Author Archive

‘Slow slip’ earthquake season raises risk of ‘The Big One’

B.C. is headed back into another one of its riskier seismic seasons, raising the risk of “The Big One,” earthquake experts say.

Every 14 months, the Cascadian subduction zone — which runs from northern Vancouver Island down to northern California — experiences what seismologists call a “slow slip.”

This year’s slip has already kicked off underneath Washington State and is expected to reach B.C. any day now.

The phenomenon happens when seismic stress shifts onto the fault area where the Juan de Fuca and North American plates lock together.

That causes thousands of mini-tremors and heightens the likelihood of a major earthquake event in B.C., according to seismologist Alison Bird.

“If that locked zone is close to critical, and you add more stress on to it … that could trigger, theoretically, the ‘megathrust’ earthquake,” said Bird, who works for the Geological Survey of Canada.

As for how much more risk that is, she says it’s been likened to the increased risk of driving in rush hour traffic.

“Going for a drive in the country on a Sunday, you’re not that likely to be in a car accident. But if it’s rush hour in Vancouver and there’s a game on … you’re more likely to be in an accident. You’re not necessarily going to be, but the probabilities are higher.”

Tremors undetectable

The tremors caused by the slip are different from routine earthquakes that occur in the Pacific Northwest, and they aren’t felt on the surface because they originate so far underground.

“We look at a tremor as sort of a slow earthquake … it’s like you stretch a magnitude-3.0 earthquake over an hour-and-a-half,” Bird said.

During the last slow slip, which began in late December 2015, around 8,000 mini-tremors were recorded.

Two earthquakes off Vancouver Island and near Seattle, Wash. on Wednesday night aren’t “at all related” to the slip because they happened away from the locked-zone region, Bird said.

She said the phenomenon almost serves as a calendar reminder to British Columbians to be prepared.

“We are living in a seismically active area. We will have damaging earthquakes — they’re guaranteed,” Bird said. “A lot of people use that cycle to remind them to check on their kit, to review their plan, that sort of thing.

“It’s a good ‘prompt’ to make sure you’re ready for an earthquake when it happens.”


Posted in: In The News

Leave a Comment (0) →

Magnitude 4.2 earthquake detected north of Powell River

A 4.2-magnitude earthquake struck northeast of Powell River, B.C. on Saturday morning.

No damage has been reported and a tsunami is not expected.

The tremor hit 139 kilometres from the Sunshine Coast city around 6:40 a.m., according to Earthquakes Canada.

The agency said the tremor was felt in Port Alberni, Gibsons and other cities in the region.

The USGS rated the magnitude at 4.0, and said it was triggered a little more than 17 kilometres underground.


Posted in: In The News

Leave a Comment (0) →

Is Seattle prepared for a Cascadia Megathrust or Seattle Fault earthquake?

In the event of a large Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) earthquake, damage will be significant, and lifelines will be cut off. Approximately 8 million people live in the earthquake damage zone, and the Seattle and Portland metro areas are home to Nike, Amazon, Boeing, and Microsoft. Therefore, preparing for a large-scale earthquake along the entire West Coast is vital. Last June, Cascadia Rising, a FEMA-designed exercise specifically addressed a M=9.0 Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake. Findings from this exercise showed that the state of Washington lags far behind California, Oregon, and British Columbia in its earthquake preparedness.

In response to these findings, Governor Jay Inslee convened a subcabinet of state agency directors on Tuesday. He stressed that, “while we cannot prevent or predict earthquakes or tsunamis, we can be better prepared to respond and recover quickly when these natural disasters do occur.” In order to determine proper methods, the 2012 Resilient Washington report was examined as it provides a general framework to help the state mitigate losses in the event of an earthquake.

This report not only addresses what could happen in a Cascadia earthquake, but other events as well. For example, the Seattle Fault runs underneath the city of Seattle, and has the potential to rupture in M=7+ earthquakes. Therefore, multiple scenarios have to be considered when increasing earthquake preparedness.

One example of how far Washington lags behind, is its school retrofits. While California, Oregon and British Columbia have already allocated tens of millions of dollars per year to retrofit schools, Washington is still in the process of determining which schools are most at risk. Retrofitting schools is of primary concern because many were not built to current seismic codes, and since they are often used as emergency shelters following disasters.

The main objectives from this subcabinet were to determine both how the state could better prepare, and how to reduce the time needed to recover. This recovery time has come under question, as the Washington Emergency Management Division recently amended their recommendations towards earthquake kits. Prior to Cascadia Rising, the state advised that people should have enough food, water, medicines, and other basic supplies to last three days. Now, it is recommended that people have kits which could sustain them for at least two weeks.

Such an increase suggests that following a large earthquake, people may be without emergency attention for longer than initially thought. The combination of retrofitting schools and encouraging citizens to have adequate earthquake kits is, according to Jim Buck, a former legislator from Clallum County, vital to survival following a large earthquake. He is most concerned about losing people to exposure due to lack of shelters, food, or fuel to warm shelters.

Despite measures taken to determine how the state could better prepare for an earthquake, the funding needed may not come any time soon. According to the director of the Washington state Emergency Management Division, money directed towards mitigation is unlikely in the current budget cycle. Therefore, Governor Inslee stated that in order for this to work, resources from federal, state, county, local and tribal governments must be pooled.

Northwest Public Radio (NWPR)
Washington Military Department
Washington Emergency Management Division
Cascadia Rising
Resilient Washington State


Posted in: In The News

Leave a Comment (0) →

B.C. announces first step in province-wide earthquake warning system

CBC Vancouver’s Fault Lines podcast gives province a push, courtesy of Johanna Wagstaffe, CBC News.

Earthquake technology saves lives.

Japan has it, the U.S is working on it, and now B.C. is beginning the process to get it in place — a province-wide earthquake early warning system.

The province of B.C. has issued a formal request for expressions of interest on an earthquake early warning and seismic monitoring program.

It’s the first step to gain a better understanding of what sensors and networks are already in place, and what groups are interested in — and have the capacity to implement — the program.

Currently, there are a number of different entities independently working on seismic sensors in the province but up until now it’s been a race against a ticking clock.

