by frog
A sad day for us all. Our thoughts are with the people of Christchurch.
I’ve found twitter to be a good way to get a feel for what’s happening:
Tweets from people in/near Christchurch
Published in Health & Wellbeing by frog on Tue, February 22nd, 2011
Tags: christchurch, earthquake, eqnz
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
If you can’t locate somebody, enter their details here: http://christchurch-2011.person-finder.appspot.com/
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
5 
18 (-13)
What are you suggesting? That Christchurch should have just been demolished and a new city established somewhere else and the people of Christchurch forcibly moved there?
I am not a geologist, but my understanding is that it is extremely rare for an earthquake of this magnitude to follow so closely on the one in September last year.
Maybe a new look at the viability and safety of the Christchurch CBD needs to be had after today’s events, but you are too fast off the mark, Turnip.
The priority now has to be ensuring the wellbeing of those injured or homeless, and mourning those who have died, not to attribute blame.
I have nothing but contempt for you, Turnip, given your comment above.
Like or Dislike:
11 
0 (+11)
What about somewhere people can offer billets on the internet for all these displaced people?
Like or Dislike:
5 
1 (+4)
http://www.facebook.com/WellingtonAirport/posts/204356046245380
Billets for people in Christchurch:
http://www.3news.co.nz/Christchurch-quake—offer-someone-a-bed/tabid/423/articleID/199324/Default.aspx
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Same goes for Wellington, but masonry is favored for some reason. Well reinforced concrete, steel frame buildings with proper bracing, Wood, Domes… Timbercrete.
Fnck the crown inquiry… import a couple of building inspectors from LA or San Francisco. They can rewrite (copy)the code in a month or so, no yammering about it for half a year.
There ARE ways to build… Christchurch can stay where it is… but when you have a severe seismic problem you don’t build high and you don’t use bricks. Use the bricks for roads somewhere. Waste of time and money to build it back the way it was.
Time now to do it right.
BJ
PS. When contemplating disasters for NZ buildings it occurred to me that the whole country is unbelievably vulnerable to termites. Never had them here… one hopes that we are being really really careful with the contents of the palm-kernel shipments.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0 (+7)
toad, it was not unusual – apparently it is common for an after shock earthquake one point below the original one (that means one around 6), a geologist said they had “hoped” after 6 months had past (those at 5 and 5.5 were all that would occur).
One wonders how the enabling act covers the issue of ensuring a safer re-build?
And after this, if Wellington gets the big one, how difficult it will be to get public servants back to work in the months afterwards?
bj – brick veneer is OK right?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
@SPC 8:40 PM
Fair enough. I was relying on the opinion of a geologist who considered this was actually a quake on a different fault line from the one that caused the September quake last year. So was a new quake, rather than an aftershock.
But reliance on one expert probably not that good this early in the piece. Point taken, SPC.
I guess one way of coping with the human catastrophe is to focus on the science, and I’m probably guilty of that, and of not doing it that well.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Sure, it was a different fault-line but apparently its still called an after-shock (because of load-up pressures? these will apparently increase the risk for Wellington as this usually occurs in clusters).
Incidently English says that the force of the after-shock was greater than that provided for in the current building code.
PS I tend to look at “after event” management issues.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Wellington gets the big one, how difficult it will be to get public servants back to work in the months afterwards?
[frog: An insensitive and inappropriate comment in the context of today's events. Be warned.]
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
This is kinda interesting. Looks like these guys predicted it:
http://www.predictweather.com/ArticleShow.aspx?ID=334&type=home
It means this area of the sun that corresponds to NZ is again seeing some activation. The window of 15-25 February should be potent for all types of tidal action, not only kingtides but cyclone development and ground movement.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
If you look at the Christchurch quake map and all the epicentres since September, you can see that there has been a redistribution of seismic stress over a very wide area.
This latest quake was situated on a fault on the ancient extinct volcanic structure that makes up Banks peninsular.
The previous quake has possibly triggered this event due to a shift in seismic strain towards the east.
Geologists will very quickly gain a picture of what is going on by data gained from aftershocks.
It is entirely possible that these stresses could trigger other fault lines in the central South Island, I am hoping the Alpine fault is not one of them.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Like or Dislike:
6 
0 (+6)
HELP
Hi Everybody, my immediate concern is that I know a couple of families in east christchurch who are without water.
I rang them back and told them the nearest triage and welfare centers but there are no phone numbers for those centers.
Can anyone help us out?
Thanks todd that number is helpfull the only number I could get from the site is—-Ph 0800 779 997 Govt. help line.
The situation is that those outside christchurch have a lot more information than those in Christchurch as their computers are down due to outages. Texting is the most preferable method of communication!!!!
Those living outside the limits could be filling up sealable containers with clean water and getting them to those centers or to those in need.
Turnip; we could do without you comments at the moment they are not very helpfull.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
BJ says “Same goes for Wellington, but masonry is favored for some reason. Well reinforced concrete, steel frame buildings with proper bracing, Wood, Domes… Timbercrete”
There is a reason why NZ buidlings were not built from steel until recent times.
The BNZ building in Wellington was a high-rise steel office building started in 1972. The Unions went on strike as tehy would not let any non-union members do welding, hence it took over a decade to build.
Because of the stranglehold of the boilermakers union, leading to the cost in money and time to finish the BNZ building, steel was simply not used to construct NZ bulldings for about two decades.
When I was doing civil engineering in the 1980s, it was completely unheard of to build a large building out of steel – to the point it was pretty much dropped from civil engineering courses.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BNZ_Centre
Like or Dislike:
3 
3 (0)
Yep, Quiggs reckons its a another new, hither-to, unknown fault.
On balance, didn’t enjoy Christchurch much today. On the other hand, some folks aren’t with us any more, and thats a tradgedy.
But we’re getting to the end of Christchurch’s “historic” status; most of the old interesting buildinsg are now gone. I expect the wrecking ball will make short work of what is remaining. Christchurch will end up beng a rebuilt city.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Todd,
Earthquakes are essentially unpredictable (we know the chance of one happening in the next 10 years or whatever, but cannot say when it will happen).
