The earthquake that hit Kobe, Japan in on January 17, 1995 lasted about twenty (20) seconds but with a magnitude of 7.3 on the Richter scale, it was enough to kill 6,400 people and damage up to 120,000 structures. The disaster disrupted the nation’s economy as the earthquake destroyed Kobe’s seaport, wrecked railways, roads & bridges, and shut down numerous manufacturing facilities. Critics chided the government’s slow initial response amid the disbelief that Japan’s much vaunted earthquake-proof infrastructure did not withstand the tremblor.
In one week, however, electricity service was restored in Kobe. Gas and water supplies were fully operational in four (4) months. Industries resumed manufacturing and national production output was back on track. Four (4) years later, Kobe’s infrastructure was rebuilt.
From the lessons learned from the Kobe earthquake, the Japanese reinforced many roads, buildings, & bridges and revised disaster response policies. Japanese engineers since then had continuously invested time & resources to better improve structural designs such that they would withstand another strong earthquake like the one that hit Kobe.
The big test of their improvements came on March 11, 2011 when a magnitude 9 earthquake hit the Tohoku region north of Tokyo. The earthquake and accompanying tsunami killed an estimated 20,000 people and destroyed roads, bridges, and railways. The tsunami overwhelmed seashore defences at the Fukushima nuclear power plant and caused a catastrophic meltdown. The economic impact was estimated at $USD 360 billion.
Most of Tokyo’s high-rise buildings, however, survived the swaying and came out practically unscathed. Engineers attributed this to ongoing improvements in structural design since the Kobe earthquake although the Japanese were once again shocked by the unprecedented damage and deaths. Critics again complained that the government was slow in responding to the disaster.
Ten years later, in 2021, Japan virtually recovered from the Tohoku earthquake with most infrastructure restored (except for the damaged nuclear power plant which will probably entail decades of cleaning up radioactive materials). Engineers may have learned lessons from the 1995 Kobe earthquakes but officials concluded that they needed to do better.
If there was common denominator in the lessons learned from Kobe and Tohoku earthquakes, it was that we should not believe we can learn everything we need to know from one or even two disasters. There will always be something we didn’t foresee, something we did not expect. We should always be anticipating different scenarios and seeking solutions to potential problems.
There was one other lesson.
Disasters may not happen often, but it doesn’t mean another won’t happen again and with much worse effect. Disasters occur when we least expect it and even though we may be able to predict or anticipate some of them, they likely can still hit us with more damage and disruption that we thought.
Of course, there are disasters which don’t turn out worse than we anticipated. A typhoon may veer at the last minute, sparing our cities. Or an unexpected heavy rain puts out a forest fire which was threatening a community. Before a container ship collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge at Baltimore in the early morning of March 26, 2024, first responders stopped traffic heading to the bridge in about 90 seconds after the harbour pilots issued a mayday alert; many motorists and riders (except for an unfortunate construction crew) were saved from tragedy as a result.
It’s not only that we learn a lot to mitigate the impacts from future disasters; but it’s also we realise there will be new lessons when they do occur. Every disaster is unique and thus we should always be open to learn new lessons when and after they happen.
The Japanese accept their country is prone to disastrous earthquakes, not to mention tsunamis, typhoons, and even threats from neighbouring nations. What is going for them is that they don’t give up learning, despite whatever frustrations they may feel when what they thought were solutions to risks didn’t prevent heavy casualties and losses.
The Japanese know they must not only learn from their mistakes but also that they should explore potential ones. We must identify and solve problems even though they may at the moment be just figments of our imaginations.
It is not risk management, but engineering for risk.
Ellery's Essays 