ORETA_JSPS-RSID_2006

8/6/2019 ORETA_JSPS-RSID_2006

1/10

IMPACT OF NATURAL DISASTERS ON INFRASTRUCTURES AND

THE ENVIRONMENT: DESIGNING FOR SAFETY AND STABILITY

LEADS TO SUSTAINABILITY

Andres Winston C. Oreta, D. Eng.Professor in Civil Engineering

De La Salle University Manila, PhilippinesEmail: [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract: Structural and geotechnical engineers have significantly contributed towards the

protection and conservation of the natural environment especially when we consider theimpact of natural disasters, like earthquakes, tsunamis and landslides, on infrastructures andthe environment. Today, the emphasis of sustainability is on how to deal with the issues oflimited resources and how to reduce the impacts on the natural environment. But in anenvironment frequently attacked by natural disasters like seismic countries, Japan and thePhilippines, the primary considerations in the design and construction of infrastructures aresafety and stability. When structures and foundations are properly designed for safety andstability, the accumulation of construction waste and disaster-caused debris waste isminimized and the consumption of non-renewable natural resources is reduced. This paperhighlights the contribution of structural and geotechnical engineers to the preservation of theenvironment.

Key Words: Sustainability, Natural Disasters, Environmental Impact, Safety, Stability

1. INTRODUCTION: Today, there is anincreasing demand for engineers to focus theirefforts on the protection and preservation of theenvironment. The civil engineering community,which includes structural and geotechnicalengineers, plays a major role in maintaining the balance and harmony between the built andexisting natural environment. Provision of

proper housing and the necessary infrastructurefor transport, communication, water supply andsanitation, energy, commercial and industrialactivities to meet the needs of a growingworldwide population, at the same timereducing the environmental impact, pose amajor challenge to civil engineers (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Infrastructure Development

(Photo by A. Oreta)


2/10

2. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT

The built environment, which includes infrastructures such as residential houses, high-risebuildings, long-span bridges, roads and expressways, and large civil structures like dams andreservoirs, provide for a livable atmosphere for all. However, the impact of theseinfrastructures on the natural environment should be a concern. The environmental impact of

infrastructure development with respect to the depletion of our natural resources andproduction of waste is staggering (Figure 2).

Richardson (2002) summarizes the realities of infrastructure impact on the environment asfollows:It is said that50% of the world population lives in cities today and this may grow to 75% by 2030.Cities are said to cause 75% of the worlds pollution and consume 75% of the worlds energy.

Buildings are reported to produce 40% of the worlds CO2, consume 50% of the energy derived from fossil fuels, consume 3 billion tonnes of raw materials in construction each year andconsume 75% of all energy used through artificial lighting, heating and cooling every day. 25%

of all wood harvested is used in building construction.

Maydl (2004) emphasizes that the construction sector is the most important contributor inresource consumption and waste production. According to him, within the European Union(EU), half of all materials that are taken from the earths surface are used in the constructionsector and more than one fourth of the amount of the total waste is construction waste. InAustria, the share of the total waste from building sites including excavation material amountsto 57% of the total waste per year (Maydl 2004).

In the case of the United Sates, Webster (2004) summarizes the following information:There are 83 million residential buildings, 4.7 million commercial buildings and 230,000

industrial buildings in the US. Residential and commercial buildings consume 39% of the

nations prime energy, consume 71% of its electricity and emit 38% of the greenhouse gases.

Building construction and demolition (C&D) generated 123 million metric tons of waste in

Figure 2. Two major impacts of infrastructure development:

(a) Depletion of natural resources, and (b) Accumulation of construction waste


3/10

1996, equivalent to ton per person per year. Approximately 43% of the waste came from

residential sources and 57% from non-residential sources. Of this waste, about 40% went toC&D landfills, 20 to 30% was recovered or recycled and the bulk of the remainder was

deposited in landfills, buried or burned on-site. Construction waste accounted for 8% of the

total, renovation waste 44%, and demolition waste 48%.

