Abandoned Buildings

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Eric Stevens, Dec 6, 2013.

  1. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Eric Stevens, Dec 6, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Eric Stevens

    Savageduck Guest

    Savageduck, Dec 6, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Eric Stevens

    Robert Coe Guest

    Robert Coe, Dec 7, 2013
    #3
  4. Eric Stevens

    PeterN Guest

    PeterN, Dec 7, 2013
    #4
  5. Eric Stevens

    Savageduck Guest

    Savageduck, Dec 7, 2013
    #5
  6. Eric Stevens

    Savageduck Guest

    Savageduck, Dec 7, 2013
    #6
  7. Eric Stevens

    Robert Coe Guest

    : On 12/7/2013 9:33 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
    : > On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 13:46:54 -0800, Savageduck <[email protected]{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
    : > wrote:
    : > : On 2013-12-06 21:09:13 +0000, Eric Stevens <> said:
    : > :
    : > : > Some interesting photographs
    : > : >
    : > : > http://weburbanist.com/2013/12/04/the-crumbling-shire-7-abandoned-wonders-of-new-zealand/
    : > :
    : > : You
    : > : >
    : > : guys need to fix that place up. ;-)
    : > : One of the hospital shots looks like a prison yard.
    : >
    : > California will have its turn.
    : >
    : Except we won't see the abandoned buildings without SCUBA gear.

    Well, I guess California does have some low-lying areas that could be
    threatened by sea-level rise. But I have to think that their more immediate
    problem is "The Big One" that will occur if and when the San Andreas Fault
    decides to assume a more comfortable position. In principle, that could make
    the devastation in Christchurch look like a Halloween prank.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Dec 7, 2013
    #7
  8. Eric Stevens

    PeterN Guest

    I recommend purchasing land in Arizona, so when the bog one happens, you
    will have waterfront property.
     
    PeterN, Dec 7, 2013
    #8
  9. Eric Stevens

    Robert Coe Guest

    : On 12/7/2013 10:30 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
    : > On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 09:55:16 -0500, PeterN <>
    : > wrote:
    : > : On 12/7/2013 9:33 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
    : > : > On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 13:46:54 -0800, Savageduck <[email protected]{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
    : > : > wrote:
    : > : > : On 2013-12-06 21:09:13 +0000, Eric Stevens <> said:
    : > : > :
    : > : > : > Some interesting photographs
    : > : > : >
    : > : > : > http://weburbanist.com/2013/12/04/the-crumbling-shire-7-abandoned-wonders-of-new-zealand/
    : > : > :
    : > : > : You
    : > : > : >
    : > : > : guys need to fix that place up. ;-)
    : > : > : One of the hospital shots looks like a prison yard.
    : > : >
    : > : > California will have its turn.
    : > : >
    : > : Except we won't see the abandoned buildings without SCUBA gear.
    : >
    : > Well, I guess California does have some low-lying areas that could be
    : > threatened by sea-level rise. But I have to think that their more immediate
    : > problem is "The Big One" that will occur if and when the San Andreas Fault
    : > decides to assume a more comfortable position. In principle, that could make
    : > the devastation in Christchurch look like a Halloween prank.
    : >
    : I recommend purchasing land in Arizona, so when the bog one happens, you
    : will have waterfront property.

    Many years ago I recall reading that a scientist had, in all seriousness,
    asserted that if California fell off into the sea, the resulting tidal wave in
    the Atlantic Ocean would wash over the Appalachians. But with the current
    understanding of plate tectonics nobody believes that anymore. The Big One,
    however big it is, will represent nothing more than a blip in the northward
    slide of the land west of the San Andreas Fault. Eventually Los Angeles is
    supposed to be at about the same latitude as San Francisco, leaving time for
    numerous Big Ones in the intervening several thousand years.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Dec 7, 2013
    #9
  10. Eric Stevens

    RichA Guest

    Rich fools buy expensive beach-front property, get flooded, we all pay for it thanks to the socialistic nature of insurance. Recently, a flood in onearea of Toronto resulted in insurance being raised for everyone. Intermittent, 100 year-type storms are one thing, but people who willingly build in areas known to be unsafe (forest fires, continual floods, earthquakes) should be left to fend for themselves.
     
    RichA, Dec 7, 2013
    #10
  11. Eric Stevens

    PeterN Guest

    I was just being a tad facetious.
     
    PeterN, Dec 7, 2013
    #11
  12. Eric Stevens

    J. Clarke Guest

    LA being flooded out would IMO be a good thing. A lot of the crazier
    pollution regs we have are for the purpose of trying to maintain
    reasonable air quality in a place that is a trap for air pollution and
    grossly overpopulated.
     
