radiation, sparking, branding, and individual separations of buildings. 4.4.3 Lifelines Studies
Lifelines studies have been carried out in a number of cities and regions in New Zealand starting with Wellington, to consider the potential for damage to lifelines in earthquakes and other hazards, and understand the interdependencies. These studies were carried out at a high level to understand the potential damage to lifelines largely based on the expert judgement of engineering professionals, based on their knowledge. These include studies for : Wellington (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1991) Christchurch (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1997) Auckland Hawkes Bay Invercargill These studies nevertheless provided the impetus for further assessment of the risk from earthquakes and other natural hazards, and implementation of mitigation measures. 4.4.4 Water Supply
ORourke and Liu (2001) ORourke and Liu have considered the theoretical response of pipelines to ground deformation. However because of the complexities of the ground motions, the soil-pipe interaction and pipeline behaviour, it is not practicable to estimate network damage rates from these analyses. Damage rates are therefore based primarily on empirical evidence (earthquake damage data), tempered with engineering judgement and sometimes by analytical formulation.
20
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 American Lifelines Alliance (2001). Seismic Fragility Formulations for Water Systems The American Lifelines Alliance has prepared fragility curves for buried pipelines, water tanks, tunnels and canals. These are based in part upon a large volume of earthquake damage data that was assembled for that study. These are the most comprehensive and soundly based models for water systems in particular and pipelines in general. Data are available from the 1995 Kobe, 1994 Northridge, 1989 Loma Prieta, 1983 HihonkaiChubu, 1971 San Fernando and 1906 San Francisco earthquakes principally. Even so there is not a great deal of data available, and even that has inconsistencies in the way that numbers of repairs and the demands (PGV and PGD) were recorded. Typically damage survey compilations are performed by third parties some time after the water system has been restored. Repair records by field crews are commonly used to ascertain damage counts. Since the main objective of the repair crews is to restore supply as rapidly as possible, documenting damage is of secondary importance. As a result, the damage estimates have some inaccuracies, including omitted repair records, vague damage descriptions, multiple repairs at a single site combined into one record and two visits (e.g. temporary and permanent repair) to one site counted as two repairs. Unfortunately, this inaccuracy is inherent in all damage surveys, is likely to vary significantly from earthquake to earthquake, and is impossible to quantify. These uncertainties need to be kept in mind when interpreting the results of loss analyses based on these data. The fragility curves developed by the American Lifelines Alliance and others take into consideration the data and lessons from these earthquake events. Opus International Consultants (2002). Earthquake Loss Assessment for Wellington Region Wholesale Water Pipelines A probabilistic assessment was made of the financial loss that the Wellington Regional Council is exposed to from damage to its wholesale water supply pipeline network caused by an earthquake on the Wellington Fault. The damage models for the buried pipe were expressed as a repair rate per unit length of pipe, as a function of wave passage (peak ground velocity) or ground failure (permanent ground deformation). These were derived from the American Lifelines Alliance data (ALA, 2001). 4.4.5 Telecommunications Networks
Schiff AJ (ed)(1998). Proceedings of the Workshop on Performance Criteria for Telecommunication Services Under Earthquake Conditions These proceedings provide useful data on the earthquake performance of telecommunications networks. They identify several measures to characterise communications systems performance in earthquakes. The performance of the overall system will depend on the performance of various sub-systems and components in the
21
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 telecommunications network. The workshop also addressed the key issues to help improve earthquake performance. Work Consultancy Services (1996) Estimated Earthquake Damage to Telecom New Zealands Outside Plant Opus (Works Consultancy Services) estimated the damage to the Telecom New Zealands telecommunications network in the Wellington Region. These were based on damage models for buried and pole mounted cables that were developed from earthquake damage data. The damage assessment for the telecommunication cables were based on the expected ground shaking from earthquakes and more importantly the level of ground damage due to the earthquakes considered. Permanent ground deformation was assessed based on the potential for liquefaction and consequent lateral spreading as well as the potential for fault rupture and earthquake induced slope failures, which were derived from regional hazard maps and consideration of ground conditions in representative sub-areas. This then enabled the assessment of the damage to these assets by developing appropriate fragility relationships. 4.4.6 Road Networks
International literature on road risk assessment was summarised by Brabhaharan et al (2001). Relevant and particularly recent literature are summarised below. Bridges The National Institute of Standards and Technology (1992) held a US-Japan workshop in 1991 on earthquake disaster prevention for lifeline systems. The section on transportation lifelines concentrated on bridges, with reports on Caltrans seismic retrofit program in the USA (Maroney and Gates, 1992), and the seismic inspection and strengthening program in Japan (Kawashima et al, 1992). There have also been several reports and papers published on bridge seismic screening, prioritisation and retrofit. Transit New Zealand (1998) published a seismic screening procedure for state highway bridges based on the methodology developed by Opus International Consultants (1998). The bridges along New Zealands state highways have been screened systematically, and the bridges were prioritised by Opus for further assessment on the basis of the screening (Opus International Consultants, 2002). Following on from the screening programme, the seismic performance of some bridges has been assessed in further detail. Basoz and Kiremidjian (1995) proposed a more network based approach to the assessment of bridges and demonstrated the use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) for bridge prioritisation. The use of GIS has facilitated the combination of seismicity, bridge vulnerability and traffic origin-destination information, to assess the risk. This allowed them to consider the effect of the seismic performance of bridges on the road network (Basoz and Kiremidjian, 1997).
22
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Road Network Nozaki and Sugita (2000) considered the traffic demand from post-earthquake emergency disaster recovery activities and the potential for damage to network links in assessing the network, using a parameter termed structural performance index. They illustrate the use of this model to assess the effectiveness of structural (retrofit) and non-structural (traffic control) measures. Chunguang and Huiying (2000) presented an assessment of the reliability of a road network by considering the probability of damage to various components of the network using a Monte Carlo simulation. They demonstrated the use of this approach in considering the location of emergency service resources, such as ambulances. Henrickson et al (1980) considered losses to users from earthquake damaged road networks. They assessed a net user benefit or the value of the transportation network to users as the difference between the total user benefit and the cost of the trip. The effect of disruption from an earthquake was assessed as a decrease in the total net user benefit. Hence the total loss from the earthquake was assessed as : total loss = repair or replacement cost + loss in user benefits This together with a component damage probability matrix (earthquake damaged road link capacity and the associated probability of damage states for different earthquake intensities) was used to derive total cost of earthquake damage. This was then compared with the retrofit cost for that component. Werner et al (1997) proposed seismic risk analysis of a highway system to estimate the loss from earthquakes. The use of GIS was suggested, with the following four modules : System module with network and traffic data. Hazards module with seismicity, topography and soils data. Component module with structural, functionality and loss / repair cost data. Socio-economic module with loss, emergency response and societal effects data. They demonstrated this model using a simplified deterministic analysis for four earthquake scenarios (considering only the ground shaking effects) for a section of the road network in Memphis, Tennessee, USA, and considering only bridges on the road network. MINUTP traffic forecasting software was used to assess traffic impact. Only direct losses (repair cost) and traffic disruption costs were considered. Gordon et al (1997) outlined a framework for assessing the total economic impact from the effect of earthquakes on transportation (bridges only considered), using input/output models. They included the change in traffic demand after the earthquake.
23
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Augusti et al (1994) described the use of a dynamic programming optimisation procedure to assess the reliability (that is maintaining connection between origin and destination), evaluate optimal intervention (retrofit of bridges) and reduce the seismic risks to highway networks. The method allowed intervention (retrofit) to be distributed for a given amount of total resources, to maximise the reliability. Opus International Consultants (1999) carried out a risk analysis for Upper Hutt City Councils rural road network comprising the Akatarawa, Whitemans, Kaitoke and Moonshine Valley areas (Brabhaharan, 2000). A risk management framework was developed for the study based on hazard characterisation, loss estimation and riskeconomic analysis with the aid of a GIS based model. The study considered all natural hazards, and characterised and mapped the hazards and the potential impact on the roads. The analysis comprised an assessment of the total economic costs, which were derived as : total economic costs = damage reinstatement costs + traffic disruption costs The analyses took into consideration the probabilities of various intensities of each hazard. In this instance, earthquake and storm hazards were the dominant hazards, and consequent liquefaction, slope failure, erosion and flooding were also considered. Dalziell et al (1999) carried out a study of the hazards affecting the road network in the Central North Island of New Zealand. They considered the state highway network in the area, and assessed the risk to the Desert Road section of State Highway 1. Computer aided traffic analysis using a SATURN model was used to consider the impact on traffic using the road network. The study included consideration of volcanic eruption, earthquakes, snow and ice as well as traffic accidents. Brabhaharan et al (2001) developed a GIS based approach for the assessment of the risk to road networks and a systematic approach for the management of the risk. This was further developed by Brabhaharan & Moynihan (2002) who presented methods of implementation of risk management in the New Zealand context. This approach has been successfully applied to assess the risk to road networks in New Zealand (Brabhaharan, 2002 and 2004). In particular, the application to the Wellington Road Network has enabled the development of systematic risk management and implementation. The approach developed by Brabhaharan et al (2001) would be a useful approach for assessing the risk to the road network, as it covers the risk to the whole road network, and the results are readily suited to further assessment of risk management. 4.5 Earthquake Risk Studies Undertaken for Christchurch and Canterbury The Earthquake Hazard in Christchurch (Elder et al, 1991) presented a detailed evaluation of the earthquake hazards in Christchurch, and also included a brief overview of the potential damage that may affect structures, housing, water supply, sewerage reticulation, drainage, transport and energy supply.
24
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Christchurch Seismic Loss Study (Soils & Foundations, 1991) presents an early study of potential earthquake losses for Christchurch, based on the understanding of the earthquake hazard at that time and total building stock values classified into building type from the valuation department. The report estimated an average annual loss of $ 42 Million (in 1989 dollar values) for structural damage to buildings, with losses exceeding $ 1 billion (in 1989 dollar values) for a 200-year return period earthquake. Canterbury Regional Council Infrastructural Assets Risk Assessment (Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 1994) reported the seismicity, areas of liquefaction and damage ratios for Canterbury Region, but did not actually provide an estimate of the risk or losses. Risks & Realities, a report of the Christchurch Engineering Lifelines Group (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1997) presents a multi-disciplinary approach to the vulnerability of lifelines to natural hazards. It presents a qualitative assessment of the potential damage to drainage, sewer system, water supply, petroleum products, electricity supply, telecommunications, transport and emergency services. It also provides some maps showing the distribution of expected damage. It provides a good overview of potential damage from a variety of hazards, but only in a qualitative manner. Soils & Foundations (1999) Lower Avon River Lateral Spread, Damage Costs and Mitigation considered the impact of liquefaction and consequent lateral spread in the Lower Avon River banks on residential properties, damage costs and potential liquefaction mitigation costs. This was an area-specific study confined to a small area of Christchurch. LAPP Fund : Earthquake Risk to Councils Assets in Wellington and Christchurch ( Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences , 2002) presents an assessment of the loss to assets owned by the Council only. The fragility models used for the assessment of the loss are not presented in the report. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (2003). Review of Effects of Liquefaction Induced Differential Settlements on Residential Dwellings in Christchurch. The report reviews a student report by Kirsti Maria Carr on the potential damage to houses due to liquefaction. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (2005). earthquakes affecting Christchurch. 4.6 Summary of Literature Review A review of relevant literature has been searched, sourced and reviewed as part of this project. The focus of the review has been to identify sources of information and techniques that would help develop a methodology for the earthquake risk assessment for Christchurch. HAZUS provides a general framework for the assessment of the risk from earthquakes, buildings, casualties and lifelines. This framework is applicable for the earthquake risk assessment for Christchurch, with variations to suit the information available for the study. Estimated damage and casualties from
25
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 The available hazard information and the approach for modelling hazards are presented in detail and discussed in Section 6. Fragility relationships are available from HAZUS, ATC13 as well as data from the research into New Zealand earthquake damage and selected overseas data such as from Northridge. The Wellington study on 1995 still provides a useful example for a risk assessment for the built infrastructure and casualties. The recent research into damage from fire following an earthquake, has been carried out by Victoria University and the Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, and could be useful to better assess the damage from fire. Lifelines studies across New Zealand, including the Christchurch Study (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1997) have been high level studies based on expert opinion, and have highlighted the importance of earthquake effects. The American Lifelines Association fragility relations provide a useful basis for assessment of the damage to water supply pipelines, and recent studies by Opus International Consultants in Wellington provide an example of its application for the New Zealand, and are relevant for the Christchurch study. Schiff AJ (ed)(1998) provides useful information on the assessment of performance of telecommunication systems, and the Works Consultancy Services (1996) study provides an example of risk assessment to Telecom assets in Wellington. The HAZUS based assessment of the risk to bridges and the Brabhaharan et al (2001) approach to assessment of the risk to road networks provide a useful basis for road networks, particularly as illustrated by its successful application to the Wellington Road network by Brabhaharan (2004). Previous risk studies for Christchurch have considered some aspects of damage and loss to the city, but not in a comprehensive manner.
