Potential Losses in a Repeat of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, Earthquake
-
Published:2005-11
Issue:4
Volume:21
Page:1157-1184
-
ISSN:8755-2930
-
Container-title:Earthquake Spectra
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Earthquake Spectra
Author:
Wong Ivan1, Bouabid Jawhar2, Graf William3, Huyck Charles4, Porush Allan5, Silva Walter6, Siegel Timothy7, Bureau Gilles8, Eguchi Ronald9, Knight John10
Affiliation:
1. Principal Seismologist, Seismic Hazards Group, URS Corporation, 1333 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94612 2. Project Director, PBS&J, 5665 New Northside Dr., Suite 400, Atlanta, GA 30328 3. Manager, Earthquake Risk, URS Corporation, 915 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 700, Los Angeles, CA 90017 4. Senior Vice President, ImageCat, Inc., 400 Oceangate #1050, Long Beach, CA 90802 5. Principal Structural Engineer, URS Corporation, 915 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 700, Los Angeles, CA 90017 6. Principal Seismologist, Pacific Engineering & Analysis, 311 Pomona Ave., El Cerrito, CA 94530 7. Senior Engineer, S&Maine, Inc., 1413 Topside Rd., Knoxville, TN 37777 8. Consultant, formerly with URS Corporation, 1333 Broadway, Suite 800, Oakland, CA 94612 9. President, ImageCat, Inc., 400 Oceangate #305, Long Beach, CA 90802 10. Risk Assessment Program Manager, South Carolina Emergency Management Division, 1100 Fish Hatchery Rd., West Columbia, SC 29172
Abstract
A comprehensive earthquake loss assessment for the state of South Carolina using HAZUS was performed considering four different earthquake scenarios: a moment magnitude ( M) 7.3 “1886 Charleston-like” earthquake, M 6.3 and M 5.3 events also from the Charleston seismic source, and an M 5.0 earthquake in Columbia. Primary objectives of this study were (1) to generate credible earthquake losses to provide a baseline for coordination, capability development, training, and strategic planning for the South Carolina Emergency Management Division, and (2) to raise public awareness of the significant earthquake risk in the state. Ground shaking, liquefaction, and earthquake-induced landsliding hazards were characterized using region-specific inputs on seismic source, path, and site effects, and ground motion numerical modeling. Default inventory data on buildings and facilities in HAZUS were either substantially enhanced or replaced. Losses were estimated using a high resolution 2- km×2- km grid rather than the census tract approach used in HAZUS. The results of the loss assessment indicate that a future repeat of the 1886 earthquake would be catastrophic, resulting in possibly 900 deaths, more than 44,000 injuries, and a total economic loss of $20 billion in South Carolina alone. Schools, hospitals, fire stations, ordinary buildings, and bridges will suffer significant damage due to the general lack of seismic design in the state. Lesser damage and losses will be sustained in the other earthquake scenarios although even the smallest event could result in significant losses.
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Subject
Geophysics,Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology
Reference15 articles.
1. Magnitudes and Locations of the 1811-1812 New Madrid, Missouri, and the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, Earthquakes 2. Bollinger, G.A. , 1977. Reinterpretation of the intensity data for the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, in Studies Related to the Charleston, South Carolina, Earthquake of 1886: A Preliminary Report, edited by D. W. Rankin ,U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper1028, pp. 17–32. 3. Bollinger, G.A., Johnston, A.C., Talwani, P., Long, L.T., Shedlock, K.M., Sibol, M.S., and Chapman, M.C. , 1991. Seismicity of the southeastern United States; 1698 to 1986, inNeotectonics of North America, edited by D. B. Slemmons , E. R. Engdahl , M. D. Zoback , and D. Blackwell , Geological Society of America, Decade Map Volume I, pp. 291–308. 4. Bouabid, J., Wong, I., Bureau, G., Graf, W., Huyck, C., Porush, A., Siegel, T., Silva, W., Swigart, M., Eguchi, R., Rouleau, J., Knight, J., and Dreher, T. , 2002. A comprehensive seismic vulnerability and loss evaluation of the state of South Carolina using HAZUS: Part I—Overview and results,7th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering Proceedings(CD-ROM). 5. Bureau, G., and Ballentine, G.D. , 2002. A comprehensive seismic vulnerability and loss evaluation of the state of South Carolina using HAZUS: Part VI—Dam inventory and vulnerability assessment methodology,7th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering Proceedings(CD-ROM).
Cited by
27 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|