Tsunami Mitigation Systems During Tohoku Earthquake
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Tsunami Mitigation Systems During Tohoku Earthquake
Peer response 1
Response to Question #1
The Tohoku earthquake struck Japan in 2011, going down as one of the greatest earthquakes in history. The earthquake had a magnitude of nine and was known as the Great East Japan Earthquake. The epicenter was located 48 miles off the Tohoku region on the Sanriku Coast, sending a large tsunami towards this region. The earthquake was so massive that it moved the Han Shu Island 14 feet and shifted the earth’s axis more than six inches.
The Tohoku earthquake killed 16,000 people and injured 6,000. The Japanese government had invested in physical mitigation systems for this very scenario. Tsunami break waters were built in the Sanriku coast to break the incoming waves that would be generated from deep sea earthquakes. They were designed based off two of the largest earthquakes in history at the time, the 1896 Meiji Sanriku and the 1960 Chilean.
The Tohoku earthquake sent waves higher than anyone could have imagined or designed for. The break waters did help with preventing a larger tragedy but were not high enough to combat the massive waves (Cuadra, 2022). A second mitigation system built that failed during the 2011 Tohoku earthquake were sea walls. Over 190 kilometers of the 300-kilometer sea wall was either damaged or broken when the tsunami was over.
The tsunami waves generated had reached three to four meters over the sea walls, destroying any in its path. The sea walls were designed to protect people from high tides and typhoons except. There was a section 2.4 kilometers long that was specifically made for tsunami’s because that town was prone to getting them in the past. The They were 10 meters tall, and yet the tsunami waves from the earthquake still managed to demolish the eastern portion of this sea wall and even raise above the sea wall at some sections (Suppasri et al., 2012).
References
Cuadra, J. (2022). Week 10 Video Lecture: Tohoku Kanto Earthquake Japan. [Weekly Lecture Video]. Retrieved from Tohoku Kanto Earthquake Japan Video Lecture: (PAD4380.sp22) Disasters: From Shock to Recovery (fsu.edu)
Suppasri, A., Shuto, N., Imamura, F., Koshmura, S., Mas, E., Yalciner, A. (2012). Lessons Learned from the 2011 Great East Japan Tsunami: Performance of Tsunami Countermeasures, Coastal Buildings, and Tsunami Evacuation in Japan. Pure and Applied Geophysics. 170, 993-1018, DOI 10.1007/s00024-012-0511-7.
peer 2
Peer response 2
Describe two tsunami mitigation systems that failed during the 2011 Tohoku earthquake.
In March of 2011 Japan suffered one of the greatest earthquakes in history (Cuadra, 2022). However, Japan is an industrialized country and was well aware of its vulnerability and susceptibility to earthquake and tsunami type disasters. As compared to other cases we’ve studied this semester in which tsunamis or cyclone’s threatened coastal communities, Japan was much more well prepared for and equipped to respond than they were.
Japan had several mitigation systems in place to help thwart threats to life and property. Tsunami breakwaters, sea walls, and tsunami gates were in place and their construction was engineered based off great tsunami disasters Japan faced in years gone by (Cuadra, 2022). However, in this case, the tsunami that impacted Japan’s eastern coast as a result of the massive earthquake overpowered many of these mitigation systems. Although Japan made a valiant effort to mitigate their risk, the scale and magnitude of this disaster was not able to be harnessed and corralled by Japan’s systems. As a result, much of Japan’s infrastructure was destroyed and thousands of lives were lost.
Included in this destruction was Japan’s power grid as several nuclear power plants were damaged or destroyed (Okada Noria et al, 2011). Japan attempted to respond to failing power plants by introducing water as coolant to overheating systems which in turn created and steam. The pressure from the steam contributed to the failing systems ultimately resulting in catastrophic loss (Okada Noria et al, 2011).
Japan created marvelous manmade mitigation systems to help relieve the impact of such a disaster but ultimately mother nature overpowered and washed away wooden homes. Japan did well in enforcing building codes and using concreate construction material which helped with the initial earthquake. This seemed to be a very unfortunate case illustrating that sometimes even though people have really tried to mitigate and prevent disaster, it is out of human control.
References
Cuadra, J. (2022). Tohoku Kanto Earthquake Japan Video Lecture. Tallahassee: https://canvas.fsu.edu/courses/188584/pages/tohoku-kanto-earthquake-japan-video-lecture?module_item_id=3572380.
Okada Norio1, T. Y. (2011). The 2011 Eastern Japan Great Earthquake Disaster: . Int. J. Disaster Risk Sci., pp. 34-42.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!