26
5
5.1
Inventory Data
General Approach Research into potential sources, availability and nature of data for buildings, engineering lifeline assets and demographic information has been carried out for the Christchurch area. ECan limited the lifeline infrastructure investigations to water, roads, electricity and telecommunications. Other assets such as the rail network, ports and wastewater infrastructure were not investigated but could be included in the earthquake risk study. The research was undertaken by contacting infrastructure managers at the Christchurch City Council (CCC), utility and telecommunications companies. Discussions were also held with people responsible for maintaining and updating information at these organisations. The information available is predominantly stored in databases, GIS systems, asset management plans and seismic investigation reports. Details of these are included in the sections below. Another key source of information is the engineering lifelines study for Christchurch that was undertaken in the mid nineties. The results are summarised in the publication Risks and Realities (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1997). This study represents a major collation of lifeline information that was provided by various organisations in a form suitable for risk assessments.
5.2
Buildings The CCC and commercial organisations such as Quotable Value (QV) hold information on properties and buildings. The council databases have been populated with information from: Building permits prior to 1992; Building consent information since 1992; Property information supplied by the former Government Valuation Department. Up until 1998, the Government Valuation Department undertook property valuations and maintained detailed records of property information. However since the enactment of the Rating Valuations Act 1998, responsibility for property valuations was transferred to local councils and detailed land and building data held by the Government Valuation Department was transferred to the local councils. Information is generally available at property level or mesh block level. Mesh blocks are predefined areas that contain information for all properties within the mesh block boundaries. The number of properties within a mesh block can vary from a few up to hundreds of properties. The mesh blocks for Christchurch are shown in Appendix A.
27
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Typical property information that is available from commercial or council databases include : Residential/commercial/industrial classification; Building Age (decade of construction); Wall construction material (wood, brick, concrete etc); Property use (residential, office, hotel, retail, mixed, storage, education etc); Numbers of properties; Land and building valuations. The three important factors for classifying the earthquake performance of buildings are: building structure, age, and number of storeys. The age and number of storeys can be readily obtained from commercial or council databases, however the building structure classification (i.e. unreinforced masonry, steel frame, concrete frame) is not generally held on any database. The wall material classification and age of the building can be used to infer the likely building structure with reasonable accuracy. A small random sample of commercial properties could be inspected to verify the validity of the assumptions. CCC has a register of earthquake risk buildings. The data is stored on a GIS system that is used to prepare LIM reports. The council could supply a spreadsheet file with a property identifier. Information on seismic upgrades to commercial buildings is not available on the Council databases. Seismic strengthening of earthquake prone buildings will generally improve the structural performance of a building in a seismic event, above the level assessed based on the building classification only. Access to the CCC database is typically for in-house staff only, and much of the data and GIS information is not available in the public domain. Release of data for the ECan earthquake risk study may require approval by a number of people at the CCC and conditions of use may apply to data that is deemed potentially sensitive in the public domain. ECan and CCC work closely together on many related projects and regularly exchange information from their databases. Therefore ECan would need to play an active role in assisting the risk study group with obtaining data from CCC through database searches
28
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 and GIS layers. Some costs may apply to CCC staff that spend time clarifying information requests and processing data to provide it in a suitable format for risk study use. Some information may already be held by Environment Canterbury, who could provide the data for the study. Alternatively, property information can be obtained from a commercial organisation, such as QV. QV hold similar information to the council databases (with the exception of the earthquake prone building register). The benefits of using QV are that they will provide the information in a timely manner and reduce the negotiations and approvals necessary to obtain data from the CCC. 5.3 Roads 5.3.1 Local Roads
The road network model can be developed from one of the following two sources: Topovector data; RAMM database. Use of Topovector data requires a software licence. The Topovector data would allow the entire road network in the Christchurch City to be modelled in GIS. The geometry is based on 1:50,000 topographic maps. However, the attributes associated with the data are limited and include such characteristics as the number of road lanes and whether the surface is sealed or unsealed. RAMM data could be sourced from the CCC. The RAMM data has a mapping layer that can be exported into other GIS systems. The RAMM data contains all attributes that characterise the road including surface width, seal type, traffic volumes and maintenance history. The RAMM data has several advantages over the Topovector data. One advantage is that the results from the analysis, in the form of GIS layers, can be returned to the council for its own use at a later date, and would be consistent with the data already held by the Council. Another advantage is that the RAMM data contains more attributes that describe the road itself enabling a more robust risk assessment The RAMM database does not hold any information on bridges, retaining walls and culverts. The majority of data and maintenance history for these structures are in hardcopy format. Studies into seismic vulnerabilities of bridges have been completed by CCC and would be made available to the risk study group. The detail to which this study has been carried out is not known at this stage. Bridge and retaining wall drawings and specifications would also be available to allow the risk study group to briefly assess and classify the seismic performance if required.
29
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 5.3.2 State Highways
State highways 1, 73, 74 and 75 pass through the Christchurch city area. The highways are owned and maintained by Transit New Zealand (Transit). The RAMM database is used to store information on the highway network. attributes can be exported into a GIS system with RAMM mapping software. Road
Bridge information is held on a separate database. For Transit, Opus has carried out a seismic screening of the state highway bridges in the Christchurch area and the results of this study would be available for the Christchurch risk study. 5.4 Water Supply Networks The key assets for the water supply network are pipes, pumping stations, valves and reservoirs. The CCC stores information on pipes in a GIS system. Pipe attributes including size, length, age and material are also available. The location of pumping stations, major valves and reservoirs can also be linked into a GIS model. An overview of the Water Supply Asset Management Plan 2002 is available on the council website. A detailed copy of the asset management and business continuance plan would be made available to the risk study group. 5.5 Telecommunications Assets Telecom New Zealand Ltd (Telecom) and Telstra Clear Ltd (TelstraClear) have communication networks in Christchurch. Vodafone and Telecom also operate independent cellular phone networks. 5.5.1 Telecom
Telecom uses Small World GIS software to store information on their network assets. Telecoms main assets are exchange buildings, underground communication cables and cell phone towers. Telecom has a policy of not releasing drawings showing the complete underground cable network as this information is commercially sensitive. Telecom has released incomplete or disjointed information for previous lifelines studies. Most of the drawings were provided in a CAD format and prepared by in-house Telecom draughtsmen. It may be more difficult to obtain the same quality of information for this risk study as Telecom no longer have the in-house drafting capability to provide such services. Small World GIS compatibility software is available to convert layers and attribute data into appropriate formats for use in other GIS systems. However the ability to provide incomplete or disjointed cable network information from a GIS system may be difficult. Another alternative would be to trace printed outputs from the Small World GIS system using CAD. The CAD layer could then be imported into the GIS model for Christchurch.
30
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Any network information used in the risk study would need prior sign off with Telecom. 5.5.2 TelstraClear
The majority of the TelstraClear network has been installed over the last ten years. The majority of communications equipment is likely to be restrained with seismic restraints and exchange buildings designed to modern standards. Information on the TelstraClear network is stored on a GIS system. TelstraClear have indicated they would be willing to provide information with a lifelines confidentiality agreement. Exchange buildings, cabinets and major underground cable routes would be able to be incorporated into a GIS model. TelstraClear have also provided a summary document of a recent civil defence exercise that includes information on major cable routes, exchange buildings, vulnerabilities and links to other providers such as Vodafone and BCL. 5.5.3 Vodafone
Vodafones main assets include cellular towers and small exchange buildings. The majority of the Vodafone network has been installed over the last ten to fifteen years, so most of the network has be designed to modern seismic standards. The tower structures are not susceptible to seismic loading. However the tower foundations will be susceptible to earthquake induced ground settlement and landslides. Underground fibre optic cables are also prone to damage from earthquake settlement. Vodafone exchange buildings are generally small single storey buildings with communication cabinets. Most cabinets are generally secured by seismic restraints that are designed to the latest earthquake standards. 5.6 Electricity Assets Orion NZ Ltd (Orion) owns and operates the local supply network in the Christchurch region. Orion receives power via the national grid, which is owned and operated by Transpower NZ Ltd (Transpower). 5.6.1 National Grid
Transpowers asset information is available in a form that can be imported into a GIS platform. Transpowers main assets are substations, transmission lines and communication towers. Transpower has undertaken seismic mitigation work at their substations over the last fifteen years. There are four substations located within the Christchurch city area. The
31
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 substations have switching cabinets housed in buildings and switchyards that contain high voltage equipment such as circuit breakers and transformers. The transmission and communication tower foundations are susceptible to earthquake induced ground settlement and landslides. Earthquake induced damage to transmission lines located away from Christchurch city area that are closer to the earthquake epicentre may affect the power supply to Christchurch city. This risk study will only consider the key electricity supply assets within the Christchurch city area. 5.6.2 Local Supply Network
Orions main assets are district substations and supply cables. The substations have switching cabinets housed in buildings and switchyards that contain high voltage equipment such as circuit breakers and transformers. The electricity cables throughout the city are a mixture of overhead lines and underground cables. Orion has a GIS system that holds information on the electricity network. A copy of the 2005 asset management plan is available on the Orion website. The asset management plan has a section on risk management that summarises the following topics: Seismic strengthening of substation buildings; Importance of electricity supply to other lifeline services; Key assets that could lead to catastrophic supply failure; Recent earthquake mitigation works. Orion has provided a summary of reports relating to recent seismic investigation work (a selection of which are listed below). The reports would be made available to the risk study group. Resource Management Act - Risk Assessment, 1993; Resource Management Act Reduction of Risk Exposure, 1993; Outdoor Pad Mounted Transformers Survey, 1998; Dallington 66kV Cable Liquefaction Hazard at the Avon River Crossing, 1998; Substation Liquefaction Hazard, 1998; Assessment of Overhead LV Distribution Network in Christchurch Metropolitan Area, 2000; Christchurch Urban Network Full Scale Pole Testing Report, 2002; Seismic Risk Assessment Transpower Christchurch Substations, 2002.
32
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 5.7 Demographic Information Demographic information is available from the Statistics New Zealand 2001 Census data. Information that will be useful in a risk analysis study includes: Average number of people per household (night time figures only); Average number of people employed in the Christchurch Central Business District. The census data can be grouped into appropriate land areas such as the statistical area unit or mesh block. The mesh block is the smallest unit of area for which population data is available. 5.8 Geographical Information Systems Data Format Property information is stored in the CCC GIS databases in two forms. Firstly the property parcels are stored in a polygon theme/layer with each having a key field landparcel_id. Secondly the addresses of properties are stored in a point theme/layer. Non-spatial data covering the items of interest to the CCC are also stored in relational databases. These contain data such as capital values but not necessarily a propertys condition, age or materials. Any of this non-spatial data can be spatially linked to the parcels polygon theme/layer through the common key field landparcel_id. Actual building outlines are also stored in the CCC GIS databases but they contain no key fields or useful attributes. The building centroids could be used to define the parcel-based data to a more refined location to that of the parcel centroid. Water, wastewater and stormwater are stored in line theme/layers and hold attributes such as pipe age, material, and diameter. The information can be readily incorporated with other GIS themes/layers to provide a basis for further data manipulation and spatial analysis. The resultant spatial modelling of the data provides a basis for the risk/hazard analysis. Much of this information is also held by Environment Canterbury, either generally (land parcel data) or for restricted use in the consents section (water, wastewater, stormwater data). 5.9 Summary of Asset Inventory Data Sources of asset data for the study have been explored by contacting the relevant Councils and organisations. This indicates that the information required for the risk assessment is likely to be available. Building data is available from Environment Canterbury, Christchurch City Council or Quotable Value, and the most effective means of obtaining the data and the cost needs to be confirmed.
33
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 The power supply companies have shown a willingness to supply information. Telecom New Zealand has indicated that they would make information available, but this would be limited for commercial sensitivity reasons. The information Telecom is willing to make available for the study needs to be confirmed. TelstraClear have indicated that would provide the information. Information on water supply would be available from CCC and they also hold information on local roads. The information on state highways is available from Transit New Zealand.
34
6
6.1
Earthquake Hazard Information Review

