DOCSLIB.ORG

The Mw9.0 Tōhoku Earthquake and Tsunami of 11Th March 2011 a Field Report by Eefit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Mw9.0 Tōhoku Earthquake and Tsunami of 11Th March 2011 a Field Report by Eefit THE MW9.0 TŌHOKU EARTHQUAKE AND TSUNAMI OF 11TH MARCH 2011 A FIELD REPORT BY EEFIT THE MW9.0 TŌHOKU EARTHQUAKE AND TSUNAMI OF 11TH MARCH 2011 A FIELD REPORT BY EEFIT Mr. Antonios Pomonis, CAR Limited, Global Earthquake Model (Team Leader) Dr. Keiko Saito, CAR Limited, Willis Research Fellow (Deputy Team Leader) Mr. Stuart Fraser, Massey University / GNS Science Joint Centre for Disaster Research (Editor) Mr. Siau Chen Chian, University of Cambridge Dr. Katsu Goda, University of Bristol Mr. Joshua Macabuag, Building Design Partnership Mr. Mark Offord, Sellafield Ltd Dr. Alison Raby, Plymouth University Prof. Peter Sammonds, Institute for Risk & Disaster Reduction, University College London Report prepared in association with: Dr. Eri Gavanski, Tōhoku University Dr. Maki Koyama, Kyoto University Prof. Hitomi Murakami, Yamaguchi University Report reviewed by: Dr. Tiziana Rossetto, University College London Dr. Damian Grant, Arup Dr. John E. Alarcon, Willis th The Mw9.0 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami of 11 March 2011 ii Acknowledgements The EEFIT Japan team would like to express our sincere thanks to the many following organisations and individuals for their support prior, during and following this mission, without whom we would not have been able to carry out the field trip and research so effectively. Ms. Berenice Chan, Institution of Structural Engineers Professor David Cope, Director, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology Mr. Tomonori Goto, PASCO Mr. Ryota Hamamoto, Mr. Yasumasa Matsunaga, ESRI-J Professor Hideyuki Horii and Dr Riki Honda, Tokyo University Professor Fumihiko Imamura, Abdul Muhari and Dr. Anawat Suppasri, Disaster Control Centre, Tōhoku University Mr. Go Ishikawa, GIS NEXT Dr. Aiming Lin, Shizuoka University Dr. Lee Manjae, Sendai National College of Technology Professor Akira Mano, Japan Society of Civil Engineers and Disaster Control Centre, Tōhoku University Mr. Akihito Morikawa, Miyagi Prefecture Government official Michaela Musilova, University College London Dr Alessio Patalano, Kings College London Dr. Rui Pinho, Dr. Helen Crowley, Global Earthquake Model Mr. Chris Pook, Mr. Kevin Knappett, Ms. Naomi Takegoshi, British Embassy Tokyo Mr. John Riding, Sellafield Ltd. Mr. KenTarō Sakagawa, Mr. Akira Marusaki, Mr. Koichi Sanefuji, Mr. Yushi Matsumoto, Mr. Hisanaga, Okuyama, Japanese Self Defence Force Mr. Satoshi Sugai, Japanese Red Cross Professor David Tappin, British Geological Survey Mr. Shoji Yamada, Tsutomu Kawabata, Mr. Noritoshi Kamagata, Professor Shibayama, Waseda University Mr. Mamoru Yamada, Kamaishi City, Officials of Natori City, Ōfunato City and Rikuzentakata City Kokusai Kogyo KK Thanks are also due to the following organisations for funding the participation of team members: EEFIT and the Global Earthquake Model, for funding Antonios Pomonis EPSRC for funding Dr. Alison Raby, Dr. Katsu Goda and Siau Chen Chian Aon Benfield for funding Stuart Fraser Institution of Civil Engineers QUEST Travel Award and Building Design Partnership for funding Joshua Macabuag Sasakawa Foundation for funding Professor Peter Sammonds Sellafield Ltd. for funding Mark Offord Willis Research Network, Cambridge Architectural Research Ltd. and Department of Architecture, University of Cambridge for funding Dr. Keiko Saito EEFIT would like to acknowledge the ongoing support of its corporate sponsors: AIR Worldwide, Aon Benfield, Arup, British Geological Survey, CREA Consultants, Malishev Wilson Engineers, Risk Management Solutions and Sellafield Ltd . th The Mw9.0 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami of 11 March 2011 iii Contents Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................................. iii Contents ................................................................................................................................................................. iv List of figures .......................................................................................................................................................... vii List of tables .......................................................................................................................................................... xv 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Preamble .................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2. The EEFIT Tōhoku mission ...................................................................................................................... 2 1.3. Japanese collaboration ............................................................................................................................. 5 1.4. References ............................................................................................................................................... 7 2. The earthquake of 11th March 2011 .......................................................................................................... 8 2.1. Rupture zone and tectonics of the Japan Trench ..................................................................................... 8 2.2. Historical seismicity and tsunami in the Japan Trench ............................................................................. 9 2.3. Earthquake rupture mechanism and tsunami generation........................................................................ 11 2.4. Economic loss due to the earthquake and tsunami ................................................................................ 