Search

found 6359 results

Images for canterbury earthquakes; more images...

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of the earthquake damage to the Observatory tower at the Christchurch Arts Centre. The top two storeys of the tower collapsed during the 22 February 2011 earthquake and the rubble spilled into the courtyard in front. A digger was used to clear the rubble away from the building. A tarpaulin has been draped over the top of the tower and the roof of the building behind.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of the earthquake damage to the Observatory tower at the Christchurch Arts Centre. The top two storeys of the tower collapsed during the 22 February 2011 earthquake and the rubble spilled into the courtyard in front. A digger was used to clear the rubble away from the building. A tarpaulin has been draped over the top of the broken tower and the roof behind.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of the earthquake damage to the Observatory tower at the Christchurch Arts Centre. The top two storeys of the tower collapsed during the 22 February 2011 earthquake and the rubble spilled into the courtyard in front. A digger was used to clear the rubble away from the building. A tarpaulin has been draped over the top of the broken tower and the roof behind.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of the earthquake damage to the Observatory tower at the Christchurch Arts Centre. The top two storeys of the tower collapsed during the 22 February 2011 earthquake and the rubble spilled into the courtyard in front. A digger was used to clear the rubble away from the building. A tarpaulin has been draped over the top of the broken tower and the roof behind.

Audio, Radio New Zealand

The Bishop of Christchurch has asked parishioners to think about the victims of the earthquake in Haiti. Bishop Victoria Matthews is appealing to Canterbury Anglicans to give at least $100,000 for quake relief in Haiti.

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

The Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 generated hundreds of thousands of insurance claims, many of which were disputed. The New Zealand justice system faced the same challenge encountered by other jurisdictions following a natural disaster: how to resolve these disputes quickly and at minimal cost but also fairly, to avoid compounding the disaster with injustice? The thesis is of this article is that although the earthquakes were catastrophic for New Zealand, they also created a unique opportunity to design an innovative civil justice process—the Christchurch High Court Earthquake List—and to test, over a relatively short timeframe, how well that process works. This article describes the Christchurch High Court Earthquake List and analyses it by reference to civil justice theory about the relative normative values of public adjudication and private settlement and the dialogic relationship between them. It then evaluates the List, using statistics available five years on from the earthquakes and by reference to the author’s own experience mediating earthquake disputes.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Surface rupture and slip from the Mw 7.8 2016 Kaikōura Earthquake have been mapped in the region between the Leader and Charwell rivers using field mapping and LiDAR data. The eastern Humps, north Leader and Conway-Charwell faults ruptured the ground surface in the study area. The E-NE striking ‘The Humps’ Fault runs along the base of the Mt Stewart range front, appears to dip steeply NW and intersects the NNW-NNE Leader Fault which itself terminates northwards at the NE striking Conway-Charwell Fault. The eastern Humps Fault is up to the NW and accommodates oblique slip with reverse and right lateral displacement. Net slip on ‘The Humps’ Fault is ≤4 m and produced ≤4 m uplift of the Mt Stewart range during the earthquake. The Leader Fault strikes NNW-NNE with dips ranging from ~10° west to 80° east and accommodated ≤4 m net slip comprising left-lateral and up-to-the-west vertical displacement. Like the Humps west of the study area, surface-rupture of the Leader Fault occurred on multiple strands. The complexity of rupture on the Leader Fault is in part due to the occurrence of bedding-parallel slip within the Cretaceous-Cenozoic sequence. Although the Mt Stewart range front is bounded by ‘The Humps’ Fault, in the study area neither this fault nor the Leader Fault were known to have been active before the earthquake. Fieldwork and trenching investigations are ongoing to characterise the geometry, kinematics and paleoseismic history of the mapped active faults.

Images, Alexander Turnbull Library

Refers to the government's earthquake response legislation and the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill. 26 experts in constitutional law from all six of the country's law faculties have penned a letter condemning the Government's earthquake response legislation. No sooner was their work in the public eye than the similarly flawed Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill was reported back from a select committee, with a recommendation that it pass. It also goes far beyond what is required to get things done. In bypassing the normal consent process, the bill says the authority does not have to hold hearings on applications and that its decisions can be challenged in the High Court only on points of law. Effectively, the legislation asks New Zealanders to accept that the Rugby World Cup Minister knows best. It is he who knows how the event must be run. Precisely the same attitude pervades the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Act. This hands individual Government ministers the power to change almost every law, thereby handing Parliament's normal law-making role to the Executive. Their decisions cannot be challenged in any court'. (NZ Herald editorial - 1 October 2010) Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

