• 3 different eruptions over 2 days

Damage:

• 17 deaths

• 98 injuries

• Estimated 60 thousand euro in building damage

• Partial destruction of the famous Naples duomo

• Most damage was to residential buildings

Response:

• Sensors detected earthquakes and gas emissions 36 hours before the eruption

• Evacuation of Naples and surrounding areas started 22 hours before the eruption

• All phones, computers, and TVs received a warning message

• Total evacuation time = 15 hours

• 93% of impacted area was evacuated at the time of the first eruption

Evaluation

Overall this was a good disaster management response (8.5/10) for the following reasons:

• Scientists were monitoring the volcano so that they knew right away when it started to show warning signs, and could compare it to other data to understand that this eruption would be bigger than normal

• They sent out an evacuation notice early and by sending it to phones, computers, and TVs it was seen by most people

• The evacuation route was already planned in advance, so people knew where to go already

However, it could be improved by:

• Many houses in Naples are old and made of stone so they fell - reinforcing and replacing old buildings could improve this

• The electrical systems in the centre of Naples are very old and the shaking made them explode and start fires - replacing any system from before 2000 would help to prevent this

• 2 separate earthquakes

Damage:

• 308 deaths

• 783 injuries

• Estimated 306 thousand euro in building damage

• High level of destruction to 35% of buildings in the city

• Moderate level of destruction to 40% of buildings in the city

Response:

• Sensors detected the earthquake as it happened

• Earthquake notice was sent as the shaking started through a city-wide siren

• People sheltered under tables and doorways, but many homes collapsed and resulted in serious injuries and deaths

• Fires started as a result of the earthquake and lasted for 15 hours before being fully put out

Evaluation

Overall this was a bad disaster management response (2/10) for the following reasons:

• Due to the low GDP of the country (it is pretty poor) there was not advanced technology to help monitor and communicate earthquakes

• Most buildings in Kabul are old stone buildings and therefore are not very resistant to shaking.

• Poorly constructed buildings fell over quickly and caused many injuries and deaths

• Bad and old electrical cords broke and started fires throughout the city. These fires caused more damage than the falling buildings and many injuries and deaths.

However, something that was good was:

• When the earthquake started, the city siren went off, alerting people before the major shaking started and buildings fell. Some people managed to take cover and escape their building before it fell or a fire started. Without these sirens, more people would have died.

Deaths, Approximately 525 people lost their lives, and 25 people went missing.

Injuries, Around 12,000 people were injured.

Infrastructure Ruined: The earthquake destroyed 220,000 homes, 4,500 schools, 56 hospitals, and 53 ports. It also severely damaged the Santiago airport and the Port of Talcahuano.

Financial Cost: The estimated cost of the earthquake was around $30 billion.

What Was Done to Manage the Disaster?

Immediate Response, Emergency services responded quickly, and international support provided field hospitals, satellite phones, and floating bridges. Within 24 hours, the north-south highway was temporarily repaired, allowing aid to be transported from Santiago to affected areas3.

Restoration of Services: Within ten days, 90% of homes had power and water restored.

Financial Aid: A national appeal raised $60 million, which funded 30,000 small emergency shelters.

Long-term Response: Chile’s government launched a housing reconstruction plan to help nearly affected 200,000 families. The recovery took over four years3.

Disaster Management Ranking (0-10 Scale)

I would rank the disaster management for this disaster at 8. The response was swift and effective, with international support and quick restoration of essential services. However, there were still significant challenges and areas for improvement.

Evaluation of Disaster Management

What Was Good:

Swift Response: Emergency services and international aid arrived quickly.

Restoration of Services: Power and water were restored to most homes within ten days.

Financial Aid: Significant funds were raised to support recovery efforts.

What Was Bad:

Infrastructure Damage: Extensive damage to homes, schools, hospitals, and ports.

Displacement: Many people were left homeless and had to rely on emergency shelters.

What Could Be Improved:

Building Standards: Strengthening building codes to better withstand earthquakes.

Preparedness: Enhancing disaster preparedness and public awareness to reduce casualties and damage.

The disaster happened in 2010 in Haiti

There were hundreds of thousand of people killed and 300000 injured. The whole city was left in ruins including historical landmarks like the presidential palace.

The government didn’t make much of an effort in rebuilding the city, there were some efforts to rebuild and provide aid but not much more.

Evaluate disaster management:

The disaster management is ranked as (3/10)

We gave it that score since the recovery process of the city was very slow and wasn’t fully finished. You’ve got to keep in mind that Haiti faced challenges while rebuilding due to infrastructure damage and not enough personnel.

They could build more earthquake proof buildings beforehand so there would be less destruction. They should also have a already made evacuation plan so the citizens know what to do when the earthquake strikes.

The could have homeless shelters and just have a place for the people that don’t have housing. They should also have enough hospitals for injured people.

When and where did it happen ?

~ Indonesia 26 dec 2004

What was the damage ?

~ 220000 deaths

~13 billion damage

There was no information on sea level so you couldn’t tell when it was coming and there was no warning

o    On a scale of 0 (worst) -10 (best) rank the disaster management for this disaster

It is a 3 because there was no warning for the disaster but they tried repairing the damages with local organisations.

When and Where?

March 11 2011, Tõhoko Japan

What?

Earthquake and Tsunami

Damage:

20,000 dead

6,000 injured

300 billion USD in damage

Response:

-An emergency command center was

- Followed by a massive tsunami

-snowfall hindered early rescue efforts

-3 nuclear reactors exploded leading to even more damage and evacuation to all in a twelve mile radius of the plant

-other country like the US sent support

-ended up being the costliest natural disaster in history

What could have been better?

The nuclear reactors should been made safer, not being completely depended on the city electricity, with backup generators. And of course more preparation in case of an earthquake should have been made.

Rating:

5/10, not flattering, yet it was the 4th strongest earthquake in history, with a huge tsunami. While 20,000 people died, Japan did ensure that this did not get higher, for it could have even reached 100,000 deaths. Overall their preparation for the disaster could have been better, like making the nuclear plant more secure. Yet they reacted immediately and made sure that that life could quickly return back to normal after the disaster.