WINNING THE GLOBAL WAR AGAINST APATHY AND IGNORANCE

WINNING THE GLOBAL WAR AGAINST APATHY AND IGNORANCE Walter Hays, Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction, Vienna, Virginia, USA

NOW IS A GOOD TIME TO MAKE OUR WORLD DISASTER RESILIENT We can do it through the convergence of realistic thinking and strategic actions that are based on improving community preparedness, protection, response, and recovery.

STATUS OF THE WORLD AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 21 ST CENTURY • 7 billion people, and counting • Living and competing in an interconnected global economy • Producing $60 trillion of products • Facing many complex problems (e, g. , 5 E’s and 2 S’s)

OUR COMPLEX GLOBAL PROBLEMS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 21 ST CENTURY • Conflict and terrorism • Health care • Chronic hunger • Increasing risk of pandemic disease • Large-scale migration of people • Environmental degradation • Increased impacts of natural hazards • Threats related to global climate change

THE REALITY OF THE 21 ST CENTURY Unless we devise and implement a realistic, new strategy, OUR problems may grow worse rapidly, and all of us may share in the blame for an unnecessary reduction in the quality of life on Planet Earth.

THE FRAMEWORK OF DISASTER RESILIENCE PROVIDES WORTHY GOALS • To protect and preserve the environment • To build capacity for disaster resilience • To inform, educate, and train • To build equity in all communities in all regions of the World

WE KNOW WHAT TO DO, SO JUST DO IT! • Working strategically, we can implement a realistic set of scientific, technical, and political solutions--- within OUR administrative, legal, and economic constraints, --- and become disaster resilient.

CAUSES OF DAMAGE INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO HORIZONTAL GROUND SHAKING SOIL AMPLIFICATION PERMANENT DISPLACEMENT (SURFACE FAULTING & GROUND FAILURE) EARTHQUAKES IRREGULARITIES IN ELEVATION AND PLAN CASE HISTORIES TSUNAMI WAVE RUNUP LACK OF DETAILING AND POOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS LACK OF ATTENTION TO NON-STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS

ANY COMMUNITY CAN EVALUATE THE VULNERABILITY OF ITS BUILDINGS • An Incremental Process CLARIFY VULNERABILTIES INDENTIFY OPTIONS IMPLEMENT BEST SOLUTION INITATE ACTIONS OPTIMIZE EVALUATE

SOURCE OF INFORMATION • The following graphic characterizations of building vulnerability to earthquake ground shaking were developed by an insurance company and provided to facilitate education and training.

BUILDING ELEVATIONS • Horizontal and vertical changes in symmetry, mass, and stiffness will increase a building’s vulnerability to ground shaking

AN IMPORTANT NOTE • NOTE: The local site geology and the construction materials are key parameters in controlling a building’s performance; analysis of their effects is NOT considered here.

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 1 -2 Box None, if attention given to foundation and non-structural elements. Rocking may crack foundation and structure. XCracks around windows.

DAMAGED HOUSE: CHINA

ASYMMETRY AND LATERAL CHANGES: CHINA

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 1 Pyramid None, if attention given to foundation and non structural elements. Rocking may crack foundation.

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 4 -6 Inverted Pyramid Top heavy, asymmetrical structure may fail at foundation due to rocking and overturning.

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 5 -6 “L”- Shaped Building Asymmetry and horizontal transition in mass, stiffness and damping may cause failure where lower and upper structures join.

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 3 -5 Inverted “T” Vertical transition and asymmetry may cause failure where lower part is attached to tower.

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 2 -3 Multiple Setbacks Vertical transition in mass, stiffness, and damping may cause failure at foundation and transition points at each floor.

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 4 -5 Overhang Top heavy asymmetrical structure may fail at transition point and foundation due to rocking and overturning.

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 6 -7 Partial “Soft” Story Horizontal and vertical transitions in mass and stiffness may cause failure on soft side of first floor; rocking and overturning.

