A photograph of components of a model of the ChristChurch Cathedral being built from LEGO by Sam Butcher. Sam comments "Fixing a large variety of bits that were wrong/annoying/cheating (not purist) about the last model. The new one is set AFTER the Feb 22 earthquake. This newer, and much stronger model is also completely modular for easier transport. Obviously still a WIP, I'm currently waiting for a pretty large bricklink order at the moment, and will probably need to place a couple more after that too. Here you can see a couple of aspects of how the model is put together. The technique used proved - from what I tried - to be the best and strongest way to do it".
A photograph of components of a model of the ChristChurch Cathedral being built from LEGO by Sam Butcher. Sam comments "Fixing a large variety of bits that were wrong/annoying/cheating (not purist) about the last model. The new one is set AFTER the Feb 22 earthquake. This newer, and much stronger model is also completely modular for easier transport. Obviously still a WIP, I'm currently waiting for a pretty large bricklink order at the moment, and will probably need to place a couple more after that too. Here you can see a couple of aspects of how the model is put together. The technique used proved - from what I tried - to be the best and strongest way to do it".
A photograph of components of a model of the ChristChurch Cathedral being built from LEGO by Sam Butcher. Sam comments "Fixing a large variety of bits that were wrong/annoying/cheating (not purist) about the last model. The new one is set AFTER the Feb 22 earthquake. This newer, and much stronger model is also completely modular for easier transport. Obviously still a WIP, I'm currently waiting for a pretty large bricklink order at the moment, and will probably need to place a couple more after that too. Here you can see a couple of aspects of how the model is put together. The technique used proved - from what I tried - to be the best and strongest way to do it".
Part of a house that fell can be seen on the rocks above right hand containers.
Cunningham House at the Christchurch Botanic Gardens is still closed due to earthquake damage. I wonder if it will ever re-open or suffer the demolition fate many other iconic structures in Christchurch have.
Part of the container wall to stop rock falls on Main Road, Sumner.
Shows in six cameos the Mayor of Christchurch, Bob Parker and his wife, Jo Nicholls Parker, wining and dining in six different places, including Christchurch. Context: Christchurch mayoress Jo Nicholls-Parker will add "real value" to a planned series of ratepayer-funded overseas trips, Mayor Bob Parker says. Councillors will discuss whether to approve regular visits by the mayor and mayoress to Christchurch's sister cities and "other strategic partners". (Press 13 June 2012) Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).
What more can one say except that Shag Rock is now about one third it's original height. Whitewash Head in the background with the road that now drops over a cliff.
The small wharf area of the now gone Pleasant Point Yacht Club has already been taken over by the Pied Shags (cormorants). It is under water now except for low tide. Note the dead pine tree in background. Many have died because of the salt water their roots are in.
Shot from up Hunstbury Hill with a 600mm f/4 on a very grey morning. 8am demolition. The guy behind me only looked up when the sounds of the explosion reahed us and the building was half way down!
The sea wall at Beachville Road, Redcliffs, after the earthquake. It used to be straight and level - not now! As a teenager I went fishing off this wall.
Shows a mobile phone with a text on it that reads 'Dear Chch (Christchurch) thinking of u (you) all xxx NZ'. Context: Refers to the commemoration events taking place in Christchurch on 22 February 2012 which is the first anniversary of the 2011 earthquake which killed 185 people. Mobile phones were instrumental in helping to locate victims and in enabling people to communicate with trapped victims. B&W and colour versions of this cartoon available Quantity: 2 digital cartoon(s).
20120321_2397_1D3-47 Beachcomber Dairy Corner of New Brighton Road and Rawson Street, New Brighton. This diary is inside the suburban red zone and will probably be demolished some time in the future. See how the earthquakes have moved the footpath - the post and phone box used to stand straight! This is one of the Teleccom Wi-Fi hotspot boo...
Demolition of the relatively new seven-storey Waters Edge Apartments in Ferrymead continues. CERES Environmental NZ are doing the job for CERA (Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority). Some will be pleased to see this block go as there was lot of resentment to it being built on the site of the old Ferrymead Tavern, Selected for Explore, #347...
