In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
WHY WAS THE GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE?
In 1989 an earthquake hit San Francisco, on the west coast of USA, killing around 63 people. Twelve years later an earthquake hit Gujarat, in India. This time it killed approximately 20,000 people. In this report I will be comparing the two earthquakes, giving reasons why the Gujarat earthquake was so much more destructive than the one in San Francisco. An earthquake is a movement or tremor in the earth’s crust. Earthquakes happen all the time, but some are so weak that they cannot be felt. The San Francisco earthquake and the Gujarat earthquake were so powerful that the shaking of the ground caused the buildings to collapse and landslides to occur. In both earthquakes a lot of damage was done not just to the buildings but to the people as well. In the San Francisco earthquake over 3000 people were injured and 13,000 people were left homeless this is a big impact but compared to the Gujarat it wasn’t. In the Gujarat earthquake 170.000 people were injured and 1,000,000 were left homeless. The damage cost $4 billion in the Gujarat earthquake but in the San Francisco it cost $7 billion. This is mainly because India is a poorer country compared to the USA. We can know this because of the average wage in each country.
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
Many people face dire situations everyday, but what about deadly? This is what about 43,000 Filipinos faced on October 15, 2013 when a deadly 7.2 magnitude earthquake struck the islands of Bohol and Cebu. The temblor was the largest to shake the area in 23 years. (BK Info) Also, 2211 aftershocks hit the region and most citizens were completely unprepared, and shocked. The cause of this disaster is likely the East Bohol Fault. The quake killed around 185 people and put at least 36,000 buildings (mainly homes) into a state of destruction. Various locations were now just heaps of wreckage, including ports, schools, airports, hospitals, and lots of houses. People respond to a natural catastrophe by gathering supplies, getting help, and trying to survive and get back upon their feet.…
- 477 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
The 1906 Great San Francisco earthquake is one of the worst earthquake’s to happen yet. The magnitude was believed to be about a 7.8 on the Richter scale. What made it so destructive wasn’t just the magnitude of the earthquake but the fact that the fires were uncontrollable. These factors led to the San Francisco quake to be know as a tragedy.…
- 748 Words
- 3 Pages
Better Essays -
Discuss the view that the impact of earthquake hazards depends primarily on human factors (40 marks)…
- 2230 Words
- 9 Pages
Powerful Essays -
The 1906 San Francisco earthquake is widely believed to be the most significant earthquake of all time with regards to destruction, loss of life, and subsequent learnings. On the 110th anniversary of the April 18th, 1906 earthquake, we delve into how our understanding of earthquakes has developed and how this particular earthquake helped further our understanding.…
- 657 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
There are many horrible things that come with have to take care of the after math of earthquakes. Even through earthquakes usually are not the direct causes of death and injure people they do cause buildings to fall and falling building and pieces of buildings hurt and kill people. Many people have been killed and injured by buildings due earthquakes and the amount of money it costs to repair the damage is very pricey as…
- 799 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
While both the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake of Northern California, and the 2010 earthquake that devastated Port au Prince, and surrounding areas in Haiti, were very similar in magnitude (6.9 California, and 7.0 in Haiti), there is great contrast in the number of lives lost due to these natural disasters, with 63 dead in Santa Cruz county, and an estimated 220,000 lives lost in Haiti. From a geographical standpoint, the town of Léogâne was at the epicenter, of Haiti’s 2010 earthquake, the United Nations claims that this was “the worst affected area” with notable damage occurring to approximately 90% of the buildings in the area, and over 20,000 lives lost. (Millar, 2010). According to the Medical Examiners and Coroners investigating the earthquake…
- 280 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
There are a variety of reasons why the strongest earthquakes are not always the most costly. One of these reasons may be that the country is well prepared when it comes to natural disasters. An example of this was the earthquake that happened in Chile in 2010. This earthquake had a magnitude of 8.8 which is the 8th largest earthquake recorded since 1900. Because Chile is on a fault line it has always been prone to earthquakes and therefore has learnt to adapt and cope with them. For example, the run drills in their schools so children will know what to do in case there is an earthquake. There are also a lot stricter rules on building regulations, so they are more likely to survive an earthquake than collapse. Because of this only 525 were killed and the total costs were $15-30 billion which is relatively small compared to other earthquakes of similar size.…
- 456 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
It is impossible for anybody to argue that human factors do not have an effect on the impact caused by earthquake hazards; however the extent of the effect is debatable depending on the situation. This can depend on many different aspects, for instance the level of development in the relevant country, the standard of infrastructure, the magnitude and location of the quake and lastly what time the quake occurs. In order to properly assess whether the impact of earthquake hazards depends primarily on human factors, it is necessary to look at a range of case studies which will provide a balanced overview. For instance – looking at the LEDW – examples such as the Haiti earthquake in January 2010 as well as the earthquake in the Indian Ocean in December 2004 could suggest that the impact depends primarily on human factors as these countries are not fully developed and thus might have underdeveloped infrastructure and building regulations. Contrary to this, the MEDW with examples such as the Northridge earthquake in 1994 could provide a contrasting argument in terms of how human factors affect the impact. However, there are always multiple factors which the impact depends on, regardless of the development of the relevant country.…