    J. Clarke, Dec 7, 2013
    #12
  13. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Christchurch isn't finished yet. It's more that it started earlier
    than expected from a previously unknown source. They are still waiting
    for the really big one.

    http://tinyurl.com/khvp9om
    "The Alpine Fault will rupture in the near future (quite possibly
    in your lifetime), without any prior warning. When it does, the
    scale of the immediate disaster will be unprecedented in New
    Zealand, and secondary effects will probably continue for
    decades."

    The Alpine fault is where the first unambiguous evidence for
    continental drift was recognised.
     
    Eric Stevens, Dec 8, 2013
    #13
  14. Eric Stevens

    Me Guest

    As a resident of Chch, slowly rebuilding my house which suffered about
    $250,000 damage, mainly from a "mere" M6.3 "aftershock", a couple of points.

    The epicentre of the M6.3 aftershock event was a few km from my home.
    The nearest strong motion detector (about 1.5 km away as the crow flies)
    recorded 2.2g lateral and 1.8g vertical peak ground acceleration (pga).
    The only good thing was that the shaking only lasted <10 seconds.
    First-hand, yet after experiencing a violent M7.1 quake with epicentre
    approx 30km away (not fun - but not seriously damaging to my home), and
    hundreds of subsequent often violent aftershocks, it did not strike me
    as being an earthquake while it was happening. Several 1/4" plate glass
    windows beside me exploded, light fittings dropped from ceilings, the
    contents of every cupboard were emptied etc. You are also unable to move
    - so the "quake drill" is effectively worthless.


    That has implications for California (and elsewhere) as the quake was on
    a small blind fault. A comparable event and prelude was perhaps the '94
    Northridge quake in LA, where pga of ~1.8g was recorded. It's the
    shaking which destroys stuff, magnitude makes headlines. Such large
    shaking from such small magnitude quakes was not thought to be possible
    until Northridge, the Christchurch quakes confirmed it, and this has
    major implication for seismic engineering design globally.

    The Alpine fault will let rip. I believe that the calculated odds are
    about 1:3 that it will suffer a major rupture within 50 years. The
    rebuild of Christchurch is very much focused on this certainty.
    Anticipated shaking intensity is however much lower (than what we've
    had), about 0.25g, but duration of shaking longer (about 3-5 minutes, as
    would be expected from a ~>M8 event). The period/frequency of vibration
    will be lower, this far less damaging immediately to low small buildings
    (homes), but potentially more serious to high-rise structures. There is
    no significant Tsunami risk to Christchurch from an Alpine Fault event
    (as there is none to California from a San Andreas event - the immediate
    risk to US West coast is from the offshore Cascadia subduction zone,
    similar to the risk to the E coast of the NI of NZ from the subduction
    zone in the Kermadec trench).

    But the damage will not be focused in Chch. It depends where the fault
    ruptures, the direction of rupture (could be in two directions
    propagating from a central point on the fault, start one end or the
    other, rupture the entire length or half), and what else ruptures
    simultaneously. For example, there's evidence that major faults in the
    Cook Strait region have ruptured simultaneously with past Alpine Fault
    events, generating major tsunami in Wellington and Tasman Bay, and even
    significant Tsunami as far North as Auckland.
     
    Me, Dec 8, 2013
    #14
  15. Eric Stevens

    Me Guest

    No - not in living memory.
     
    Me, Dec 8, 2013
    #15
  16. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    I agree with you about the shaking. Even if it not extremely severe
    the duration can lead to considerable cumulative damage.

    Re tsunami: it is probable that the end of the archaic Maori period
    was brought about by tsumai causing Maori to evacuate their coastal
    sites where they had been living. Something similar is believed to
    have happened on the NW coast of North America.
     
    Eric Stevens, Dec 8, 2013
    #16
  17. Eric Stevens

    Savageduck Guest

    10 years ago, December 22, 2003, we experienced a magnitude 6.5 quake
    centered about 12 miles from my home. That felt as though a truck had
    hit the house. I was sitting on the couch and I was not able to get to
    stand until the initial movement stopped. As I sat there I watched
    helplessly as the stove pipe for my wood burning stove undulated and
    other furniture swayed. Fortunately our house and others in our
    neighborhood were built to California earthquake code and there was no
    major damage. However, in town there were several buildings which had
    not been retrofitted to code and they suffered severe damage, and two
    women were killed.
    Some details:
    < ftp://hazards.cr.usgs.gov/maps/sigeqs/20031222/20031222.jpg >
    < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Simeon_Earthquake >

    ....and the epicenter in relation to my home;
    < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_446.jpg >
     
    Savageduck, Dec 8, 2013
    #17
  18. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Auckland is New Zealand'd biggest city and is right on top of an
    active (but, fortunately, sluggish) volcanic field.
    http://www.gns.cri.nz/var/ezwebin_s...-figure-1/5677-1-eng-GB/Auckland-figure-1.gif
    I'm just off the map at the top-left.
     