Introduction The source, availability and nature of earthquake hazard information have been reviewed, to assess the appropriateness for use in the earthquake risk study. A comprehensive list of earthquake hazard information held by ECan was collated and relevant publications have been obtained and used in this review. Other literature of earthquake hazard in Christchurch has also been sourced and reviewed.
6.2
Earthquake Hazard Literature 6.2.1 Ground Shaking
The Earthquake Hazard in Christchurch (Elder et al, 1991) presented a detailed evaluation of the earthquake hazards in Christchurch, and contributed to a significant advance in the knowledge of the earthquake hazards in the city. It considered earthquake fault sources, a prediction of the intensity of ground shaking (with associated probabilities and recurrence intervals) and spectra. In addition, it also considered the influence of the geology of the area, the potential for amplification of shaking, liquefaction susceptibility and earthquake induced slope failures. It also presented some generic comments on the potential damage to buildings and infrastructure. However, this did not provide a formal assessment of the risk. Natural Hazards in Canterbury (Canterbury Regional Council, 1994) summarised natural hazards affecting Canterbury. A section of the report presented the seismic hazards including historical earthquakes, the faults systems capable of causing earthquakes and a summary of the outcomes of seismic hazards assessments. Risks & Realities, a report of the Christchurch Engineering Lifelines Group (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1997) presents a multi-disciplinary approach to the vulnerability of lifelines to natural hazards. This comprehensive report only provides a summary of the earthquake hazards affecting Christchurch. The report notes that the likelihood of surface fault rupture in Christchurch is remote given that there are few geological indications of surface fault traces. Faults close to Christchurch are postulated to be capable of maximum magnitudes of 6.6, whereas faults in the foothills region can give magnitude 7.5 earthquakes, and the more distant Alpine Fault can give magnitude 8 to 8.5 earthquakes. It discusses three potential sources of earthquakes: 1. 2. 3. Moderately large to large earthquake in the Canterbury Foothills or North Canterbury A very large earthquake on the Alpine Fault Earthquakes centred close to Christchurch
35
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 The first two scenarios were considered to be capable of causing MM VIII to IX shaking intensities on the Modified Mercalli Scale, and the third MM VIII intensity. The lifeline study adopted a 150-year return period earthquake with shaking intensities of MM VIII IX over most of Christchurch. There was disagreement between researchers as to the expected intensity of shaking in a 150-year return period earthquake, though these were considered to be of less significance in the assessment of damage to lifelines. The report notes the potential effect of the deep relatively soft sediments and variability of the soil profile on the ground shaking, and points out that the shaking intensities could be increased by 0 to 2 MMI units compared to bedrock, or 0 to 1 MMI units compared to average ground (shallow soil). The potential for ground shaking amplification is classified into three zones (Zone 1 bedrock at shallow depths, Zone 2 sediments less than 50 m deep and Zone 3 sediments 50 m to 800 m deep). The Probability and Consequences of the Next Alpine Fault Earthquake (Yetton et al, 1998) presented the outcomes of further paleoseismic investigations and research into the age of forests along the Alpine Fault corridor in the West Coast of the South Island. The report concluded that the last two earthquakes along the Alpine Fault appear to have occurred in about 1717 AD and 1620 AD. Based on the information available including these outcomes, Yetton et al (1998) estimated the probability of an earthquake involving rupture on the Alpine fault over the next 50 years to be 65 15%, and 85 10% over the next 100 years. Earthquake Source Identification and Characterisation (Pettinga et al, 1998) collated and presented the potential earthquake source information relevant to the Canterbury Region. This collective study by the University of Canterbury, Geotech Consulting Limited and the Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, presents the locations and characteristics of known faults in and around the Canterbury Region, classified into eight domains. The report notes that while instrumentally recorded seismicity beneath the Canterbury Plains indicates active earth deformation, and the highest recorded level of shaking MM 7 to 8 in Christchurch was recorded during the 1869 New Brighton Earthquake (with an inferred epicentre immediately offshore from Christchurch), there are no known faults or sources of earthquake in the Canterbury Plains including Christchurch. The thick alluvium, complex subsurface structures and poor data constrain the identification of earthquake sources, and there remains the potential for hidden earthquake sources. Recurrence intervals for the Alpine Fault rupture over the past 1500 years vary considerably, from 100 years to more than 380 years, with an average of about 250 years and standard deviation of 96 years. North of Christchurch, the Porters Pass - Amberley Fault Zone is assessed to have a recurrence interval of about 1300 years to 2000 years, and is thought to be capable of a magnitude 7 to 7.5 earthquake. Information of the North Canterbury fault and fold belt is noted to be limited. Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment and Earthquake Scenarios for the Canterbury Region and Historical Earthquakes in Christchurch (Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 1999) is a
36
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 follow on study that presented a review of historical earthquakes in the region, and a probabilistic seismic hazard assessment. Christchurch is noted to have felt MM 6 or greater shaking in nine historical earthquakes, and their characteristics are summarised in Table 3 below : Table 3 Historical Earthquakes Causing MM 6 or Greater in Christchurch
Year of Occurrence 1869 1870 1881 1888 1901 1922 1929 1929 1994 Castle Hill North Canterbury Cheviot Motunau Arthurs Pass Buller Arthurs Pass Earthquake Name Christchurch Magnitude 5? 5.5 ? 6.0 ? 7 7.3 Ms 6.9 Ms 6.4 Ms 7.01 Ms 7.8 ML 6.7 Arthurs Pass Location / Epicentral Distance from Christchurch Very close Addington ?, hidden source ? South of Christchurch, Lake Ellesmere ? Cass ? Hope Fault, west of Hanmer Springs Parnassus Motunau / Scargill Kakapo Fault / Arthurs Pass MM Intensity recorded in Christchurch 7-8 6-7 5-6 5-7 6 6-7 6 5-6 3-6
The report suggests that amplification by about 1 MM unit occurred in Christchurch city in five of these earthquakes in the 1881 Castle Hill, 1888 North Canterbury, 1922 Motunau, 1929 Arthurs Pass, and 1929 Buller earthquakes. The probabilistic seismic hazard analysis carried out as part of that study gives contour maps of peak ground accelerations on average soil sites (Class B) for the Canterbury Region, for return periods of 50 years, 150 years, 475 years and 1000 years. Similar maps for 0.2 s and 1 s spectral accelerations are also included. The peak ground acceleration maps have also been converted into MM intensity maps using an empirical relationship. Tabulated values are also provided for the main towns, and the values for Christchurch are reproduced in Table 4. Deaggregation plots showing the contribution of various earthquake sources to the ground shaking in Christchurch, for annual frequency of exceedance of 0.8g (0.2 s spectral acceleration) and 0.1g (2 s spectral acceleration) are presented in the report. The 0.2 s spectral acceleration is dominated by local M 5 to 6 earthquakes or to some extent by foothills earthquakes of M 7 to 7.2 at distances less than 40 km.
37
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 It is noted that the Alpine Fault has a very small contribution to the 0.2 s spectral acceleration, but makes a significant contribution to the 2 s spectral acceleration in Christchurch. Table 4 Ground Shaking Estimates for Christchurch
Ground Shaking in Christchurch in Average Soil Ground Shaking Parameter 50 years PGA 0.2 s SA 0.5 s SA 1 s SA 2 s SA MM I 0.17 0.37 0.24 0.09 < 0.05 7.5 Return Period 150 years 0.25 0.61 0.35 0.16 0.08 7.99 475 years 0.37 0.97 0.49 0.19 0.12 8.52 1000 years 0.47 1.27 0.60 0.24 0.17 8.82
The expected ground shaking in Christchurch from a local earthquake, a foothills earthquake and an Alpine Fault earthquake are summarised in Table 5. Table 5 Expected Ground Shaking in Christchurch from Earthquake Scenarios
Foothills earthquake on Local earthquake
Ashley, Springbank, Porters Pass-Amberley Faults M 7 to 7.2 closer than 50 km
Alpine Fault earthquake
Magnitude / distance MM Intensity Duration
M 5 to 5.5 closer than 20 km
M 8 at 75 km to 150 km
7, possibly 8 5 s to 10 s
8 30 s
7 to 8 60 s or more
Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment of New Zealand : New Active Fault Data, Seismicity Data, Attenuation Relationships and Methods (Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 2000) presents the results of a probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA) for the whole of New Zealand. This national study gives somewhat lower levels of peak ground accelerations than from the Canterbury study (IGNS, 1999).
38
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Deaggregation plots showing the percentage contribution of different earthquake sources to the ground shaking with different return periods in Christchurch are presented in the report. The deaggregation plots for peak ground accelerations (PGA) with 475 year and 1000 year return periods (reproduced in Figure 6 and Figure 7) and 1 second period spectral accelerations for these return periods (reproduced in Figure 8 and Figure 9) show the significant contribution of the foothills earthquakes (magnitude of about 7 to 7.3) and secondly the local earthquakes (magnitude 5.5 to 6) to the peak ground accelerations. The dominant contribution to higher spectral acceleration motions (1 second period) is from the distant Alpine Fault earthquake (magnitude 8 to 8.5) and the foothills earthquakes (magnitude 7 to 7.3)
Figure 6 - Deaggregation Plot, PGA, for 475 year Recurrence Interval, Christchurch (Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 2000)
Figure 7 - Deaggregation Plot, PGA, for 1000 year Recurrence Interval, Christchurch (Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 2000)
39
Figure 8 - Deaggregation Plot, 1s SA, for 475 year Recurrence Interval, Christchurch (Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 2000)
Figure 9 - Deaggregation Plot, 1 s SA, for 1000 year Recurrence Interval, Christchurch (Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 2000) Environment Canterbury Active Faults Database Manual (Environment Canterbury, 2004) summarises how ECan has compiled and holds information on the active faults in the Canterbury Region. The information includes the location, activity, slip rates, recurrence intervals, rupture length and displacement and potential magnitude of the earthquake that could be caused by its rupture. 6.2.2 Liquefaction Hazard
Guilhem and Berrill (1993) assessed the potential for liquefaction at sixteen key lifeline sites as part of the Christchurch Lifelines Project, and concluded that 12 of the sites appeared susceptible to liquefaction. Soils & Foundations (1996) assessed the potential for liquefaction at six stormwater pump station sites in Christchurch, and concluded that four sites had a high susceptibility, one had moderate susceptibility and one had low susceptibility to liquefaction. It also makes brief comments on the potential damage to the pump stations. Risks& Realities (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1997) highlights the liquefaction hazards in Christchurch, and has mapped liquefaction by classifying the ground shaking
40
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Zone 3 into two liquefaction zones, Zone A high susceptibility (sand between 2 m and 10 m depth), and Zone B moderate susceptibility (silts and sandy silts between 2 m and 5 m depth or deeper). It appears the liquefaction susceptibility has been assessed subjectively based on soil types rather than the potential for liquefaction and consequent ground damage. Soils & Foundations (1998) carried out a study to assess the potential for liquefaction along the Kerrs Reach to Pleasant Point section of the Lower Avon River banks, and concluded that widespread liquefaction and lateral spreading was likely in earthquakes. Soils & Foundations (1999) also considered the impact of liquefaction and consequent lateral spread in the Lower Avon River banks on residential properties, damage costs and potential liquefaction mitigation costs. Soils & Foundations (1999b) also assessed the potential for liquefaction in the Ferrymead Special Planning Zone along the Heathcote River, and concluded that of the 11 sites investigated, 5 had a medium to high probability of liquefaction and lateral spreading in a moderate earthquake (450 year return period) and an additional 3 sites had a similar probability of liquefaction in a large earthquake (1000 year return period). Cassassuce and Berrill (2000) carried out seismic cone tests at various sites around Christchurch and assessed the liquefaction susceptibility at about 20 sites of which 12 had a potential for liquefaction. Carr (2001) considered different methods of estimation of liquefaction-induced settlement and the impact of differential settlements on house designs. The author estimated that a M 7.5 Porters Fault earthquake could lead to liquefaction-induced settlements of the order of 70 mm to 185 mm. Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner (2003) contacted various organisations holding information on ground conditions in the Christchurch area, on behalf of Environment Canterbury and summarise their findings. Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner (2004) report on the outcomes of the Christchurch Liquefaction Study for Environment Canterbury. Liquefaction maps are provided for two groundwater levels, and indicate high, moderate or low liquefaction potential, depending on whether liquefaction is likely in 0.12g, 0.2g or 0.34g earthquake shaking levels. All the liquefaction assessments are based on the Alpine Fault earthquake only. The report also provides liquefaction ground damage maps. 6.2.3 Slope Failure Hazards
Elder et al (1991) presents a discussion on earthquake induced slope failures in the different soil and rock materials in Christchurch, in particular Port Hills. No slope hazard maps are presented. Trangmar (1991) has compiled an Erosion Map of the Port Hills, which indicates slope instability in that area of Christchurch.
41
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Natural Hazards in Canterbury (Canterbury Regional Council, 1994) provides general information on earthquake induced slope failures, and the hazards in the wider Canterbury Region. There is limited information relating to Christchurch, except to note that there is a significant rockfall hazard in the Port Hills, and there is no evidence of large scale failure in the Port Hills loess. Risks & Realities (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1997) presents a brief section on slope hazards and presents slope hazard zones for hill areas, particularly the Port Hills. It shows three hazards zones, 1 low risk, 2 moderate risk and 3 high risk. It only indicates that damage could be triggered by a 1 in 100 year storm, or 1 in 100 or 1 in 150 year earthquake occurring in later winter. 6.2.4 Tsunami Hazards
Tsunamis are a series of very long waves caused by a sudden displacement of the sea by undersea earthquake fault rupture, landslide or volcanic eruption (undersea or flow into sea). Earthquake induced tsunamis can be caused by an undersea fault rupture or consequent landslide. Tsunamis can be locally generated by such events or could be generated at a distance and travel many hundreds or thousands of kilometres to affect coastal areas. The tsunami magnitude could be amplified by the local seabed profile. Most tsunami reports for New Zealand have been associated with distantly generated tsunamis, and these can reach the Christchurch coastline. Natural Hazards in Canterbury (Canterbury Regional Council, 1994) provides a discussion on the tsunami hazards in Canterbury and mainly focuses on the far field tsunamis originating from the South American coast. Risks & Realities (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1997) presents information on Tsunami hazards that could affect Christchurch. The risk of a near field tsunami from active faults off the Christchurch coast is not well understood. Tsunamis can cause catastrophic damage to coastal areas as evident from the South Asian Tsunami of 26 December 2004, which caused severe and widespread damage and loss of life. Following this event, the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management is collating information on tsunami hazards in New Zealand. It would be prudent to review this information, and decide if any further tsunami hazard studies are prudent for Christchurch. This would then provide the basis for a separate future tsunami risk study. The tsunami scenarios for Christchurch are likely to be quite different to the other earthquake scenarios, and a separate study or a separate part to the proposed earthquake risk study would therefore be appropriate.
42
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 6.3 Discussion of Hazard Information The probabilistic seismic hazard study for Canterbury (Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 1999) and for New Zealand (Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 2000) provide a basis for the risk assessment for Christchurch. There are some differences in the results for the two studies in the probabilistic hazards, and this may need to be resolved by discussion with the Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences. However, a scenario approach may be more appropriate for the Christchurch Risk Study (see discussion in Section 7), in which case the differences would not be important for this study. The Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences was asked if there have been any further recent developments that would make the Canterbury Study (Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 1999) out-of-date. It is understood (Mark Stirling pers comm.) that there are no significant changes to the seismicity and probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment since that time. However, it is understood that the PSHA is based on a Poisson distribution for the occurrence of earthquakes, and does not take into account the elapsed time since the last earthquake, which may be significant in the case of the Alpine Fault, where a significant time has elapsed since the last earthquake in relation to the assessed recurrence interval for that fault. However, this is not likely to make a significant difference (<10%) to the seismicity of Christchurch. The Modified Mercalli Intensities from specific earthquake scenarios can be assessed from the earthquake sources identified (Pettinga et al, 1998 and Environment Canterbury, 2004). The intensities would need to be modified to account for the presence of soft and deep soil deposits in Christchurch. In the absence of maps showing the ground class to allow for modification of rock ground motions, this would need to be assumed based on available geological and liquefaction hazard maps. Alternatively a ground class map could be produced to reflect the variation of ground conditions across the city. The ground data collated as part of the Environment Canterbury liquefaction study would provide a valuable resource for the development of ground class. The ECan liquefaction hazard maps (Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner, 2004) would provide a basis for the assessment of ground damage for the estimate of damage to infrastructure. This would need to be extrapolated to cover the potential liquefaction induced ground damage in other earthquake scenarios. The slope hazard maps in Risks & Realities (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1997) is coarse, but given the small area affected could be supplemented by a brief earthquake slope hazard study using topographical contour maps for the area and brief site reconnaissance. 6.4 Additional Hazard Information There is generally good earthquake hazard information for Christchurch. However there are a number of limited areas, where further hazard information would be useful as discussed below:
43
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Ground Shaking There is good information on the seismicity of the Christchurch area. However, it would be useful to develop a ground class map so that changes to the ground shaking due to site and soil conditions can be assessed. The ground class map can be developed using the ground information collated for ECan as part of the liquefaction hazard study. Liquefaction Hazard Comprehensive liquefaction hazard maps have been compiled by Beca (2004) for Environment Canterbury, and would provide the basis for assessing ground damage and consequent damage to infrastructure. The liquefaction maps would need to be extrapolated for other earthquake scenarios to be considered in the risk assessment. Earthquake induced Slope Failure There is limited information on the earthquake induced slope failure hazards for Christchurch. Given the terrain in Christchurch, the slope failure hazards are likely to be confined to local areas, such as Port Hills. It would be prudent to carry out brief exercise to map the earthquake induced slope failure hazards in the Port Hills area, as part of the earthquake risk assessment study. This can be based on topographical, geological maps and reports supplemented by site reconnaissance. Tsunami It would be prudent to review the tsunami hazard information compiled by the Ministry of Civil Defence Emergency Management, and consider what tsunami hazard studies are necessary to assess the risks from tsunami. It is suggested that this could be a separate study to the proposed earthquake risk study.
44
7
7.1
Development of Risk Assessment Methodology for Christchurch