Shows Minister for Christchurch Earthquake Recovery Gerry Brownlee delighted with his plan to rebuild Christchurch and to have it paid for buy the PM's casino. Context: Refers to the Christchurch Central Development Unit that Minister for Christchurch Earthquake Recovery Gerry Brownlee has put in place. Refers also to the very controversial deal that Prime Minister John Key has made with Auckland's SkyCity to the effect that SkyCity will pay the full construction cost of a new convention centre - estimated at $350 million, in return for being allowed to add more gaming tables and machines, and extending its licence beyond 2021. Colour and black and white versions of this cartoon are available Quantity: 2 digital cartoon(s).
A plane flies into the distance. Attached to it by a rope is a large package containing Christchurch Mayor Bob Parker and CEO of the City Council Tony Marryatt. The package is addressed 'Deepest Siberia c/- isolated hellhole Russia'. The mayor looks on the bright side considering this to be a junket the people will approve of. Context: Public disapproval of the Mayor's two-week tour of Asian countries with a Christchurch International Airport-led delegation. The airport is paying for the mayoral couple to take part in the trip. There is public criticism that the trip take place at this time because of ongoing problems with the council and earthquake recovery. There is also criticism of Tony Marryatt's $68,000 pay increase considered poor form when so many people are struggling with earthquake related problems. Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).
There are many things that organisations of any size can do to prepare for a disaster or crisis. Traditionally, the advice given to business has focused on identifying risks, reducing their likely occurrence, and planning in advance how to respond. More recently, there is growing interest in the broader concept of organisational resilience which includes planning for crisis but also considers traits that lead to organisational adaptability and ability to thrive despite adverse circumstances. In this paper we examine the policy frameworks1 within New Zealand that influence the resilience of small and medium sized businesses (SMEs). The first part of the paper focuses on the New Zealand context, including the prevailing political and economic ideologies, the general nature of New Zealand SMEs and the nature of New Zealand’s hazard environment. The paper then goes on to outline the key policy frameworks in place relevant to SMEs and hazards. The final part of the paper examines the way the preexisting policy environment influenced the response of SMEs and Government following the Canterbury earthquakes.
The Canterbury earthquake sequence in New Zealand’s South Island induced widespread liquefaction phenomena across the Christchurch urban area on four occasions (4 Sept 2010; 22 Feb; 13 June; 23 Dec 2011), that resulted in widespread ejection of silt and fine sand. This impacted transport networks as well as infiltrated and contaminated the damaged storm water system, making rapid clean-up an immediate post-earthquake priority. In some places the ejecta was contaminated by raw sewage and was readily remobilised in dry windy conditions, creating a long-term health risk to the population. Thousands of residential properties were inundated with liquefaction ejecta, however residents typically lacked the capacity (time or resources) to clean-up without external assistance. The liquefaction silt clean-up response was co-ordinated by the Christchurch City Council and executed by a network of contractors and volunteer groups, including the ‘Farmy-Army’ and the ‘Student-Army’. The duration of clean-up time of residential properties and the road network was approximately 2 months for each of the 3 main liquefaction inducing earthquakes; despite each event producing different volumes of ejecta. Preliminary cost estimates indicate total clean-up costs will be over NZ$25 million. Over 500,000 tonnes of ejecta has been stockpiled at Burwood landfill since the beginning of the Canterbury earthquakes sequence. The liquefaction clean-up experience in Christchurch following the 2010-2011 earthquake sequence has emerged as a valuable case study to support further analysis and research on the coordination, management and costs of large volume deposition of fine grained sediment in urban areas.
Within four weeks of the September 4 2010 Canterbury Earthquake a new, loosely-knit community group appeared in Christchurch under the banner of “Greening the Rubble.” The general aim of those who attended the first few meetings was to do something to help plug the holes that had already appeared or were likely to appear over the coming weeks in the city fabric with some temporary landscaping and planting projects. This article charts the first eighteen months of Greening the Rubble and places the initiative in a broader context to argue that although seismic events in Christchurch acted as a “call to palms,” so to speak, the city was already in need of some remedial greening. It concludes with a reflection on lessons learned to date by GTR and commentary on the likely issues ahead for this new mini-social-environmental movement in the context of a quake-affected and still quake-prone major New Zealand city. One of the key lessons for GTR and all of those involved in Christchurch recovery activities to date is that the city is still very much in the middle of the event and is to some extent a laboratory for seismic and agency management studies alike.
