Earthquakes impacting on the built environment can generate significant volumes of waste, often overwhelming existing waste management capacities. Earthquake waste can pose a public and environmental health hazard and can become a road block on the road to recovery. Specific research has been developed at the University of Canterbury to go beyond the current perception of disaster waste as a logistical hurdle, to a realisation that disaster waste management is part of the overall recovery process and can be planned for effectively. Disaster waste decision-makers, often constrained by inappropriate institutional frameworks, are faced with conflicting social, economic and environmental drivers which all impact on the overall recovery. Framed around L’Aquila earthquake, Italy, 2009, this paper discusses the social, economic and environmental effects of earthquake waste management and the impact of existing institutional frameworks (legal, financial and organisational). The paper concludes by discussing how to plan for earthquake waste management.
A seismic financial risk analysis of typical New Zealand reinforced concrete buildings constructed with topped precast concrete hollow-core units is performed on the basis of experimental research undertaken at the University of Canterbury over the last five years. An extensive study that examines seismic demands on a variety of multi-storey RC buildings is described and supplemented by the experimental results to determine the inter-storey drift capacities of the buildings. Results of a full-scale precast concrete super-assemblage constructed and tested in the laboratory in two stages are used. The first stage investigates existing construction and demonstrates major shortcomings in construction practice that would lead to very poor seismic performance. The second stage examines the performance of the details provided by Amendment No. 3 to the New Zealand Concrete Design Code NZS 3101:1995. This paper uses a probabilistic financial risk assessment framework to estimate the expected annual loss (EAL) from previously developed fragility curves of RC buildings with precast hollow core floors connected to the frames according to the pre-2004 standard and the two connection details recommended in the 2004 amendment. Risks posed by different levels of damage and by earthquakes of different frequencies are examined. The structural performance and financial implications of the three different connection details are compared. The study shows that the improved connection details recommended in the 2004 amendment give a significant economic payback in terms of drastically reduced financial risk, which is also representative of smaller maintenance cost and cheaper insurance premiums.
Seismic behaviour of typical unreinforced masonry (URM) brick houses, that were common in early last century in New Zealand and still common in many developing countries, is experimentally investigated at University of Canterbury, New Zealand in this research. A one halfscale model URM house is constructed and tested under earthquake ground motions on a shaking table. The model structure with aspect ratio of 1.5:1 in plan was initially tested in the longitudinal direction for several earthquakes with peak ground acceleration (PGA) up to 0.5g. Toppling of end gables (above the eaves line) and minor to moderate cracking around window and door piers was observed in this phase. The structure was then rotated 90º and tested in the transverse (short) direction for ground motions with PGA up to 0.8g. Partial out-of-plane failure of the face loaded walls in the second storey and global rocking of the model was observed in this phase. A finite element analysis and a mechanism analysis are conducted to assess the dynamic properties and lateral strength of the model house. Seismic fragility function of URM houses is developed based on the experimental results. Damping at different phases of the response is estimated using an amplitude dependent equivalent viscous damping model. Financial risk of similar URM houses is then estimated in term of expected annual loss (EAL) following a probabilistic financial risk assessment framework. Risks posed by different levels of damage and by earthquakes of different frequencies are then examined.