Objectives Environment Canterbury needs to know the likely impact and consequences of a major earthquake on Christchurch. This will allow it to fulfil its hazard mitigation and emergency management functions. The primary purpose of the risk assessment is therefore to provide information on the impact and consequences of earthquakes on Christchurch.
7.2
Risk Assessment Context The Australian / New Zealand Standard, AS/NZS 4360 : 2004, Risk Management (Standards New Zealand, 2004), defines risk as the chance of something happening that will have an impact on objectives. The risk is often measured in terms of the combination of the consequences of an event and their likelihood. The risk management process is set out in the standard and is reproduced in Figure 10.
Figure 10 - Risk Management Process (Standards New Zealand, 2004)
45
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 In the earthquake risk study context, risk is the damage and other consequences on the built environment, natural environment and on the society in Christchurch, due to earthquakes. The risk information is required to enable Environment Canterbury to fulfil its hazard mitigation and emergency management functions. For the earthquake risk study, the consequences are the: Damage losses (repair or replacement cost) Consequential direct losses (e.g. traffic disruption) Indirect social and economic costs This risk study focuses mainly on the damage losses and some consequential direct losses. The indirect consequences such as economic losses and social disruption are much more difficult to quantify and are not considered in this study. The indirect losses may be considered separately as a follow-on study based on the results of this study. There are ongoing research initiatives to develop methodologies to assess the socio-economic consequences of earthquakes and their impact on the built environment as discussed in Section 3.3. For risk mitigation and emergency management, it is important to know the distribution of the damage and losses, and not just the total losses, to facilitate the planning of risk reduction and response. A spatial approach to the risk assessment is therefore considered to be more beneficial. 7.3 Scenario and Probabilistic Approaches Earthquake risk assessments are commonly carried out for selected earthquake scenarios (e.g. Alpine Fault event) or for selected probability levels (uniform hazard levels)(e.g. 10% probability in 50 years). The probabilistic or uniform hazard approach is useful for economic analyses of the impacts of earthquake risk and risk mitigation options. A scenario approach is useful to assess the impact to a city or region in a selected event, so that emergency response and recovery measures can be planned. It would also be valuable in assessing the performance of the lifelines or assets against desired performance expectations or levels of service in selected earthquake events. Given the context of this study for Environment Canterbury, and taking into consideration their objectives with respect to emergency management and hazard or risk mitigation, a scenario approach is considered to be the most appropriate, as it would define the extent of damage and losses in a particular earthquake event. The scenario approach would be valuable in planning for responding to potential casualties. This approach was used for the Wellington Risk Study carried out by Opus for the Wellington Regional Council (Works Consultancy Services, 1995).
46
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 The scenario approach would also be useful for lifeline asset owners to assess the overall impact to their assets from particular events and the consequential effect on the services provided to the community or customers. This would also allow asset owners to set levels of service or performance criteria and assess whether these would be met under different plausible earthquake scenarios. However, a probabilistic approach based on a range of uniform earthquake hazard levels (say 10% in 50 years) would be useful to assess the financial benefits or justification for a particular level of performance or for assessing risk reduction measures. The previous risk assessments carried out for Christchurch have been carried out on the basis of a probabilistic risk assessment approach (Soils & Foundations, 1991 and Institute of Geological Sciences, 2002), and while they could have been useful for insurance purposes, they have not provided the information necessary for Environment Canterbury to fulfil its emergency management functions. Given that the primary purpose of this risk study is to provide ECan with information required for it to fulfil its emergency management and risk reduction functions, a scenario approach is considered to be the most appropriate. This will also be useful for asset owners such as Christchurch City Council, and could be later supplemented by a probabilistic risk assessment based on uniform hazard levels if considered appropriate. A separate study using tsunami scenarios should also be considered. 7.4 Spatial Assessment Approach The asset information should be obtained in spatial format wherever possible and the risk assessment results presented spatially. The hazard information should also be collated and or derived in spatial form. It would be prudent to carry out the risk assessment where possible using GIS to facilitate risk assessment and presentation. However, some information may be better assessed using a database or spreadsheet. The GIS presentation would facilitate the use of the results for emergency management and risk reduction planning. It is therefore proposed that GIS be used as the basis for the risk assessment study. 7.5 Modelling Uncertainty There is a considerable amount of uncertainty in earthquake risk assessments. dominant uncertainties are : Earthquake event characteristics (for example rupture length, magnitude etc) Within event (rate of attenuation of earthquake shaking between source and location in Christchurch, and through different ground conditions) Fragility relationships (extent of damage given certain ground shaking) Losses (damage repair cost and consequential costs given damage state) The
47
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Given that the uncertainties are significant, it would be prudent to reflect the degree of uncertainty through appropriate analysis. The uncertainties would be taken into account through : Assigning a range of values for the parameters based on the uncertainty, with a suitable probability distribution. Monte Carlo analysis using a program such as the @Risk module of spreadsheets. This would lead to outcomes that are probability distributions or ranges, which can be stated in terms of a mean and confidence intervals. This would involve assessment using a combination of GIS and spreadsheets with a module with Monte Carlo simulation capability such as @Risk. 7.6 Risk Assessment Model 7.6.1 General Description
A potential risk assessment model for the Christchurch Risk Study is described and discussed below. The approach is consistent with that used in HAZUS99 (FEMA, 2001), and other studies undertaken in New Zealand (Works Consultancy Services, 1995 and Brabhaharan, 2002). The risk should be quantified by, for example, $ losses (cost of repair), numbers of pipe breaks and number of casualties. For lifelines (in particular water supply and roads) it would be prudent to quantify the consequential loss of service (loss of water supply for users and traffic disruption). Indirect losses such as business and social disruption are not included, and could be considered in a follow-on study as discussed in Section 3.3. In general terms, loss (or numbers of breaks, etc) could be estimated as follows: Loss = f (hazard, vulnerability, exposure), where: o o o hazard is a condition that increases the chance of loss (e.g. proximity to a fault line), vulnerability is the susceptibility to damage (e.g. earthquake design standard), exposure is the quantity exposed to earthquake (e.g. length of pipeline).
The process of earthquake risk assessment proposed for Christchurch may be visualised as a series of GIS themes, each representing a layer of data. This would require the acquisition of data in a GIS format that would include : (a) infrastructure maps to establish location and various properties of each asset, (b) earthquake hazard information, comprising ground shaking ground class liquefaction slope failure
48
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 7.6.2 Infrastructure Inventory Modelling
General Approach Obtaining reliable inventory data is the most difficult and time-consuming part of earthquake risk studies. It is therefore necessary to very carefully design an inventory model for each infrastructure type that will meet the requirements of the risk methodology while making use of data that are readily accessible. This requires professional judgement by engineers experienced in earthquake engineering. Infrastructure inventory data would be collected from various sources as follows: (a) Demography Statistics New Zealand (b) Buildings (Residential, commercial and Industrial) from ECan, CCC or QV (c) Critical Facilities (Hospitals, Fire Stations, Police Station, Emergency Response Centres) (d) Roads CCC and Transit NZ (e) Water Supply CCC (f) Telecommunications Telecom, TelstraClear, Vodafone (g) Electricity Orion, Transpower The following assets should be covered in the study: all residential, commercial and industrial buildings to estimate economic loss, casualties and numbers of homeless; the water supply network to estimate the number and distribution of repairs; the main telecommunication, power and road networks to enable the loss of service experienced from these networks and their impacts to be estimated. A GIS theme would be formed for each type of infrastructure inventory data, which would include information supplied by the asset owners, CCC or ECan. Assets would be classified according to their vulnerability to damage based on age, construction type and other infrastructure-specific characteristics. Buildings Information on buildings could be obtained from Christchurch City Council, ECan or Quotable Value (QV), as discussed in Section 5.2. Mesh block information would be ideal for residential areas that contain one or two storey buildings. Typical residential properties have similar seismic performance levels that would only vary depending on the localised ground conditions. Therefore the time and effort required to process property data in areas smaller than mesh blocks is not justified as ground shaking and ground damage is not likely to vary significantly within a mesh block.
49
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 However, unlike in residential areas, in the central business district (CBD), there is generally very little uniformity between adjacent buildings. Given the diversity of commercial buildings in the CBD, it maybe useful to obtain data for individual properties considered to be significant. The CBD buildings would be run through the earthquake risk assessment model at individual property level and then aggregated to mesh block or area unit level, for presentation of the results. Additional information on the distribution of building classes within the mesh blocks would be obtained by drive-through surveys of representative samples of these areas to supplement the information available from QV and other sources. CCC has a register of earthquake risk buildings. The data is stored on a GIS system that is used to prepare LIM reports. The council could supply a spreadsheet file with a property identifier. This information could be incorporated into a GIS model to show the location of commercial buildings that are more likely to suffer extensive damage in earthquakes. The following buildings classes are proposed: Occupancy: Residential Commercial Industrial Structural Class: Timber frame Light steel frame Tilt-up concrete Steel moment frame Steel braced frame Concrete moment frame Concrete shear wall Unreinforced masonry Reinforced masonry Structural class could be inferred from building age as discussed in Section 5.2. Similar classes should be developed for other infrastructure. Building age is also a key consideration as it relates to earthquake design standards at the time of construction, as discussed in Section 5.2. Critical Facilities Specific information on critical facilities such as hospitals, fire stations, police stations and emergency response centres will be obtained so that the potential damage to these critical buildings in earthquakes can be assessed.
50