- 877 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Just after 2 o’clock AM of December 16, 1811, the Mississippi River valley was hit by an earthquake so strong that it awakened people in cities as distant at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Norfolk, Virginia.(Page) This shock started what must have been the most frightening sequence of earthquakes ever to occur in the United States. The strong shaking continued through March 1812 and aftershocks strong enough to be felt occurred through the year 1817. The initial earthquake of December 16 was followed by two other principal shocks, one on January 23, 1812, and the other on February 7, 1812. (Nuttli) No other earthquakes have lasted so long or produced so much evidence of damage as the New Madrid earthquakes. Three of the earthquakes are on the list of America’s top earthquakes: the first one on December 16, 1811, a magnitude of 8.1 on the Richter scale; the second on January 23, 1812, at 7.8; and the third on February 7, 1812, at as much as 8.(Page)…
- 663 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
On Monday, January 17, 1994 at 4.31 a.m. an earthquake measuring a magnitude of 6.7 struck a densely populated area of San Fernando Valley. In spite of Los Angeles County considered as one of the greatest prepared regions for earthquakes, Northridge was one of the worse disasters financially. They were around 14,000 aftershocks reported in the magnitude of 4.0-5.0 range. Because of the earthquake people displaced from their homes are estimated to be around 80,000 to 125,000. Preliminary estimated damages were USD 15-17 billion dollars. The earthquake had occurred at the early morning hours, had it occurred at another time of day, there would have been more injuries and more fatalities. Gas, power, water, and sewer utilities were affected greatly along with structural damages to major bridges causing a nightmare to travel (Petak & Elahi, 2001).…
- 933 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
Many parts of this disaster are very common to earthquakes that occur all around the world. There is a fault near the San Francisco area, the San Andreas Fault. This fault has been the birth place of many earthquakes striking this area for hundreds of years, and was for the Great San Francisco Earthquake of 1906. The earthquake’s…
- 487 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
Economic cost was high with losses estimated at $40 billion. The earthquake severely tested building codes, earthquake-resistant construction and emergency preparation and response procedures. The experience confirmed many of the lessons learned from past earthquakes, exposed weaknesses in the society’s generally resilient fabric, and produced many surprises about the levels and consequences of strong ground shaking. Near the epicenter in the San Fernando Valley, well-engineered buildings withstood violent shaking without structural damage. However, numerous structural failures throughout the region were evidence of significant…
- 510 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Seismic hazards have many different impacts around the world. An earthquake took place in Haiti 2010 and it was measured 7 on the Richter scale. The main hazard was the seismic waves caused by shifting rocks in an earthquake. There are two main types of waves, P waves and S waves. P waves travel through solids and liquids around 6-7 km/h and parallel through the rocks. S ways travel side ways at 2.5-4km/h and can only get through solids. Both waves can have a big impact on the community, a lot of buildings will collapse and as a result people will be injured and infrastructures will be damaged. Over 3.5 million people were affected by the earthquake, with 220000 fatalities and over 300000 people injured as a result of poorly constructed houses…
- 426 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
The amount of damage caused by an Earthquake does not solely depend on the magnitude of the Earthquake. Factors such as population, geographic location, soil type, and the type of building material commonly used for construction in a region determine the extent of damage caused. If an Earthquake strikes a densely populated region, then life loss and property damage will be high. If an Earthquake of a similar or even higher magnitude strikes a region with a relatively low population, then life loss and property damage will be lower. The 6.4 Richter scale Earthquake (1993) in the State of Maharashtra, India and the 8.3 Richter scale Earthquake (2006) in Kuril Islands, Japan are examples that come to mind. With stone houses and a population of over 2 million, the Earthquake in Latur left nearly 8,000 people dead and brought as many as 30,000 houses to the ground. In contrast, Kuril Islands, with a population of just 17,000 and better disaster preparedness mechanisms, was able to get away with no loss of human life ,despite the fact that the Earthquake was much higher in magnitude when compared to that of Latur.…
- 787 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
In 2010, a huge earthquake hit Haiti and almost flattened the tiny country. A year later, in 2011, an equally huge if not bigger earthquake hit Japan. Many people were affected in Japan but now the country is running smoothly again while Haiti’s poverty rates are still as a high as 80%. Why did these earthquakes have such different effects on these countries? The most significant reason these earthquakes had such different effects is the simple matter that Japan is just much more prepared than Haiti due to more economic, political, and educational development.…
- 522 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays