On 28 December 1989, an earthquake measuring 5.6 on the Richter scale hit Newcastle. The epicenter was 15 km south-southwest from the city center. This earthquake caused widespread damage, damaging 50 000 buildings and killing 13 people. Damages are estimated to have cost $1.5 billion. The death toll from the earthquake could have been a lot worst. Fortunately, school was not in session at the time, as many schools were badly damaged.Although 5.6 is generally considered to be only a moderately strong earthquake, many buildings were destroyed. This was due to a number of factors. Newcastle was considered to have a low seismic risk, so buildings were not expected to adhere to earthquake standards. Many of the damaged buildings were built on alluvial land, or land deposited by water, which is affected more strongly by earthquake waves. The shaking went on for a very long time, 35-40 seconds. Finally, the focus was very shallow at only 11 km below the surface of the Earth. While the earthquake's measurement on the Richter scale was moderate, its measurement on the Mercalli scale would have been much higher.This paved the way for new building codes and tighter enforcement.
Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensland
http://www.ses.sa.gov.au/site/community_safety/earthquake_information.jsp
http://www.seismicity.see.uwa.edu.au/welcome/seismicity_in_australia
You have a great point re: type of soil...even if a quake starts far away, the waves travel differently depending on the geology. So, in a lot of cases, if you have a lot of unconsolidated material below houses, there will be a lot of destruction even though the epicenter was not close....
ReplyDeleteThat was crucial information concerning Newcastle.It was not considered to have a high seismic risk so appropriate preventive measures were not taken. As far as I'm concerned, if there is a risk of any seismic activity, then steps should have been taken. Mother nature doesn't impose her wrath based on human predictions and theories.When it comes to caution. don't be settle with just doing enough We should always go one step more.
ReplyDeleteThat was crucial information concerning Newcastle.It was not considered to have a high seismic risk so appropriate preventive measures were not taken. As far as I'm concerned, if there is a risk of any seismic activity, then steps should have been taken. Mother nature doesn't impose her wrath based on human predictions and theories.When it comes to caution. don't be settle with just doing enough We should always go one step more.
ReplyDelete