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Population Population data will be obtained from Statistics New Zealand census data from the 2001 census. This will provide night-time population data. This would need to be supplemented by information on employment in the CBD, occupancy rates, school population and transportation information from the Council to estimate day-time population data. This will enable estimation of casualties depending on whether the earthquake happens at night or during the day. Road Assets Road asset information will need to be sourced from the Christchurch City Council and Transit New Zealand, in GIS format as discussed in Section 5.3. Information would also be obtained on the bridges and retaining structures on the priority roads in the city, and any reports on the assessment of the earthquake performance of the bridges. The road network would be prioritised using a range of factors using the approach developed by Brabhaharan et al (2001), and the risk assessment would then be carried out for the higher priority roads, rather than every road in the network. It should be noted that the consequences of failure of minor residential streets is small and therefore the risk is low. This will enable greater focus to be placed on the priority roads. The roads will be characterised in terms of their vulnerability to failure and partial or full closure of the road. This would be dependent on the geology, height of slopes, geometry and liquefaction or slope failure potential. Retaining structures would be classified based of the type, age and height. The characterisation of roads would be carried out through site reconnaissance by appropriate specialists, consistent with the approach developed by Brabhaharan et al (2001). Bridges on priority roads would be characterised by a bridge earthquake specialist, through screening the bridges for earthquake vulnerability. The process would involve viewing of bridge drawings where available and brief site reconnaissance, consistent with the approach of HAZUS, but modified to reflect the bridge stock in Christchurch, based on aspects of the state highway-screening programme developed by Opus International Consultants (1998) for Transit. Water Supply Information on the water supply network is available from CCC. GIS data showing the location of the water supply pipe network and asset data on the type, size and condition of the pipes would also be sourced from the Council. The characterisation of the pipe network would be similar to that in HAZUS, and adapted for the Wellington Region bulk water pipeline risk assessment study (Opus International Consultants, 2002).
51
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Telecommunications Assets Telecommunication asset and location information would need to be sourced from Telecom, Telstra Clear and Vodafone. The exact extent of information available should be discussed and agreed given the commercial sensitivity of the information for the telecommunication companies. The asset information collated would include the type and age of exchanges (similar to building data) and any recent seismic upgrades. Also the location, type and age of key main fibre-optic land cable links should be obtained. Electricity Assets Information on the electricity assets would be obtained from Transpower and Orion. This would be GIS information on the location of assets as well as information on the type, age and generic design of the assets (similar to buildings). Also the location, type and age of main electricity feeder lines should be obtained. 7.6.3 Hazard Modelling
Earthquake Scenarios A scenario approach to the earthquake risk assessment is proposed as discussed in Section 7.3 of this report. Four earthquake scenarios are proposed, as summarised in Table 6. The first three scenarios are discussed in Section 6.2.1. The fourth scenario is a possible large earthquake on a hidden earthquake source close (say 10 km to 20 km) to Christchurch, perhaps an extension of the North Canterbury faults into the Canterbury Plains. This is a conjectured source and would indicate the level of damage from a large, say magnitude 7, earthquake in the Canterbury Plains where the earthquake sources are poorly understood, and could provide a possible extreme scenario. This scenario would require further consideration, and reviewed against seismological knowledge before it is adopted as a scenario for the risk study. Table 6 - Earthquake Scenarios for Risk Study
Scenario Local earthquake Alpine Fault earthquake Magnitude / distance
M 5.5 closer than 20 km M8 at 75 km to 150 km
MM Intensity 7, possibly 8 7 to 8
Duration 5 s to 10 s 60 s or more
52
Foothills earthquake on
Ashley, Springbank, Porters Pass-Amberley Faults
M 7.2 closer than 50 km M7 At 10 km to 20 km
30 s
Hidden Canterbury Plains Earthquake
9+
25 s to 30 s
Source Data Fault data (locations, magnitudes, rupture type, recurrence intervals) can be sourced from the Environment Canterbury (2004) Active Faults Database and other publications (e.g. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, 1999). Further information on potential earthquake sources in the Canterbury plains would need to be obtained from Geological and Nuclear Science. Attenuation International trends in earthquake hazard and risk modelling (e.g. HAZUS) use ground motions (e.g. PGA, spectral accelerations) as the earthquake intensity parameter, rather than MM intensity. McVerrys attenuation model (McVerry et al, 2000) has been developed from New Zealand earthquake data and is therefore the most appropriate for this study. Ground shaking in the Christchurch area would be derived from the source model and the McVerry Attenuation relationships and mapped in GIS. Microzonation Microzonation effects should be taken into consideration by deriving the following maps: (a) Ground Class map, from the ground information collated by ECan for the liquefaction study of Christchurch (Beca, 2003). (b) Liquefaction ground damage maps, derived by extrapolation of the liquefaction ground damage map prepared for the Alpine Fault event, for ECan (Beca, 2004). (c) Slope failure hazard maps, prepared using the broad scale map prepared for the Christchurch lifelines study (Centre for Advanced Engineering, 1997), improved through consideration of the terrain (topography data) and site reconnaissance of the small area affected in the Port Hills. The ground shaking from earthquake scenarios would be modified using ground class maps.
53
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 7.6.4 Damage Modelling
General Approach A damage model could be developed for each asset type, which relates the intensity of the earthquake to the expected level of damage defined as damage state. Buildings The building damage modelling would be based on the HAZUS standard damage states, none, slight, moderate, extensive and complete. Damage descriptions would be provided for each building class in each damage state. The models would be in the form of fragility curves similar to those shown in Figure 11. They could be derived from HAZUS, ATC-13, New Zealand data (Dowrick et al various) as well relevant other data (e.g. from Northridge). Estimates would also be made of damage due to post-earthquake fire.
Slight/Minor
Moderate
Extensive
Complete
1.0000
Probability [ Ds > ds | PGA ]
0.7500
0.5000
0.2500
0.0000 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40
Peak Ground Acceleration (g)
Figure 11 - Typical Fragility Curves for Buildings The damage state would also be modified to take into consideration ground damage such as liquefaction and slope failures. Water Supply The pipeline fragility curves would be based on the ALA data (ALA, 2001), which are in terms of repairs/km versus peak ground velocity or permanent ground deformation (i.e. fault rupture, liquefaction, landslide). They are available for a range of pipe materials, ductility, and joint type. A typical fragility curve from ALA is shown on Figure 12.
54
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 The damage state to water pipelines along roads (bridges, embankments and retaining structures) would be modified to reflect the damage state of the road or associated structure. Reservoir fragilities would be based on HAZUS and any other models that have been developed. Pumping station fragilities would be suitably modified building models.
1.4 Repair Rate per km 0 0 PGV (mm/sec) 1600
16% (ALA) 84% (ALA)
Median (ALA) Data Points (ALA)
Mean (ALA)
Figure 12 - Typical Fragility Curve for Pipelines from ALA (2001) Outputs would be: numbers of pipe repairs, reservoir damage states, pump station damage states. Telecommunications Telephone exchange fragility models could be suitably modified from building models. Models could also be developed for cable fragilities (buried and pole mounted). Power Supply Substation fragility models could be suitably modified from building models. Models could also be developed for cable fragilities (buried and pole mounted). Road Networks Bridge fragility models could be developed from data on the type and age of bridge stock in Christchurch based on seismic screening studies carried out for state highway bridges in that area and other areas of New Zealand. The seismic screening methodology developed by Opus International Consultants for Transit New Zealand (1998) could be used in the development of the damage models, and this is available from Transit New Zealand. The outputs from the damage models will the damage states for the bridges.
55
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 The fragility models for the roads could be based on the road characterisation (see Section 7.6.2) and the approach developed by Brabhaharan et al (2001), and the damage states developed for a current Transfund Research project (Brabhaharan and Wiles, 2005). This would provide damage states for the road. 7.6.5 Loss Modelling
Economic Loss Economic loss estimates would be limited to cost of repairing building damage. These losses are calculated by assigning damage ratios (cost of repair/replacement cost) to the damage states. While it is possible to estimate the cost of repairing other infrastructure such as pipelines, power cables, etc, this would require the total inventory to be modelled, i.e. local as well as main networks, which is not the intention of this study. Loss of Function The impact of the damage on the functioning of the lifelines could be assessed. This could be modelled as availability /outage states. The consequence of damage to the pipelines, electricity and telecommunications could be assessed as the loss of supply to properties, and the consequence of damage to roads as the traffic disruption. Casualties Deaths and injuries are principally attributable to the failure of man-made structures and facilities. Of these the largest proportion of casualties would be due to building damage. The casualties could be estimated for a day-time and night-time earthquake, based on population estimated as discussed in 7.6.2. The model proposed is to generally follow the HAZUS approach. 7.7 Risk Assessment Outputs 7.7.1 Outputs
The outputs of the study could be as follows: (a) Numbers of buildings in each damage state (none, light, moderate, extensive, complete). (b) Costs of repairing earthquake damage to buildings. (c) Expected damage to critical facilities (hospitals, police stations, fire stations, CDHQ).
56
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 (d) Numbers of casualties. (e) Damage state in terms of repairs per kilometre for main water supply pipelines (see example in Appendix B). (f) Damage state of reservoirs and pump stations. (g) Damage state of the core telecommunication network. (h) Damage state of telephone exchanges. (i) Damage state of core power supply network. (j) Damage state of electricity substations.
(k) Damage state of bridges on the main road network. (l) Damage state of the main road network (see example in Appendix B). (m) Availability and outage states for main water supply and roads networks. (n) Households affected by loss of water supply due to damage to water supply mains. (o) Traffic disruption for main roads affected. (p) Maps showing the geographical distribution of these damages and losses, for the items (a) and (d) to (o) above. 7.7.2 Uncertainty
There are high levels of uncertainty, from both random process effects and lack of knowledge, associated with all stages of the risk assessment process. Outputs that take account of these uncertainties could be in the form of a probability distribution rather than a single number. The uncertainty would be reflected by applying probability distributions to the hazard, damage and loss models, and using Monte Carlo analyses to calculate the results.
57
Conclusions