13 2.5. Conclusions on the earthquake of 11th March 2011 ................................................................................ 15 2.6. References ............................................................................................................................................. 16 3. Earthquake ground motion report ........................................................................................................... 19 3.1. Ground motions of the MW9.0 mainshock and major aftershocks ........................................................... 19 3.2. Ground motion characteristics ................................................................................................................ 21 3.2.1. Specific cases ................................................................................................................................. 22 3.2.2. General cases ................................................................................................................................. 25 3.3. Comparison of ground motions with past significant events ................................................................... 27 3.4. Damage potential of long duration ground motions ................................................................................ 29 3.5. Conclusions on ground motion ............................................................................................................... 31 3.6. References ............................................................................................................................................. 32 4. Field observations on ground shaking damage ...................................................................................... 34 4.1. Building regulations in Japan .................................................................................................................. 34 4.2. Composition of building stock ................................................................................................................. 34 4.3. Field Observations .................................................................................................................................. 36 4.3.1. Overall damage statistics ................................................................................................................ 38 4.3.2. Damage survey in Sendai, Miyagi Prefecture ................................................................................. 40 4.3.3. Damage survey in Shirakawa, Fukushima Prefecture ..................................................................... 42 4.3.4. Damage survey in Sukagawa, Fukushima Prefecture ..................................................................... 44 4.4. Conclusions on ground shaking damage ................................................................................................ 47 4.5. References ............................................................................................................................................. 48 5. The 11th March 2011 tsunami and its impact .......................................................................................... 50 5.1. Tsunami terminology............................................................................................................................... 50 5.2. Coastal morphology and bathymetry in the affected region .................................................................... 51 5.3. Coastal defences in Japan ...................................................................................................................... 52 5.4. Tsunami severity ....................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Newsletter 2020, Special Issue 1
    SCEaR Newsletter 2020 Special Issue 2020/1 First Memory of the World Global Policy Forum Disaster Risk Reduction and Management for Sustainable Preservation of Documentary Heritage 11 December 2018, UNESCO Headquarters, Paris A Retrospective View Edited by Akira Matsuda and Lothar Jordan In cooperation with Fackson Banda and Kenji Tamura _______________________________________________________________________________ Editors of this Issue Dr. Akira Matsuda Prof. Dr. Lothar Jordan Associate Professor at the University of Tokyo; UNESCO Memory of the World Programme, Member of the Japanese National Committee for the Chair of the Sub-Committee on UNESCO Memory of the World Programme Education and Research (SCEaR) Dr. Fackson Banda Kenji Tamura UNESCO, Chief of the Documentary Heritage Unit UNESCO, Documentary Heritage Unit (Memory of the World Programme) (Memory of the World Programme) Special thanks of the Editors go to Ophélie Kukansami-Léger and Roslyn Russell for their editorial help. Date of delivery of this Issue: 5 September 2020 SCEaR Newsletter Editors: Lothar Jordan (editor-in-chief), Roslyn Russell, Papa Momar Diop (French texts) This Newsletter is a medium of the Sub-Committee on Education and Research (SCEaR), IAC, UNESCO Memory of the World Programme. More information “On SCEaR, Impressum” (p. 29) in SCEaR Newsletter 2019/2 (December) 2 _______________________________________________________________________________ Contents Editorial by Akira Matsuda 5 Greeting by Fackson Banda 7 Opening Remarks by Takeo Kato 8 Keynote Speech Disaster Risk Reduction for the Sustainable Preservation of Documentary Heritage by Kirsi Madi 10 Session 1. Overall Status of Documentary Heritage under Situations of Disaster Salvaging Historical Documents and Rebuilding Communities: Lessons from after the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011 by Daisuke Sato, J.
