NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this report are those of the committee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsoring agencies.
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 92-60712
International Standard Book Number 0-309-04639-4
Copies of this report are available from:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418
S-481
Printed in the United States of America
COMMITTEE ON EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING
GEORGE W. HOUSNER (Chair),
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
KEIITI AKI,
Department of Geological Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
CHRISTOPHER ARNOLD,
Building Systems Development, Inc., San Mateo, California
JAMES E. BEAVERS,
Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., Oak Ridge, Tennessee
RAY W. CLOUGH,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley
C. B. CROUSE,
Dames & Moore, Seattle, Washington
JOANNE NIGG,
Disaster Research Center, University of Delaware, Newark
METE A. SOZEN,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
ROBERT V. WHITMAN,
Department of Civil Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
JAMES K. WIGHT,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
T. LESLIE YOUD,
Department of Civil Engineering, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah
Liaison Representatives
WILLIAM H. ALLERTON,
Division of Inspections, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
WILLIAM A. ANDERSON, Program Director,
Division of Biological and Critical Systems, National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.
C. CHESTER BIGELOW,
Division of Advanced Technology Development, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.
STEPHEN BOYCE,
Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Bolling Air Force Base, Washington, D.C.
MANMOHAN S. CHAWLA,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Washington, D.C.
DAE H. CHUNG,
Nuclear Systems Safety Program, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California
FRED COLE, Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance,
Agency for International Development, Washington, D.C.
JAMES COOPER,
Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C.
JAMES F. COSTELLO,
Mechanical/Structural Engineering Branch, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
RICHARD F. DAVIDSON,
Civil Engineering, Geotechnical Branch, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of the Army, Washington, D.C.
G. ROBERT FULLER,
Compliance Branch, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C.
WALTER W. HAYS,
Office of Earthquakes, Volcanoes, and Engineering, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia
JAMES R. HILL,
Natural Phenomena Hazards Mitigation Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.
PAUL KRUMPE, Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance,
Agency for International Development, Washington, D.C.
H. S. LEW,
Center for Building Technology, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland
DON LINGER,
Strategic Structures Branch, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C.
S.C. LIU,
Earthquake Hazard Mitigation, Division of Biological and Critical Systems, National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.
UGO MORELLI,
Office of Natural and Technological Hazards, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
KENNETH J. SULLIVAN,
Office of Natural and Technological Hazards Programs, State and Local Programs and Support, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
J. LAWRENCE VON THUN,
Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of the Interior, Denver, Colorado
SPENCER WU,
Air Force Office of Scientific Research, U.S. Department of the Air Force, Washington, D.C.
EDWARD YOUNGER,
Structural Engineering Service, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, D.C.
ARTHUR ZEIZEL,
Office of Natural and Technological Hazards Programs, State and Local Programs and Support, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
Staff
RILEY M. CHUNG, Director
SUSAN R. MCCUTCHEN, Administrative Assistant
SHIRLEY J. WHITLEY, Project Assistant
EDWARD LIPP, Editor
Technical Editor
CAROLETTA LOWE,
Editorial Concepts, Columbia, Maryland
ADVISORY GROUP FOR THE FORUM ON EARTHQUAKE ECONOMIC ISSUES
JOANNE NIGG (Chair),
Disaster Research Center, University of Delaware, Newark
RICHARD N. BOISVERT,
Department of Agricultural Economics, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
RICHARD K. EISNER,
Bay Area Regional Earthquake Preparedness Project, Oakland, California
HOWARD KUNREUTHER,
Department of Decision Sciences, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
SHIRLEY MATTINGLY,
Office of Emergency Management, City of Los Angeles, California
JEROME MILLIMAN (retired),
Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Florida, Gainesville
RISA PALM,
Graduate School, University of Colorado, Boulder
WILLIAM J. PETAK,
Institute of Safety and Systems Management, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
Liaison Representatives
GARY JOHNSON,
Office of Natural and Technological Hazards Programs, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
EUGENE L. LECOMTE,
The Earthquake Project, National Committee on Property Insurance, Boston, Massachusetts
JAMES TAYLOR,
Insurance Support Services, Federal Insurance Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
SPEAKERS
CHRISTOPHER ARNOLD,
Building Systems Development, Inc., San Mateo, California
ROBERT G. CHAPPELL,
State and Local Programs and Support, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
LEONARD K. CHENG,
Department of Economics, University of Florida, Gainesville
HAROLD COCHRANE,
Department of Economics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins
NEIL DOHERTY,
Department of Decision Sciences, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
RONALD EGUCHI,
Dames and Moore, Los Angeles, California
DON G. FRIEDMAN,
Corporate Strategy and Research, Travelers Insurance Company, Hartford, Connecticut
ROBERT M. HAMILTON,
U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia
ROBERT W. KLING,
Department of Economics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins
HOWARD KUNREUTHER,
Department of Decision Sciences, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
TAPAN MUNROE,
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco, California
RICHARD J. ROTH, Jr.,
California Department of Insurance, Los Angeles
BARBARA D. STEWART,
Stewart Economics, Inc., Chapel Hill, North Carolina
KATHLEEN TIERNEY,
Disaster Research Center, University of Delaware, Newark
L. THOMAS TOBIN,
Seismic Safety Commission, Sacramento, California
ANTHONY M. YEZER,
Department of Economics, George Washington University, Washington, D.C.
Original transcription of Proceedings by C.A.S.E.T. Associates, Fairfax, Virginia
List of Illustrations
Figures:
|
FIGURE 1-1 |
Global distribution of seismicity. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-2 |
Earthquakes and global tectonics. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-3 |
Schematic cross section illustrating plate tectonics processes. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-4 |
The North American plate. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-5 |
Major (M>7) California Earthquakes (1812–1989). |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-6 |
The San Andreas fault system. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-7 |
The Loma Prieta earthquake. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-8 |
Cross section of seismicity along the San Andreas fault. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-9 |
Loma Prieta earthquakes (October 17–19, 1989). |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-10 |
Preliminary probabilities of large San Andreas earthquakes (1988–2018). |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-11 |
Collapsed section of the Bay Bridge. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-12 |
Multistory building in the Marina District. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-13 |
Liquefaction in the Marina District. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-14 |
Collapsed bridge in Salinas River valley. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-15 |
Nimitz Freeway, showing collapsed pilings. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-16 |
Chasms in the Santa Cruz Mountains. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-17 |
Collapsed house at Boulder Creek. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-18 |
San Francisco Bay area: predicted maximum earthquake intensity. |
|
FIGURE 1-19 |
Earthquakes of intensity > VII or felt area > 450,000 km2. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-20 |
Felt areas of some large U.S. earthquakes. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-21 |
Terrain map of the eastern United States. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-22 |
Gravity map of the eastern United States. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-23 |
Seismic activity in the New Madrid region. |
|||
|
FIGURE 1-24 |
Magnetic field in the New Madrid region. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-1 |
Earthquake-damage-loss estimation. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-2 |
Loss ratio versus modified Mercalli intensity (mean damage ratio curves). |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-3 |