The site you linked to belongs to a guy called Ken Ring. He reckons he can predict the weather (and other things) from cycles of the moon. I reckon otherwise … but my honest opinion of his methods might be considered defamatory.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
SPC
I would not recommend normal bricks or blocks. Full Stop. Masonry carries too much mass too high up the wall and it is difficult to maintain its attachment even as a veneer. This was 6.3. Wellington can expect an 8 and I don’t doubt that Christchurch should design similarly at this point.
If you want to imagine… attach the house or building at its foundation – to a vertical wall – So it is standing straight out from that wall. Cantilevered.
If your structure can handle THAT without bits falling off, shearing off, collapsing to the ground, you have done the job pretty well. If it can handle the pressure of another house stacked on top of it without collapsing…. that’s good. That’s basically what a 1 G hit looks like to the house/building. Just picture that when you are looking at the design of the structure.
Something like a dome has almost no problem adjusting to that rearrangement of forces.. and a lightweight structure has an easier job than the heavy one.
For a wood frame house that means diagonal bracing in the walls. Not little squares, real triangulation. Can be done by sheathing in plywood but I have never seen that. Can be done with tension bars or cables in the frame. I was totally nonplussed to see this missing entirely in a structure going up above Johnsonville… pretty much smack on the main Wellington faults.
I imagine it is possible to do a brick veneer using many many attachments, but the labor to get it attached that well would seem prohibitive to me.
Better to use if you must have that look, Timbercrete, or one of the aerated lightweight concrete blocks or panels. Heavy is bad, steel is good, wood is OK.
…and if the earth cracks open directly under the foundation – Against fate, even the Gods do not fight.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
Thanks Photonz, that is interesting about the Unions of the time. Explains a lot of what people’s attitudes now… and about why some buildings were built as they were.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj – I was overseas for a long time late 80s and 90s, but I think after the unions were broken we slowly started to build some steel buildings again some time in the 90s or 00s.
There is quite a strong anti-union feeling among many Kiwis, largely due to overpowering unions in the 70s and 80s.
Another case was the Mangare Bridge to Auckland airport, which took nearly a decade to construct.
And the regular strikes on the Cook Stait ferrys, always timed to coincide with school holidays to cause maximum disruption So much stuff went missing on the ferries that the union officials gave themselves the nick-name Great train robbers.
And there was concern that small vessels would run aground on the artificial reefs caused by so much crockery thrown overboard because no one wanted to wash the dishes.
There was also good support for some union action – some was reasonable and warranted – some strikes were the complete opposite.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
Really a sad news. I heard i early in the morning may god save those people.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
This earthquake in Christchurch is bigger than it seems. little earthquakes are often a sign of large problems. I am quite worried.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I am sorry that I am quick off the mark but unlike you Toad I understand science and don’t listen to so called experts that got their education from the back of a weetbix packet. No real expert would have made the statement you made Toad none so I really have to call your friend out.
We just had the 80th year since the Napier quake and the same bricks and masonry that killed people then killed people yesterday in Christchurch.
Right now we need to deal with the suffering people but come on how many people need to die until we hire some real engineers from California since its clear that NZ civil engineers are bordering on the retard level.
The September Quake in CHCH was a god dam warning to us and we did nothing please Toad cite a single piece of legislation dealing with our shoddy building codes, you can’t can you. While we got lucky after September we showed how stupid we were after yesterday.
When a couple of 1000 people have been killed in Wellington after it gets hit by a magnitude 8.0 earthquake Toad. Will you get it then or will you still be listening to your experts.
And please Toad I am not quick to jump to any conclusion i’m just smarter than you so I reach the conclusion before you and no I don’t need to listen to your so called experts.
Just scrap the NZ democracy and let BJ run the place already ok. He doesn’t even need a crown inquiry and just skips to the fix which is the NZ building codes.
In the next 6 months I doubt any political parties or faux NZ journalists will have the balls or guts to question the mighty John Key and our building standards.
As I write this I am looking across the street in Manhatten at the new 40 story building that went up and noticing the exterior brick work and masonry work which in the event of an Earthquake here would crumble fall and kill people on the street below. Now its a bit different here in NY but NZ and the New Zealand people should know better, so stop being stupid and sheep like.
The CBD of Christchurch was a death trap and like all traps it was waiting to spring well yesterday it sprung and sadly people died, but please don’t push the lie that those people died due to unknown events or random actions they died because people like you pretend problems don’t exist and can only see these problems after the fact when their are bodies lying on the ground. We need to talk about this now since in 6 months like the last earthquake you and your kind will have placed your heads in the sand and gone back to pretending.
And when the real Earthquake hits, ie one from the Alpine fault we wont be ready and more will die and once again we will show how stupid and sheep like we are.
Like or Dislike:
3 
2 (+1)
A smart turnip, will wonders never cease. Do Toads eat turnips?
Samiuela
The moon and sun does influence the weather. It creates tides and wind, which in turn creates much of the weather on the earth. The basics:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/tide.html
The Earth experiences two high tides per day because of the difference in the Moon’s gravitational field at the Earth’s surface and at its center. You could say that there is a high tide on the side nearest the Moon because the Moon pulls the water away from the Earth, and a high tide on the opposite side because the Moon pulls the Earth away from the water on the far side. The tidal effects are greatly exaggerated in the sketches.
As the sun warms the Earth’s surface, the atmosphere warms too. Warm air, which weighs less than cold air, rises. Then cool air moves in and replaces the rising warm air. This movement of air is what makes the wind blow.
Tides create structural force on the earths crust.
We have some of the largest solar events in a long time happening at the moment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_flare
A solar flare is a large explosion in the Sun’s atmosphere that can release as much as 6 × 1025 joules of energy (about a sixth of the total energy output of the Sun each second). The term is also used to refer to similar phenomena in other stars, where the term stellar flare applies.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17216251/Sunspots-and-Earthquakes
Some scientists have become aware of a correlation between sunspots and Earthquakes and want to use the sunspot data to help predict earth-quakes. The theory is that an intensification of the magnetic field can cause changes in the geo-sphere.
So depending on how strong the sunspot is and where the lunar bodies are placed has a very strong influence on weather and pressure on the earths crust. I have no problem with such theories being the basis for predicting earthquakes. The failure of geoscience to clearly predict such events is apparent. Ken Ring and others have predicted the earthquake to a far greater degree so there must be some relevance in the techniques they are using.
This is a very old theory and there probably is computer based predictive modeling to a high degree already. Getting people to listen is another question though.