This research provides an investigation into the impact on the North Island freight infrastructure, in the event of a disruption of the Ports of Auckland (POAL). This research is important to New Zealand, especially having experienced the Canterbury earthquake disaster in 2010/2011 and the current 2012 industrial action plaguing the POAL. New Zealand is a net exporter of a combination of manufactured high value goods, commodity products and raw materials. New Zealand’s main challenge lies in the fact of its geographical distances to major markets. Currently New Zealand handles approximately 2 million containers per annum, with a minimum of ~40% of those containers being shipped through POAL. It needs to be highlighted that POAL is classified as an import port in comparison to Port of Tauranga (POT) that has traditionally had an export focus. This last fact is of great importance, as in a case of a disruption of the POAL, any import consigned to the Auckland and northern region will need to be redirected through POT in a quick and efficient way to reach Auckland and the northern regions. This may mean a major impact on existing infrastructure and supply chain systems that are currently in place. This study is critical as an element of risk management, looking at how to mitigate the risk to the greater Auckland region. With the new Super City taking hold, the POAL is a fundamental link in the supply chain to the largest metropolitan area within New Zealand.
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.
During many years the analysis of some geophysical results of Charles Darwin was being carried out in Department. Darwin has connected almost 200 years ago results of catastrophic earthquakes with vertical movement of a surface of the Earth. Usually this movement less horizontal movement and its influence on destruction of cities is not considered. Earthquake hazard assessment studies were focused usually on the horizontal ground motion. Effects of the strong vertical motion were not, practically, discussed. The margins of safety against gravity-induced static vertical forces in constructed buildings usually provide adequate resistance to dynamic forces induced by the vertical acceleration during an earthquake. However, the earthquake in Christchurch is an example of the vertical seismic shock . The earthquake magnitude was rather small - nearby 6.3. However, the result was catastrophic. The same took place in 1835. It allowed to Darwin to formulate a few great ideas. Charles Darwin has explained qualitatively results of an interaction of huge seismic waves with volcanoes and the nature of volcanism and seismicity of our planet. These important data of Charles Darwin became very actual recently. It is possible to tell also the same about tsunami and extreme ocean waves described by Charles Darwin. Therefore this data were analyzed using modern mechanics, mathematics and physics in Department. In particular, the theory of catastrophic waves was developed based on Darwin's data. The theory tried to explain occurrence, evolution and distribution the catastrophic waves in various natural systems, since atoms, oceans, surfaces of the Earth and up to the very early Universe. Some results of the research were published in prestigious magazines. Later they were presented in two books devoted to Charles Darwin's anniversary (2009). Last from them was published in Russian (2011). We give here key ideas of this research which is a part of interdisciplinary researches of Department. Some ideas are discussed. Not less important purpose is very short historical review of some researches of Darwin. In particular, we underline Darwin' priority in the formulation of the bases of Dynamics Earth.
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement “My expectations are that this will be a busy, hard three years’ work and we will need to deliver results for New Zealanders”? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “we don’t favour one group over another”? PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on housing affordability? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: When his office had a “quick look at the matters involved” with regard to the funding of the Mackenzie Sustainable Futures Trust, whom did they speak to and what documents did they look at to arrive at their conclusion that “we did not find anything that raised concerns to us”? MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Social Development: What initiatives has the Government put in place to better protect children? ANDREW WILLIAMS to the Minister of Finance: Does the Government still intend to achieve a budget surplus by 2014/15; if so, how? GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Does he stand by his statement on the Campbell Live 9 February programme on fracking that, “In Taranaki, it’s actually been done very, very well. There’s been no effect on the environment whatsoever”? Dr JIAN YANG to the Minister of Health: What progress has been made in providing improved child health services? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement regarding migration to Australia “What’s the point of standing in the airport crying about it?”; if so, how many of the 158,167 people that have migrated to Australia since November 2008, as reported by Statistics NZ, are from 18 to 30 years of age in number and percentage terms? COLIN KING to the Minister of Science and Innovation: How will the Advanced Technology Institute boost business-led research and development? Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Why did he use section 27 of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011 to amend the Canterbury Regional Policy Statement instead of using the Order in Council provisions of the Act or developing the recovery strategy or a recovery plan? SHANE ARDERN to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent announcements has he made to further improve New Zealand’s biosecurity system?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Is it still a fundamental purpose of his Government to narrow the wage gap between New Zealand and Australia, and to grow local wages in New Zealand? TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he received on the economy? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: In dollar terms, what is the shortfall in the tax-take for the nine months to March revealed in yesterday’s Financial Statements compared to October’s pre-election update? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: How much has been raised to date by the Earthquake Kiwi Bonds and, at this rate, how many years will it take to cover the Government’s estimated $5.5 billion liability resulting from the Canterbury earthquakes? Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister for Social Development: How will Budget 2012 provide greater support for young people most at risk of long-term welfare dependency? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Does he stand by the Prime Minister’s statement regarding asset sales that “We are not going to do anything tricky there”? Dr JIAN YANG to the Associate Minister of Health: How is the Government expanding its programme to reduce rheumatic fever in vulnerable communities? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Housing: Does he stand by all his comments regarding housing? JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister of Transport: What is the plan to pay for the Government’s transport expenditure given that the Ministry of Transport’s Briefing to the Incoming Minister warns of a funding shortfall of $4.9 billion if high oil prices and low GDP growth continue? MARK MITCHELL to the Minister for Economic Development: How is the Government improving value for money in its procurement of services for the public sector? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her statement that “I do not want to see unnecessary change for change’s sake. Rather I am looking to put in place pragmatic solutions as we implement our manifesto commitments and let employers, employees and business focus on what they do best.”? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he still have confidence in the Minister for Social Development and the Associate Ministers for Social Development; if so, why?
