Kobe Earthquake
Comparing Kobe and Sichuan Earthquake- “The wealth of a country influences the nature of the earthquake event experienced there”.
With reference to the Kobe earthquake (1995) and Sichuan earthquake (2008), decide whether this statement is true or not.
This statement can be true in a number of ways, because an MEDCs have generally better infrastructures made for withstanding huge earthquakes unlike LEDCs where houses (especially squatter settlements) are damaged very easily and this makes the area affected have more people that are homeless etc.
Two earthquakes that we are looking at is the Kobe and Sichuan earthquake, located in Japan and China.
Kobe Earthquake
At 5:46am on 17 January 1995 the Philippines Plate shifted beneath the Eurasian Plate along the Nojima fault line that runs beyond Kobe. This type …show more content…
of earthquake is known as an ‘inland shallow earthquake’ because earthquakes f this type often happen at active faults. These types of earthquakes can be destructive at even low magnitudes because they generally occur in highly populated areas. The earthquake measured at 7.2 on the Richter scale, with some tremors lasting 20 seconds.
Primary effects of this earthquake include the death of 6500 people (4,600 in Kobe) as well as 40000 people seriously injured.
Also buildings and bridges collapsed including the Great Hanshin Expressway, which is a series of expressways used to link Kobe and other surrounding areas. It is said that 150,000 buildings were ruined and 120 of the 150 quays in the port of Kobe were destroyed.
However, secondary effects were much worse as gas mains ruptured, water pipes fractured and railway lines buckled. This led to fires engulfing all around the city which destroyed wooden structures. Due to the water supply and roads being damaged, it made attempts to extinguish them impossible. Also, the electricity supply was disrupted amongst all this with around 2 million homes without electricity. 300,000 were left homeless and many refugees were moved into temporal housing.
It is said that some residents were afraid to return home because the aftershocks could be felt for several days. One million residents had to cope for a few days without water too.
The damage was around $220 billion and big companies such as Panasonic even closed down
temporarily.
Some short term responses include emergency rations being provided to those affected and also those who were affected were evacuated. Rescue teams also searched for survivors through the rubble for the next 10 days. Also, major retailers such as Motorola kept telephone connections free of charge and 7-Eleven helped provide essentials.
Long term responses involved many residents permanently leaving the area. However many jobs were created in the construction industry because of a rebuilding programme. Also, when rebuilding some of the structures that demolished by the earthquake, a new long term change had been made. Buildings no longer followed the 1981 code, but a newer one prior to the Kobe earthquake. Buildings were built further apart to prevent the domino effect for starters. High-rise buildings had flexible steel frames instead of wood. Also, rubber blocks were put in place to absorb shocks.
Through this new plan, Kobe has now recovered and still continues to be one of the busiest container ports.
Sichuan Earthquake
At 2:28pm on 12 May 2008 the pressure resulting from the Indian Plate collided with the Eurasian Plate was released along the Longmenshan fault line that runs beneath Sichuan. This earthquake measured 7.9 and some tremors lasted 120 seconds long. It is claimed that this earthquake released 30 times the energy than the earthquake in Kobe.
Primary effects of the Sichuan earthquake include the death of around 9000. This figure rose to 55000 within 11 days. A further 20000 were missing. Around 35000 were injured and around 8 million were said to be homeless. Also, 5 million buildings collapsed including many schools.
In the long term, this damaged China’s economy massively. It is claimed that the cost of the earthquake was upto $75 million. Other secondary effects are that most communication was bought to a halt; mobile phones didn’t work in Wenchuan. Roads were also blocked and fears of flooding arose when some landslides blocked rivers.
Short term responses consist of many helicopters assigned for rescue and relief as entering Wenchuan was impossible. Troops began parachuting in to access the situation. Many army troops were also deployed after the earthquake. Many people joined in to search for survivors through the rubble from collapsed buildings. Those affected were given clean water, food supplies and tents to shelter people from the spring rains. However, there were calls made to increase the number of tents to the required amount of around 3 million.