If such events are predictable, we have the opportunity to develop theories and measurements through technology so that the predictability becomes even more precise and lives will be saved.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
People in New Zealand have known about the risks of brick buildings for decades. I distinctly remember one of my primary school teachers telling us about why houses should be built of wood instead of brick. Now I don’t know what the building standards in New Zealand say about construction materials, but I can assure you that its common knowledge that brick buildings are less safe in earthquakes than wooden ones. I’ve also heard and seen reports which claim New Zealand’s building standards are better than most other countries when it comes to earthquakes (but I don’t know enough to be able to say categorically this is the case).
Having said that, you’ll notice many of the brick buildings in Christchurch which have collapsed are old buildings, predating Napier’s earthquake.
Now its all very fine to say that there was plenty of time to strengthen/rebuild buildings more safely, and I’m sure this will happen throughout New Zealand in the next few years. However, its a very big and hugely expensive undertaking, and the risk of a catastrophic earthquake is actually quite small in any year. So realistically such a re-building or restrengthening would need to take place over many years (presumably with the most risky buildings targeted first).
Your comments about the abilities of New Zealand civil engineers are wrong. New Zealand engineers have been responsible for a number of major earthquake safety improvements. For example, a guy called Bill Robinson invented the lead rubber bearings which are put under buildings (such as parliament) to lessen the vibrations. I’m sure there are plenty of good American engineers as well. However your comments comparing US engineers with those from other places are just plain arrogant.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Wellington buildings were either pulled down or upgraded in the 70′s to resist earthquake expected loads.
Christchurch was considered a lesser risk, but buildings were also upgraded.
NZ buildings are generally well able to resist earthquakes.
Most of the fallen buildings were built before Napier or the 70′s revised codes..
In many cities in the world an earthquake this strong would have flattened the whole city.
Like or Dislike:
5 
0 (+5)
Many new buildings are required to withstand earthquakes. I recall many of the buildings in Auckland being retrofitted. However I’m also aware of reports that much of this work was not done satisfactorily.
http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/earthquakes/4
The department of civil engineering at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch has gained international recognition for its research into the behaviour of reinforced and pre-stressed concrete in buildings and bridges during earthquakes. Their analysis and design methods have been used in structural design codes both in New Zealand and overseas. Books by New Zealand scientists and engineers have become standard texts.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Can we please stop pushing the false notion that Christchurch was not at risk from earthquakes, after Wellington it was hands down next in line. Also the liquafication which would result in Christchurch was also well known and understood to be a serious problem certainly more serious than in Wellington. Christchurch is sitting on unstable ground to begin with. Less money was spent in Christchurch because its less important than Wellington, losing Wellington would have a larger effect on the NZ economy so we needed to protect it more.
Making statements like this earthquake would of flattend other cities is true but pointless those other cities didn’t have years and yes we have had as I said before 80 years to understand that brick and masonry kill. Hell we got a free reminder of that in the september earthquake.
The NZ Civil engineering community was rather silient Sam after Christchurch’s September earthquake. We were lucky in September we were not in February. Luck is not a good basis for a risk management strategy since (and i’ve been to Las Vegas many times) your luck will always run out.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
A few months ago we got hit by a seven, and we were lucky. We all thought, phew, thats OK, when the Alpine fault arrives (predicted as an eight) it’ll be just a bit worse.
Now a six has trashed the city and lots of people did not live to tell the tale.
The eight, when it arrives, will have 100 times the displacement of the six, and so its pretty clear that Christchurch and the surrounds will have a devastating event.
We now know that our buildings will kill us. We need to properly examine every building in Canterbury, and have it either upgraded to withstand the ‘quake we know is coming, or be demoiished. We need this to be mandated by law.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Donations.
It appears that donations to the Red Cross have overwhelmed their server. Please try here instead:
Salvation Army: https://secure20.salvationarmy.org/donation.jsp
0800 530000 or go to http://www.salvationarmy.org.nz/
The Christchurch SPCA has opened a Pet Emergency Earthquake Fund.
http://www.spcacanterbury.org.nz/
The ANZ, ASB and Westpac banks have donated $1 million each so far. Please verify all donations are going to the right place.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Kerry
If that is true, and the building I saw is still to be fitted with something, it will have to be on the inside, as the building paper was already installed. There was no indication of any arrangement for quake resistance that could be recognized. This may be different from having a problem with the NZ code, and more a problem with enforcing it, but my garage in LA was braced better than this house appears to be.
Trust no one.
The fact that the earthquake broke the breakables is an evolutionary step. Those buildings will go and more resilient buildings will be put in their place… by survivors who have learned caution by paying the price in blood that effective safety measures always charge society.
As for the code, it seems to me that a lot of older buildings were “grandfathered” into compliance rather than being demolished and replaced. This isn’t a safe way to proceed, but it is very human. The historical societies object to the replacements and so do the owners who are lumbered with the costs. Still, there are altogether too many fncking bricks in the streets of Christchurch, and they never should have been carried up high enough to be thrown down.
Now of course we have the occupants and the country as a whole paying a rather higher price.
If the code were adequate this would not have been as bad as it was, though I see the failure of the Pyne-Gould building as likely to be a very fruitful area of study for innumerable engineering students in the future.
I have no doubt that the people who designed that structure did not anticipate it being able to fail as it did. Either the ground beneath the core of the building was not correctly assessed or the structure itself was not able to hold together. The core’s failure (indicated by the fact that it is tilted over) to stay upright left the flooring on its own, and it was not designed to stay up under those conditions, without its connection to the core. There will be a lot of analysis done better than this but it will not take a “royal commission” to get at it. Engineers want to understand that failure more than anyone else can imagine.
That it is better than Haiti or China is not particularly reassuring.
We do usually push limits but I think none will be pushed in Christchurch for at least another year.
I would still regard it useful to get someone who is NOT from NZ to look at the code… and I still regard the use of bricks, as they are used in Wellington and in Christchurch, to be a matter for some reserved words.
Such structures, historical or not, need to be replaced with structures that will not shed missiles or collapse. We can do better and given the nature of this pair of islands, we really ought to work at it.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Turnip
Didn’t know you were close enough to Lost Wages to go there often…. somehow thought you were in Jersey.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
In the meantime:
Go to Phil McDermott’s blog for commentart on “Resilient Cities”:
http://cities-matter.blogspot.com/
Sample: from today’s post:
“And what can urban designers and planners take from this devastation? What does it tell us about the importance of space in the central city, of wide boulevards, generous parks, and civic squares? About the need for more space, not less. The centre of Christchurch is still relatively open, and perhaps that has saved some lives. It was possible to take refuge in the streets, the squares, and the parks.