There’s a 33 per cent chance a damaging earthquake will occur in B.C. in the next 50 years, but there are no plans to put a cohesive warning system in place everyone can connect to.

While there has been some government investment in researching the issue, this is a huge step in finally making a province-wide warning system a reality.

CBC ‘Fault Lines’ podcast gives province a push

On October 11th, CBC Vancouver launched an original podcast series: ‘Fault Lines,’ outlining two catastrophic earthquake scenarios for B.C.

Although the province has been working on various actions to improve earthquake preparedness, CBC has learnt our recent earthquake coverage has in part been an impetus for pushing a request for expression of interest forward.

The province’s Minister of Emergency Preparedness, Naomi Yamamoto , spoke to the CBC after its release:

“Thanks to I think Johanna Wagstaffe and her podcast series, this is [a] conversation people are having now and certainly that awareness of not having proper plans in place was something that the premier also felt, that’s my new job. I’m really enjoying it but there’s a lot to do now”.

This is incredibly exciting news for the scientists, emergency planners and advocates of earthquake early warning systems — but what does this actually mean for the province?

Earthquake early warning system

When an earthquake strikes, it sends out a series of seismic waves that travel at different speeds. The fastest waves don’t actually shake the ground in a damaging way — in fact, we can’t even feel them.

But sensitive instruments can. And the lag between those first waves and the more damaging waves that come later is enough time to get a warning out. The farther away you are from the epicentre, the greater the warning time.

Depending on the various earthquakes that could strike the West Coast, that warning time could be anywhere from a few seconds to a couple of minutes.

Though it may not sound like much, it’s enough time to get under a desk or a table, measures that have proven to be life-saving.

In its mission statement, the province says it’s looking for expertise in providing a seismic monitoring system that could detect these early waves, as well as enhance research of B.C.’s seismic hazards.

But on top of that the province will need an earthquake early warning system that can communicate those critical seconds of warning time to citizens and businesses. The EEW system will ideally send alerts to the public through mobile and SMS devices, Internet, television and radio but the system will also automatically trigger protective measures such as:

  • close bridges and tunnels
  • stop trains
  • shut off gas valves
  • open fire department garage doors
  • shut down laser scalpels
  • Wondering why we don’t already have a complete system in place?

    Current players

    There are already a number of different organizations in the province that have been working towards developing these monitoring systems.

    In fact, there are seismic networks in place that range from the public sensors that detect our earthquakes to ocean-based sensors from Ocean Networks Canada, to the University of British Columbia’s school program to private organizations that are working on both sensors as well as automated shut-down services.

    Collaboration between these different groups will be key to moving forward since the technology already exists and some networks are already in place. The province will be looking for groups that fit a number of objectives ranging from financial sustainability to transparency and in the end that might mean a number of groups working together to meet all the needs of the province.

    Next steps

    The deadline for file an expression of interest is Tuesday, Dec. 20, 2016. After that the government will move forward with a ‘request for proposals’ before ultimately awarding a contract to a group or a combination of groups.

    Imagine getting a 15, 30 or even 90 second warning that a damaging earthquake is about to shake the ground? A province-wide earthquake early warning system may finally become a reality.


    Posted in: In The News

    Leave a Comment (0) →

    B.C. Earthquake Threatens Vancouver Buildings

    More than once, the city has failed to act on its own recommendations for addressing the seismic dangers of older private buildings.

    On Dec. 3, 2013, Vancouver city staff updated city council on a plan to prepare for a major earthquake.

    Council asked for the report in 2011, after deadly earthquakes in New Zealand, where 185 people were killed, and in Japan, where the death toll from the ensuing tsunami was more than 16,000.

    Under the update, the city was to establish a technical committee to advise it how to reduce the risk of private buildings collapsing or being badly damaged in an earthquake.

    Three years later, that committee has not been created, and the city is no closer to addressing the seismic dangers of the city’s many older private buildings.

    It is not the first time the city has failed to act on its own recommendations.

    An examination by Postmedia News found the city identified the need to develop a proactive plan to reduce the seismic hazard of older, privately-owned building stock more than two decades ago, through an engineering report. But successive councils have failed to do so.

    The 1994 report contains a list of 1,100 buildings and their risk rankings. It was never made public, but a copy has been obtained by Postmedia News.

    Hundreds of buildings on the list — including aging multi-storey brick-apartments that provide rooms to the city’s poorest on the east side — appear to have had no seismic upgrades since 1994, a Postmedia News investigation found.

    In 2011, when the city for the third time in two decades, launched an effort to produce a proactive strategy to seismically improve private buildings, Mayor Gregor Robertson called Vancouver “the most vulnerable city in Canada.”

    This week, city staff said Robertson was unavailable for an interview.

    In a written statement, he said in the coming years the city will work with industry and stakeholders to explore tools and incentives to seismically upgrade all buildings in the city. “Private buildings vulnerable to earthquakes are a major concern to the city,” he said.

    In 2013, city staff said a strategy for seismic improvement of private buildings was important because a major earthquake would cause death and injury; displace people and cause an exodus of residents; result in the loss of income, taxes and livelihood; and could shut the downtown for a year or more.

    A map in the 2013 earthquake preparedness update showed a concentration of purple dots — large buildings constructed before modern seismic standards were introduced in 1973 — in the downtown, the West End, the east side, along Kingsway and Broadway, and in the industrial and commercial areas of south Vancouver along the Fraser River.

    The report said that 60 per cent of Vancouver’s buildings were constructed before building codes were introduced that set seismic safety standards.

    Earlier reports said the city needed to go beyond its existing passive mechanisms, which trigger requirements for seismic upgrades when building owners apply for permits at city hall to change the use of their building or do a major renovation. Robertson, the mayor, argued this week the city’s bylaw triggers that require seismic upgrades for renovations are a leader in the country.

    Other than the passive triggers, there are no bylaws in Vancouver, or any other B.C. community, that require building owners to seismically upgrade older buildings.

    Evidence of risk

    In the late 1980s, there was growing scientific evidence that the Pacific Northwest was at high risk of a major earthquake — risk more normally associated with California. That led the City of Vancouver to take an interest in privately owned buildings that did not meet modern seismic building standards.