Previous earthquakes demonstrated destructive effects of soil-structure interaction on structural response. For example, in the 1970 Gediz earthquake in Turkey, part of a factory was demolished in a town 135 km from the epicentre, while no other buildings in the town were damaged. Subsequent investigations revealed that the fundamental period of vibration of the factory was approximately equal to that of the underlying soil. This alignment provided a resonance effect and led to collapse of the structure. Another dramatic example took place in Adapazari, during the 1999 Kocaeli earthquake where several foundations failed due to either bearing capacity exceedance or foundation uplifting, consequently, damaging the structure. Finally, the Christchurch 2012 earthquakes have shown that significant nonlinear action in the soil and soil-foundation interface can be expected due to high levels of seismic excitation and spectral acceleration. This nonlinearity, in turn, significantly influenced the response of the structure interacting with the soil-foundation underneath. Extensive research over more than 35 years has focused on the subject of seismic soil-structure interaction. However, since the response of soil-structure systems to seismic forces is extremely complex, burdened by uncertainties in system parameters and variability in ground motions, the role of soil-structure interaction on the structural response is still controversial. Conventional design procedures suggest that soil-structure interaction effects on the structural response can be conservatively ignored. However, more recent studies show that soil-structure interaction can be either beneficial or detrimental, depending on the soil-structure-earthquake scenarios considered. In view of the above mentioned issues, this research aims to utilise a comprehensive and systematic probabilistic methodology, as the most rational way, to quantify the effects of soil-structure interaction on the structural response considering both aleatory and epistemic uncertainties. The goal is achieved by examining the response of established rheological single-degree-of-freedom systems located on shallow-foundation and excited by ground motions with different spectral characteristics. In this regard, four main phases are followed. First, the effects of seismic soil-structure interaction on the response of structures with linear behaviour are investigated using a robust stochastic approach. Herein, the soil-foundation interface is modelled by an equivalent linear cone model. This phase is mainly considered to examine the influence of soil-structure interaction on the approach that has been adopted in the building codes for developing design spectrum and defining the seismic forces acting on the structure. Second, the effects of structural nonlinearity on the role of soil-structure interaction in modifying seismic structural response are studied. The same stochastic approach as phase 1 is followed, while three different types of structural force-deflection behaviour are examined. Third, a systematic fashion is carried out to look for any possible correlation between soil, structural, and system parameters and the degree of soil-structure interaction effects on the structural response. An attempt is made to identify the key parameters whose variation significantly affects the structural response. In addition, it is tried to define the critical range of variation of parameters of consequent. Finally, the impact of soil-foundation interface nonlinearity on the soil-structure interaction analysis is examined. In this regard, a newly developed macro-element covering both material and geometrical soil-foundation interface nonlinearity is implemented in a finite-element program Raumoko 3D. This model is then used in an extensive probabilistic simulation to compare the effects of linear and nonlinear soil-structure interaction on the structural response. This research is concluded by reviewing the current design guidelines incorporating soil-structure interaction effects in their design procedures. A discussion is then followed on the inadequacies of current procedures based on the outcomes of this study.