This event must surely erode planners’ resistance to the decentralisation that is the mark of a prosperous, modern city, that makes it that little bit more liveable, and so much more resilient in the face of disaster? Perhaps we should be thankful that a diminishing share of Christchurch’s people actually works in the CBD – today just 26% of the total. And that not too many dwellings – and residents — had been crammed into retrofitted buildings or high rise apartments assembled in inner city precincts.”
Then read the earlier blog post on resilience stimulated by the devastation of the floods in Queensland.
http://cities-matter.blogspot.com/2011/02/cities-in-search-of-resilience.html
Hence my own view that fundamentally, our planners should stop worrying about sea levels rises that MIGHT happen in 100 years – with plenty of warning – and start thinking about making our cities resilient in the face of catastrophic events which we know can happen tomorrow – cyclones, volcanoes, earthquakes and tsunumai. eg. Don’t put our motorways in tunnels below sea level. Don’t further intensify the central city, especially near the harbour edge.
I suspect given the trauma in Christchurch the city will be re-built as a multi-nucleic low-rise decentralised urban area.
Now matter how good the engineering, people will be reluctant to work in buildings more than a few stories high. And any CBD will probably be built somewhere else. The cathedral and square are a symbol of Christchurch – like the Eiffel Tower – and may be worth rebuilding for that emotional content.
But Auckland Council should take note that all cities in NZ are prone to catastrophe and the “spatial plan” should embody this reality.
And NZ engineers are not dummies. After the last SF earthquake all bridges on the highway network and all
critical buildings were retro-fitted with lead rubber base isolation bearings designed and developed by NZ engineers. I know because I helped negotiate the licenses to manufacture.
Also bjchip, our single storey wood framed dwellings are better braced than you might think from casual inspection. We have to deal with both high windloads (frequent) and earthquakes (occasional) and the code allows a combination of bracing elements to provide the necessary stiffness – Interior linings included.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Updated Donations list:
People can make a donation to the Canterbury Earthquake Appeal either at an ANZ Branch (account number 01-1839-0188939-00) or at the National bank (account number 06-0869-0548507-00).
Donations can be made to the Red Cross online (http://www.redcross.org.nz/donate) or via the GrabOne website (http://www.grabone.co.nz/christchurch), as the Red Cross site has been crashing.
Aucklanders who are able to offer accomodation to displaced Cantabrians should register by calling 0800 AUCKLAND.
Donations can be made to the Westpac Canterbury Care Fund, which is in partnership with the Salvation Army, either at branches nationwide or to the account number 03-0207-0617331-00.
People can donate to the Salvation Army Earthquake appeal online here (http://salvationarmy.org.nz/) or by calling 0800 53 00 00.
Donations can be made to the Rotary New Zealand World Community Service here (http://www.rnzwcs.org/).
Donations can be made to the Christchurch Earthquake Support Fund in ASB branches or online (account number 12-3205-0146808-00). Across the Tasman, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, is also accepting donations for the New Zealand Red Cross.
NZ Blood Services say have sufficient blood stocks but if you are not already a donor and would like to sign up to be contacted when they do need blood donations, call 0800 GIVE BLOOD (0800 448 325) or email here (mailto:donors.national@nzblood.co.nz) to register.
The Christchurch SPCA has opened a Pet Emergency Earthquake Fund. You can donate money here (http://www.spcacanterbury.org.nz/) or to the Westpac account 030802 0586429 00.
Vodafone users can donate to the Red Alert Canterbury Earthquake Appeal by texting “Quake” to 333 to make a $3 donation to the Red Cross Canterbury Earthquake Appeal.
Thanks to Chris for the list
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Turnip, there is nothing wrong with New Zealand’s civil engineers. In fact, the civil engineering school at Canterbury University is a world leader when it comes to such earthquake-resisting technologies as base isolation and fuse joints.
The problem is that there are still a lot of buildings that haven’t been brought up to these standards. You can blame that on landlords or you can blame it on regulators, but you can’t blame it on engineers.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
BJ, There has never been a problem with brick veneered timber frame walls collapsing in earthquakes in NZ. The problem that has been identified in every major earthquake since 1855 is unreinforced masonry walls, most particularly those on the road frontages of shops due to their large ground floor window openings. The correct use of masonry anchors and cement mortar instead of lime mortar reduces the risk of structural collapse onto footpaths by more than 80%. Unfortunatly the building code has never actually required that masonry anchors be installed to pre-1942 UMR buildings.
Please note that the geology under Christchurch is near as damnit identical to Mexico City so the spectra are quite different to those assumed in NZS 1170.5 resulting in significantly less than the assumed risk to one and two storey buildings and greater than the assumed risk for four and five story buildings (and multiples thereof.)
http://db.nzsee.org.nz:8080/web/lfe-darfield-2010/structural/-/blogs/comparison-of-earthquake-intensity-versus-nzs-1170-5-design-1
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ, for info on the root cause of PGC collapse read the summary of chapter eleven of The Earthquake Hazard In Christchurch: A Detailed Evaluation.
http://www.eqc.govt.nz/research/researchpapers/p_105.aspx
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Kevyn – I would never expect the frame wall to collapse. I would expect the veneer to separate unless a LOT of anchors are used. It matters little if the wall stands, at that point the missiles have been launched. Not a serious issue for most houses as they are seldom bricked to any height, but I would still not want such a veneer for a quake resistant house.
Thanks for pointing me at the paper.
Owen, whatever they are planning for the inside of that house, it is going to be unusual if it is going to be “braced” by the time it is finished. Since I don’t KNOW except for what I saw, I remain sceptical that it will wind up being properly finished.
I know I won’t be living in it. Too expensive for me that part of town.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I hope that they do rebuild the Cathedral, and I do hope that they build a replica (as far as they can with modern building regulations) – that is a symbol of Christchurch and it would be a symbol of its rebirth.
