1 seismic risks, transportation networks, and resilient communities 2
TRANSCRIPT
Seismic Risks, Transportation Networks, and Resilient Communities in a Globalized Economy
John Bowen, Department of Geography, Central Washington University
Photo source: Reuters – National Journal (2011) Pictures – Earthquake in Japan. March 11. http://www.nationaljournal.com/pictures-earthquake-in-japan-20110311
Sendai Airport, JapanMarch 11, 2011
Damaged HighwayTohoku Region, Japan, March 2011
Photo source: thetimes.co.uk
Port of Sendai, JapanMarch 2011
Photo source: www.porttechnology.org
Seismic Risks, Transportation Networks, and Resilient Communities in a Globalized Economy
John Bowen, Department of GeographyCentral Washington University
Why prioritize transportation systems?1. Transportation infrastructure elements are vulnerable to
seismic hazards.
Collapsed highway, Sylmar, CaliforniaJanuary 18, 1994
Image source: The Atlantic (2014) The Northridge earthquake – 20 years ago today. January 17:
http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2014/01/the-northridge-earthquake-20-years-ago-today/100664/
San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge CollapseOctober 17, 1989
Image source: SF Gate (2013) 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. October 18: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/1989-Loma-Prieta-Earthquake-2459219.php#photo-2020876/
Seismic Risks, Transportation Networks, and Resilient Communities in a Globalized Economy
John Bowen, Department of GeographyCentral Washington University
Why prioritize transportation systems?1. Transportation infrastructure elements are vulnerable to
seismic hazards.2. Transportation systems are spatially extensive,
exacerbating seismic vulnerability.
Shinkansen Network
Image source: Wikipedia (2014)
Epicenters for earthquakes M ≥ 6.0 between 1950 and 2013
Seismic Risks, Transportation Networks, and Resilient Communities in a Globalized Economy
John Bowen, Department of GeographyCentral Washington University
Why prioritize transportation systems?1. Transportation infrastructure elements are vulnerable to
seismic hazards.2. Transportation systems are spatially extensive,
exacerbating seismic vulnerability.3. Transportation systems are organized in networks in which
the loss of one node or link can be propagated across multiple scales.
"Tracks were displaced in 2,590 places, and 1,150 electrification masts were broken, leaning or cracked. […] The 11 March earthquake forced us to cancel, suspend or reduce train operations on most of our 7,512.6km network".Mitsuo Higashi, JR East International Department DirectorQuoted in International Railway Magazine, May 2011
Eyjafjallajoküll EruptionErupted April-May 2010
Seismic Risks, Transportation Networks, and Resilient Communities in a Globalized Economy
John Bowen, Department of GeographyCentral Washington University
Why prioritize transportation systems?1. Transportation infrastructure elements are vulnerable to
seismic hazards.2. Transportation systems are spatially extensive,
exacerbating seismic vulnerability.3. Transportation systems are organized in networks in which
the loss of one node or link can be propagated across multiple scales.
4. Transportation systems are critically important to relief efforts.
Image sources: USGS & NASA
Image source: BBC
Tsunami Wave Height, December 26, 2004
Airlift of emergency relief supplies December 2004
Image source: dc-photographer.photoshelter.com
Seismic Risks, Transportation Networks, and Resilient Communities in a Globalized Economy
John Bowen, Department of GeographyCentral Washington University
Why prioritize transportation systems?1. Transportation infrastructure elements are vulnerable to
seismic hazards.2. Transportation systems are spatially extensive,
exacerbating seismic vulnerability.3. Transportation systems are organized in networks in which
the loss of one node or link can be propagated across multiple scales.
4. Transportation systems are critically important to relief efforts.
5. Transportation networks strongly affect post-disaster redevelopment prospects.
Image source: P. Gelling (2009) Bumpy journey to rebuild Aceh after tsunami. The New York Times, December 25.
Image source: US Embassy, Jakarta
US Funded Road ProjectAceh Province, Indonesia
Image source: USGS
Source: Chang, S. 2000. ""Disasters and Transport Systems: Loss, Recovery, and Competition at the Port of Kobe after the 1995 Earthquake," Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 8, pp. 53-65.
Chang, S. 2000. ""Disasters and Transport Systems: Loss, Recovery, and Competition at the Port of Kobe after the 1995 Earthquake," Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 8, pp. 53-65.
The Port of Kobe
Port of Kobe
Photo source: http://www.kptc.co.jp/e_port_outline.html
Rank Port Country Twenty Foot Equivalent Units (TEUs) Millions, 2012
1 Shanghai China 32.53
2 Singapore Singapore 31.65
3 Hong Kong China 23.10
4 Shenzhen China 22.94
5 Busan South Korea 17.04
6 Ningbo-Zhoushan China 16.83
7 Guangzhou China 14.74
8 Qingdao China 14.50
9 Dubai United Arab Emirates 13.27
10 Tianjin China 12.30
52 Kobe USA 2.57
74 Seattle USA 1.89
78 Tacoma USA 1.71
Containerport Rankings, 2012
Source: Containerisation International (2013) Top 100 Ports. pp. 14-15.
Source: The Economist (2011) Counting the cost. Accessed April 1, 2014. Online at: http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/03/natural_disasters
Seismic Risks, Transportation Networks, and Resilient Communities in a Globalized Economy
John Bowen, Department of GeographyCentral Washington University
Why prioritize transportation systems?1. Transportation infrastructure elements are vulnerable to
seismic hazards.2. Transportation systems are spatially extensive,
exacerbating seismic vulnerability.3. Transportation systems are organized in networks in which
the loss of one node or link can be propagated across multiple scales.
4. Transportation systems are critically important to relief efforts.
5. Transportation networks strongly affect post-disaster redevelopment prospects.
6. Transportation systems can be made more resilient to seismic hazards.
Image source: www.ecaminer.com
State Route 99 Tunnel in Seattle, October 2013
Bridges in WSDOT Seismic Retrofit Program as of March 2014Completely Retrofitted 284Partially Retrofitted 120Needing Retrofitting 477Under Contract 32 Total 913Source: WSDOT Bridge Office
Willapa River Bridge (old & new)State Route 6 near Menlo, WA
Shinkansen train speeds past temporary housing, SendaiApril 11, 2011
Photo source: www.nbcnews.com
Source: Oregon Department of Transportation (2012) Lifeline Selection Summary Report. Available at: http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP/Reports/Lifeline%20Selection%20Summary%20Report.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2014.
Source: A. Pollack and S. Lohr (2011) A Japanese plant struggles to produce a critical auto part. New York Times, April 27. Online.
A stone tablet warning of tsunami risks Aneyoshi, Japan. Hundreds of such tablets, some as many as 600 year old, have been placed along the coast of Japan.
Source: M. Fackler (2011) Tsunami warnings, written in stone. The New York Times, April 21: A6.
Image source: www.cityoftacoma.org
Image source: http://baybridgeinfo.org/baybridge360
New & Old East Spans of the Bay Bridge, 2013
Source: The New York Times (2012) A replacement bridge rises on the bay. Accessed April 1, 2014. Online at: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/02/06/science/a-replacement-bridge-rises-on-the-bay.html?ref=science
Features of the New East Span of the Bay Bridge, 2013
Business Continuity Institute Supply Chain Resilience 2011 Survey
Source: Business Continuity Institute (2011) Supply Chain Resilience 2011. Online at http://www.zurichna.com/internet/zna/SiteCollectionDocuments/en/corporatebusiness/riskengineering/Supply_Chain_Resilience_2011.pdf. Accessed April 3, 2014.
0
20
40
60
80
100
Frequency of magnitude 6.0 or greater earthquakes from 1984-2014 in the Northwest Pacific Rim
0
20
40
60
80
100
Frequency of Magnitude 6.0 or Greater Earthquakes from 1984-2014 in the Western
Indonesian Region
Source: T. Harriman (2014) Geography 309 project. Used by permission.
Earthquake Archive Search
Rank Port Country Twenty Foot Equivalent Units
(TEUs) Millions, 2012
Number of earthquakes 1950-2013 with M ≥ 6.0 and epicenter distance ≤ 200 km
1 Shanghai China 32.53 1
2 Singapore Singapore 31.65 0
3 Hong Kong China 23.10 0
4 Shenzhen China 22.94 0
5 Busan South Korea 17.04 5
6 Ningbo China 16.83 1
7 Guangzhou China 14.74 0
8 Qingdao China 14.50 1
9 Dubai UAE 13.27 7
10 Tianjin China 12.30 6
52 Kobe USA 2.57 28
74 Seattle USA 1.89 2
78 Tacoma USA 1.71 2
Seismic Risks of Major Containerports