Disasters, either man-made or natural, are characterised by a multiplicity of factors including loss of property, life, environmental degradation, and psychosocial malfunction of the affected community. Although much research has been undertaken on proactive disaster management to help reduce the impacts of natural and man-made disasters, many challenges still remain. In particular, the desire to re-house the affected as quickly as possible can affect long-term recovery if a considered approach is not adopted. Promoting recovery activities, coordination, and information sharing at national and international levels are crucial to avoid duplication. Mannakkara and Wilkinson’s (2014) modified “Build Back Better” (BBB) concept aims for better resilience by incorporating key resilience elements in post-disaster restoration. This research conducted an investigation into the effectiveness of BBB in the recovery process after the 2010–2011 earthquakes in greater Christchurch, New Zealand. The BBB’s impact was assessed in terms of its five key components: built environment, natural environment, social environment, economic environment, and implementation process. This research identified how the modified BBB propositions can assist in disaster risk reduction in the future, and used both qualitative and quantitative data from both the Christchurch and Waimakariri recovery processes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key officials from the Christchurch Earthquake Recovery Authority, and city councils, and supplemented by reviewing of the relevant literature. Collecting data from both qualitative and quantitative sources enabled triangulation of the data. The interviewees had directly participated in all phases of the recovery, which helped the researcher gain a clear understanding of the recovery process. The findings led to the identification of best practices from the Christchurch and Waimakariri recovery processes and underlined the effectiveness of the BBB approach for all recovery efforts. This study contributed an assessment tool to aid the measurement of resilience achieved through BBB indicators. This tool provides systematic and structured approach to measure the performance of ongoing recovery.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This is an interim report from the research study performed within the NHRP Research Project “Impacts of soil liquefaction on land, buildings and buried pipe networks: geotechnical evaluation and design, Project 3: Seismic assessment and design of pipe networks in liquefiable soils”. The work presented herein is a continuation of the comprehensive study on the impacts of Christchurch earthquakes on the buried pipe networks presented in Cubrinovski et al. (2011). This report summarises the performance of Christchurch City’s potable water, waste water and road networks through the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES), and particularly focuses on the potable water network. It combines evidence based on comprehensive and well-documented data on the damage to the water network, detailed observations and interpretation of liquefaction-induced land damage, records and interpretations of ground motion characteristics induced by the Canterbury earthquakes, for a network analysis and pipeline performance evaluation using a GIS platform. The study addresses a range of issues relevant in the assessment of buried networks in areas affected by strong earthquakes and soil liquefaction. It discusses performance of different pipe materials (modern flexible pipelines and older brittle pipelines) including effects of pipe diameters, fittings and pipeline components/details, trench backfill characteristics, and severity of liquefaction. Detailed breakdown of key factors contributing to the damage to buried pipes is given with reference to the above and other relevant parameters. Particular attention is given to the interpretation, analysis and modelling of liquefaction effects on the damage and performance of the buried pipe networks. Clear link between liquefaction severity and damage rate for the pipeline has been observed with an increasing damage rate seen with increasing liquefaction severity. The approach taken here was to correlate the pipeline damage to LRI (Liquefaction Resistance Index, newly developed parameter in Cubrinovski et al., 2011) which represents a direct measure for the soil resistance to liquefaction while accounting for the seismic demand through PGA. Key quality of the adopted approach is that it provides a general methodology that in conjunction with conventional methods for liquefaction evaluation can be applied elsewhere in New Zealand and internationally. Preliminary correlations between pipeline damage (breaks km-1), liquefaction resistance (LRI) and seismic demand (PGA) have been developed for AC pipes, as an example. Such correlations can be directly used in the design and assessment of pipes in seismic areas both in liquefiable and non-liquefiable areas. Preliminary findings on the key factors for the damage to the potable water pipe network and established empirical correlations are presented including an overview of the damage to the waste water and road networks but with substantially less detail. A comprehensive summary of the damage data on the buried pipelines is given in a series of appendices.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In practice, several competing liquefaction evaluation procedures (LEPs) are used to compute factors of safety against soil liquefaction, often for use within a liquefaction potential index (LPI) framework to assess liquefaction hazard. At present, the influence of the selected LEP on the accuracy of LPI hazard assessment is unknown, and the need for LEP-specific calibrations of the LPI hazard scale has never been thoroughly investigated. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of three CPT-based LEPs from the literature, operating within the LPI framework, for predicting the severity of liquefaction manifestation. Utilising more than 7000 liquefaction case studies from the 2010–2011 Canterbury (NZ) earthquake sequence, this study found that: (a) the relationship between liquefaction manifestation severity and computed LPI values is LEP-specific; (b) using a calibrated, LEP-specific hazard scale, the performance of the LPI models is essentially equivalent; and (c) the existing LPI framework has inherent limitations, resulting in inconsistent severity predictions against field observations for certain soil profiles, regardless of which LEP is used. It is unlikely that revisions of the LEPs will completely resolve these erroneous assessments. Rather, a revised index which more adequately accounts for the mechanics of liquefaction manifestation is needed.