I suspect that the problems that Christchurch have faced with respect of its collapsing buildings have been two fold:
Firstly, unlike Wellington and Auckland which saw almost all of their 19th Century buildings demolished in the 1980s, Christchurch did not go through that experience. Obviously, those buildings were going to be hazardous
Secondly, until last year, no-one really expected that Christchurch was going to be hit badly by an earthquake – we always expected that the most likely disaster to hit Christchurch would be a flood, with Wellington getting the deadly earthquake. Unfortunately for the people of Christchurch, we have learnt a nasty lesson – we should never underestimate the power of mother nature.
That is the bit that scares me, especially when we consider that the Richter Scale is exponential (the difference between a 6 and a 7 is less than the difference between a 7 and an 8).
Even scarier is remembering that all the recorded earthquakes of 9 and above have occurred around the Pacific.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Todd,
You are mixing lots of things up: the sun certainly drives the weather, but the moon does not have much influence on the atmosphere (as opposed to the oceans). One can measure tides in the atmosphere (it shows up in the surface pressure observations in the tropics quite nicely), but they have minimal effect on weather systems.
Furthermore, weather is pretty much unpredictable beyond 7-10 days (about 2 weeks at the most); Ken Ring claims to be able to make predictions far beyond this (you can shell out $58 Australian dollars to get weather forecasts for the whole of 2011: http://www.predictweather.com/ArticleShow.aspx?ID=326&type=home ). Its been well understood why the weather is unpredictable beyond a week or two for decades (its to do with an area of science known as chaos theory; see https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Chaos_theory ) Without even looking at Ring’s methods in detail I can tell you with confidence that they cannot produce forecasts any more skillful than climatological forecasts (e.g the chance of rain on any day in May is 20% or whatever it is).
I have never heard any reputable seismologists link earthquake occurrence to sunspot activity, or lunar cycles for that matter.
You just need to be a bit more skeptical when you hear claims such as Ken Ring makes. Ask them to back up their forecasts with rigorous verification, and the best they’ll do is give you a list of all the times they were right (but they won’t mention how often they were wrong).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Just to clear things up the BIG one involves slippage along 200-400 kms of the Alpine Fault. This means the west coast cities of Greymouth and Hokitika have serious casualites the west coast is cut off by road for weeks!!! and on its own the mountain passes are closed as massive slips have occurred in the mountains, the quake has hit further north and had effects all accross the top of the South Island including Nelson, Motueka, Blenheim and all the way up to Wellington. Christchurch looks exactly like it does today.
In short think Tuesday but include the bottom part of the north Island and half the south island. The hydro dams may be damaged so the entire country could be with out power or at the very least power outages may be required.
To those making the false claim about christchurch please explain how Christchurch ignores this massive earthquake. It doesn’t.
We have no idea what one of these quakes is like since no one has documented the experience.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Heritage buildings need to go that is the number one problem with Christchurch we have known this for years.
I love the people defending the (silient) NZ civil engineers on this one, its a bit stupid that we have world earthquake experts but people were still killed by falling bricks and masonry.
The blame for that lies with the historic places trust and its near strangle hold on the christchurch city council. I mean after the Sept Quake people in Christchurch were protesting the tearing down of historic buildings, just stop it the historic buildings need to go they are as has been demonstated with blood this time death traps.
All we hear from people on this site is Wellington Wellington Wellington Wellington. As my above scenario shows we should be talking about the whole top half of the south island. For instance what is the most important building in Greymouth, its the hospital what level of earthquake can it stand. Note it will need to be able to handle all the west coast casualities. The only access to Christchurch will be via air.
Look we can barely handle the Christchurch earthwquake so we obviously can’t handle the BIG one.
If you live anywhere in those above areas next time you are walking in your town look up at the buildings and see the masonry and the bricks in the above earthquake that is all falling on you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Richter scale doesn’t seem to have done the job here. Last years was 7.1(?) this one was 6.3 and yet FAR more destructive. Is there a scale out there that includes other factors (depth is the obvious one) into a more realistic scale of a shake’s destructiveness?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
I agree Turnip, safety trumps history. Take pictures of the places, lots of ‘em. Measure them up. Record them in detail and then replace them. There is no excuse for “falling masonry” in this country. We know better.
We discuss Wellington because it is hellaciously vulnerable… and hard to get in and out of on a good day. Almost all of us know that.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
@samiam 8:43 AM
It is not just depth, it is also location. The 7.1 last year was centred at Darfield, 30km from Christchurch. The 6.3 on Tuesday was centred at Lyttleton, much closer to the CBD.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Really Sam not for the people out in Kaiapo it wasn’t.
The 7.1 was far more destructive than the 6.3.
The Richter scale works fine along with the depth and distance.
Also please note that you are completly dicounting the effect of the 7.1 on the buildings in the CBD along with the thousands of aftershocks.
also If the 7.1 had struck at 1pm people would of died Sam.
I was in upstate NY when I heard about the 7.1 Earthquake and saw the time of day, was i worried about my family back in Christchurch nope. When i saw the 6.3 and the time of day I was far more worried although thank god none of my family works in the CBD. Note its not the CBD i’m worried about just the fact its were all the death traps are.
I found a google Cache of the Christchurch City Councils rebuilding of the Heritage buildings since right now you can’t get to it since the CCC’s website is redirecting. Anyway they have pictures of Heritage Buildings being rebuilt after the September Quake guess what those buildings are now down dumping their bricks all over the place after this latest earthquake.
My question remains Was the Christchurch City Council wrong after the September Quake I say yes at least this time hopefully they will get it right I doubt it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
This is another scale…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercalli_intensity_scale
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Mercalli Scale Sam is un-Scientific since Human beings don’t make very good scientific measuring instruments.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Turnip, you are talking absolute bollocks.
Have you got a television?, because I am seeing that the greatest casualties have all been caused by modern, multi story office blocks collapsing.
Hell, the biggest hotel in Christchuch (and I think the tallest building) is about to topple over, certainly nothing nostalgic about any of these buildings.
You don’t seem to see the many historic buildings still standing, you would also do well to understand that at the peak ground acceleration experienced was near the limit of engineering to protect any structure.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Richter scale doesn’t seem to have done the job here. Last years was 7.1(?) this one was 6.3 and yet FAR more destructive. Is there a scale out there that includes other factors (depth is the obvious one) into a more realistic scale of a shake’s destructiveness?