A comprehensive review of literature relating to earthquake risk assessment has been completed. This included New Zealand and international literature. Key features of significant relevant literature are presented. Sources of asset data for the study have been explored by contacting the relevant Councils and organisations. This indicates that the information required for the risk assessment is likely to be available. Building data is available from Environment Canterbury, Christchurch City Council or Quotable Value, and the most effective means of obtaining the data and the cost needs to be confirmed. Telecom New Zealand has indicated that they would make information available, but this would be limited due to commercial sensitivity reasons. The data Telecom are willing to make available needs to be confirmed. The hazard information that is available for the risk assessment has been reviewed. Generally there is good hazard information available from previous research and specific studies for Environment Canterbury. To facilitate risk assessment it is considered prudent to derive some additional microzoning information including a map showing ground class to modify ground shaking and extrapolate the liquefaction ground damage hazards for other earthquake scenarios. It would also be useful to assess the slope hazards for the small part of Christchurch affected in the Port Hills. These relatively limited tasks can be effectively incorporated into the risk assessment. A methodology has been developed to undertake an earthquake risk assessment for Christchurch. This takes into account recent developments in risk assessment approaches, the earthquake hazard and the existing infrastructure in Christchurch. The approach has been based on generating risk information that would match the objectives of Environment Canterbury for the study and to provide a basis for organisations to undertake risk management actions. The risk assessment would be based on modelling the inventory (assets), the hazards, damage and losses. The inventory would be collected from a variety of organisations, and would include information on critical facilities. It is proposed that the risk assessment be carried out for four earthquake scenarios, rather than using probabilistic uniform hazard levels (e.g. 10% probability in 50 years). This would provide information most suitable for emergency management and meeting functionality requirements for lifelines. The four earthquake scenarios proposed are the Alpine Fault earthquake, a foothills earthquake, a local earthquake and a possible earthquake on a hidden fault source near Christchurch. The hidden fault scenario requires further consideration and discussion before adoption. The earthquake shaking would be derived using the McVerry attenuation relationships, and the ground class would be assessed to derive motions across Christchurch that takes into consideration the ground conditions. The liquefaction and slope hazards would be from existing studies and would be extended as required for other scenarios.
58
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 The building damage modelling would be based on HAZUS, with relationships reviewed to incorporate New Zealand data, such as from Dowrick et al. The water pipelines would be assessed based on the American Lifelines Association models adapted to allow for New Zealand data and similar studies by Opus. The road damage would be derived using the approach developed by Opus for bridge assessment for Transit and for road networks. The electricity and telecommunications damage would be assessed by a combination of these methods. Risk assessment has considerable uncertainty and loss estimates could be derived using probability distributions and using a Monte Carlo approach, so that the uncertainty is explicitly presented, and could be taken into consideration during emergency management planning.
59
Recommendations
Environment Canterbury will be commissioning an earthquake risk assessment study for Christchurch. The objectives of such a risk assessment are to understand the likely impact and consequences of a major earthquake on Christchurch, to fulfil its hazard mitigation and emergency management functions, and provide information to stakeholders for them to fulfil their responsibilities under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act. The following recommendations are made:
(i) A risk assessment study be carried out as envisaged to provide information for risk management planning and implementation by Environment Canterbury, and other stakeholders. The study be based on the outline methodology presented in HAZUS and Figures 1 to 3 in this report. A spatial approach be used for the risk assessment using a geographical information system (GIS) platform, and the results of the study be presented as maps and accompanying tables and charts, so that the information can be readily used by stakeholders. Building and lifeline inventory information is available and be collected in spatial form from stakeholders, wherever available, or be collated into spatial GIS database. Building and demographic data be obtained from ECan, Christchurch City Council or QV, after considering the most effective way to obtain the data in a format suitable for the study. Confirm with Telecom New Zealand, what information it would make available for this study. The risk assessment be carried out using a scenario approach, to provide information that most suits ECans objective to facilitate its emergency management functions. The data compiled would be in a format useful for using a probabilistic assessment of risk by stakeholders at a later stage to facilitate risk management decision making. Three earthquake scenarios and a possible fourth scenario be used for the risk assessment, to provide earthquake risk information to enable emergency response planning for a range of scenarios. The fourth scenario of a hidden Canterbury Plains Fault earthquake should be discussed with seismologists as part of the risk assessment, to decide on the appropriateness for this study. A ground class map be compiled based on ground information collated for ECan for the liquefaction study, to enable modifications of bedrock shaking to be assessed across the Christchurch City.
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
60
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 (ix) The liquefaction ground damage map for the Alpine Fault compiled for ECan be extended to present liquefaction ground damage for earthquake scenarios. The earthquake induced slope failure hazard presented in the lifelines report be enhanced to represent the slope failure hazards in the Port Hills Area, through a review of aerial and topographical maps and site reconnaissance. The earthquake damage assessment to buildings be based on inventory data aggregated to mesh block level in residential areas. In the CBD where the buildings in each mesh block vary considerably, the damage assessment be at building level and then aggregated to mesh block or area unit level. The building damage fragility be based on data presented in HAZUS, ATC-13, information from research into damage in New Zealand earthquakes, and relevant other data (e.g. Northridge). The damage from fire following earthquakes be included in the risk assessment. Consideration should be given to using recent New Zealand research into fire following earthquake. The earthquake risk to critical facilities such as hospitals, fire stations, police stations and emergency response centres be assessed in addition to the area wide assessment of the other buildings. Casualties be assessed based on day time and night time population distributions, based primarily on building damage. The uncertainty associated with the risk assessment be reflected by applying appropriate probability distributions to hazard, damage and loss models.
(x)
(xi)
(xii)
(xiii)
(xiv)
(xv)
(xvi)
(xvii) The assessment of damage to lifelines be based on recent information such as pipeline fragility data published by the American Lifelines Association modified for New Zealand pipe stock, and power and telecommunications fragility using data suitably modified from building and pipeline data. (xviii) The bridge risk be assessed by developing bridge fragility models from data on the bridge stock in Christchurch, supplemented by data from the seismic screening of State Highway bridges for Canterbury. The road network risk be assessed based on the approach developed by Brabhaharan et al (2001). (xix) The loss of function be assessed for damage to lifelines to represent direct consequences. The socio-economic consequences be considered as a separate follow on study as methodologies are developed to facilitate such an assessment. The results of the study be presented through a series of maps to present the spatial distribution of damage, and accompanying charts and tables.
(xx)
(xxi)
61
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 (xxii) The methodology adopted and outcomes be summarised in a report, highlighting the limitations and uncertainties. (xxiii) The study be carried out based on a robust understanding of the performance of buildings and lifelines in earthquakes and the earthquake hazards affecting Christchurch. (xxiv) The tsunami risk be considered in a separate study, when there is more information available on tsunami hazards affecting Christchurch.
62
10
Bibliography
American Lifelines Association (2001). Seismic Fragility Formulations for Water Systems. http://www.americanlifelinesalliance.org/pdf/Part_1_Guideline.pdf Augusti, G, Borri, A & Ciampoli, M (1994). Optimal allocation of resources in reduction of the seismic risk of highway networks. Engineering Structure Vol 16 No 7 1994, 485-492. Basoz, N & Kiremidjian, AS (1995). Use of geographic information systems for bridge prioritisation. Proc 5th International Conference on seismic zonation, October 17-19, Nice, France, Vol 1. EERI p17-24. Basoz, N & Kiremidjian, AS (1997). Risk Assessment of Bridges and highway systems from the Northridge earthquake. National Seismic Conference on bridges and highways 2nd. July 8-11, 1997. Sacremento, California FHWA USA. Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner (2003). Christchurch Liquefaction Study Stage III, Review of Data Sources. Environment Canterbury Report No. U02/80. May 2003. Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner (2004). Christchurch Liquefaction Study Stage IV. Environment Canterbury Report No. U04/25. May 2004. Brabhaharan, P, Fleming, MJ and Lynch, R (2001). Natural hazard risk management for road networks. Part I : Risk management strategies. Transfund New Zealand Research Report 217. 75pp. Brabhaharan, P (2002). Natural Hazard Risk Management for Road Networks : Strategies for Implementation. Ingenium Annual Conference 2002. Queenstown, New Zealand. 14-16 June 2002. Brabhaharan, P and Moynihan S (2002). Natural hazard risk management for road networks. Part II : Implementation strategies. Transfund New Zealand Research Report 212. 75pp. Brabhaharan, P (2004). An Effective Approach to Improved Asset Risk Management for Road Networks. Towards Sustainable Land Transport Conference. 21-24 November 2004. Wellington, New Zealand. Brabhaharan, P and Wiles, L (2005). Risk Management for Road Networks. Performance Criteria. Transfund research report. Under preparation. Canterbury Regional Council (1994). Natural Hazards in Canterbury. Report 94(19). Prepared by Owens, IF, Kirk, RM, Bell, DH, Cowan, H, Pettinga, N and Todd, D. June 1994. Canterbury Regional Council (1998). Earthquake Source Identification and Characterisation. Earthquake Hazard and Risk Assessment Study. Stage 1 (Part A). Prepared by Pettinga,
63
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 JR, Chamberlain, CG, Yetton, MD, Van Dissen, R and Downes, G. CRC Publication No. U98/10. March 1998. Carr, KM (2001). Effects of Liquefaction-Induced Differential Settlements on Residential Dwellings in Christchurch. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury. October 2001. Cassassuce, F and Berrill, J (2000). Investigation of Possible Liquefaction Sites in the City of Christchurch, using the CPT and Seismic Cone. Prepared for Christchurch City Council. Research Report 2000-08. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury. August 2000. Centre for Advanced Engineering (1991). Lifelines in earthquakes. Wellington case study. Project report. University of Canterbury, New Zealand. 1991. Centre for Advanced Engineering (1997). Risks & Realities. A multidisciplinary approach to the vulnerability of lifelines to natural hazards. Report of the Christchurch Engineering Lifelines Group. November 1997. Chapman, H E, Oakden, G J and Lauder, M K (2000). Seismic Screening of Bridges in New Zealand. 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, 30 January 4 February 2000. Cochrane, H (1995). The economic impact of earthquake disasters. Proc of conference on Wellington after the Quake the challenge of rebuilding cities. 27-29 March 1995. Published by the Earthquake Commission. pp65-79. Cooper, JD (1981). Mitigation of earthquake damage on eastern highway systems. Public Roads. Vol 45, No 3, Dec 1981. p113-123. Cornell CA (1986). Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bull. Seis. Soc. Am. 58 (5). Cowan, H (1993). Measurement of earthquake ground shaking at characteristic sites in Christchurch. Dalziell EP, Nicholson AJ, Wilkinson DL (1999). Risk Assessment Methods for Road Network Evaluation. Transfund New Zealand Research Report No. 148. 212pp. Dowrick D J, Rhoades D A, (1990). Damage Ratios for Residential Buildings in the 1987 Edgecumbe Earthquake. Dowrick D J, (1991a). Damage Costs for Houses and Farms as a Function of Intensity in the 1987 Edgecumbe Earthquake. Engineering & Structural Dynamics, Vol. 20, 445-469. Dowrick D J, Rhoades D A, Babour J, Beetham R D, (1994). Damage Ratios for Houses in the MM10 Zone of the Magnitude 7.8 Hawkes Bay New Zealand Earthquake of 1931. Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences Ltd. Prepared for the Earthquake Commission.