    [Show full text]
  • Zest for Living in Disaster” –
    Developments of Tools to Survive the Disasters –CivilEmpowermentof“ZestforLivinginDisaster”– Survey Report: Developments of Tools to Survive the Disasters – Civil Empowerment of “Zest for Living in Disaster” – Shosuke Sato∗, Fumihiko Imamura∗, Mari Yasuda∗, Motoaki Sugiura∗,∗∗,andRuiNouchi∗,∗∗,∗∗∗ ∗International Research Institute of Disaster Science, Tohoku University Aoba, 468-1 Aramaki, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-0845, Japan E-mail: [email protected] ∗∗Institute of Development, Aging and Cancer, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan ∗∗∗Frontier Research Institute for Interdisciplinary Sciences, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan [Received September 2, 2015; accepted January 4, 2016] This paper introduces practical efforts to reduce lo- plans and enlightening tools to acquire “zest for living.” cal disasters in the “Project on civil empowerment for To summarize those activities and discuss future devel- ‘zest for life during a disaster”’ undertaken by the au- opment, the project involved the “symposium for promot- thors and the three projects that have been developed ing the project on civil empowerment for ‘zest for life and implemented thus far: “Pocket Notebook and during a disaster”’ in the third UN World Congress on Handbook for Family’s Disaster Resilience (MINNA- Disaster Reduction in March 2015. This report describes NO-BOSAI TECHO),” “Pocket Notebook and Hand- “Pocket Notebook and Handbook for Family’s Disas- book for Boys and Girls Disaster Resilience (BOKU- ter Resilience (MINNA-NO-BOSAI TECHO),” “Pocket NO-WATASHI-NO-BOSAI TECHO),” and “SENDAI Notebook and Handbook for Boys and Girls Disaster Re- CAMP (BOSAI CAMP).” These activities were re- silience (BOKU-NO-WATASHI-NO-BOSAI TECHO),” ported on a public forum in the third UN World and “SENDAI CAMP (BOSAI CAMP)” that had been ac- Congress on Disaster Reduction, where the impor- tively undertaken in the project on civil empowerment for tance of involving all citizens in disaster reduction and ‘zest for life during a disaster.’ prevention through projects was recognized in a com- prehensive discussion.