Geologists are starting to use ground acceleration readings to record local intensity of movement, but even then this is still difficult to correlate to damage potential. For example, the recorder in the Christchurch botanical gardens recorded a higher peak ground acceleration for a mag 4.1 aftershock (which was almost directly beneath them) than for the original 7.1. But the original earthquake was more destructive due to the duration of the shaking and the resonance of the shock waves.
It is a bit like the effects of a surface Nuclear explosion which is a comparable release in energy, the closer to ground zero you are the more dangerous it becomes. Also, like an air burst nuclear weapon, the height of detonation is akin to the depth of an earth quake epicentre. A detonation above ground has the effect of spreading damage from shock waves much further, where as a detonation much closer to the surface causes greater destruction at ground zero but much less further away.
The Magnitude 7.1 was 3 times deeper and 4 times further away from the city centre than the 6.3, so although the 7.1 had a greater overall energy release and duration, the city was not in the worst part of the “blast” radius.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s not quite as simple as high rise/low rise and old and modern.
I suspect that liquefaction will have contributed to the collapse of modern strong buildings. In the Kyoto earthquake some high rise blocks simple fell over but remained in one piece because of the total collapse of the ground under the building.
One advantage of low rise buildings is that people can get out of them quickly and there is less “stuff” to fall down on top of them.
Then there is the furniture inside the building. If all the bookshelves in a school library all end up against one wall it’s not very nice for the kids inside.Fortunately, in the Alaskan earthquake, where this happened, the kids had just gone home. The quake struck at 3.30.
But masonry is bad news. Our brick veneer works because it does have a multitude of ties and is not allowed to go up more than one storey from its base support. I still don’t like it and prefer to keep domestic structures light weight and low and of consistent stiffness.
Anyhow, these sort of problems and issues are not solved by sets of simple rules but by the application of skill, experience and wisdom.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What ever Shunda. Modern???? the PGG building is Modern????? try 40 years old Shunda, Built in the 1960′s. You seem to imply that every Office Tower in Central Christchurch has Collapsed so go ahead the burden is on you to demonstrate this by showing pictures of Every single office tower in central Christchurch collapsed. I await this proof.
The Grand Chancellor has behaved exactly how a building should in an earthquake. I think it was built in the 1980′s. It didn’t fall yet you seem to be sighting it as an example of a building that did fall over during the Earthquake. If it toples after the Earthquake shunda that is fine nobody should be near it or in it.
Now according to your little theory the Crowne Plazza (Park Royal see how old i am). Which I thought was the tallest building in Christchurch should be lying in ruin after having fallen onto the Christchurch town hall. Right Shunda can you please show me the picture, oh thats right your theory is complete rubbish I forgot that.
What is most concering to both BJ and myself is the vast number of 2-3 storey buildings built using Masonry and Brick that just dumped it all onto the pavement and anyone unluckey enough to be standing outside at the time. That was entirely preventable Shunda but as long as we have Brick & Masonry denialists like you then we don’t stand a chance.
The Cathedral has undergone MAJOR earthquake Strengthing as have the Arts center and the Muesem, This is why they are still standing but there are almost 500 heritage buildings in the Christchurch Area many of them have not had that kind of money spent on them. There is also all the Brick & Masonry 2 & 3 story buildings that line the CBD streets, these have also had. You need to understand what is and isn’t a Heritage building since their are 2 different types and a lot more than you seem to know about. Nearly every single Heritage Church in Christchurch has suffered terrible damage. Of course many of those Heritage Buildings had already suffered major damage during the last earthquake and this one has simple increased the damage.
When I see a picture of a bus Shunda covered in Bricks, although I know you are going to deny the bus picture since you are a Brick and Masonry Denialist I know full well that their were injuries and possible fatalities on that bus. That wasn’t caused by a collapsing office tower, that was caused by something that is entirely preventable.
Just wait Shunda and you are going to see a pattern emerge where building built prior to the 1980′s will have suffered far worse than those built afterwards. I wonder why of course that is my theory which I think will probably be found to be valid.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
So Turnip, are you still suggesting that the majority of casualties are from bricks?
Really Turnip, you are sounding much more irrational of late.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Grand Chancellor has behaved exactly how a building should in an earthquake. I think it was built in the 1980’s. It didn’t fall yet you seem to be sighting it as an example of a building that did fall over during the Earthquake. If it toples after the Earthquake shunda that is fine nobody should be near it or in it.
Then you have to afford the same rationale to heritage buildings that are irreparably damaged but still standing.
Modern buildings have crashed to the ground, old buildings have crashed to the ground, this doesn’t appear to be the smoking gun you think it is.
And for the record, I am not a “Brick and Masonry Denialist” I have no qualms about removing unsafe buildings, or old buildings that can’t be made safe.
By the way, the Grand chancellor has effectively ended rescue efforts in several blocks around it’s imminent collapse, not exactly a good “performance”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The CTV and the PGG building Shunda probably got hit by Liquafaction as Owen suggested.
The Liquafaction is what has caused far more problems in Christchurch and while we knew we could get liquafaction in Christchurch earthquakes, I think because we hadn’t experienced it we were a little naive.
What I and BJ and anyone with half a brain is absolutly right about is that the Brick and Masonry is preventable and we should of known better since we have had 80 years to understand this, thats our failure.
What we have learn’t from the two Christchurch quakes is that we have to take liqufaction seriously in Christchurch this doen’t apply accross the whole country although the brick and masonary does.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda
Any structure can be “protected” against any knowable quake loading. (Accelerations experienced by a ship in a heavy sea make the earthquake look quite sedate by comparison). We know we can do it but the question of cost quickly raises its head. Is it worth it to do it?… or better to build where the geology is more favorable? Glad I am this decision not to have to make.
The problem comes when the design load is short of what the real load turns out to be. That clearly happened in more than one place and that it did speaks to a general failure in the geological evaluations… something that is an INPUT to the calculations of the engineers. I doubt that there was an engineering error. For several modern structures in the same center to fail this way requires an error of specification.
Which argues that our geological sciences group should be revisiting the risk for population centers that have not (yet?) been completely destroyed. On an urgent basis.
Which is something I think, that we could be calling for as a party.
Frog?
respectfully
BJ
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
But yes you are Shunda old buildings can’t be made safe the Cathedral is a good example this has undergone earthquake strengthing it still killed people.