3. IMPACT OF NATURAL DISASTERS

The natural environment, through natural disasters, in a way contributes to its deterioration.Natural disasters like earthquakes, floods, typhoons and volcanic eruptions spoil both the builtand natural environment. Aside fromcausing numerous deaths andinjuries to people, natural disastershad caused the destruction ofimportant infrastructures such as buildings, bridges and roads anddevastation of nature which

contributed to environmentaldegradation. Consider the followingexamples:

The 1985 Mexico City earthquakeresulted in a death toll of at least9,500, 30,000 injuries and more than100,000 people left homeless. It isestimated that the quake seriouslyaffected an area of approximately825,000 square kilometers, caused

between 3 and 4 billion U.S. dollarsof damage, and was felt by almost 20million people. Four hundred twelve buildings collapsed and another3,124 were seriously damaged inMexico City. About 60 percent ofthe buildings were destroyed atCiudad Guzman, Jalisco (USGSwebsite).

The July 16, 1990 earthquake (M

7.8) which struck northern andcentral Luzon Island in thePhilippines resulted in substantialmorbidity and mortality andwidespread damage. Among theareas severely affected were themountain city of Baguio; the coastalareas in La Union; Dagupan city in

Figure 3. News of a disaster brings grief

(Headline from the Philippine Daily Inquirer)

Figure 4. Collapsed Hyatt Hotel- Baguio City

(Photo from Hawaiian Webmaster)


4/10

Pangasinan; and the central plain area - primarily Cabanatuan city in Nueva Ecija andmountainous Nueva Viscaya. Buildings in Baguio and Cabanatuan suffered extensivestructural failure, and buildings in the coastal areas in La Union and in Dagupan sufferedfoundation failure or the effects of liquefaction.In Baguio City, of more than 350 inspectededifices, consisting of public, publicly-used and private buildings, 190 structures were

pronounced building hazards, 110 edifices were deemed partially damaged and may be partially occupied, and 54 buildings showed no observable damage or only minor damagethus allowing resumption of their normal operation (Baguio Midland Courier/August 5, 1990).

The Hyogo-ken Nanbu or the Great Hanshin earthquake measuring 6.8 on the Richter scalehit the city of Kobe and surrounding areas in Hyogo prefecture on January 17, 1995. Over6,000 fatalities and close to 35,000 serious injuries were caused by the earthquake. 88% of thedeaths were instantaneous, caused by building collapse, which literally crushed people in theirsleep. Nearly 55,000 houses collapsed and 32,000 houses were severely damaged in the cityof Kobe. Traditional wooden houses with heavy tiled roofs suffered the most severe impact.Most of these collapsed. Many of the new timber houses with light roofs partially collapsed.

Both of these types of houses caught fire easily, leading to the destruction of over 23,000buildings by fire. In total, over 500,000 persons effectively lost their place to live as a directresult of the quake; 100,209 housing units were officially classified as 'totally damaged', with107,074 designated as 'severely damaged'. The cost of reconstruction of buildings alone wasroughly estimated at between US $61-70 billion(http://www.cohre.org/cohrelibrary2/country/kobe.html).

The 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake inTaiwan caused 2,415 deaths, 1,441severely wounded, US$9.2 billionworth of damage, 44,338 housescompletely destroyed and 41,336houses severely damaged(Wikipedia).

The 2001 Gujarat earthquake inIndia was the most devastatingearthquake in India in recenthistory. As many as 15,000 -20,000 people were initiallyreported dead but within a fewdays after the earthquake, thedeath toll kept on rising reachingmore than 30,000. The quakedestroyed 90 percent of the homes

in Bhuj, several schools, and flattened a hospital. Considerable damage occurred also atBhachau. In Ahmedabad, Gujarat's commercial capital and a city of 4.5 million, as many as50 multistory buildings collapsed and several hundred people were killed. Total propertydamage was estimated at more than $5.5 billion (Wikipedia).