64
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Dowrick D J, Rhoades D A, Babour J, Beetham R D, (1995). Damage Ratios for Houses and Microzoning Effects in Napier in the Magnitude 7.8 Hawkes Bay New Zealand, Earthquake of 1931. Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 28, No 2, June 1995. Dowrick D.J., Rhoades D.A. (1999). Attenuation of Modified Mercalli Intensity in New Zealand Earthquakes, Bulletin of NZSEE, Vol 32, No. 2. Dowrick D J, Rhoades D A, Davenport P N, (2002). Damage Ratios for Domestic Property in the Magnitude 7.2 1968 Inangahua, New Zealand, Earthquake. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 34, No 3, September 2001. Dowrick D J, Rhoades D A, Davenport P N, (2002). Damage Ratios for Low-Rise NonDomestic Brick Buildings in the Magnitude 7.1 Wairapa, New Zealand, Earthquake of 24 June 1942. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 35, No 3, September 2002. Du, Z and Nicholson, AJ (1993). Degradable transportation systems Performance, Sensitivity and reliability analysis. Research Report 93-8. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. Earthquake Commission (1995). Wellington After the Quake The Challenge of Rebuilding Cities. Proceedings of a conference in Wellington, 27-29 March 1995. Published jointly by the Earthquake Commission and the Centre for Advanced Engineering. P284. July 1995. Elder, D McG, McCahon, IF, Yetton, MD (1991). The Earthquake Hazard in Christchurch. A detailed evaluation. Funded by EQC. March 1991. Environment Canterbury (2004). Environment Canterbury Active Faults Database Manual. Report No U04/27. Prepared by Helen Grant. June 2004. Environment Canterbury Active Faults Database http://www.ecan.govt.nz/EcanGIS/ecanpro/viewer.htm FEMA (2001). Earthquake loss estimation methodology, HAZUS99. Service Release 2, Technical Manual. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC. Gordon, P, Moore II, JE, Richardson, HW, Shinozuka, M, Cho, KY, Cho SB, Kim BS and Kim, GY (1997). An integrated model of bridge performance, highway networks, and the spatial metropolitan economy : towards a general model of how losses due to earthquake impacts on lifelines affect the economy. NCEER Technical Report (Earthquake Engineering Frontiers in Transportation 97-0005. p515 525. Guilhem, O and Berrill, J (1993). Cone Penetrometer Results and Estimates of Liquefaction Potential at some Key Christchurch Lifeline Sites. Project No. CP/2245. University of Canterbury. Christchurch. August 1993.
65
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Hendrickson, C, Oppenheim, IJ and Siddarthan, K (1980). User Losses in EQ damaged roadway networks. Journal of the Technical Councils of ASCE. Proceedings of the Americal Society of Civil Engineers. Vol 106, No TC1, August 1980. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (1999). Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment and Earthquake Scenarios for the Canterbury Region, and Historic Earthquakes in Christchurch. Stage 1 (Part B) of Canterbury Regional Councils Earthquake Hazard and Risk Assessment Study. Prepared for Canterbury Regional Council by Stirling, M, Yetton, M, Pettinga, J, Berryman, K and Downes, G. CRC Report No. U99/18. Client Report 1999/53. June 1999. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (2000). Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment of New Zealand : New Active Fault Data, Seismicity Data, Attenuation Relationships and Methods. Prepared for the Earthquake Commission Research Foundation by Stirling, M, McVerry, G, Berryman, K, McGinty, P, Villamor, P, Van Dissen, R, Dowrick, D, Cousins, J and Sutherland, R. Client Report 2000/53. May 2000. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (2002). LAPP Fund: Earthquake Risk to Councils Assets in Wellington and Chrishchurch. Prepared for Trustees of the Local Authority Protection Programme (LAPP) Fund by Jim Cousins and Warwick Smith. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (2003). Review of Effects of LiquefactionInduced Differential Settlements on Residential Dwellings in Christchurch authored by Kirsti Maria Carr in October 2001. Reviewers Jim Cousins and Dick Beetham. 14 July 2003. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences (2005). Estimated damage and casualties from earthquakes affecting Christchurch. Prepared by Jim Cousins. Client Report 2005/057 prepared for Christchurch City Council. May 2005. The basics of seismic risk analysis. Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 5, No. 4, 1989. Kawakami, H (2000). EQ performance of highway system in Tokyo. 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, 30 January - 4 February 2000. Kawashima, K, Unjoh, S and Iida, H (1992). Seismic inspection ad seismic strengthening of highway bridges in Japan. Proceedings of the 4th US-Japan workshop on earthquake disaster prevention for lifeline systems. August 19-21, 1991, Los Angeles, California. Edited by Eguchi, RT. National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST special prublication 840. p55-76. King SA and Kiremidjian, A (1994). Regional seismic hazard and risk analysis through geographic information systems. The John A Blume Earthquake Engineering Centre, Report No. 111.
66
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Li, Y & Tsukaguchi, H (1996). A study on the capability of local road network against the Great Hanbin-Awaji earthquake disaster. International Conference on urban engineering in Asian cities in the 21st century Nov 20-23 1996, Bangkok, Thailand. McGuire, RK (2001). Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, MHO-10. McVerry GH, et al. (2000). Crustal and Subduction Zone Attenuation Relations for New Zealand Earthquakes. Paper No. 1834. Proceedings of the 12th World Conference of Earthquake Engineering 2000. Auckland. New Zealand. Maffei, J (1996). The seismic evaluation and retrofit of bridges. Department of Civil Engineering Research Report 96-2. University of Canterbury, New Zealand. Maroney, B and Gates, J (1992). Seismic risk identification and prioritization in the CALTRANS seismic retrofit program. Proceedings of the 4th US-Japan workshop on earthquake disaster prevention for lifeline systems. August 19-21, 1991, Los Angeles, California. Edited by Eguchi, RT. National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST special prublication 840. p55-76. Montgomery Watson NZ (1999). The Security of New Zealands Strategic Roading System. Transfund New Zealand Research Report No. 147. 70pp. National Institute of Standards and Technology (1992). Proceedings of the 4th US-Japan workshop on earthquake disaster prevention for lifeline systems. August 19-21, 1991, Los Angeles, California. Edited by Eguchi, RT. National Institute of Standards and Technology. Nojima, N & Sugito, M (2000). Simulation & Evaluation of Post-EQ functional performance of transportation network. 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, 30 January - 4 February 2000. Nozaki, T and Sugita, H (2000). A method to determine seismic performance of highway network option. 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, 30 January - 4 February 2000. Opus International Consultants (2002). Earthquake Loss Assessment for Wellington Region Wholesale Water Pipelines, Prepared for Wellington Regional Council. Opus International Consultants (1998). Seismic Screening of Bridges. Prepared by Howard Chapman for Transfund. November 1998. ORourke MJ & Liu X, (1999). Response of buried pipelines subject to earthquake effects. Multidisciplinary Centre for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY. Reiter, Leon (1990). Earthquake Hazard Analysis. Columbia University Press. New York.
67
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Rojahn, C & Sharpe, R L (1985). Earthquake Damage Evaluation Data for California, ATC-13. Applied Technology Council, California. Schiff AJ (ed) (1998). Proceedings of the Workshop on Performance Criteria for Telecommunication Services Under Earthquake Conditions, Multidisciplinary Centre for Earthquake Engineering Research Technical Report MCEER-98-0008. Soils & Foundations (1996). Christchurch City Council. Stormwater Pumping Stations. Liquefaction Hazard. Prepared by McCahon, I and Young, R. April 1996. Soils & Foundations (1998). Christchurch City Council. Lower River Avon. Liquefaction Hazard. June 1998. Soils & Foundations (1999). Christchurch City Council. Heathcote River Special Planning Zone. Liquefaction Potential. April 1999. Soils & Foundations (1999). Christchurch City Council. Lower Avon River Lateral Spread. Damage Costs and Mitigation. July 1999. Standards NZ (2004). Risk Management. AS/NZS 4360:2004. Australian/New Zealand Standard. Trangmar, BB (1991). Erosion Map of the Port Hills, Canterbury, New Zealand. Scale 1:15,000. D.S.I.R. Land Resources Map 314 & 315. Transit New Zealand (1998). Manual for Seismic Screening of Bridges. SM 110. Revision 2. Wellington. Werner, SD, Taylor, CE & Moore II, JE (1997). Loss Estimation Due to Seismic Risks to Highway Systems. Earthquake Spectra. Volume 13. No 4. November 1997. Weseman, L, Hamilton, T, Tabazer, S & Bare, G (1996). Cost-of-delay studies for freeway closures caused by Northridge Earthquake. Environmental, social, and economic effects of transportation. Transportation Research Record, 1559, p67-75. National Research Council (US). Transportation Research Board. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1996. Works Consultancy Services (1990). Risk Management - Asset Damage due to Earthquake or Volcanic Eruption. Report to Transit New Zealand. Works Consultancy Services (1995). Earthquake Risk Assessment Study Review of Methodologies and Risk assessment for Study Areas Wellington, Hutt Valley, Wairarapa, Kapiti Coast, Porirua Basin. Work Consultancy Services (1996). Estimated Earthquake Damage to Telecom New Zealands Outside Plant. Report Prepared for Telecom New Zealand.
68
Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 Works Consultancy Services (1996). Seismic assessment of New Zealand highway bridges : development and testing of preliminary screening procedures. Transit New Zealand Research Report No. 58. World Road Association (1996). Natural Disaster Reduction for Roads. Comprehensive Report. PIARC Committee on Road Management. Permanent International Association of Road Congresses. PIARC 72.01.B 1995. World Road Association (1999). Natural Disaster Reduction for Roads. Final Report. PIARC Working Group on Natural Disaster Reduction (92). Yetton, MD, Wells, A and Traylen, NJ (1998). The Probability and Consequences of the Next Alpine Fault Earthquake. EQC Research Report 95/193. March 1998. http://www.fema.gov/hazus http://www.gns.cri.nz/store/databases/indexb.html#Faults http://www.gns.cri.nz/store/databases/indexb.html#Earthquake
69
Appendix
Mesh Blocks and Statistical Area Units for Christchurch
70
Appendix
Example Risk Assessment Map Outcomes
71
LEVEL OF RISK FROM VARIOUS HAZARD EVENTS
EARTHQUAKE
WELLINGTON FAULT (MODERATE)
INSIGNIFICANT
MINOR
MODERATE
SIGNIFICANT
MAJOR
SEVERE
CATASTROPHIC
# # # # # # #
Low
Low
Moderate
Significant
High
High
Extreme
# # # # # # # # #
# #
STORM
REGIONAL EARTHQUAKE (ALMOST CERTAIN)
Low
Moderate
Significant
High
Extreme
Extreme
# # # # # # # # #
-
>50 YEAR EVENT (LIKELY)
Low
Moderate
Significant
Significant
High
# # # # # # #
-
# # #
CONSEQUENCES TO ROADS FROM SLOPE FAILURE HAZARDS
MAP COLOUR
STORM
WELLINGTON FAULT EVENT
# #
# #
LARGE REGIONAL EARTHQUAKE
# # # # # # # # #
50 YEAR
# # # # # # # #
Insignificant
# # # # # # #
Insignificant
Insignificant
Minor
Insignificant
Insignificant
Moderate
Minor
Minor
Significant
Moderate
Moderate
Major
Significant
Significant
Severe
Major
Major
Catastrophic
Severe
Severe
Wellington Harbour
CONSEQUENCES TO ROADS FROM LIQUEFACTION AND WELLINGTON FAULT RUPTURE HAZARDS
MAP COLOUR
EARTHQUAKE
# # # # # # #
WELLINGTON FAULT
FAULT RUPTURE
LARGE REGIONAL EARTHQUAKE
LIQUEFACTION
# #
Insignificant
Insignificant
Minor
Insignificant
Moderate
Minor
Significant
Moderate
Major
Significant
# # # # #
Severe
Catastrophic
# #
Water Pipelines 0 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.5 0.5 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 > 5.0
N W S E
Title:
Water Pipelines: Estimated Breaks/km Wellington Fault (Scenario 2)