The buildings built in the 1980′s as Owen has already suggested were probably not built thinking about Liqufaction, remember we have a tunnel vision earthquake approach which seems to focus on Wellington and how to build buildings to survive the big one its going to be hit with.
Liqufaction is not going to have the same effect in Wellington as it does in Christchurch. We have been guilty of not taking liqufaction seriously in Christchurch we need to, we KNEW this but since we HAD never seen a Big Earthquake in Christchurch we didnt take it as serious as we should.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What I and BJ and anyone with half a brain is absolutly right about is that the Brick and Masonry is preventable and we should of known better since we have had 80 years to understand this, thats our failure.
With regard to Christchurch, this is completely unfair, even 5 years ago I don’t think any geologist would have suggested a mag 6.3 was a high probability under the port hills.
Christchurch was never expected to have to endure such close seismic events, the closest were expected to be from north Canterbury and possibly the foot hills of the alps.
Wellington on the other hand, should be watching this very closely.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
After Napier they rebuilt with (what’s turned out to be) an enduring Art Deco theme.
What’s the ‘new Chch’ theme going to be?
I’d like to see the Greenz championing energy efficient/sustainable buildings as the enduring legacy of the rebuild. Structural integrity will, of course, be a reasonable goal as well.
I mean this in the context of public structures and state housing in the first instance, but encourafing private housing to be repaired and/or rebuilt to a world leading standard too.
New enviro flag bearer city of the world?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Sorry Shunda but any geologist would know that WAS the case. The southern alps are the result of the eastern plate driving west and up over the western plate (driving down).
The resulting stresses radiate out eastward in parallel lines over the chatham rise. The fact that the canterbury region is overlaid by gravel (alluvium) does not hide those fault lines from any reasonable analysis of those forces at work. The exact location of the fault lines might not be apparent but it’s obvious they are there. They (the gravels) do however clearly highlight the liquefaction risk.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
samiam, the geologists have said they didn’t know, this is all very new.
They knew of faults on the Chatham rise, but had no idea they possibly ran right through Christchurch.
Also, faults like the Apline fault and Hope fault have a return period of rupture in the order of hundreds of years, I believe the Greendale fault (where the 7.1 occurred) is something like a return of 15 000 years, which is why it was invisible.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Rubbish again Shunda.
A 300km long slippage of the Alpine Fault causing a Magnitude 8+ it hits Christchurch still with perhaps a similar or slightly smaller effect than what we have seen with the 7.1 and 6.3. Last one was sometime in the 1700′s.
Wellington has a number of faults which branch off the Alpine fault and we have know about them for years. After what we have seen in Christchurch I don’t think we know that much about the smaller faults in and around Christchurch due to them having no visible appearance on the surface, the canterbury plains keeps everything covered up. There is no rocks until you get to the Port Hills which are rememnets of a number of Volcanoes.
Christchurch one of the best cities in the world to study Geology as you can head up into the foot hills of the Alps and see fault lines and how its folded the rock and then head onto and into the Port hills and get a good understanding of the inner workings of a Volcano, its like a minature model cut out showing the insides of the volcano except it isn’t a minature its the real thing.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What the hell are you on about Turnip, what is the “rubbish” am supposed to have said?
I only repeated what the geologists have been repeatedly saying.
And for your information, the Alpine fault is a good 200km West of the city, it will be nowhere near as bad as the 6.3 Christchurch has unfortunately just experienced.
I am starting to think that you haven’t grasped just how powerful this 6.3 actually was, the peak ground acceleration recorded in the city was astonishing.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda your too caught up on the fault line that actually caused the Earthquake while we didn’t know it was there we certainly knew the
Neither the 7.1 or the 6.3 were massive Earthquakes Shunda, however both of them seem to have caused a lot of Liqufaction in Chch, again the geologists knew this would happen in Christchurch.
If they hit Wellington they would of had a completely different effect.
Wellington and Christchurch ground composition is completely different and so will fair worse/better in the event of a similar type of Earthquake.
Of course the Masonry and Brick argument still stands for both, the liqufaction and its effects.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Turnip – at least the people of Christchurch were only idiotic enough to work and shop in UMR buildings. The people of Aquila must be ten times more idiotic because they chose to LIVE in UMR buildings. Their 6.3 earthquake killed more than 200 people even though their population is one-tenth of Christchurch’s.
John-ston – Until the 1998 publication Probability and Consequences of the Next Alpine Fault Earthquake it had been generally assumed that Christchurch had an extremly low risk of severe shaking from earthquakes. Since at least 2004 the Waimakariri district plan’s sismic hazrd section has assumed 150 year return intervals for m5, m6 and m7 quakes on th foothills faults and 350 year retrun interval for m8 on the Alpine fault.
Because Christchurch shares the geologic characteristics of Mexico City of a drained wtland on top of approx. half a mile deep aluvial deposits the problm for office buildings isn’t liquifaction it is resonant frquencies.
Turnip – at least the people of Christchurch were only idiotic enough to work and shop in UMR buildings. The people of Aquila must be ten times more idiotic because they chose to LIVE in UMR buildings. Their 6.3 earthquake killed more than 200 people even though their population is one-tenth of Christchurch’s.
John-ston – Until the 1998 publication Probability and Consequences of the Next Alpine Fault Earthquake it had been generally assumed that Christchurch had an extremly low risk of severe shaking from earthquakes. Since at least 2004 the Waimakariri district plan’s sismic hazrd section has assumed 150 year return intervals for m5, m6 and m7 quakes on th foothills faults and 350 year retrun interval for m8 on the Alpine fault.
http://www.davidcox.com.mx/ministry/pics_earthquake/index_earthquakes_in_mexico_city.htm
http://mceer.buffalo.edu/infoservice/reference_services/EQaffectBuilding.asp
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda – at it’s closest point the Alpine Fault is barely 100km from Christchurch because th fault has a 33 degree eastward dip so that an epicentre at 50km to 100 km depth is going to be much closer to Christchurch than the surface expression of the fault is.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Owen – the areas of most extreme liquifaction and lateral spread are all closely associated with old courses of the Waimakariri River. That river once ran directly east into the Pacific at Birdlings Flat. But as Mr Betham’s report to the Provincial Secretary notes a ridge of high ground, or sand dunes, has diverted the river from th natural fall onto a more northerly course. That ridge is parallel to and north of the Greendale fault trace and likely due to the same tectonic processes that are creating the Southern Alps, albeit on a less grand scale.
http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=LT18590212.2.21&srpos=7&e=27-01-1859-29-12-1859–10-LT-1—-2waimakariri-ARTICLE-
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kevyn, and others (this may be a double up post – sorry)
I have tried to avoid any reference to the specific situations and outcomes in Christchurch because I do not know enough about them. That is why my examples relate to Kyoto and Alaska.