    In 1990, the city set aside $500,000 to study the structural condition of private buildings and develop a seismic hazard reduction plan, records show.

    By September 1994, the city’s engineering consultants — Delcan, and Norecol, Dames & Moore — had assessed the seismic risk of more than 1,100 apartment, office and commercial buildings, mostly in the downtown, West End and east side. Single-family homes were not included.

    By January 1995, Delcan and Norecol had produced a cost-benefit analysis of a seismic-retrofit program to increase buildings’ ability to withstand a major earthquake.

    That analysis concluded that retrofitting privately owned buildings over a 20-year period would save nearly 200 lives and prevent or reduce the scope of thousands of injuries in the more than 1,100 buildings studied, if a catastrophic earthquake occurred. The consultants estimated direct economic savings of $450 million and billions in spinoff savings, which would more than offset the estimated $200-million cost of a retrofit program.

    Recommendations considered by city council included mandatory seismic assessments, deadlines for mandatory upgrades, public disclosure of the seismic risk of buildings and possibly even requiring the posting of signs on buildings that were not upgraded. These strategies had been used in California since at least the 1980s.

    The recommendations were not adopted, shows a review of hundreds of pages of City of Vancouver reports and minutes of council meetings, and interviews.

    The issue resurfaced again in 2000, when city staff delivered a major report pointing to increasing knowledge of the risk of both local, shallow crustal earthquakes and the so-called “Big One” in the Cascadia subduction zone off the Pacific coast.

    The report estimated there were 8,000 commercial buildings and apartments that did not meet modern seismic codes in Vancouver.

    Council instructed staff to develop a program to reduce the seismic risk of private buildings within 18 months, accepting staff’s conclusion that there “is sufficient research, understanding, and experience to support a more ‘proactive’ approach to seismic upgrade.”

    It never happened, the review of city records shows.

    A Postmedia examination also found that a program created in 1996 to independently review the structural designs of proposed new buildings for seismic safety ended in about 2007, in part because funds were diverted to create a new engineering position to support the city’s green building strategy to reduce carbon emissions.

    The green building strategy — which includes the retrofit of older buildings to make them more energy efficient — is a major program of Robertson’s Vision party, which has controlled city council since 2008.

    Hundreds remain unrenovated

    Over time, some of the 1,100 buildings the city’s consultants Delcan-Norecol assessed in the early 1990s have been seismically upgraded, some triggered by changes of use or renovations.

    But hundreds of buildings on the list compiled by the city in 1994 — including aging multi-storey brick-apartments that provide rooms to the city’s poorest on the east side — appear to have had no seismic upgrades, the Postmedia News examination also found.

    The city has taken other steps to prepare for an earthquake. It has spent as much as $100 million on upgrading water lines and bridges, and building auxiliary water systems that can draw water directly from the ocean to fight fires. It has also started to upgrade city-owned buildings. A city heritage building incentive program that was ended in 2007 also helped to revitalize buildings in Gastown that included seismic upgrades.

    But the identification and lack of action on a comprehensive and explicit approach to addressing the seismic hazard of private buildings — including producing an up-to-date inventory — is a continuing gap in the city’s earthquake preparedness strategy.

    As the 2000 city report stated, “earthquakes don’t kill people, buildings do.”

    Leaving the hardest for last

    Graham Taylor, a consulting structural engineer who has been doing seismic assessments since the 1980s, said professionals are only too aware of how unprepared B.C. communities are for a major earthquake when it comes to their buildings.

    “Something has to give, and it better not be the earthquake first,” said Taylor.

    New Democrat MLA Spencer Chandra Herbert called on the City of Vancouver in 2014 to do a seismic assessment of apartment buildings but received only vague assurances, he said. “We need to make sure our private buildings are safe. It will take a lot of time, but if we don’t start now, they will never be safe,” he said. “People deserve to know if their building is going to collapse on them.”

    Senior City of Vancouver staff have an explanation for the lack of action on a proactive plan to retrofit private buildings: Other items such as earthquake response preparations, including training of city staff, and identifying city buildings in need of seismic upgrades, came first.

    What is clear from this approach is the city has left the most difficult for last.

    “We have done a lot of the easier work up until now,” acknowledged Pat Ryan, the city’s chief building official. “Unfortunately, it now gets much more complicated.”

    In an interview with Ryan and Daniel Stevens, the city’s director of emergency management, the city officials said producing a plan to reduce the seismic risk of privately-owned building remains on the city’s agenda.

    But no deadlines have been set and it is not clear what the next steps will be.

    Ryan and Daniels said the long-promised technical advisory committee would still be established.

    City officials stressed the 1994 assessment of private buildings is out-of-date and “does not currently directly inform” its policy decisions on earthquake preparedness, mitigation and response.

    However, the city does not have an up-to-date list of old buildings that are seismically at risk. (The map produced for the 2013 report was just for illustrative purposes, they said).

    Some kind of new assessment may be required, but a decision has not been made on that either, said city officials.

    Stevens, the city’s emergency management director, said there is a wide array of policy considerations on the table, including mandatory seismic retrofits like those implemented in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

    “We are not ruling anything out at this point,” said Stevens. “There is a building stock in the city that is at risk. The extent of it, and the details of which buildings and where, absolutely needs further work.”

    The low-income connection

    The West Hotel, at 488 Carrall St., was built in about 1912 by prominent Vancouver businessman Yip Sang to house new immigrants from China.

    More than 100 years later, the eight-storey, red brick building continues to provide low-cost housing: a room with a bathroom goes for $550 a month, a room where a tenant has to use a communal bathroom rents for $490.

    It houses about 80 people.

    The building is one of the more than 1,100 buildings the city’s two engineering consultants, Delcan and Norecol, assessed 22 years ago.

    That seismic assessment was based on a walkaround survey and structural data including construction material, height and building irregularities, as well as soil conditions and itemization of chimneys or parapets that can topple in an earthquake. A small portion of the buildings in the rapid-visual screening — a survey in accordance with National Research Council of Canada standards for seismic screenings of buildings — included reviews of building drawings.

    In their report, the engineering consultants noted the rankings should not be used as a structural integrity assessment without review by a qualified structural engineer, and the information was used for comparative purposes.