Long term responses included help from nearby countries like Russia, South Korea and Japan after China had requested international help. Most of this money went to running the camps. Donations to Red Cross exceeded £100 million pounds within two weeks. Temporary homes were also created for the homeless and jobs were created as part of the rebuilding programme, which the government hoped would be completed within 3 years.
Sichuan has recovered now with new buildings put in place so that they can withstand future earthquakes, and China has also promised those who survived will live a better life.
Having analysed both earthquakes, it is fair to say both the human and physical side of geography can affect the nature of an earthquake. In terms of physical geography, it is obvious that the size of the earthquake is the obvious factor but other things like tsunamis can also change the extent of damage. However, with human geography, it may be the wealth of a country or the population of the area affected that decides the nature of an earthquake.
By looking at these earthquakes, it is clear a combination of both physical and a part of human geography affected the nature of the earthquakes in both Kobe and Sichuan.
Both the countries of Japan and China have high GDPs and so they are both fairly wealthy countries but still there is a huge contrast between the natures of the earthquakes between the two. I think that the statement within the question does not apply to these two case studies as it wasn’t the factor in why these earthquakes contrast. The physical side of geography differed and a part of human geography not related to wealth were the factors as to why these earthquakes were different.
In terms of human geography, the only factor that affected the size of the earthquake is the population of both the areas affected. Kobe had a population of around 1.5 million whilst Sichuan had a population of 80 million. This fact alone is one reason for why there were more casualties- 10 times more in Sichuan than Kobe.
Also, the magnitude of the earthquake was another factor as to why Sichuan was a more damaging one, because the magnitudes were hugely contrasting. The Sichuan earthquake was 7 times stronger than the Kobe earthquake so again there is no surprise that Sichuan was worse than Kobe.
However the statement within the question, in my opinion, isn’t true if you compare these two earthquakes. Both Japan and China have a fairly good economy so I don’t think it was the wealth of these countries that affected the nature of the earthquake but the reasons above.
With reference to the Kobe earthquake (1995) and Sichuan earthquake (2008), decide whether this statement is true or not.
This statement can be true in a number of ways, because an MEDCs have generally better infrastructures made for withstanding huge earthquakes unlike LEDCs where houses (especially squatter settlements) are damaged very easily and this makes the area affected have more people that are homeless etc.
Two earthquakes that we are looking at is the Kobe and Sichuan earthquake, located in Japan and China.
Kobe Earthquake
At 5:46am on 17 January 1995 the Philippines Plate shifted beneath the Eurasian Plate along the Nojima fault line that runs beyond Kobe. This type …show more content…
of earthquake is known as an ‘inland shallow earthquake’ because earthquakes f this type often happen at active faults. These types of earthquakes can be destructive at even low magnitudes because they generally occur in highly populated areas. The earthquake measured at 7.2 on the Richter scale, with some tremors lasting 20 seconds.
Primary effects of this earthquake include the death of 6500 people (4,600 in Kobe) as well as 40000 people seriously injured.
Also buildings and bridges collapsed including the Great Hanshin Expressway, which is a series of expressways used to link Kobe and other surrounding areas. It is said that 150,000 buildings were ruined and 120 of the 150 quays in the port of Kobe were destroyed.
However, secondary effects were much worse as gas mains ruptured, water pipes fractured and railway lines buckled. This led to fires engulfing all around the city which destroyed wooden structures. Due to the water supply and roads being damaged, it made attempts to extinguish them impossible. Also, the electricity supply was disrupted amongst all this with around 2 million homes without electricity. 300,000 were left homeless and many refugees were moved into temporal housing.
It is said that some residents were afraid to return home because the aftershocks could be felt for several days. One million residents had to cope for a few days without water too.
The damage was around $220 billion and big companies such as Panasonic even closed down
temporarily.