    [Show full text]
  • Great East Japan Earthquake, Jr East Mitigation Successes, and Lessons for California High-Speed Rail
    MTI Funded by U.S. Department of Services Transit Census California of Water 2012 Transportation and California Great East Japan Earthquake, Department of Transportation JR East Mitigation Successes, and Lessons for California High-Speed Rail MTI ReportMTI 12-02 MTI Report 12-37 December 2012 MINETA TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE MTI FOUNDER Hon. Norman Y. Mineta The Mineta Transportation Institute (MTI) was established by Congress in 1991 as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Equity Act (ISTEA) and was reauthorized under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st century (TEA-21). MTI then successfully MTI BOARD OF TRUSTEES competed to be named a Tier 1 Center in 2002 and 2006 in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). Most recently, MTI successfully competed in the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2011 to Founder, Honorable Norman Thomas Barron (TE 2015) Ed Hamberger (Ex-Officio) Michael Townes* (TE 2014) be named a Tier 1 Transit-Focused University Transportation Center. The Institute is funded by Congress through the United States Mineta (Ex-Officio) Executive Vice President President/CEO Senior Vice President Department of Transportation’s Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology (OST-R), University Transportation Secretary (ret.), US Department of Strategic Initiatives Association of American Railroads Transit Sector Transportation Parsons Group HNTB Centers Program, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and by private grants and donations. Vice Chair Steve Heminger (TE 2015) Hill & Knowlton, Inc. Joseph Boardman (Ex-Officio) Executive Director Bud Wright (Ex-Officio) Chief Executive Officer Metropolitan Transportation Executive Director The Institute receives oversight from an internationally respected Board of Trustees whose members represent all major surface Honorary Chair, Honorable Bill Amtrak Commission American Association of State transportation modes.
    [Show full text]
  • Rate/State Coulomb Stress Transfer Model for the CSEP Japan Seismicity Forecast
    Earth Planets Space, 63, 171–185, 2011 Rate/state Coulomb stress transfer model for the CSEP Japan seismicity forecast Shinji Toda1 and Bogdan Enescu2 1Disaster Prevention Research Institute (DPRI), Kyoto University, Gokasho, Uji, Kyoto 611-0011, Japan 2National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED), 3-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0006, Japan (Received June 25, 2010; Revised January 13, 2011; Accepted January 13, 2011; Online published March 4, 2011) Numerous studies retrospectively found that seismicity rate jumps (drops) by coseismic Coulomb stress increase (decrease). The Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Prediction (CSEP) instead provides us an opportunity for prospective testing of the Coulomb hypothesis. Here we adapt our stress transfer model incorporating rate and state dependent friction law to the CSEP Japan seismicity forecast. We demonstrate how to compute the forecast rates of large shocks in 2009 using the large earthquakes during the past 120 years. The time dependent impact of the coseismic stress perturbations explains qualitatively well the occurrence of the recent moderate size shocks. Such ability is partly similar to that of statistical earthquake clustering models. However, our model differs from them as follows: the off-fault aftershock zones can be simulated using finite fault sources; the regional areal patterns of triggered seismicity are modified by the dominant mechanisms of the potential sources; the imparted stresses due to large earthquakes produce stress shadows that lead to a reduction of the forecasted number of earthquakes. Although the model relies on several unknown parameters, it is the first physics based model submitted to the CSEP Japan test center and has the potential to be tuned for short-term earthquake forecasts.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great East Japan Earthquake 2011
    Tohoku University International Recovery Platform Kobe University Cabinet office of Japan Asian Disaster Reduction Center United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction © IRP 2013 This report was jointly developed by Tohoku University, Kobe University, and individual experts with the support and supervision of the International Recovery Platform (IRP) and Prof. Yasuo Tanaka of University Tunku Abdul Rahman/Kobe University. International Recovery Platform Yasuo Kawawaki, Senior Recovery Expert Yoshiyuki Akamatsu, Senior Researcher Sanjaya Bhatia, Knowledge Management Officer Gerald Potutan, Recovery Expert The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of IRP partners and governments. The information contained in this publication is provided as general guidance only. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information. This report maybe freely quoted but acknowledgment of source is requested. INTERNATIONAL RECOVERY PLATFORM RECOVERY STATUS REPORT March 2013 The Great East Japan Earthquake 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... I FOREWORD ........................................................................................................................ 1 OVERVIEW OF THE GREAT EAST JAPAN EARTHQUAKE ............................................................ 3 TWO YEARS AFTER THE GREAT EAST JAPAN EARTHQUAKE: CURRENT STATUS AND THE CHALLENGES