    The owners of buildings on the list were unaware of the 1994 seismic risk analysis, Postmedia interviews have found.

    The West Hotel was one of 275 buildings given the poorest seismic ranking and a very high need for further evaluation.

    Another 122 buildings were ranked as below average for seismic strength and in high need of further evaluation; 599 buildings were given an average ranking for seismic strength and in medium need for further evaluation.

    The buildings were selected for study because they were built before 1973 and were generally three storeys or higher, according to a pair of reports produced by Delcan and Norecol.

    Two decades later, the West Hotel does not have any visual signs up a structural upgrade, a visit to the building by Postmedia showed.

    It is one of 100 buildings Postmedia visited in the past year to examine the top-ranked buildings on the 1994 list.

    Those visits showed that there had been major rebuilds or additions completed or underway at seven of the 100 buildings. There are another two dozen or more buildings with visual signs of some kind of structural upgrades, many of them in Yaletown, Gastown and in some downtown areas. Those improvements include metal cross beams, metal posts and beams, concrete reinforcement walls, metal tension rods and metal cleats bolting floors to brick walls.

    But as many as half the top 100 at-risk buildings showed no visual signs of seismic upgrades, including in Chinatown and the West End.

    According to B.C. Assessment data provided by Landcor Data Corp., about 590 of 731 buildings with a very high to medium seismic risk ranking on the Delcan-Norecol list have an “effective” construction year of 1972 or earlier, before modern seismic building codes were introduced. (The effective construction year was not available for all 996 very-high to medium-risk buildings.)

    The “effective” year is a measure produced by B.C. Assessment that takes into consideration upgrades and includes a review of building permits, according to the provincial agency.

    The “effective” year — as a measure of seismic building age — has been used in earthquake damage and risk modelling in B.C. and in California, and by the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency for flood hazard mapping.

    But the “effective” construction year date is not an absolute indication of the seismic quality of the building — that would take a detailed engineering assessment. However, it gives an idea of whether the building has had any significant upgrades since it was built.

    A landlord’s dilemma

    At 488 Carrall St., the West Hotel has an “effective” construction year of 1969, before modern seismic building standards were introduced in the early 1970s.

    Chris Wall purchased the West Hotel four months ago.

    He is already upgrading some of the rooms with new drywall, new paint and bathroom retrofits, and has fixed the elevator and is working on leaking water lines, which has gained him praise from the residents who had launched a lawsuit against the previous owners for lack of maintenance.

    Wall said he was not aware of any previous seismic assessments of the building.

    He said he had building inspection reports carried out on the West Hotel and the Empress Hotel on East Hastings, another building he owns that is the Delcan-Norecol list, but seismic issues were not brought to his attention.

    Both are designated by the city for single-room occupancies to maintain low-income housing stock. Normally, a seismic upgrade could be paid for by higher rents but that is difficult under the city’s single-room occupancy rules.

    “We are in a difficult position because to seismically upgrade our buildings would mean displacing our tenants,” said Wall.

    However, Wall said he would be open to hearing more about how building owners can prepare and said opening a public discussion on the issue is a good idea.

    Dan Zimmerman, a longtime resident at the West Hotel, said most residents have other more urgent needs than worrying about earthquakes.

    “I would rather be in this building than a new one if an earthquake hit as these old buildings are pretty solid and have already survived quakes over the last 100 years,” he said.

    Zimmerman has a false sense of security, say experts, as one the major factors in lack of action in Vancouver is that it has not been hit by a serious earthquake in the past century. The city’s 2013 earthquake preparedness update noted that because there has been no damaging earthquake in modern times, all the vulnerable buildings remain.

    Some of Vancouver’s best-known landmarks are on the Delcan-Norecol list, including the 17-storey Sun Tower, at the southeast corner of Beatty and West Pender, built in 1912.

    It was ranked as well below average for seismic quality. B.C. Assessment data lists its “effective” construction year as 1967.

    Josh Bligh, a project manager at SCC Construction whose company is a tenant with offices on the 15th floor, said they helped complete significant cosmetic restorations to the heritage building.

    Bligh said he had never thought about whether the building could withstand an earthquake, nor had he heard anyone else discuss it.

    Bligh noted that historical photos of the building’s construction show it has a metal frame all the way to the dome at the top, and that the structural columns are immense, but he did not know if there had been a recent seismic assessment of the building.

    “I don’t feel unsafe,” he said. “I don’t know. Maybe it is just ignorance is bliss.”

    Building-owner Allied Properties REIT, a real estate investment trust with a Toronto head office, did not respond to questions.

    Also on the 20-year-old seismic assessment is the former CP Rail Building, at 601 Cordova. It is now Waterfront Station, a TransLink transportation hub for SkyTrain’s Expo Line, the Canada Line, the SeaBus and the West Coast Express. It is also home to several restaurants and offices.

    During the peak afternoon rush, as many as 10,500 people an hour pass through the fare gates at Waterfront Station, according to TransLink figures.

    The building was ranked well below average for seismic quality and very high for further evaluation. It was built in 1925 and has an effective construction year of 1969, according to B.C. Assessment data.

    It is owned and operated by Cadillac Fairview, a subsidiary of the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan.

    In a written response, Cadillac Fairview said it has invested millions in structural upgrades to the Station, including facade restoration, and beam and column upgrades.

    “We operate all of our buildings to code requirements, as outlined by the City of Vancouver, and we continue to invest in our buildings and regularly monitor and inspect the performance and operations of our buildings to ensure the safety of occupants, tenants and the community,” Cadillac Fairview spokeswoman Janine Ramparas said in an email.

    Cadillac did not directly answer questions about whether the building had been evaluated for seismic performance.

    In an interview with Postmedia News, senior City of Vancouver officials cautioned against reading too much into the 1994 Delcan-Norecol evaluation, saying it was preliminary work and that only a full engineering assessment could determine seismic risk.

    Ryan, Vancouver’s chief building officer, pointed to lessons the city had learned in having its own buildings assessed. They believed the city hall east wing building — 370 city workers were moved out of it in 2013 over concerns of seismic risk — would be a relatively easy fix, but it turned out to be much more difficult, said Ryan.

