Putting USGS Research to Use: User Perspectives on Research Evolution, Accomplishments, and Challenges USGS Earthquake H - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Putting USGS Research to Use: User Perspectives on Research Evolution, Accomplishments, and Challenges USGS Earthquake H PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Putting USGS Research to Use: User Perspectives on Research Evolution, Accomplishments, and Challenges USGS Earthquake H

play fullscreen
1 / 25
Putting USGS Research to Use: User Perspectives on Research Evolution, Accomplishments, and Challenges USGS Earthquake H
153 Views
Download Presentation
aurorette
Download Presentation

Putting USGS Research to Use: User Perspectives on Research Evolution, Accomplishments, and Challenges USGS Earthquake H

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Congressional Briefing on Earthquakes Natural Hazards Science: Reducing America’s Risk From Earthquakes May 12, 2006 Putting USGS Research to Use: User Perspectives on Research Evolution, Accomplishments, and Challenges USGS Earthquake Hazards Program (EHP) Lloyd S. Cluff Director, Geosciences Department Earthquake Risk ManagementPacific Gas and Electric CompanySan Francisco, California

  2. 70,000 square milesof service territory 15 million people served 4.1 million gas customers 5 million electric customers 3,400 buildings Pacific Gas and Electric PG&E at a Glance San Andreas fault Active faults 70% of SA fault traverses PG&E service territory

  3. EHP-Accomplishments • Learning from earthquakes • National Hazards Maps • Surface fault rupture effects characterized • Near-source ground motions characterized • Regional hazards assessments • Earthquake forecasts and Shake-Maps

  4. Public/Private Partnership (1991-2006) San Francisco Bay Area (1992-2006) Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) on Earthquake Hazards SF Active Faults

  5. All PG&E Facilities Sacramento San Francisco Active faults Monterey Bay

  6. Earthquake Risk Management Policy* for Utilities and Transportation Systems • Program to understand hazards and system vulnerabilities • Plan to implement risk management options • Dedicated staff • Dedicated budget • Accountability *California Seismic Safety Commission, 1990

  7. Public/Private Partnership • Lifelines User-Driven Research Program (1996-2006) • Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center • PG&E • Caltrans • California Energy Commission • Other stakeholders for specific projects (USGS, FEMA, and the Southern California Earthquake Center) • $15 million leveraged funding

  8. Hayward Fault Rupture San Andreas Fault Rupture Scenarios Nishenko 2006 Rodgers Creek Fault Rupture Gas transmission Nishenko 2006 Nishenko 2006

  9. Hayward Fault Scenario UC Berkeley

  10. Hayward Fault Scenario Nishenko 2006

  11. PG&E Seismic Retrofit Projects for Earthquake Performance Improvements – (1986 to 2006) • Facilities Cost ($ millions) • Buildings 300 • Substations 45 • Dams and Related Hydro Facilities 75 • Power Plants 60 • Gas Pipeline Replacement 1950 • Loma Prieta Repairs 75 • TOTAL INVESTMENT ~ $2.5 billion

  12. Earthquake Performance Mitigation Improvements for Utilities and Transportation Systems San Francisco Bay Area (1989 to 2006) • PG&E – Gas and electric systems • Caltrans – Bridge and highway systems • East Bay MUD – Water systems • BART – Rail transportation system • San Francisco Water Department Combined existing and planned expenditures ~ $15 billion

  13. Trans-Alaska Pipeline Success Story November 3, 2002 M 7.9 Eq & Denali fault rupture Epicenter TAPS Susitna Glacier fault Denali fault Rupture Length ~ 354 km Maximum right slip ~ 8.8 m Totschunda fault Not a drop of oil was spilled ! T. Dawson, 2002

  14. P. Haeussler 2002

  15. P. Haeussler 2002

  16. Denali fault-crossing design zone 71-Fault characterization data sites Pipeline

  17. Denali fault crossing Teflon-coated concrete and steel beams Teflon-coated pipeline support shoes L. Cluff, 1976

  18. Denali fault crossing design zone 2000 ft L. Cluff, 1976

  19. Fault rupture through Denali fault crossing design zone

  20. Denali fault-crossing design parameters Horizontal, 20 feet Vertical, 5 feet Up Most likely location 2000 ft Right slip will cause pipeline to experience axial compression • November 3, 2002 rupture • Horizontal, 18 feet • Vertical, 3.5 feet • Axial compression, 11 feet Pipeline performed as designed; and not a drop of oil was spilled !

  21. 7.5 ft Width of deformation 660 ft Fault displacement 18 ft 10.5 ft Fault displacement design zone 2,000 ft wide

  22. Conclusions and Recommendations • Seismic safety must be given priority • 39 states have significant seismic exposure • They will experience painful deaths and staggering economic losses • The losses are preventable by implementing mitigating measures

  23. Conclusions and Recommendations • The USGS must initiate a leadership role: • A complete analysis of the consequences of catastrophic California earthquakes (San Francisco Bay Area / Southern California Region • Integrate all hazards threats to develop a comprehensive emergency response for all infrastructure elements that will institute a full and speedy recovery for society • The lessons learned in this demonstration project would be applicable to all national extreme disasters

  24. Conclusions and Recommendations • There is an urgent need to fully implement the USGS Advanced National Seismic System through appropriations that are consistent with Congressional Authorizations • It is in the public interest to support research for lifelines infrastructure and buildings • Multi-hazard emphasis • User-driven • Standardized post-event data collection • Successes • Challenges