    Eric Stevens, Dec 9, 2013
    #18
  19. Eric Stevens

    Me Guest

    The NW coast of N America event is dated to 1700:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1700_C...n.wikipedia.org/wiki/1700_Cascadia_earthquake

    300-900 year return period, but looks like a fair average is about 400
    years. It could go at any time - there must be quite a high probability
    that it will over the next 100 years or so.

    It could be that the event which caused the abandonment of coastal sites
    wasn't an earthquake generated tsunami, but an impact event creating the
    "Mahuika crater" in the mid 1400s.
    Of course NZ has the Taupo megavolcano to think about, the capital city
    sitting right on top of a complex and active system of faults, one of
    which ruptured in 1855 (M 8.4 approx), the largest city perched atop an
    active monogenetic volcanic field, and much of the E coast at risk from
    Tsunami from the offshore subduction zones.
    Yes - it is quite an experience - one that I don't want to go through
    again. EQ building codes in NZ are much the same as for California.
    About 180 people were killed in the February 22 2011 M6.3 quake, but 2/3
    of those in one building which has been the subject of a major inquiry,
    as it was built in the 1980s when quite stringent codes were already in
    place. Design, construction quality, and the adequacy of checking
    damage caused by the M7.1 event about 6 months earlier are questioned.
    Ultimately though, the building was never designed to survive >1g
    vertical ground acceleration. One other office building collapsed with
    loss of (IIRC) 18 lives. Most of the other deaths were from falling
    unreinforced masonry, facades etc from old buildings, this long known to
    be a risk. Many unsafe buildings which did collapse partially or
    completely were unoccupied, as they had been condemned following the
    earlier quake, or were scheduled to have strengthening work carried out.
    So in a twist - the previous quake may have saved lives in the later
    event.

    As far as private dwellings go, I'm only aware of two fatalities, one a
    small child killed by a falling CRT TV set, the other a man killed in
    the back-yard of his home by rockfall.
    I don't see a huge correlation between age (hence building code that it
    was constructed to) and survival of houses where we are. About the most
    significant thing would be that if you had a house on piles, with
    lightweight timber cladding, with lightweight roofing, single story, and
    with relatively simple rectangular design, then the house probably
    suffered much less damage - and is much simpler to fix.
    But further away from the epicentre - at least if you were on good land
    not prone to liquefaction and/or lateral spread, and where damage was
    more cosmetic than structural, then for sure the extra bracing etc
    resulted in much less severe cosmetic damage.
    Our home is on a hill site - not steep but sloping. Base is heavy clay.
    The RC foundation is a little over-engineered, columns supporting the
    structure have been dug through the clay to bedrock, the foundation
    itself survived with only superficial cracking to the perimeter walls.
    A neighbour's house with full RC construction, built only a few years
    ago, the top story shifted about 300mm laterally relative to the ground
    floor, every column attachment shattered top and bottom and columns all
    on a lean. This despite supposed design to seismic code. There's
    nothing quite like "proven" IMO and that was a proven failure.
    We live in a private lane servicing 7 homes. 3 have been demolished,
    the fate of one is uncertain, between the 7 homes, there's about $3.5
    million earthquake damage.

    It seems to have quietened down here now, from several large aftershocks
    per hour, then per day - some of which were getting up to the M5-6 range
    at which point they're quite frightening - to it now being many months
    since I've felt a quake that I'd consider to be a bit "alarming" Every
    week or so we seem to get something in the M3-4 range, quite noticeable
    as they are close and shallow, but 18 months ago a rattle that size
    would hardly have you raise an eyebrow.
     
    Me, Dec 9, 2013
    #19
  20. Eric Stevens

    Savageduck Guest

    Eric! You are always just off the map at the top-left. ;-)

    I might have mentioned that my cousin's son & his wife are both doctors
    (one a pathologist the other a shrink) in the Tauranga area. They live
    in the suburb Bethlehem.
     
    Savageduck, Dec 9, 2013
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.