    “There has been a greater understanding that the building has to be looked at as a whole,” said Ryan.

    The east wing is now slated for demolition, and another city hall building, the west annex, is slated for a $4.5-million seismic upgrade.

    Also on the Delcan-Norecol list at high seismic risk were Holy Rosary Cathedral in downtown Vancouver and St. Augustine’s Church and rectory on the west side.

    Recent assessments carried out by engineering firm Ausenco for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Vancouver — part of an assessment of its 300 churches, rectories, convents, schools and offices — confirmed the two buildings as a high priority for seismic retrofit.

    The cathedral was built in 1901 and St. Augustine’s in 1931.

    Archdiocese spokesman Paul Schratz said all local parishes are expected to raise funds to finance the seismic upgrades and develop a plan to do so.

    Schratz said the archdiocese’s first priority is to seismically upgrade its schools.

    “We are probably looking at decades for all of this work,” he said.

    There were also numerous buildings in the West End on the Delcan-Norecol list, including brick apartments owned by S.A.H. Properties Ltd. on Jervis and Thurlow.

    Mike Pomeroy, who helps manage the buildings for his family, said there is already a significant cost to the general maintenance of the buildings and he could not imagine being able to afford seismic upgrades.

    “I think when it comes to mandating (seismic retrofits), you are basically saying you have to tear your building down and start again,” said Pomeroy. “I think it would be more cost-effective to tear it down and rebuild. But I don’t know.”

    If older-style brick buildings were torn down, that would be a sad loss for the city, said Pomeroy.

    A question of cost

    Jon Stovell, president of Reliance Properties, has direct experience with seismic upgrades.

    In 2013, four concrete-and-glass storeys were added to his firm’s building at 564 Beatty, originally a six-storey brick and stone building that was on the Delcan-Norecol list, where it ranked as well below average for seismic quality.

    As part of that expansion, the building got a full seismic upgrade that included a new vertical concrete core anchored to the ground. Original wood columns remained, buttressed by new concrete columns.

    However, the upgrade was only made feasible by property tax incentives to preserve its heritage status, as was the case with other buildings that Stovell’s firm redeveloped in Gastown under the heritage incentive program that was shut down in 2007.

    Stovell says a carrot approach is much better than using a stick, such as by mandating retrofits.

    He said most upgrades to older buildings happen when they are largely empty or under-utilized.

    “It is easy to say that stuff (about mandating retrofits). But how does that really get paid for?” queried Stovell. “Is that simply going to mean those buildings get emptied out because there is no economic case?”

    Experts agree that seismically upgrading private buildings is a thorny issue. They can be costly, as retrofits can cost hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars for full upgrades of commercial buildings. They are also disruptive, as tenants may have to move out.

    Mandating assessments and retrofits of older buildings could also result in buildings being demolished and the loss of low-income housing.

    Out of sight, out of mind

    Gordon Price was a Vancouver city councillor when the Delcan-Norecol study was produced and in 2000, when the issue of seismically upgrading the older building stock was again resurrected.

    Key challenges were the cost to building owners and the potential loss of affordable housing, he remembers.

    “You just do the political assessment: Is there any urgent reason you would impose something that would be political suicide? And the answer of course, is not until you get the next earthquake,” said Price.

    The last earthquake to cause loss of life and damage in B.C. was the Vancouver Island earthquake of 1946.

    While scientists estimate there is a 30-per-cent probability of a damaging earthquake occurring in a populated area in B.C. in the next 50 years, they cannot predict where and exactly when it will take place.

    Nevertheless, experts agree it is necessary to address the old building stock, particularly unreinforced masonry buildings, often easily identifiable by a red-brick exterior. In unreinforced masonry buildings, the walls can topple or shower bricks to the ground below. That’s because the walls are not stabilized by steel bars, and the floors and roof are not connected with any strength to the walls, which means when the buildings shakes or bows, the structure can come apart.

    Another class of buildings that needs work consists of older, brittle-concrete buildings built before the 1980s that, instead of flexing, can crack or break, during a major earthquake.

    Computer modelling — which includes consideration of building types and age, and soil conditions —paints an ugly picture of damage from a major earthquake in Metro Vancouver.

    In one scenario, explained in a video on the Vancouver city’s website, a 7.3-magnitude earthquake in the Strait of Georgia is estimated to damage 90,000 buildings in Metro Vancouver, 20,000 of them beyond repair.

    In another scenario, a similar earthquake directly beneath Vancouver, the death toll is estimated to reach 10,000.

    There is also the real experience of places such as Christchurch, New Zealand.

    Both masonry and concrete buildings were extensively damaged, and the city’s downtown core was cordoned off for two years. The biggest loss of life took place in the collapse of the concrete Canterbury Television building, where 115 people were killed. Another 42 people were killed in masonry structures or outside the buildings from falling bricks.

    “The science tells us these buildings are not safe,” says Carlos Ventura, director of the Earthquake Engineering Research Facility at the University of B.C.

    “In my opinion, that’s where society has to make a commitment — to say, we need to do something about that, we as a community. This is not only government. It’s everybody,” said Ventura, a professor of civil engineering.

    Fixes to improve the ability of unreinforced masonry buildings to withstand earthquakes can be relatively simple: tying parapets to roofs and anchoring walls to roofs and floors, noted Ventura.

    Seismic retrofits of at-risk brittle concrete buildings are more difficult, he said.

    Ken Elwood spent 11 years at the University of B.C. before he became chair of earthquake engineering at the University of Auckland in New Zealand.

    In 2011, after the Christchurch earthquake, Elwood warned there was a need to take stock of apartments and office buildings in B.C., particularly those built of masonry but also those constructed of concrete before the mid-80s.

    “Certainly, the concern is still there,” Elwood said in a recent interview from New Zealand. “But it’s very difficult to actually get it done unless you have some (bylaw) that makes it happen.”

    No B.C. cities have mandated retrofits to older building seismically at risk, as California did beginning in the 1980s and as New Zealand did after the Christchurch quake. In California, by 2006, 0f the 26,000 unreinforced masonry buildings identified for retrofits, 55 per cent had been upgraded and another 15 per cent demolished, according to a report from the California Seismic Safety Commission. Some California cities offered low-interest loans, tax relief or waiving of fees to encourage compliance, all steps suggested for Vancouver in the Delcan-Norecol report in 1994.

    Portland and Seattle are considering mandatory retrofits of unreinforced masonry buildings. Portland may decide as early as November and Seattle sometime in 2017.

    “It’s not an issue until it’s too late,” observed Eric Holdeman, a former director of the Office of Emergency Management for Seattle-area King County, of the reluctance of governments to mandate seismic retrofits until after major earthquakes hit cities.

    Both Portland and Seattle are ahead of cities like Vancouver, Victoria and New Westminster — the U.S. cities have recent inventories of unreinforced masonry buildings at risk in a major earthquake that they have made public.

    Blair Fryer, New Westminster manager of communications and economic development, said his city has no plans to create a list of buildings that don’t meet modern seismic standards.

    It shows that Vancouver and the region — with a population of 2.5 million, and growing — is behind other jurisdictions on the West Coast in taking the first steps to addressing the private at-risk building stock.

    Dave Park, economist emeritus of the Vancouver Board of Trade, believes it is time for an aggressive plan to seismically upgrade older buildings.

    It’s necessary, he said, not only because of the deaths and injuries that could be prevented, but because collapse and damage of buildings in a major Metro Vancouver earthquake could bring the region’s economy to a standstill for years.

    He is particularly concerned about unreinforced masonry buildings. “They desperately need to be upgraded,” said Park, who is in favour of using incentives to get upgrades.

    The Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of B.C. also says it is worried.

    Said Peter Mitchell, director of professional practice, standards and development at the professional and regulatory organization: “We certainly see there is a need to address seismically retrofitting of existing buildings stocks.”


    Posted in: In The News

    Leave a Comment (0) →

    The storm that wasn’t (and the earthquake that will be)

    The storm that wasn’t (and the earthquake that will be)

    Did we worry too much about the storm? Do we worry enough about a major quake?

    The frustrating news spread quickly among Vancouver Island parents at last weekend’s B.C. Taekwando Master’s Cup in Burnaby: the ferries were cancelled and we would all have to spend the night on the mainland.

    No one needed to ask why.

    We all knew the cause of the cancellation: The remnants of super typhoon Songda would be the third big storm of the week, with some forecasters speculating it could be the strongest one to hit southern Vancouver Island since Typhoon Freda caused havoc in 1962.

    In the end, though, it wasn’t as bad as many had predicted.

    Yes, it was inconvenient for the thousands of people who lost power and for people like me who missed their ferries and were stuck on the mainland.

    In fact, it was tragic for a 15-year-old boy who was killed by a falling branch in Surrey.

    The popular response on social media, however, was that the storm was a bust. Photos of plastic patio chairs that had fallen over started to circulate under the hashtag #BCStorm and the cheeky caption “We will rebuild.”

    Onboard the 7 a.m. sailing from Tsawwassen to Swartz Bay the following morning, I laughed at some of those jokes on Twitter, and I confess I did wonder if perhaps BC Ferries had been a bit too cautious in cancelling so many sailings on that route the previous day.

    But the obvious question is what would have happened if they hadn’t cancelled them, especially if the storm had been as big or even bigger than expected?

    What would have been the public backlash if people’s lives had been put in jeopardy?

    Now that the storm is a week behind us, it might be useful to turn our attention to the much bigger natural disaster that will strike one day and the task of managing the risk beforehand.

    Of course I’m talking about a major earthquake.

    And many more British Columbians are talking about it this week, in large part because of CBC’s excellent earthquake podcast and web series, Faultlines.

    As someone who has been interested in — and worried about — a massive earthquake for many years, I was glad to hear someone else talking about it.

    On our Victoria morning show I sometimes feel like I’m either terrifying our radio listeners or boring them.

    I’ve lost track of the number of interviews I’ve done about school seismic upgrades, early warning systems, unreinforced masonry, earthquake insurance, liquefaction, tsunamis, dam collapses, and many more depressing earthquake-related issues.

    But, to state an obvious point, it is important.

    No second-guessing

    If the Big One hits British Columbia soon, it seems highly unlikely that the second-guessing after the disaster will bear any resemblance to the response to last weekend’s storm.

    Last weekend, many of us asked if those in charge of public safety did too much. If a major earthquake were to happen next weekend, I’d wager, most of us would ask why they didn’t do more.

    If the earthquake were to happen next week, many schools would collapse. Members of the public and the media would ask why they weren’t fixed sooner, and why early earthquake warning systems weren’t installed.

    If the two dams above Campbell River fail and the city centre floods, many would ask why the warning signs (which may be installed in the next year or so) weren’t installed several years earlier.

    If the iconic B.C Legislature collapses and public servants are buried inside, we will ask why it wasn’t strengthened sooner.

    If thousands of our older houses collapse and insurance companies go bankrupt, we will ask if governments should have spent more money to help homeowners do seismic upgrades on their homes.

    If gas leaks cause serious fires after the quake, we will ask why B.C. didn’t follow California’s lead and encourage homeowners to install earthquake natural gas shut-off valves.

    And we’d have a lot more questions than those.

    No doubt, there is a significant cost to doing all of these things, and many argue we can’t afford to do everything all at once.

    But when we question those in charge of public safety for being too cautious, it’s worth pondering how we would feel in the future if the earth shakes and some of them haven’t been cautious enough.


    Posted in: In The News

    Leave a Comment (0) →

    How to survive a major earthquake if you’re in an unusual place

    The Great British Columbia ShakeOut drill advises residents to “drop, cover, and hold on”

    The Great British Columbia ShakeOut, the province’s largest earthquake drill, takes place on Oct. 20 at 10:20 AM, with over 790,000 B.C. residents registered to participate.

    While most people know to “drop, cover and hold on” if they feel the earth begin to shake, keeping safe may not always be obvious if you find yourself outside of your home or workplace when an earthquake hits.