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Report of the 2011 Off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake
    Preliminary report of the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake Mar. 25, 2011 Yoshimitsu Okada (President, NIED) 1. Introduction In March 11, 2011, “Off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake” was generated with magnitude 9.0, which records the largest in the history of seismic observation in Japan. The greatest disaster on record was brought by huge tsunami with nearly 30 thousand killed or missing people. We would like to express our deepest sympathy for the victims of this earthquake. Associated with this earthquake, nuclear reactors No.1 through 4 at the Fukushima 1st Nuclear Power Plant got into the serious situation by considerable disability of cooling and confining functions. General public felt alarm with this situation and power shortage led many people in disruption by unprecedented planned outage of electricity. Coincidence of earthquake and nuclear hazards made people partly in panic and civilian life was attacked by unprecedented disasters such as difficulty in commodity procurement of gasoline and foods. Here, we will present a preliminary report about the outline of the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake. 2. Main shock Main shock occurred on 14:46 of March 11, 2011 (JST). Seismic intensity of 7 in JMA (Japan Meteorological Agency) scale was recorded at Kurihara City, Miyagi Pref., and intensity of 6+ or 6- were observed in wide area along Pacific region ranging from Iwate Pref. to Ibaraki Pref (Fig.1). Peak ground acceleration of 2,933gal (composite of three components) was observed at Tsukidate, Kurihara City, one of the NIED K-NET station. It was the third time that intensity of 7 was recorded in Japan following the 1995 Kobe Earthquake (M7.3) and 2004 mid-Niigata Earthquake (M6.8).
    [Show full text]
  • HFA Irides Review Preliminary Report Focusing on 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake
    October, 2013 Having experienced the catastrophic disaster in 2011, Tohoku University has founded the International Research Institute of Disaster Science (IRIDeS). Together with collaborating organizations from many countries and staff with a broad array of specializations, IRIDeS conducts world-leading research on natural disaster science and disaster mitigation. Based on the lessons from the 2011 Great East Japan (Tohoku) Earthquake and Tsunami disaster, IRIDeS aims to become a world center for the study of disasters and disaster mitigation, learning from and building upon past lessons in disaster management from Japan and around the world. Throughout, IRIDeS will contribute to on-going recovery/reconstruction efforts in areas affected by the 2011 tsunami, conducting action-oriented research and pursuing effective disaster management to build a sustainable and resilient society. The 3rd United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 will be held in Sendai City, one of the areas seriously damaged due to the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami. IRIDeS will play an important role for the conference as an academic organization located in the hosting city. Drafting of this report, focusing on the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami in terms of the core indicators of the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015, is one of the contributory activities to the forthcoming event. This publication is the preliminary report toward the final issue, which will be released in March 2014. We hope that the Japanese experience of past disasters including the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami will be shared among national/local governments, the private sector, and citizens all over the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix (PDF:4.3MB)