Expert responses to round one damage factor questionnaire for Facility Class 18—low-rise moment-resisting ductile concrete-frame buildings. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-4 |
Expert responses to round two damage factor questionnaire for Facility Class 18—low-rise moment-resisting ductile concrete-frame buildings. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-5 |
Fragility curves for wood-frame buildings. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-6 |
Intensity-damage relationships for unreinforced masonry buildings. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-7 |
Composite map of the highest modified Mercalli intensity that might be observed at each location if the magnitude of a simulated earthquake held constant at 8.6 and its epicenter were shifted in increments along the New Madrid seismic zone. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-8 |
Loss-producing potential of a recurrence of the December 16, 1811, New Madrid earthquake. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-9 |
Loss-producing potential of a recurrence of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina earthquake. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-10 |
Loss-producing potential of a recurrence of the 1755 Cape Ann (Boston), Massachusetts earthquake. |
|
FIGURE 2-11 |
Loss-producing potential of a recurrence of a stronger (magnitude 6.7) Cape Ann (Boston), Massachusetts earthquake. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-12 |
Estimated damage to buildings caused by ground motion and fire following an earthquake, versus earthquake magnitude. Damage, expressed in terms of the catastrophe index (Table 2-5), is based on vulnerability scenarios 1 and 3. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-13 |
Effect of a local labor demand increase. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-14 |
Effect of a local labor demand decrease. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-15 |
Social capital lost from relocation. |
|||
|
FIGURE 2-16 |
Losses to workers from lower labor demand. |
|||
|
FIGURE 3-1 |
Flow of payments in a simple, three-sector economy. |
|||
|
FIGURE 5-1 |
San Francisco Bay Area economic indicators (1985 = 100). |
Tables:
|
TABLE 2-1 |
Construction Classes Used in the ISO and NOAA/USGS Methods |
|||
|
TABLE 2-2 |
Injury and Death Rates in Relation to Damage |
|||
|
TABLE 2-3 |
Comparison of Some Building Damage Ratios (D/R) |
|||
|
TABLE 2-4 |
Percentage of Past Hurricanes with a Simulated 1990 Recurrence that Produce Various Loss Potentials when Grouped by Storm Intensity |
|||
|
TABLE 2-5 |
Catastrophe Index Resulting from the Simulated Present-Day Recurrence of 247 Past Hurricanes (1871–1990) Listed Versus Each Storm's Saffir-Simpson Intensity at Landfall |
|
TABLE 2-6 |
Occurrence Date, Location, and Magnitude of the Ten Largest Earthquakes that Affected the Central and Eastern United States and Southern Canada in Historic Times |
|||
|
TABLE 2-7 |
Estimate of the Number of Persons Who Would be Exposed to Various Levels of Ground-Motion Severity Caused by Each of the Scenario Earthquakes |
|||
|
TABLE 2-8 |
Estimate of the Number of Fatalities Caused by Each of the Hypothetical Earthquakes and the Three Fatality-Vulnerability Scenarios |
|||
|
TABLE 2-9 |
Estimated Building-Damage Losses by State Resulting from a 1990 Recurrence of the December 16, 1811, New Madrid Earthquake with a Richter Magnitude 8.6, Based on Damage-Vulnerability Scenario 2 |
|||
|
TABLE 2-10 |
Probability of Earthquake Occurrence in the Decade Before the Year 2001 (in Percentages) |
|||
|
TABLE 2-11a |
Estimated 1990 Fatality and Building Damage Potentials in the Central and Eastern United States Resulting from Simulated Earthquakes of Various Magnitudes Centered at the Location of the 1811 New Madrid, 1886 Charleston, and 1755 Cape Ann Events, Based on the Scenario 2 Vulnerability Relationship: Number of Fatalities |
|||
|
TABLE 2-11b |
Estimated 1990 Fatality and Building Damage Potentials in the Central and Eastern United States Resulting from Simulated Earthquakes of Various Magnitudes Centered at the Location of the 1811 New Madrid, 1886 Charleston, and 1755 Cape Ann Events, Based on the Scenario 2 Vulnerability Relationship: Building Damage (Millions of Dollars) |
|||
|
TABLE 2-12 |
Per Trip Costs and Per Capita Visits |
|||
|
TABLE 2-13 |
Visits Demanded at Various Cost Increments |
|||
|
TABLE 5-1 |
Economic Impact of the Loma Prieta Earthquake |
|||
|
TABLE 5-2 |
Economic Impact of the Loma Prieta Earthquake |
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpe tuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Frank Press is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and of advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Frank Press and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