Figure 5. Earthquake waste and debris - 1995 Hyogo-

ken Nanbu Earthquake (Photo by K. Kawashima)


5/10

The 2004 Niigata - Chuetsu earthquake in Japan caused more than 3,000 injuries and over onehundred thousand people fled their homes. The earthquakes caused houses to collapse inOjiya and damaged thousands in the area. For the first time in its history, a Shinkansen trainderailed while in service. Eight out of ten cars of the Toki 325 (a 200 Series Shinkansen)derailed on the Joetsu Shinkansen line between Nagaoka Station in Nagaoka and Urasa

Station in Yamato East Japan Railway Company stopped aall trains in Niigata Prefecture,including the extensively damaged Joetsu Line, Shinetsu Main Line, Iiyama Line, TadamiLine and Echigo Line. Part of Nagaoka Station appeared ready to collapse as a result of anaftershock, but after a brief closure, the station has reopened. The segment of the JoetsuShinkansen between Echigo Yuzawa Station and Nagaoka Station closed. Buses transferredpassengers between the two operating segments of the line: Tokyo StationEchigo YuzawaStation and Nagaoka StationNiigata Station.

The 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami affected about 11 countries in Southeast Asiaincluding Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, Thailand, the Maldives, Somalia, Myanmar, Malaysiaand Seychelles. The number of people killed and missing has reached more than 200,000 in

Indonesia. More than half a million were left homeless. The toll in Sri Lanka, which wassecond hardest hit by the catastrophe, was 30,957 (Wikipedia).

As a consequence of the destruction brought about by natural disasters, the natural resources,materials and energy that have been utilized in constructing these infrastructures have beenput to waste. Moreover, the large amount of disaster-caused waste and debris poses anotherenvironmental problem (Figure 5). Debris removal is a major component of every disasterrecovery operation. Much of the debris generated from natural disasters is not hazardous. Soil,building material, and green waste, such as trees and shrubs, make up most of the volume ofdisaster debris. Debris from hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, and fires falls into afew major categories (Table 1).

Table 1. Disaster Debris (from US EPA)

The most severe natural disasters generate debris in quantities that can overwhelm existingsolid waste management facilities or force communities to use disposal options that otherwisewould not be acceptable. Debris estimates for major earthquakes in the US range from

Major Categories of Disaster Debris

DamagedBuildings

Sediments Green WastePersonalProperty

Ash and CharredWood

Hurricanes X X X X

Earthquakes X X X X X

Tornadoes X X X

Floods X X X X

Fires X X X


6/10

500,000 tons for a magnitude 7.0 earthquake on the Hayward Fault, to 2.5 million tons for amagnitude 7.7 on the San Andreas Fault (DiMartino 1999).

Figure 6. Understanding the Relationship between Infrastructures and the Environment

Infrastructures andthe Built Environmentatural Environment

The Impact of the Environment on Infrastructures

Disasters due to natural hazards (earthquakes, tsunamis,landslides, flashfloods, volcanic eruptions, typhoons) Destruction and collapse of infrastructures causing deaths

and injuries Structural deterioration (steel corrosion, foundation

settlement, etc.) due to severe environment

The Impact of Infrastructures on the Environment Construction and operation of infrastructures uses natural

resources and energy Costly repairs and rehabilitation of damaged infrastructures

use more resources and leads to wastage End-of-life effects of structures and debris of structures

damaged by disasters cause disposal problems


7/10

4. CONTRIBUTION OF STRUCTURAL AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS IN

DISASTER-PRONE COUNTRIES

The negative impacts between infrastructures and the environment are summarized in Figure6. Natural disasters like earthquakes spoil the built environment. The negative impact ofinfrastructures on the environment, on the other hand, aggravates especially when natural

disasters occur. How do structuraland geotechnical engineers

contribute towards the reduction ofthese negative impacts in a region

where natural disasters like

earthquakes, typhoons andlandslides are prevalent?