Some short term responses include emergency rations being provided to those affected and also those who were affected were evacuated. Rescue teams also searched for survivors through the rubble for the next 10 days. Also, major retailers such as Motorola kept telephone connections free of charge and 7-Eleven helped provide essentials.
Long term responses involved many residents permanently leaving the area. However many jobs were created in the construction industry because of a rebuilding programme. Also, when rebuilding some of the structures that demolished by the earthquake, a new long term change had been made. Buildings no longer followed the 1981 code, but a newer one prior to the Kobe earthquake. Buildings were built further apart to prevent the domino effect for starters. High-rise buildings had flexible steel frames instead of wood. Also, rubber blocks were put in place to absorb shocks.
Through this new plan, Kobe has now recovered and still continues to be one of the busiest container ports.
Sichuan Earthquake
At 2:28pm on 12 May 2008 the pressure resulting from the Indian Plate collided with the Eurasian Plate was released along the Longmenshan fault line that runs beneath Sichuan. This earthquake measured 7.9 and some tremors lasted 120 seconds long. It is claimed that this earthquake released 30 times the energy than the earthquake in Kobe.
Primary effects of the Sichuan earthquake include the death of around 9000. This figure rose to 55000 within 11 days. A further 20000 were missing. Around 35000 were injured and around 8 million were said to be homeless. Also, 5 million buildings collapsed including many schools.
In the long term, this damaged China’s economy massively. It is claimed that the cost of the earthquake was upto $75 million. Other secondary effects are that most communication was bought to a halt; mobile phones didn’t work in Wenchuan. Roads were also blocked and fears of flooding arose when some landslides blocked rivers.
Short term responses consist of many helicopters assigned for rescue and relief as entering Wenchuan was impossible. Troops began parachuting in to access the situation. Many army troops were also deployed after the earthquake. Many people joined in to search for survivors through the rubble from collapsed buildings. Those affected were given clean water, food supplies and tents to shelter people from the spring rains. However, there were calls made to increase the number of tents to the required amount of around 3 million.
Long term responses included help from nearby countries like Russia, South Korea and Japan after China had requested international help. Most of this money went to running the camps. Donations to Red Cross exceeded £100 million pounds within two weeks. Temporary homes were also created for the homeless and jobs were created as part of the rebuilding programme, which the government hoped would be completed within 3 years.
Sichuan has recovered now with new buildings put in place so that they can withstand future earthquakes, and China has also promised those who survived will live a better life.
Having analysed both earthquakes, it is fair to say both the human and physical side of geography can affect the nature of an earthquake. In terms of physical geography, it is obvious that the size of the earthquake is the obvious factor but other things like tsunamis can also change the extent of damage. However, with human geography, it may be the wealth of a country or the population of the area affected that decides the nature of an earthquake.
By looking at these earthquakes, it is clear a combination of both physical and a part of human geography affected the nature of the earthquakes in both Kobe and Sichuan.
Both the countries of Japan and China have high GDPs and so they are both fairly wealthy countries but still there is a huge contrast between the natures of the earthquakes between the two. I think that the statement within the question does not apply to these two case studies as it wasn’t the factor in why these earthquakes contrast. The physical side of geography differed and a part of human geography not related to wealth were the factors as to why these earthquakes were different.
In terms of human geography, the only factor that affected the size of the earthquake is the population of both the areas affected. Kobe had a population of around 1.5 million whilst Sichuan had a population of 80 million. This fact alone is one reason for why there were more casualties- 10 times more in Sichuan than Kobe.
Also, the magnitude of the earthquake was another factor as to why Sichuan was a more damaging one, because the magnitudes were hugely contrasting. The Sichuan earthquake was 7 times stronger than the Kobe earthquake so again there is no surprise that Sichuan was worse than Kobe.
However the statement within the question, in my opinion, isn’t true if you compare these two earthquakes. Both Japan and China have a fairly good economy so I don’t think it was the wealth of these countries that affected the nature of the earthquake but the reasons above.