Project:
Integrated Seismic Risk Study
Client:
Upper Hutt City Council
Kilometers
Job No:
Date:
Figure:
5C5638.01
October 1999
# # # # # # ### # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # ## # # #
Council Buildings
# # # # #
None Slight Moderate Extensive Complete Roads
#
Title:
N W S
Client:
Council Buildings: Most Likely Damage State
E
Project:
Wellington Fault (Scenario 2)
Integrated Seismic Risk Study
Upper Hutt City Council
Kilometers
Job No:
Date:
Figure:
5C5638.01
October 1999

Christchurch Earthquake Risk Assessment Stage1 Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Christchurch Earthquake Risk Assessment Stage1 Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study

Earthquake Hazard and Risk Assessment Project

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study

Opus International Consultants Limited 2005

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1

Key Components of Earthquake Risk Assessment and Applications

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1

Potential Earth Science Hazards

Direct Physical Damage

5. General Building Stock

6. Essential and High Potential Loss Facilities

Induced Physical Damage

Direct Economic/ Social Losses

10. Fire 11. HazMat 12. Debris

16. Indirect Economic Losses

Figure 4 - Flow Chart of the HAZUS Loss Estimation Methodology

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1 5.3.2 State Highways

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

5C0542.00 August 2005: Final

Earthquake Risk Assessment Study : Part 1

Earthquake Hazard Information Review

Earthquake Hazard Literature 6.2.1 Ground Shaking