I believe the basic but criticalfactor in reducing the negativeimpacts of natural disasters on boththe built and natural environment

is designing for safety andstability. Structural andgeotechnical engineers havesignificantly contributed towardsthe protection and conservation ofthe natural environment especiallywhen we consider the impact ofnatural disasters, like earthquakes, tsunamis and landslides, on infrastructures and theenvironment. Today, the emphasis of sustainability is on how to deal with the issues oflimited resources and how to reduce the impacts on the natural environment. But in anenvironment frequently attacked by natural disasters like seismic countries, Japan and the

Philippines, the primary considerations in the design and construction of infrastructures aresafety and stability. However, engineers, when they properly design structures andfoundations for safety and stability, are actually contributing significantly to the preservationof the natural environment. Proper analysis, design and construction of structures willminimize damage or collapse. Refined modeling, testing and analysis of soil may preventfoundation failures. Strengthening and improvement of unstable slopes will control theoccurrence of landslides. When structures are strengthened or retrofitted, the usable life of thestructure is extended reducing end-of-life waste. These primary responsibilities of structuraland geotechnical engineers regarding safety and stability, in the end, leads to the reduction ofnon-renewable natural resources consumption and minimizing the accumulation ofconstruction waste and disaster-caused debris waste. Engineers, even if they do not directly

address the issue of the environment by using tools such as Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) oradopting sustainable engineering concepts in their design, always contribute to thepreservation of the environment, especially in the event of the occurrence natural disasters.The lack of understanding on the impact of structural and foundation failures of built

structures on the environment is one of the chief impediments to achieving the greatest possible reduction in the environmental impact of infrastructures. The responsibility ofstructural and geotechnical engineers in designing for safety and stability and the role they

Figure 7. Updating of codes and retrofitting of

existing structures may prevent similar failures -

1995 Hyogo-ken Nanbu Earthquake (Photo by K.

Kawashima


8/10

play concerning the maintenance of environment especially in disaster-prone countries mustbe appreciated by everyone including the so-called environmentalists.

Sustainability of the Built Environment in Seismic Regions

Research Group 3 (RG3) of the JSPS Core University Program on Environmental

Engineering addresses issues related to the safety and stability of infrastructures in highlyurbanized and densely populated regions against environmental impacts especiallyearthquakes. The group recognizes the interrelationship between the natural environment andthe built environment. The natural environment through geotechnical and seismic hazardsaffects the safety and stability of various infrastructures such as buildings, bridges, slopes andreclaimed lands. The built environment, on the other hand, introduces negative impacts in thenatural environment through the use, reuse, wastage and disposal of construction materials.Thus RG3, aside from finding clever solutions to safety, economy and serviceability,addresses also the issue of sustainability to diminish the social and ecological impact. Thiscan be done by understanding the impact of natural hazards to infrastructures, finding ways ofimproving the design, enhancing the performance and upgrading the construction of new

structures and extending the lifespan of existing structures these activities would result to anefficient use of non-renewable materials and reduction of waste materials from damaged orcollapsed structures, and mitigation of damage or collapse of structures which causes injuryand death.

The researches (Table 2)conducted by Philippine visiting scientists through the JSPS CoreUniversity Program on Environmental Engineering can be categorized into three majorthemes:I. Evaluation and assessment of structural and geotechnical hazards

II. Evaluation and improvement of the performance of structures and foundations through

refined modeling, analysis and design

III. Development and implementation of programs to mitigate the effects of natural hazards.

5. DESIGN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

Sustainability in the built environment must consider the entire lifetime of structures fromcradle to grave. Although the major responsibility of structural and geotechnical engineers isdesigning for safety and stability, they should also appreciate the fundamentals of sustainabledevelopment and have the know-how to interpret the environmental labeling and qualitystandards. The material and resource selection eventually based upon the environmentqualities and friendliness must also be addressed at the initial stage of the design. The systemand the form of structure which plays an important role in aesthetics, cost factor and the speedin implementation are factors to consider in sustainable design. A structural engineer shouldtry to maintain a balance between the prefabricated elements or mass produced units and theself-built or indigenous technologies together using newer and innovative approaches to thedesign. Faster construction, reductions of on-site activities, optimization of resources and costeffectiveness are innovations that must be introduced in a structural design andimplementation. The design of structures should now be aimed towards the followingimportant considerations the 4 S and 1 E : (a) safety, (b) stability, (c) serviceability, (d)sustainability, and (e) economy.


