Learning from Earthquakes Loss Adjusting in Italy Carlo Tozzi Spadoni, Senior Partner Sinaia, 21st...

Learning from Earthquakes Loss Adjusting in Italy

Carlo Tozzi Spadoni, Senior Partner

Sinaia, 21st May 2013

SUMMARY

1. Earthquakes: different occurrences, common patterns;

2. Loss Prevention: Technical Norms are useful, but not enough;

3. Loss Adjusters: those to rely upon when it’s too late for others to step in.

1. Earthquakes: different occurrences, common patterns

1. Valdivia, Chile - magnitude 9,5 - 22 May 19602. Straight of Prince William, Alaska - magnitude 9,2 - 28 March 19643. Sumatra, Indonesia - magnitude 9,1 - 26 December 20044. Kamchatka, Russia - magnitude 9,0 - 4 November 19525. Sendai, Japan - magnitude 9,0 - 11 March 20116. The Ecuador Coast - magnitude 8,8 - 31 January 19067. Concepción, Chile - magnitude 8,8 - 27 February 20108. Rat Island, Alaska - magnitude 8,7 - 4 Feburary 19659. Sumatra, Indonesia - magnitude 8,7 - 28 March 200510. Haiyuan, China - magnitude 8,6 - 16 December 1920

A hot issue: the worst 20 earthquakes in the XX and XXI century were all in the Asia-Pacific, with 4 out of 10 in the last 7 years out of 111.

And a «Club-Med» issue as well: Italy, the Balkans and Turkey have all been affected by devastating Earthquakes in recent years and are exposed to such a risk.

In Italy, we’ve had two major events (L’Aquila in 2009 and Emilia in 2012), from which a few lessonsa can be drawn.

Estimate between the scale, TNT equivalent energy and the occurrence of seismic events

magnitude TNT equivalent Frequency estimated

0 1 kilogramme About 8.000 per day

0,5 5,6 kilogrammes

1 31,6 kilogrammes

1,5 178 kilogrammes

2 1 ton about 1.000 per day

2,5 5,6 tons

3 31,6 tons about 130 per day

3,5 178 tons

4 1.000 tons about 15 per day

4,5 5.600 tons

5 31.600 tons 2-3 per day

5,5 178.000 tons

6 1 million tons 120 per year

6,5 5,6 million tons

7 31,6 million tons 18 per year

7,5 178 million tons

8 1 billion tons 1 per year

8,5 5,6 billion toms

9 31,6 billion tons 1 every 20 years

9,5 178 billion tons

10 1.000 billion tons unknown


Every day has its quake: Every day, small seisms are recorded, but fortunately only a few release an energy and hit a populated area that cause significant damages (Causalties and Property).

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitrotoluene

The impact of an Earthquake is a functionIt = f (e, t, m, o, z, p,…) of various factors, including:

• the energy released - e• the different types (bradyseism, seaquake, tsunamis, cluster shocks, etc.) - t• the type of movement (shake, wave) - m• the type of wave (compression, cutting, superficial) - o• the area struck (population, housing density, infrastructures, social organisations, etc.) - z• the protection measures adopted (technical, civil defence, financial, etc.) - p• …

Each quake is a different event impacting a different area and thus causing different losses – both in terms of casualties and/or material / financial damages.

Diagram of an Earthquake


Not only the type and structure of the buildings involved, but also the energy of the Earthquake varies significantly between , for instance, Japan (above) and Italy (L’Aquila) below.


Construction standards most frequently used in modern industrial buildings are prefabricated reinforced concrete elements. Most recent trends include flat roofs to fully exploit the height which, over the years, was considerably increased.

Common Patterns. These structures do not always react well, with more or less relevant detachments of wall panels, roof parts and loss of connections among the prefabricated elements.


The main reasons for this can be traced down to the following:

1. The height of pillars generates a remar-kable cantilever which in turn, during oscil-lation, stresses connections among pre-fabricated parts;

2. The considerable mass of roof panels, which adds further stress;


3. Side wall panels connections are often relatively weak;

4. Structures do not absorb well normal deformations, thus stressing the connections among elements.


Purpose

Area of application

Compulsory implementation

Technical Norms

Loss Prevention

1. To protect human lives;2. To limit damages;3. To preserve functionality of

structures essential for Civil Defence.

1. To limit MPL/MFL combined for material damages and BI;

2. To limit Third Party damages (also human lives)/Environment.

1. Buildings;2. Structures different from

buildings (plants, etc.), if not otherwise normed

1. Buildings (Structures and non);2. Machinery (Structures and non);3. Stock;4. BI;5. Contingent BI;6. Third Party Liability/Accident .

1. 100% for new buildings, where applicable;

2. Partially, on existing entities;3. Limited compliance to the Law

(e.g.: L’Aquila Hospital, Students Hostel, etc.).

1. Even solo to industrial risks, not that many are insured against earthquakes;

2. Furthermore, actual Loss Prevention is only implemented on sites with high MPL/MFL.

2. Loss Prevention: Technical Norms are useful, but not enough

Same shock, different loss: a well designed/built risk will resist to most quakes, while others will not. Norms are therefore useful …


… but often not enough: what statically survives the main-shock, may no longer be able to guarantee safety during after-shocks, thus causing relevant consequential and/or BI damages even with relatively limited property damage.


Furthermore, a series of non-structural civil and plant facilities are not subject to the same verifications foreseen for structures: this often causes a prolonged site unavailability for more or less long periods of time, thus adding to previously outlined problems.


Plant engineering does not generally have the same regulations designed for anti seismic structures: often, following an earthquake, gas & water pipes leak thus often triggering fire. Electrical and telecom facilities also have similar problems…


3. Loss Adjusters: those to rely upon when it’s too late for others to step in

+ Linguistic and multicultural skills & a log of previous valuable experience in a growingly international and complex business environment

Technical/Engineering Know-How

\

Civ

il/C

onst

ruct

ion

Mec

hani

cal

Ele

ctric

al

Che

mis

try

Legal/Contractual Know-How

Gen

eral

& S

tric

t Li

abili

ty

Ins

uran

ce C

ontr

acts

Assessment/Financial

Pro

pert

y: B

uild

ings

, M

achi

nery

& S

tock

Bus

ines

s In

terr

uptio

n

Others

Man

agem

ent

&

Pro

blem

Sol

ving


Your Partner for professional services in the insurance industry for Loss Adjusting, Claims Settlement, Loss Prevention and Risk Engineering in Europe and beyond.

www.iesweb.net


OUR MISSION: we are determined to provide: premium-quality professional services in the domains of Insurance Loss Adjusting, Risk Engineering, Corporate Claims Management and the development of Insurance Knowledge and Competence

to the Insurance Market, protecting the interests of Principals appointing us and/or retaining our services

in an independent, honest, transparent, cost-effective and profitable way

enhancing the growth and exploiting the individual talent, professional know-how and skills of our staff, through team-work and a solid organization framework

market bench-mark engineering, financial, legal and insurance knowledge within a multilingual and multicultural environment

to the general benefit and growth of the wider Insurance Market (Insurers, Policyholders, Claimants, Brokers, Authorities and various Professionals) and that of our own employees, professionals and stake-holders

WHAT

TO

HOW

BY

WITH

WHY

Learning from Earthquakes Loss Adjusting in Italy Carlo Tozzi Spadoni, Senior Partner Sinaia, 21st...

Documents

Transcript of Learning from Earthquakes Loss Adjusting in Italy Carlo Tozzi Spadoni, Senior Partner Sinaia, 21st...