May 17, 2005
Red circles
Romania has high exposure to seismic activity, but many of its urban structures are incapable of withstanding a powerful earthquake. With the help of the World Bank, authorities hope to address the problem before catastrophe strikes.
From the Southeast European Times
It seems to me they are a little bit late with this plan but any time is better than never, I guess. But the article boggled my mind.
The Times goes on to write:
Between 1992 and 2000, more than 3,400 buildings across Romania were examined by construction experts, evaluating their readiness to withstand earthquakes. The experts placed 578 buildings in the highest category of seismic risk, meaning that they could collapse in a quake measuring more than 6.0 on the Richter scale.
This number comes a little bit as a surprise to me. 578? Not only in Bucharest but in all of Romania? That seems like a very low number. Also, the predicitions are for a quake of close to 7.0 or above before the year 2006, according to Gheorghe Marmureanu, the director of the national seismological institute. But wait, there is more:
Most of the high-risk buildings are apartment blocks, while some are home to restaurants, theatres and stores. Furthermore, no fewer than 67 hospitals in 55 cities -- among them, three out of the four emergency hospitals in Bucharest -- are on the list. That leaves many wondering where the victims would be treated in case of a major catastrophe.
The buildings most risk-prone are marked with a red circle, and it is believed that as many as 17,000 people inhabit such houses. The efforts to reinforce the structural integrity of these buildings is noble, and needed. The World Bank is giving a 155 million dollar loan to Romania to do the necessary upgrading. Since it's a loan, Romania expects the owners of the buildings to chip in. Here's where things get tricky.
By law, the public budget can only provide support for families with a monthly income of under 165 euros. The others must pay their part over 25 years, in installments without interest. Many people are reluctant to pay, despite the constant danger they face.
Hm. Maybe the owners don't actually live inside the endangered buildings themselves but are safely tucked away in houses without the ominous red circle? Just a thought.
For the past 13 years, the government has promised to take action. But so far only 26 high-risk buildings have been reinforced -- less than one out of 20. This year, authorities allocated the money necessary for another 47 consolidations, including 40 in downtown Bucharest. Work should start on the remaining 500 buildings by the end of next year, the government says.
Hm. That would be 2006, right? Maybe they can just use the money to rebuild the rubble if the big one hits according to schedule. Ah, but that's just me being sarcastic, again. Surely things will work out all right.
Posted by claudia at May 17, 2005 08:49 AMI doubt things will work out.
It's already 2005 and the last earthquake over 7 was in 1977. And since they come every 30 years or so (with 6 degrees on Richter scale coming every 10 years or so), there's really not much time left until the next big one.
You only need to look at the recent floods in Banat to figure out the scenario for an earthquake. It'll be a massive disaster, folks will be uninsurred and the government will be in a state of analysis paralysis. As always in Romania.
And folks shouldn't solely blame the government for an eventual disaster. The responsability is mutual.
Since I live in Constanta I have the opportunity of feeling, although with less intensity, the big Turkish earthquakes as well. The old city here, in the peninsula (or what's left of it) will fully collapse in case of a similar earthquake to the one in 1977.
Great blog and thanks for sharing your thoughts on Romania,
David
"It's already 2005 and the last earthquake over 7 was in 1977. And since they come every 30 years or so (with 6 degrees on Richter scale coming every 10 years or so), there's really not much time left until the next big one."
You do realize that things don't actually work that way, right? The "30 years or so" is a probabilistic statement, not a timetable. You're making the equivalent of a guess that the next coin-toss will be heads because you happen to have come up with three tails in a row and the coin is "due".
The statement is meaningful in terms of calculating expected losses over a given period in actuarial terms and for stochastic simulations, but makes no temporal predictions. Probably based on a Poisson distribution. And even time-dependent and stress-migration models are highly probabilistic in nature, particularly if the area in question is not a single-fault system. (Which category I believe Vracea falls into.)
I've been meaning to blog about the Mărmureanu report for a while now. It's not real comforting. Much of the area is prone to soil liquefication, and I have doubts about the quality of Ceaucescu-era concrete, especially in the high-rises built after the earthquake of 1977.
The Vrancea zone is geologically interesting. The quakes occur in a vertical column right under the bend of the Carpathians, from 70 to 200 km below the surface, about 3000 square km in cross-section. What seems to be happening is that a last chunk of a subducting slab is about to sink into the mantle.
The energy released does pass through a complex fault system. The empirical relation is roughly:
number of earthquakes per year of a given magnitude or higher = 12600 / (6 ^ Richter magnitude)
or log_10 (N) = 4.1 - 0.78 * magnitude, take your pick.
So there's about a 25% in any given year of a Richter 6 earthquake or greater, a 4% chance for a Richter 7 earthquake or greater, and a one in 130 chance for a Richter 8 or greater.
The last earthquake to approach Richter 8 was the 1940 earthquake, although Bucharest weathered it better than the 1977 one.
Carlos
Posted by: Carlos at May 18, 2005 07:53 AMMaybe the next big one will come soon, maybe not. Nevertheless, there is nothing wrong with being concerned that you are not prepared yet. I must admit that I don't really know how Cluj (where I live) would last through an earthquake, maybe it's not so bad. Maybe it is. But it's never wrong to make sure it is.
Posted by: SillyCrazyMe at May 18, 2005 12:16 PMI think this about sums is up right -- you don't know when it's going to happen but you know that it's going to happen sometime. Best to be prepared, eh?
Nothing wrong in having a flashlight ready, some water tucked away, some cans stored, a first aid kit at hand, passports close. We don't have a go back sitting by the bag door (we don't have a back door) but we have everything important in one place, just in case. I live by Murphy's law: be prepared and it won't be necessary. I hope it works (but Murphy's law doesn't really work in reverse, so there's that). :-)
Those apartment buildings need to be reinforced. Better yet, they need to be replaced. I'll be dead before that happens, though.
Posted by: claudia at May 18, 2005 01:19 PMWell, if you have ever lived through a big quake, I probably don't need to tell you about making your house quake-proof.
When I remodel a house, I use plywood where most people would use plasterboard, and I fasten it with screws and glue. Totally insane, of course, until the ground starts shaking....
Is there anything that seems longer than waiting for the quake to end?
Posted by: serial catowner at May 29, 2005 11:44 PM