    B.C. ShakeOut campaign member and regional emergency planner Miranda Myles shared some of her earthquake survival tips with CBC host Andrew Chang, including what to do if you find yourself in one of the following situations:

    The shower

    Myles said that if you feel an earthquake when you’re in the shower, you should apply the conventional wisdom to get down and hold on as best you can.

    “You don’t want to run out of the shower, you want to drop down and stay in the tub.”

    She recommended securing your bathroom by ensuring that there are no heavy objects hanging near the bathtub.

    An underground parking garage

    If you find yourself in an underground parking garage, Myles recommended taking shelter by “tucking up against an interior wall, up against a pillar, or even staying in your car.”

    In the car

    Many people who have experienced earthquakes while driving say that they initially thought that something was wrong with their car, causing them to slow down and pull over, which is the safest thing to do.

    You should then stay in your car, but make sure not to stop on a bridge or under an overpass. Myles also recommended tuning into the radio for updates, and keeping an emergency kit in your car.

    Walking down the sidewalk

    Myles said that walking down the sidewalk, or being immediately outside any building, can be one of the most dangerous places to be during an earthquake.

    “You want to be really aware of your surroundings and this may be the one time where you do want to tuck inside into a doorway,” she said.

    This will best protect you from broken glass or other falling debris.

    Grocery store

    In an retail space, the key is to avoid objects that may start flying off the shelves.

    “If you’re in an aisle where there’s lots of stuff that could fall on you, you want to get low, so drop to the ground, and then crawl to the end of the aisle or use something nearby to protect you, like your shopping cart for example,” Myles said.

    If the shelves are large enough, you can also climb onto the bottom rack for protection.

    The Skytrain

    Myles said that like motorists, SkyTrain riders may not initially notice that an earthquake is occurring.

    She recommends staying where you are, getting low, and holding on until the shaking subsides. Riders should not venture onto the tracks, but wait for assistance or instructions about how to exit the train safely.

    Sports stadium and concerts

    In situations where there are crowds, Myles said it is crucial to remain calm, drop down and hold on to the seat in front of you.

    To avoid stampeding once the shaking subsides, you should follow the instructions of the people managing the event space, who will know the safest evacuation routes.


    Posted in: In The News

    Leave a Comment (0) →

    The ‘Big One’ near Vancouver you may not know about

    Many of us have heard of the so-called ‘megathrust risk’, but did you know about the ‘crustal earthquake’?

    We all know about the ‘Big One’: the magnitude 9.0 earthquake that will hit the B.C. coast one day.

    But did you know there are other earthquakes waiting to strike that could be even more damaging for Metro Vancouver?

    The real ‘Big One’ — the one that keeps engineers awake at night — is actually a magnitude 7.0 crustal earthquake, with an epicentre very close to Victoria and Vancouver.

    And there’s a one in five chance we could get hit in the next 50 years.

    Daniel Stevens, Director of Emergency Management for the City of Vancouver, said we’d be looking at a bad scenario if a shallow earthquake were to happen near Vancouver.

    “We would see damage to our bridges, damage to our roads, our telecommunications systems will be damaged. There may be fires that break out in some areas. And the biggest impact is going to be the buildings,” he said.

    “It’s going to be quite a mess where people haven’t taken steps or in the buildings that haven’t been built [properly]. Some people will be trapped in the rubble of those buildings…or injured along the way.”

    The ‘Big One’ will be big, but much further away

    The megathrust earthquake does get all the headlines, for good reason. Right now, two tectonic plates have become locked in place off the coast of Vancouver Island.

    As the oceanic Juan de Fuca plate tries to slide under the less dense North American plate we live on, it’s become stuck. And it’s been stuck now for three centuries, building up stress, ready to go at any moment.

    When it does, the devastation to our infrastructure will be enormous. Coastal communities from Vancouver Island to California may become the victims of monster tsunamis that will be generated.

    But the epicentre will be at least 300 kilometres off the coast of Vancouver — meaning the seismic waves will have to travel a long way to get to our big cities. Energy will be lost along the way.

    The impact will certainly still be enormous for Vancouver, but it will be different, said Earthquake Canada seismologist Alison Bird.

    “Those jiggling waves get filtered out by the earth and what you end up with is longer period waves. First Nations stories of the 17th century earthquake talk about people on the mainland area feeling motion sick,” she said.

    “Our tall buildings will be especially tested due to the slow, back and forth motion that will seem to last forever.”

    Shallower means closer

    As bad as the megathrust sounds, an earthquake that happens just below the surface of the earth might actually be worse for many in British Columbia.

    The major tectonic action happening just off the west coast of North America has resulted in the deformation of the North America plate that we live on. There are now dozens — if not hundreds — of cracks in the earth that are also waiting to give way.

    If one of those small faults ruptures just 10 kilometres under the Strait of Georgia, Vancouver and Victoria may only experience 20 seconds of shaking, but it would be violent enough to knock people off their feet.

    The seismic waves don’t have to travel very far, so the shaking will be much more intense for areas near the epicentre. The energy released is a thousand times weaker than a 9.0 magnitude, but would be so much closer to B.C.’s most populated cities: just 10 km down — instead of 300 km to the west, and then 30 km down.

    This is the kind of earthquake that worries our engineers the most.

    A third option

    There’s a third type of earthquake that is possible for the South Coast of B.C. — deep earthquakes of magnitude 6.5 to magnitude 7.0 that also happen right under our mainland cities.

    These quakes occur on that ‘subducting’ oceanic plate, but in the section that has already moved under the North American plate, usually at depths around 50- 60 kilometres.

    While likely not as damaging, these can happen even more frequently than the other two. The Nisqually, Washington earthquake in 2001 that damaged Seattle’s airport was one of these earthquakes.

    So what are the odds?

    While we may never be able to predict exactly when and where an earthquake will hit, British Columbia is due. Bird said the odds are greater than you might think when you factor in all three earthquake types.

    “I think people tend to focus on the big one. If you’re looking at the statistics there’s a 1 in 10 chance that it will happen within the next 50 years. I think of those as fairly high odds. If we had a lottery with that kind of probability you’d probably buy a ticket,” she said.

    “[But] if you look at the crustal earthquakes in the Vancouver region [plus] any strong earthquake that could hit Vancouver, you’re looking at a one in five chance in the next 50 years. For Vancouver Island it’s about a one in three chance of a strong damaging earthquake.”