    APPENDIX TABLE OF CONTENTS: APPENDIX 1. Overview of Japan’s National Land Fig. A-1 Worldwide Hypocenter Distribution (for Magnitude 6 and Higher Earthquakes) and Plate Boundaries ..................................................................................................... 1 Fig. A-2 Distribution of Volcanoes Worldwide ............................................................................ 1 Fig. A-3 Subduction Zone Earthquake Areas and Major Active Faults in Japan .......................... 2 Fig. A-4 Distribution of Active Volcanoes in Japan ...................................................................... 4 2. Disasters in Japan Fig. A-5 Major Earthquake Damage in Japan (Since the Meiji Period) ....................................... 5 Fig. A-6 Major Natural Disasters in Japan Since 1945 ................................................................. 6 Fig. A-7 Number of Fatalities and Missing Persons Due to Natural Disasters ............................. 8 Fig. A-8 Breakdown of the Number of Fatalities and Missing Persons Due to Natural Disasters ......................................................................................................................... 9 Fig. A-9 Recent Major Natural Disasters (Since the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake) ............ 10 Fig. A-10 Establishment of Extreme Disaster Management Headquarters and Major Disaster Management Headquarters ........................................................................... 21 Fig. A-11 Dispatchment of Government Investigation Teams (Since
    [Show full text]
  • The 2016 Fukushima Earthquake and Tsunami Local Tsunami Behavior
    International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 21 (2017) 323–330 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijdrr The 2016 Fukushima earthquake and tsunami: Local tsunami behavior and MARK recommendations for tsunami disaster risk reduction ⁎ Anawat Suppasria, , Natt Leelawata, Panon Latcharotea, Volker Roebera, Kei Yamashitaa, Akihiro Hayashia, Hiroyuki Ohirab, Kentaro Fukuic, Akifumi Hisamatsub, David Nguyenb, Fumihiko Imamuraa a International Research Institute of Disaster Science (IRIDeS), Tohoku University, Japan b Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Tohoku University, Japan c Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, School of Engineering, Tohoku University, Japan ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: The 2016 Fukushima earthquake and tsunami presented several new issues of tsunami generation mechanism 2016 Fukushima earthquake and tsunami and propagation, as well as of organizational responses such as evacuation procedures and dissemination of Tsunami disaster risk reduction tsunami warning. This study focuses on explanations to issues of public interest based on the experiences during Tsunami mechanism the 2016 tsunami: (1) Despite Fukushima Prefecture's proximity to the earthquake's epicenter, why was the Tsunami runup largest wave observed in the neighboring Miyagi Prefecture? (2) Why was the second wave of the tsunami larger Tsunami warning than the first? (3) Why was the tsunami advisory elevated to a tsunami warning in Miyagi Prefecture? (4) Why did tsunami intrusions into rivers occur? (5) And why were local tsunami runup values much higher than the broadcasted tsunami amplitudes from local tide gauges? In the wake of the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami, this study also points out remaining problems and new perspectives related to tsunami disaster risk reduction.
    [Show full text]
  • Implications of GPS-Derived Displacement, Strain and Stress Rates on the 2003 Miyagi-Hokubu Earthquakes
    Yerbilimleri, 30 (2004), 91-102 Hacettepe Üniversitesi Yerbilimleri Uygulama ve Araflt›rma Merkezi Bülteni Bulletin of Earth Sciences Application and Research Centre of Hacettepe University Implications of GPS-derived displacement, strain and stress rates on the 2003 Miyagi-Hokubu earthquakes 2003 Miyagi-Hokubu (Japonya) depremleri için GPS’ten elde edilen yer de¤ifltirme, birim deformasyon ve gerilme h›zlar›n›n de¤erlendirilmesi Ömer AYDAN Tokai University, Department of Marine Civil Engineering, Shizuoka, JAPAN ABSTRACT Earthquake prediction has been an important field of research for years and some earthquake prediction projects such as the Tokai Earthquake Prediction Project in Japan and the Parkfield Earthquake Prediction Project in USA have been recently undertaken to progress on short-term prediction. As also shown by the author, the stress ra- tes derived from the GPS deformation rates can be effectively used to locate the areas with high seismic risk. Furt- hermore, daily variations of derived strain-stress rates from dense GPS networks in Japan and USA may provide a high quality data to understand the behaviour of the earth’s crust preceding earthquakes and also to predict the occurrence time of earthquakes. In this study, the method proposed by Aydan (2000) is applied to the daily GPS measurements in the northern part of Miyagi prefecture during the period between 1998 and 2003. Although the responses of deformation velocities of stations obtained from the GPS are not generally consistent with the plate tectonics model of the region, the regional strain and stress rates are in accordance with those expected from the faulting mechanism of the earthquakes.
