The Avon and Heathcote Rivers, located in the city of Christchurch, New Zealand, are lowland spring-fed rivers linked with the Christchurch Groundwater System. At present, the flow paths and recharge sources to the Christchurch Groundwater System are not fully understood. Study of both the Avon and Heathcote Rivers can provide greater insight into this system. In addition, during the period 2010-2012, Christchurch has experienced large amounts of seismic activity, including a devastating Mw 6.2 aftershock on February 22nd, 2011, which caused widespread damage and loss of life. Associated with these earthquakes was the release of large amounts of water through liquefaction and temporary springs throughout the city. This provided a unique opportunity to study groundwater surface water interactions following a large scale seismic event. Presented herein is the first major geochemical study on the Avon and Heathcote Rivers and the hydrological impact of the February 22, 2011 Christchurch Earthquake. The Avon, Heathcote, and Waimakariri Rivers were sampled in quarterly periods starting in July 2011 and analyzed for stable Isotopes δ¹⁸O, δD, and δ¹³C and major anion composition. In addition, post -earthquake samples were collected over the days immediately following the February 22, 2011 earthquake and analyzed for stable isotopes δ¹⁸O and δD and major anion composition. A variety of analytical methods were used identify the source of the waters in the Avon-Heathcote System and evaluate the effectiveness of stable isotopes as geochemical tracers in the Christchurch Groundwater System. The results of this thesis found that the waters from the Avon and Heathcote Rivers are geochemically the same, originating from groundwater, and exhibit a strong tidal influence within 5km of the Avon-Heathcote Estuary. The surface waters released following the February 22nd, 2011 earthquake were indistinguishable from quarterly samples taken from the Avon and Heathcote Rivers when comparing stable isotopic composition. The anion data suggests the waters released following the February 22nd, 2011 Christchurch Earthquake were sourced primarily from shallow groundwater, and also suggests a presence of urban sewage at some sites. Attempts to estimate recharge sources for the Avon-Heathcote Rivers using published models for the Christchurch Groundwater System yielded results that were not consistent between models. In evaluating the use of geochemical constituents as tracers in the Christchurch Groundwater System, no one isotope could provide a clear resolution, but when used in conjunction, δ¹⁸O, δ¹³C, and DIC, seem to be the most effective tracers. Sample sizes for δ¹³C were too small for a robust evaluation. Variability on the Waimakariri River appears to be greater than previously estimated, which could have significant impacts on geochemical models for the Christchurch Groundwater System. This research demonstrates the value of using multiple geochemical constituents to enrich our understanding of the groundwater surfaces-water interactions and the Christchurch Groundwater System as a whole.
On Tuesday 22 February 2011, a 6.3 magnitude earthquake struck Christchurch, New Zealand’s second largest city. The ‘earthquake’ was in fact an aftershock to an earlier 7.1 magnitude earthquake that had occurred on Saturday 4 September 2010. There were a number of key differences between the two events that meant they had dramatically different results for Christchurch and its inhabitants. The 22 February 2011 event resulted in one of New Zealand’s worst natural disasters on record, with 185 fatalities occurring and hundreds more being injured. In addition, a large number of buildings either collapsed or were damaged to the point where they needed to be totally demolished. Since the initial earthquake in September 2010, a large amount of building-related research has been initiated in New Zealand to investigate the impact of the series of seismic events – the major focus of these research projects has been on seismic, structural and geotechnical engineering matters. One project, however, conducted jointly by the University of Canterbury, the Fire Protection Association of New Zealand and BRANZ, has focused on the performance of fire protection systems in the earthquakes and the effectiveness of the systems in the event of post-earthquake fires occurring. Fortunately, very few fires actually broke out following the series of earthquake events in Christchurch, but fire after earthquakes still has significant implications for the built environment in New Zealand, and the collaborative research has provided some invaluable insight into the potential threat posed by post-earthquake fires in buildings. As well as summarising the damage caused to fire protection systems, this paper discusses the flow-on effect for designing structures to withstand post-earthquake fires. One of the underlying issues that will be explored is the existing regulatory framework in New Zealand whereby structural earthquake design and structural design for fire are treated as discrete design scenarios.
On the second day of teaching for 2011, the University of Canterbury (UC) faced the most significant crisis of its 138-year history. After being shaken severely by a magnitude 7.1 earthquake on 4 September 2010, UC felt it was well along the pathway to getting back to ‘normal’. That all changed at 12:51pm on 22 February 2011, when Christchurch city was hit by an even more devastating event. A magnitude 6.3 (Modified Mercalli intensity ten – MM X) earthquake, just 13km south-east of the Christchurch city centre, caused vertical peak ground accelerations amongst the highest ever recorded in an urban environment, in some places more than twice the acceleration due to gravity. The earthquake caused immediate evacuation of the UC campus and resulted in significant damage to many buildings. Thankfully there were no serious injuries or fatalities on campus, but 185 people died in the city and many more suffered serious injuries. At the time of writing, eighteen months after the first earthquake in September, Christchurch is still experiencing regular earthquakes. Seismologists warn that the region may experience heightened seismicity for a decade or more. While writing this report we have talked with many different people from across the University. People’s experiences are different and we have not managed to talk with everyone, but we hope that by drawing together many different perspectives from across the campus that this report will serve two purposes; to retain our institutional memory of what we have learnt over the past eighteen months, and also to share our learnings with other organisations in New Zealand and around the world who, we hope, will benefit from learning about our experience.
