Identifying the risk from the average expected annualized losses at earthquake Gabriela Atanasiu, Genoveva Pe...
Magnitude Description of Effectless than Usually felt by only a few people near the epicenter. 3.4 ...
ICBE 2007
Earthquakes - 1996ICBE 2007
Hawaii is the state at greatestrisk for a tsunami. They getabout one a year, with adamaging tsunami happeningabout every s...
Forecasting Theory- Moving Average Risk ICBE 2007
Identifying the risk from the average expected annualized losses at earthquake• (Porter et.others , 2004 ) ...
Identifying the risk from the average expected annualized losses at earthquake 8 E...
Identifying the risk from the average expected annualized losses at earthquakeLoss probability 100% 75% ...
Identifying the risk from the average expected annualized losses at earthquakeLoss 100% 75% ...
Conclusions• The seismic risk with low frequency of occurrence and low proximity of loss should be ignored and therefore ...
of 11

Prezentare brasov

Published on: Mar 4, 2016
Source: www.slideshare.net


Transcripts - Prezentare brasov

  • 1. Identifying the risk from the average expected annualized losses at earthquake Gabriela Atanasiu, Genoveva Perju Technical University of Iasi, Romania ICBE 2007
  • 2. Magnitude Description of Effectless than Usually felt by only a few people near the epicenter. 3.4 Felt by people who are indoors and some outdoors; vibrations3.5 - 4.2 similar to a passing truck. Felt by many people; windows rattle, dishes disturbed, standing4.3 - 4.8 cars rock. Felt by everyone; dishes break and doors swing, unstable objects4.9 - 5.4 overturn. Some damage to buildings; plaster cracks, bricks fall, chimneys5.5 - 6.1 damaged. Much building damage; houses move on their foundations,6.2 - 6.9 chimneys fall, furniture moves. Serious damage to buildings; bridges twist, walls fracture, many7.0 - 7.3 masonry buildings collapse.7.4 - 7.9 Causes great damage; most buildings collapse.greater Causes extensive damage; waves seen on the ground surface, than 8.0 objects thrown into the air. ICBE 2007
  • 3. ICBE 2007
  • 4. Earthquakes - 1996ICBE 2007
  • 5. Hawaii is the state at greatestrisk for a tsunami. They getabout one a year, with adamaging tsunami happeningabout every seven years. Alaskais also at high risk. California,Oregon and Washingtonexperience a damaging tsunamiabout every 18 years. Tsunami Damage, Indian Damage at the Mauna Kea Beach Resort: (a) Ocean December 26, 2004 structural damage at an elevator shaft and (b) ICBE 2007 severe cracking at expansion joint
  • 6. Forecasting Theory- Moving Average Risk ICBE 2007
  • 7. Identifying the risk from the average expected annualized losses at earthquake• (Porter et.others , 2004 ) ∞ EAL = V ∫ y ( s )v ( s )ds s =0• where:• V denotes value exposed to loss (e.g., replacement cost of the building);• s refers to some seismic intensity measure;• y(s) is the mean seismic vulnerability function, defined here as the average level of loss as a fraction of V given an occurrence of s;• v(s) is the average annual frequency of experiencing shaking intensity s. ICBE 2007
  • 8. Identifying the risk from the average expected annualized losses at earthquake 8 EAL = ∫ V y ( s )v ( s )ds s=1 =7V * y (c ) * v( c)• y (c ) and v (c ) are the mean values of the seismic vulnerability function respectively of the annual frequency of experiencing a shaking intensity s.• We consider one medium probability of loss occurrence at a medium value of the shaking magnitude. y (c)= [1 0.75 0.5 0.33 0.25] ICBE 2007
  • 9. Identifying the risk from the average expected annualized losses at earthquakeLoss probability 100% 75% 50% 33% 25%Frequency1/1 (1.0) 7V 5.25 V 3.5 V 2.31V 1.75V½ (0.5) 3.5 V 2.65 V 0.25 V 0.17 V 0.13 V1/3 (0.33) 2.33 V 0.25 V 0.165 V 0.11 V 0.08 V¼ (0.25) 1.75 V 0.19 V 0.125 V 0.08 V 0.06 V1/5 (0.2) 1.4 V 0.15 V 0.1 V 0.07 V 0.05 V1/6 (0.16) 1.12 V 0.12 V 0.08 V 0.05 V 0.04 V1/7 (0.14) 0.98 V 0.11 V 0.07 V 0.05 V 0.04 V1/8 (0.12) 0.84 V 0.09 V 0.06 V 0.04 V 0.03 V1/9 (0.11) 0.77 V 0.08 V 0.055 V 0.04 V 0.03 V1/10 (0.1) 0.7 V 0.08 V 0.05 V 0.03 V 0.03 V ICBE 2007
  • 10. Identifying the risk from the average expected annualized losses at earthquakeLoss 100% 75% 50% 33% 25%probabilityFrequency1/1 (1.0) Unacceptab Unacceptab Unacceptab Unacceptab Unacceptab le risk le risk le risk le risk le risk½ (0.5) Unacceptab Unacceptab Medium Medium Medium le risk le risk risk risk risk1/3 (0.33) Unacceptab Medium Medium Medium Low risk le risk risk risk risk¼ (0.25) Unacceptab Medium Medium Low risk Low risk le risk risk risk1/5 (0.2) Unacceptab Medium Low risk Low risk Low risk le risk risk1/6 (0.16) Unacceptab Medium Low risk Low risk Low risk le risk risk1/7 (0.14) High risk Medium Low risk Low risk Low risk risk1/8 (0.12) High risk Low risk Low risk Low risk Low risk1/9 (0.11) High risk Low risk Low risk Low risk Low risk1/10 (0.1) High risk ICBE 2007 Low risk Low risk Low risk Low risk
  • 11. Conclusions• The seismic risk with low frequency of occurrence and low proximity of loss should be ignored and therefore not insured. We refer here to losses below 10% of the initial value of the building that in any case are not covered by insurance because of deductibles.• In case of an earthquake occurrence of once in every year the risk is unacceptable and disinvestment should be considered as option.• For frequencies of occurrence of once in one year and once in two years the seismic risk cannot be mitigated through diversification and therefore unacceptable for insurer too.• The only insurable risk is the medium towards high level of seismic risk. If the expected losses exceed 80% of the initial investment the decisions of risk mitigation should involve disinvestment or governmental aid. ICBE 2007

Related Documents