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 8 - 10 “Soft” First Floor Vertical transitions in mass and stiffness may cause failure on transition points between first and second floors.

THE TYPICAL SOFT-STOREY BUILDING IN TURKEY

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 9 - 10 Combination of “Soft” Story and Overhang Horizontal and vertical transitions in mass and stiffness may cause failure at transition points and possible overturning.

ANALYSIS OF VULNERABILITY BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FAILURE RELATIVE VULERABILITY [1 (Best) to 10 (Worst)] 10 Building on Sloping Ground Horizontal transition in stiffness of soft story columns may cause failure of columns at foundation and/or contact points with structure.

SOFT STORY BUILDING ON SLOPING GROUND: CHINA TRIGGERED LANDSLIDES

TUSCALOOSA, AL: EF 5 STORM WITH 466 KPH (280 MPH) WINDS APRIL 27, 2011

TUSCALOOSA, AL: APRIL 27, 2011

PRATT CITY, AL: APRIL 27, 2011

PRATT CITY, AL: APRIL 27, 2011

PRATT CITY; AL: APRIL 27, 2011

PLEASANT GROVE, AL: APRIL 27, 2011

DEBRIS ACROSS HIGHWAY

MOUNT KARANGETANG ERUPTS The 1, 784 m (5, 853 ft) volcano, which is one of Indonesia’s 129 active volcanoes, is located on Siau.

VOLCANO HAZARDS (AKA POTENTIAL DISASTER AGENTS) • LAVA FLOWS • LAHARS • EARTHQUAKES (related to movement of lava) • “VOLCANIC WINTER”

NATURAL HAZARDS FOR WHICH EVACUATION IS TYPICAL FLOODS GOAL: MOVE PEOPLE OUT OF HARM’S WAY HIGH BENEFIT/COST FOR SAVING LIVES, BUT LOW BEMEFIT/COST FOR PROTECTING PROPERTY HURRICANES TYPHOONS TSUNAMIS VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS WILDFIRES

CHRONOLOGY OF THE STORM • Starts in Oklahoma late Thursday (April 14) • Moves to Arkansas on Friday (April 15) • Impacts Mississippi and Alabama

TECTONICS OF INDONESIA REGION • The Australian and Eurasian plates meet in Indonesia, creating a tectonic setting favorable for generating earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions.

Indonesia has 129 active volcanoes, with two of the most active ones — Mount Kelut and Mount Merapi — on the island of Java, where the Indonesian capital, Jakarta, is.

SENSITIZED BY THE 2004 TSUNAMI DISASTER, INDONESIANS HEEDED THE WARNING This time, the tsunami that inundated towns, immobilized air ports, destroyed buildings, and killed 1, 000’s in Japan, WAS NOT DEADLY in Indonesia.

IN 2004, TSUNAMI WAVES REACHED BANDA ACHE IN 1/2 HOUR, THEN TRAVERSED THE INDIAN OCEAN

12 COUNTRIES ADJACENT TO THE INDIAN OCEAN WERE IMPACTED

THE 2004 EXPERIENCE • THE TSUNAMI WAS GENERATED BY A SHALLOW, M 9. 3 EARTHQUAKE LOCATED 260 KM (155 MI) FROM BANDA ACEH, SUMATRA

THE 2004 EXPERIENCE • THE TSUNAMI WAVES HAD HEIGHTS OF 4 TO 10 M AND RUNUP OF 3. 3 KM OR MORE ON THE COAST LINES OF 12 NATIONS

THE 2004 EXPERIENCE • THE EXISTING TSUNAMI WARNING SYSTEM WAS INEFFECTIVE IN 2004 • RESULT: LITTLE OR NO EVACUATION

THE 2004 EXPERIENCE • AN EXTIMATED 220, 000 PEOPLE WERE KILLED (120, 000 IN INDONESIA) AND 500, 000 WERE INJURED IN 12 COUNTRIES BORDERING THE INDIAN OCEAN