    Bird knows the odds. But she chooses to live on Vancouver Island anyway, taking comfort in knowing she has prepared her family for a major earthquake.

    “​This is where I want to live in Canada. I love the West Coast. As a seismologist I just don’t feel like I would be all that fulfilled if I was working from the Ottawa office. And I feel I can help people more from here.”


    Posted in: In The News

    Leave a Comment (0) →

    Why the risk of the ‘Big One’ in B.C. is heightened every 14 months

    1,000s of tremors — earthquake precursors in slow slip event — are expected on Vancouver Island.

    Roughly every 14 months, for about a two week period, seismologist Alison Bird won’t park underground.

    That’s because she knows the chances are higher of a big earthquake striking.

    Almost like clockwork, thousands of tiny tremors rumble unfelt across the Pacific Northwest indicating a ‘slow-slip’ event is taking place.

    Bird, an earthquake seismologist for the Geological Survey of Canada, says it’s something scientists discovered at the office in Victoria when they noticed an unusual pattern on seismograms.

    “Every 14 months or so there’s a sudden reversal of movement [of Vancouver island] for a couple of weeks,” she said

    “It’s buckling in that one direction but suddenly it settles a little bit … it could be a last straw scenario, [where] just that little bit of extra stress that’s going to cause that rupture to trigger … the megathrust earthquake.”

    Stress is building

    The Cascadia Subduction Zone is a 1000 km fault that runs from Northern Vancouver Island to Northern California. The fault itself is a boundary between two tectonic plates: the Juan de Fuca tectonic plate is moving towards, and getting shoved under the North American plate that we live on.

    A section of that boundary has become locked together — the plates are no longer sliding smoothly. So all that forward movement is being stored up inside the rocks, waiting for the day that the energy will be released as a catastrophic megathrust earthquake, colloquially known on the Pacific Northwest as the ‘Big One’.

    But why is there a heightened concern that the ‘Big One’ will happen during a slow slip?

    “What we think is happening is that whenever there’s that reversal, for those two weeks it’s loading extra stress onto the locked zone,” she said.

    “So if that lock zone is close to critical, and you’re loading mild stress on to it … just that little bit of extra stress could cause that rupture to trigger.”

    When’s the next slow slip?

    The last time the signature showed up on seismograms around B.C. was the end of December 2015 to the beginning of January 2016.

    That would mean the next slow slip event will happen sometime around February 2017.

    But don’t wait until then — get an earthquake kit and plan in place right now. A medium-sized earthquake could happen at any time.

    Meanwhile Bird does her part to feel empowered instead of scared.

    “Everyone [in my family] has shoes and a flashlight under their bed. Everyone knows where we’re going. It’s just one of those things, where everyone gets the lecture beforehand.”

    Slow slips around the world

    B.C. scientists aren’t the only ones studying slow-slip. Japan has the same kind of locked tectonic plate scenario, and they have been getting these ‘clues’ that indicate a heightened risk of an earthquake every one to six years.

    A recent major study from their seismologists correlated every large earthquake to a slow-slip event that was happening at the time — including the 2011 Tohoku earthquake.

    John Vidale is a seismologist at the University of Washington and says that our slow slip events are like clockwork.

    “Slow slip in Cascadia is some of the loudest, most periodic in recurrence, and best studied in the world. As GPS measurements revealed … the plate boundary … is stuck for 11–15 months, then moves relatively quickly for several weeks. The cycle is remarkably close to periodic.”

    Raising the alarm

    So if we know exactly when these events start and we know they correlate to big earthquakes, shouldn’t we be sounding the alarm every 14 months?

    Bird says that the information is available on their website, and they used to send out press briefings all the time, but it’s hard to get people interested in an event that happens so regularly with no impact.

    She said that one of her colleagues likens it to the heightened risk of getting into a car accident.

    “Going for a drive in the country on a Sunday, you’re not that likely to be in a car accident. But if it’s rush hour in Vancouver and there’s a game on … you’re more likely to be in an accident. You’re not necessarily going to be, but the probabilities are higher,” she said.

    However, some emergency managers use the slow slip cycle to retrain their team or to get their communities prepared for earthquakes. And if they happen to be freshly trained or in the process of training when the ‘Big One’ does happen, they are that much sharper and ready for action.


    Posted in: In The News

    Leave a Comment (0) →

    B.C.’s oil and gas regulator stepping up earthquake monitoring

    A series of small but high-profile earthquakes triggered by hydraulic fracturing last year is behind a decision by B.C.’s oil and gas regulator to step up monitoring of seismic activity.

    Starting June 1, the B.C. Oil and Gas Commission (OGC) will collect ground motion data from new wells in gas fields near Fort St. John and Dawson Creek, the regulator announced in an industry bulletin this week.

    The new permit conditions require companies to have “adequate monitoring” systems in place during hydraulic fracturing. In addition, companies will have to file a ground motion monitoring report within 30 days of completing a fracture.

    “This is the next step in mitigation measures that started with earlier permit conditions in 2012, increased seismic monitoring in the northeast in 2013 and new regulations in 2015,” OGC spokesperson Alan Clay wrote in an email.

    Fracking was deemed the cause of a 4.6 earthquake north of Fort St. John last summer—the largest “induced seismicity” event on record in B.C.

    The quake had its epicentre at a drilling site operated by Progress Energy, the largest drilling company in B.C. The company temporarily suspended operations during an investigation. Shaking could be felt as far away as Charlie Lake.

    While the quake caused no damage, it raised debate about industry regulation as the provincial government pins its hopes to a liquefied natural gas industry.

    Progress Energy is the upstream subsidiary of Petronas, the company behind the $11 billion Pacific NorthWest LNG export facility outside Prince Rupert. The company recently slashed its Northeast B.C. operations as it awaits a federal decision on the facility.

    More than 230 earthquakes were linked to fracking in an earlier Oil and Gas Commission study between August 2013 and November 2014, but only 11 could be felt at the surface.


    Posted in: In The News

    Leave a Comment (0) →
    Page 5 of 18 «...34567...»