Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Natural Hazards, Pop. Density, HIC vs. LIC, Hazard Risk = Hazards x…
Natural Hazards
Factors Involved
HIC vs. LIC.
-
Low in LIC (Nepal) therefore in an earthquake scenario, buildings are likely to collapse
High in HIC (London) therefore building are either made earthquake proof or retrofitted, at extensive cost to prevent collapses
Prediction
Nepal had no prior knowledge of the potential of a Earthquake hitting so soon despite possible warning signs like tremors etc.
Iceland could use mobile radars and seismometers to detect the chances of an eruption + Co-operation with Icelandic Meteorological Organisation and London VAAC
Planning
Countries who lack funding are unable to plan ahead as in many cases they are unaware of the risk posed.
In Iceland, The CDF had a 3 hour evac. plan with 4 escape point that was reharesd regulary
Mittigation
In Iceland, Leveés and dams were built to mitigate the flow of lava
-
Frequency
Low (Nepal March 2015: No one was prepared for the earthquake which wiped out building across the country and hit the alps hence the over 8,000 initial deaths)
High (Japan + Malaysia have a national earthquake day where children are taught how to act in an earthquake)
Settlement Type
Villages : People are more spaced out and therefore have higher survival chances but aid may take longer to arrive (Took helicopters 2 weeks to reach inaccessible areas of Nepal and even longer for the Alps)
Cities / Slums : Many will die as they are pact together in a small area but aid can arrive faster (MSF in main Nepal cities after Hyphoon)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-