skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Seismic Risk in Large Cities of Caucasus: Tools for Risk Management


No abstract prepared.

;  [1]
  1. Institute of Geophysics, Academy of Sciences of Georgia, Tbilisi (Georgia)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: AIP Conference Proceedings; Journal Volume: 825; Journal Issue: 1; Conference: International workshop on recent geodynamics, georisk and sustainable development in the Black Sea to Caspian Sea region, Baku (Azerbaijan), 3-6 Jul 2005; Other Information: DOI: 10.1063/1.2190743; (c) 2006 American Institute of Physics; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States

Citation Formats

Chelidze, Tamaz, and Javakhishvili, Zurab. Seismic Risk in Large Cities of Caucasus: Tools for Risk Management. United States: N. p., 2006. Web. doi:10.1063/1.2190743.
Chelidze, Tamaz, & Javakhishvili, Zurab. Seismic Risk in Large Cities of Caucasus: Tools for Risk Management. United States. doi:10.1063/1.2190743.
Chelidze, Tamaz, and Javakhishvili, Zurab. Thu . "Seismic Risk in Large Cities of Caucasus: Tools for Risk Management". United States. doi:10.1063/1.2190743.
title = {Seismic Risk in Large Cities of Caucasus: Tools for Risk Management},
author = {Chelidze, Tamaz and Javakhishvili, Zurab},
abstractNote = {No abstract prepared.},
doi = {10.1063/1.2190743},
journal = {AIP Conference Proceedings},
number = 1,
volume = 825,
place = {United States},
year = {Thu Mar 23 00:00:00 EST 2006},
month = {Thu Mar 23 00:00:00 EST 2006}
  • This article reviews city case studies to inform a framework for developing urban infrastructure design standards and policy instruments that together aim to pursue energy efficiency and greenhouse gas mitigation through city carbon budgets and water use efficiency and climate risk adaptation through city water budgets. Here, this article also proposes combining carbon and water budgeting at the city-scale for achieving successful coupled city carbon and water budget (CCCWB) programs. Under a CCCWB program, key actors including local governments, infrastructure designers/operators, and households would be assigned a GHG emissions and water 'budget' and be required by state or federal levelsmore » to keep within this budget through the use of flexibility mechanisms, incentive programs, and sanctions. Multiple incentives and cross-scale governance arrangements would be tied to energy-water systems integration, resource-efficient transportation and infrastructure development, and effective monitoring and management of energy use, emissions, climate risks to, and security of energy-water-transport-food and other critical systems. As a first step to promote strategies for CCCWB development, we systematically review approaches of and shortcomings to existing budget-based programs in the UK and US, and suggest improvements in three areas: measurement, modeling effectiveness of interventions for staying within a budget, and governance. To date, the majority of climate action or sustainability plans by cities, while mentioning climate impacts as a premise for the plan, do not address these impacts in the plan. They focus primarily on GHG mitigation while ignoring resource depletion challenges and energy-climate-water linkages, whereby water supplies can begin to limit energy production and energy shifts to mitigate climate change can limit water availability. Coupled carbon-water budget plans, programs, and policies - described in this study- may address these concerns as well as the emerging trends that will exacerbate these problems - e.g., including population growth, climatic changes, and emerging policy choices that are not coordinated. Cities and 'Budget-Based' Management of the Energy-Water-Climate Nexus: Case Studies to Inform Strategy for Integrated Performance- and Incentive-Based Design and Policy Instruments.« less
  • Recently, Italian urban planning research in the field of seismic risk mitigation are renewing. In particular, it promotes strategies that integrate urban rehabilitation and aseismic objectives, and also politicizes that are directed to revitalizes urban systems, coupling physical renewal and socio-economic development.In Italy the first law concerning planning for seismic mitigation dates back 1974, the law n. 64 'Regulation for buildings with particular rules for the seismic areas' where the rules for buildings in seismic areas concerning also the local hazard. This law, in fact, forced the municipalities to acquire, during the formation of the plans, a preventive opinion ofmore » compatibility between planning conditions and geomorphology conditions of the territory. From this date the conviction that the seismic risk must be considered inside the territorial planning especially in terms of strategies of mitigation has been strengthened.The town planners have started to take an interest in seismic risk in the [80]s when the Irpinia's earthquake took place. The researches developed after this earthquake have established that the principal cause of the collapse of buildings are due to from the wrong location of urban settlements (on slopes or crowns) After Irpinia's earthquake the first researches on seismic risk mitigation, in particular on the aspects related to the hazards and to the urban vulnerability were made.« less
  • Bussana Vecchia has been declared of important historical-cultural interest according to the laws D.Lgs.490/1999 and DDG made by the Ministry of Cultural Goods in date 11/12/2000, that has registered the historic core on the State property. The design proposals individuated in the research summarized in this paper, constitute a set of interventions aimed at favouring the liveability improvement and revitalizing of the fabric of the city, in order to return enjoyable spaces and structures for social and cultural activities to the context. In this paper a significant experience is related, through which it has been possible to test the methodologymore » concerning the seismic damage scenarios assessment, aimed at the prevention in the usual procedures of governance (dedicated policies and instruments)« less
  • As dumps fill and new landfills and incinerators are blocked by public resistance, recyling will have to take up the slack by jumping to a much higher level. The difficulty of making large scale changes in the way we manage trash is demonstrated by waste management in New York and Los Angeles, between them generating 8% of the nation's garbage. Both have destructive, but distracting management plans. New York's plans include major expansion of incinerator capacity, while Los Angeles with its air quality problems has turned to landfills as a management solution. Recycling has been slow to get started inmore » New York, while Los Angeles has been creative in recycling efforts. However, even in Los Angeles, recycling is handicapped by the spector of landfills. The possibility of an Asian market for recycled goods makes trash recycling in the US at least viable, while a domestic market would make it thrive.« less
  • Nuclear power plants should safely operate during normal operations and maintain core-cooling capabilities during off-normal events, including external hazards (such as flooding and earthquakes). Management of external hazards to expectable levels of risk is critical to maintaining nuclear facility and nuclear power plant safety. Seismic risk is determined by convolving the seismic hazard with seismic fragilities (capacity of systems, structures, and components). Seismic isolation (SI) is one protective measure showing promise to minimize seismic risk. Current SI designs (used in commercial industry) reduce horizontal earthquake loads and protect critical infrastructure from the potentially destructive effects of large earthquakes. The benefitmore » of SI application in the nuclear industry is being recognized and SI systems have been proposed in American Society of Civil Engineer Standard 4, ASCE-4, to be released in the winter of 2014, for light water reactors facilities using commercially available technology. The intent of ASCE-4 is to provide criteria for seismic analysis of safety related nuclear structures such that the responses to design basis seismic events, computed in accordance with this standard, will have a small likelihood of being exceeded. The U.S. nuclear industry has not implemented SI to date; a seismic isolation gap analysis meeting was convened on August 19, 2014, to determine progress on implementing SI in the U.S. nuclear industry. The meeting focused on the systems and components that could benefit from SI. As a result, this article highlights the gaps identified at this meeting.« less