The general point I want to make is as posted above:
“Anyhow, these sort of problems and issues are not solved by sets of simple rules but by the application of skill, experience and wisdom.”
This dreadful event is an opportunity for our experts to gain all three.
Samiam
Beware of unintended consequences.
When Napier rebuilt there was not even a Town and Country Planning Act. Art Deco was all the rage at the time and I suspect the few architects who were in Napier at the time seized the opportunity do demonstrate their flair and trendiness.
If anyone tries to impose a new set of objectives or design guidelines the communities will have to go through the LTCCP and RMA processes, presumably with an embargo in place while it is all sorted out.
This is what happened (or was tried) in New Orleans and resulted in a couple of hundred thousand households departing for places where they were able to re-house themselves without waiting for bureaucratic consensus.
So I believe any “world leader” guide lines would have to implemented solely by persuasion and involve no extra costs of DURT (delay, uncertainty, regulation and tax).
Unless of course you are willing to give Gerry Brownlee unbridled power.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
so that an epicentre at 50km to 100 km depth is going to be much closer to Christchurch than the surface expression of the fault is.
No Kevyn, the Alpine fault does not have deep earthquakes, that is why it is so much of a risk to the West Coast.
Christchurch would likely not experience the same violence of shaking from the Alpine fault as the recent 6.3, though the shaking may be longer and may cause more widespread liquefaction.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You can donate an item or some work to raise money for the Christchurch Earthquake relief fund through Trademe:
http://www.trademe.co.nz/community/announcements/post/981/new-christchurch-earthquake-support-section-live
As part of the relief effort, our team have been working hard to build a new Trade Me Earthquake Support Section dedicated to helping people out in the aftermath of Tuesday’s earthquake. This new section sets out several ways you can help those in need, and ways you can get help if you need it.
Since the earthquake, there have been heaps of members posting offers of housing and transport and all sorts of other things for earthquake victims. The new section lets people list and search labour, accommodation and transport. It also provides a place to list any lost and found pets. These categories are all free.
As well as links to some online resources around the earthquake, we have also included information for members if they want to volunteer to help out with the relief effort, or make a donation.
It’s a bit rough and ready, but we wanted to get it live as soon as possible to start helping people. We’ll be refining it and adding more stuff over the coming days and weeks. We hope you find it useful.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda, according to Probability and Consequences of the Next Alpine Fault Earthquake: Specific Report to Christchurch City Council th epicentre will be approximately 125km from th city centre compared with 195km for the Murchison quake. Since the report was prepared by Mark Yetton and Nick Traylen, two of the lead Alpine Fault seismologists, it is unlikely they got it wrong.
You are right that it is the duration rather than the magnitude that is going to be the problem for Christchurch.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Um Todd, Christchurch needs brains. That aint gonna happen, you ate all the brains. Remember that Todd? Karma, things come back and bite your arse
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
Check out googles earthquake map:
http://www.christchurchquakemap.co.nz/
The Christchurch Quake Map allows you to play time-lapse visualisations of the 4,870 quakes and aftershocks that have struck in the Christchurch area since September 2010. It is also possible to view visualisations of the last seven days of quakes or the 47 that have hit today. The Google Maps plot earthquake data from GeoNet.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
turnip – if you knew so much about the dangers of Christchuch, why are you warning everyone this week, instead of last week?
You could have saved hundreds of lives… but you didn’t bother.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
People have been warning about un-reinforced Masonry for a long time photonz1. But people like you chose to ignore it.
Its the same reason why nothing will be done about global warming, since people like you need to see the dead as proof.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
turnip spouts off again – “People have been warning about un-reinforced Masonry for a long time photonz1. But people like you chose to ignore it.”
You falsely give people positions they have never taken.
“Its the same reason why nothing will be done about global warming, since people like you need to see the dead as proof.”
Again, you falsely give people positions they have never taken.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It is certainly the case that over a decade ago ECAN published a map of likley liquifaction in Chch under earthquake conditions. The map had a lot of red areas on it. They weren’t wrong.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It begs the question, what will happen to the Wellington cbd should a similar event occur here. The council have a list of 4000 odd quake prone buildings that require work to bring up to a suitable standard that they will not kill hundreds of people when they collapse.
This list is not made public but added to a buildings LIM with a fix by date. The costs for building owners to remedy will be horrendous and no doubt result in significant rent increases. Seems the council and building owners want to keep everyone in the dark over this.
Many of these shoddy buildings have been converted into apartments as the standard is lower than other buildings types and so less expensive to fix. So now have have shoddy buildings full of people day and night that will fail to some degree.
Even though not public old copies are available at
static.stuff.co.nz/files/Wellingtonquake1
static.stuff.co.nz/files/Wellingtonquake2
static.stuff.co.nz/files/Wellingtonquake3
download and add an .pdf extension to the files then you can view them.
We have viewed graphic detail on what happens when these buildings collapse, look in the lists and make sure you dont have an office or work in one of them. So why are not the council doing more about this and informing us the general public about the safety of some of the cities buildings.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Sadly our building standards (more than any other factor) contributed to the leaky home crisis, as well as allowing brick construction and heavy overhanging verandahs to persist for so many years.
I’d be interested in exactly what San Franciscan or other Californian engineers would make of our current codes, but I don’t think it is all that easy to predict what nature can throw at us.
I do have grave suspicions about high rise of any type, as well as claddings like brick and block.
Personally not keen at all on the idea of rebuilding the cathedral.
Very true Turnip. And the same applies in Auckland. Just because a building looks interesting does not mean it is safe for human occupation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Todd, for some unknown reason a few respondents were somewhat dismissive of your comment on this, but anyone who reads that link you provided can hardly be in any doubt that it was a very prescient comment.
I have been using Ken Ring’s information for the last couple of years to plan my holiday periods and I have no doubts about his assertion that the sun and moon have massive effects on our atmosphere, waters and crust activity.
If I had read that link I would most certainly have vacated Christchurch for a couple of weeks.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)