9/10

Table 2. Summary of JSPS Research Topics (Philippines)

Research Topic / Researcher I II III

1. Parametric Investigation on the Flexure and Shear Behavior of RC

Column to Evaluate its Seismic Performance by Bernardo Lejano(TUP/DLSU)

X

2. Lateral Resistance of Piles Subjected to Liquefaction-InducedLateral Flow by Jonathan Dungca (DLSU)

X X

3. Performance of Neural Network Models in Predicting the ConfinedConcrete Strength and Strain of Circular Columns by Andres Oreta(DLSU)

X

4. Structural Damage Detection for Bolted Connection between TwoSteel Plates Using Laser Doppler Vibrometry by Giovanni J. Enecio

(USC)

X

5. An Improved Implicit Integration Algorithm for the Sekiguchi-Ohta

Constitutive Equation by Mark Albert H. Zarco (UPD)X

6. Seismic Vulnerability Rating of Philippine Bridges by RomeoEstanero

X X

7. Interaction of Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer and Lateral SteelTies in Circular Concrete Columns as Confinement by Jason M.C.Ongpeng (DLSU)

X

8. Natural Vibration and Damping Characteristics of a Steel Bridge byGerardo Apor (Xavier University)

X

9. Use of Microtremor for Evaluating Shallow and Deep GeologicProfile by Glenn Pintor (UPLB)

X X

10. Prediction of Deflection of RC Beams Strengthened with Carbon

Fiber Fabric and Carbon Plate by Alan Tan (UPD)

X

11. Quantitative non-destructive testing and evaluation of ultrasound

wave propagation in anisotropic media by Raymund Dimagiba (UPD)

X X

12. Embedment effect on the bearing capacity of spread footing in sandby Mary Ann Adajar (DLSU) X

6. PHOTO ARCHIVES ON IMPACT OF NATURAL DISASTERS

To increase awareness about the impact of natural disasters on built infrastructures and theimpact of structural and geotechnical failures on the environment, a photo archive and slideshow video presentation was developed. Highlighted in the photo archive and videopresentation are some important natural disasters like earthquakes, landslides, tsunamis andvolcanic eruptions and their effects on built structures. Through these photos, lessons on thecause of the damage or collapse of structures may be learned and corresponding response canbe done to reduce the impact of natural hazards.

A photo slide show video presenting the collections of this photo archive was also developedand saved as an mpeg file in both VCD and DVD codec. This can be viewed using theWindows Media Player.


10/10

Figure 8. Photo Slide Show Presentation on

The Impact of Natural Disasters and on Infrastructures and the Environment

References

Webster, Mark D. (2004). Relevance of Structural Engineers to Sustainable Design of Buildings, , StructuralEngineering International, J. of the IABSE, Vol. 14, No. 13, pp. 181-185.

Maydl, Peter (2004). Sustainable Engineering: State-of-the-Art and Prospects, Structural EngineeringInternational, J. of the IABSE, Vol. 14, No. 13, pp. 176-180.

Richardson, John (2004). The Realities of Sustainability, Proc. IABSE Symposium, Melbourne

USGS, http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/world/1985_09_19.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/

http://www.cohre.org/cohrelibrary2/country/kobe.html

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001734.htm

US EPA, Planning for disaster debris http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/disaster/dstr-pdf.pdf#search='disaster%20debris'

Dimartino, C. (1999) Picking-up the pieces II, http://sept11.wasteage.com/ar/waste_picking_pieces_part

Hawaiian Webmaster, http://www.cityofpines.com/baguioquake/quake.html

Acknowledgement

This project was conducted under the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) Core UniversityProgram on Environmental Engineering. The author expresses his thanks to Prof. Hideki Ohta for serving as theJapanese host professor. The assistance of the Ohta laboratory faculty and staff especially to Dr. Ohno, Dr.Thirapong and Miss Akiko Nozawa is appreciated.

The author wish to express their gratitude to those who contributed their original photos: Prof. Ohta,Prof. Orense, Prof. Honda, Prof. Suemasa, Prof. Towhata, Prof. Kawashima, Prof. Pennung, Prof.Konagai, Prof. Kuwano, Prof. Katada, Prof. Nakajima and Dr. A. Lazaro III and PHIVOLCS.

ORETA_JSPS-RSID_2006

Documents

Transcript of ORETA_JSPS-RSID_2006