    [Show full text]
  • Miyagi Sea Earthquake M9.0 Maximum Tsunami Hegiht (M) 8.5 M8.2 De Earthquake M 7 Ake
    Lessons from the 2011 Tohoku tsunami and tsunami mitigation in Japan 〇AtSiAnawat Suppasri Panon Latcharote Fumihiko Imamura Tsunami Engineering Research Field Hazard and Risk Evaluation Research Division International Research Institute of Disaster Science (IRIDeS) Tohoku University 25 February 2016 1 About IRIDeS Disaster Disaster Institute established in Major National University 1923 The University of Tokyo GtKtEthkGreat Kanto Earthquake Earthquake Research Institute（1925-） 1950 Kyoto University Typhoon Jane Disaster Prevention Research Institute（1951-） 2011 Tohoku University International Research Institute of GEJE and Tsunami Disaster Science（2012-） RiRegional and urban reconstruction Human and Disaster social science response Disaster Hazard and IRIDeS medical risk science evaluation • Overturning the Japanese character Disaster meaning disaster「災」= reconstruction and sustainable and resilient societies information management and • Purple is the color of the Tohoku Endowed University public collaboration research • The Iris is the symbol of “hope” and “dignity” 2 About tsunami engineering 3 Size of event – casualties and economic loss Logarithmic scales on vertical axes DEATHS + MISSING ECONOMIC LOSS US$ bn Source: Dr. Stephen Platt, Cambridge Architectural Research (CAR) Size of disaster size = (deaths + missing) x (loss/GDP)( loss / GDP ) Disaster Deaths Missing Loss US$bn GDP US$bn Size of disaster China, Wenchuan 2008 87,587 130 9,240 1,232 Japan, Tohoku 2011 20,350 210 4,919 869 Pakistan, Kashmir 2005 87,000 2.3 232 863 Iran, Bam 2003 30,000 1.5 368 122 Chile, Maule 2010 547 30 277 59 New Zealand, Christchurch 2011 181 15 186 15 Thailand, Indian Ocean 2004 8,212 0.4 387 8 Italy, L'Aquila 2009 308 11.6 2,149 2 Turkey, Van 2011 601 1 819 1 USA Northridge 1994 72 41.8 16,768 0 Source: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Kumamoto Japan Earthquakes of 14 and 16 April 2016 a Field Report by Eefit
    THE KUMAMOTO JAPAN EARTHQUAKES OF 14 AND 16 APRIL 2016 A FIELD REPORT BY EEFIT Seismic Skills Meeting THE KUMAMOTO JAPAN EARTHQUAKES OF 14 AND 16 APRIL 2016 Dr. Katsu Goda, University of Bristol (Team Leader and Editor) Dr. Grace Campbell, Arup Ms. Laura Hulme, Arup Mr. Bashar Ismael, University of Manchester Dr. Lin Ke, Willis Re Japan Ms. Rebekah Marsh, Mott MacDonald Prof. Peter Sammonds, University College London Dr. Emily So, University of Cambridge Report prepared in association with: Dr. Yoshihiro Okumura, Kyoto University Miss Saki Yotsui, Kyoto University Dr. Maki Koyama, Gifu University Dr. Nozar Kishi, Karen Clark & Company Report reviewed by: Mr. Antonios Pomonis, World Bank, Consultant; Social, Urban, Rural & Resilience (GSURR) The Kumamoto Japan earthquakes of 14 and 16 April 2016 i Acknowledgements The EEFIT Kumamoto team would like to express our sincere gratitude to the following individuals and organisations for their support prior to, during and following this mission, without whom we would not have been able to carry out the field trip and research effectively. • Ms. Berenice Chan, Institution of Structural Engineers • Dr. Tristan Lloyd, AIR Worldwide • Dr. Sean Wilkinson, Newcastle University • Prof. Junji Kiyono, Kyoto University • Dr. Takashi Kiyota, University of Tokyo • Prof. Shinji Toda, Tohoku University • Miss Zoe Mildon, University College London Thanks are also due to the following organisations for funding the participation of team members: • EPSRC (EP/I01778X/1) for funding Dr. Katsu Goda, Prof. Peter Sammonds, Dr. Emily So, and Mr. Bashar Ismael • Arup for funding Dr. Grace Campbell and Ms. Laura Hulme • Mott MacDonald for funding Ms. Rebekah Marsh • Willis Towers Watson for funding Dr.
    [Show full text]