My experience: still shaking, and have just had another really big one now. Hubby just arrived and we're off to the outdoor pool with the (very worried) kids to try & relax a bit (or failing that, to the Ashley river if it's closed. Hopefully not too much risk there). Not feeling like being indoors right now. What a start to the holiday.

FROM RICCARTON CHRISTCHURCH

Just so disruptive a day or two prior to Christmas, with the Malls choka with people (my wife was in Riccaron Mall when the first one struck). People react to them differently of course.

Seems like we have had a couple of short duration (length of time is an important factor)5.8's off Brighton 20 km or so at ashallow depth of about 8 k./ Another smallish one as Im typing this.

Power and water out it would appear in parts of the east. Roads seem OK.

It seems likely we will get more of them over the next day or two.

4 Sept 2010 - 7.1 mag; 22 February 2011 - 6.3 mag; 13 June 2011 - 6.3 mag; 23 Dec 2011 - 5.8 mag.

Seems like these events are playing out as the experts predicted. Most destructive were the Feb and June events centred at Lyttelton Tunnel and Taylors Mistake respectively, being close and shallow, generating greater g forces. Highest recorded in an urban area globally by accelerometres, which I understand are located in many schools now.

The Royal Society / Institution of Engineers did a superb report (with excellent maps) on this following the Feb event - accessible about 15 articles down in the Article of Note Section on my website www.PerformanceUrbanPlanning.org .

Its not so much the magnitude - more the closeness and shallowness which causes most of the problems. This particular one today appears to be a north / south subsiduary fault that runs along the north / east side of Banks Peninsula north up through Pegasus Bay. Mainly focused directly off Brighton - hence most of the problems on the coastal east, with Parklands in particular.

 "Canterbury Quake Live" is a superb website for information on this issue.

Hugh Pavletich

www.PerformanceUrbanPlanning.org

Of greater concern is the location and shallowness off the coast....that screams out get off the beach...

Awful news and at the worst possible time! I wish geonet would get some ‘real’ seismologists in from America who could explain what the hell is going on down there with all these slipping faults around Christchurch. Our own lot certainly don’t seem to know. Nevertheless my thoughts and prayers are with everybody in Christchurch. Merry Christmas Canterbury and I hope these will be the last of the big ones that you’ll have to endure for a very very long time.

FYI updated with economists' comments on quakes lasting four more years and potentially delaying the rebuild again.

Bernard

This is the one that I would look closely at....very shallow...offshore....

It was said that there would likely be more large quakes...they did their best and were right but nobody can put a time on these things...as for the economists..they fit into the spin zone and are best ignored especially those that work for banks.

FYI some good news from Moody's this evening. It has kept NZ's sovereign credit rating at Aaa with a stable outlook.

Details here:

New Zealand's Aaa ratings are based on the country's high economic strength,
very high institutional and government financial strength, and low
susceptibility to event risk. New Zealand's flexible and market-oriented
economic policies have supported economic performance that has become
stronger and less subject to external shocks. Although per capita income is
at the low end of the Aaa range, it is nonetheless high by global standards.
The relatively small scale of the economy is also a factor considered in
assessing economic strength. Institutional strength is very high, as
measured by governance, rule of law, and transparency. In addition, Moody's
believes that the government, of whichever party, will maintain a policy of
low debt and fiscal soundness.

With a relatively low level of debt and assured access to liquidity, the
government's financial strength is very high. While the fiscal metrics have
been negatively affected by the effects of the global financial crisis,
ensuing recession, and major earthquakes that struck the country in 2010 and
2011, the government that came into office in late 2008 and was recently
re-elected indicated its intention to return debt to a prudent level. Gross
government debt should peak at below 40% of GDP before beginning to decline.
Moody's believes that the debt trajectory and the policies to deal with the
recent shocks remain compatible with a Aaa rating.

The external liability position will remain high. However, there are several
factors that make the large external liability position less risky than it
might appear, including the high proportion of liabilities denominated in NZ
dollars and of foreign currency liabilities that are hedged, and the
related-party nature of much of bank liabilities. The composition of the
external liability position supports an assessment of low susceptibility to
event risk.

Rating Outlook

The stable outlook is anchored by the government's low debt relative to most
other Aaa-rated countries and Moody's belief that New Zealand will continue
with fiscal and monetary discipline and market-oriented policies.

What Could Change the Rating - Down

Inability to correct the upward government debt trajectory in the next few
years could cause the rating to move down. A major problem with access to
external finance that affected not only New Zealand and the Australian banks
that operate in the country would also pressure the rating.

I was in a city  board room full of structural engineers when the EQs hit this afternoon, they provided an interesting commentary and are the most calm people to be  around during an EQ. Their calmness is catching.

Upon reflection I do wonder if we should stay given the effect on our children.

We divested financially after Feb. as the reports all provided a concensus in findings . As a couple we have seen the main reports that were released and discussed them in depth, they  all have  a similar theme, regular six EQs will likely occur for approx. five years with increased  activity for twenty-thirty years.

We have this built into our expectations and considered carefully before deciding to stay . To keep people positive it appears the media have been asked not to disclose or are not aware of the reports commissioned?

The bank economist comments make me wonder if the embargo of non disclosure to the masses is starting to break.

I mentioned these reports without the details earlier this year for those interested to investigate and decided for themselves with the advantage of having information before it hits the mainstream.

Suspect the debate is going mainstream so decided to be a little more explicit for the benefit for those in Canterbury who may read this. The experience todate has always suggested this was going to be a long hard road. 

All the best.

I have hard copies, have not looked on the internet. Will have a look...

" regular six EQs will likely occur for approx. five years with increased  activity for twenty-thirty years."

That's dramatic, but fits in with the TV3 documentary I showed for years to year 9 and 10 students on NZ earthquakes. The implications for rebuilding CHCH are ominous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkTy6ogLDX8&lc=nTT73t5-ILJS8Mj8jY1kyjc2KZlR0Xb6ZkTdlcvA9gU&feature=inbox

RED ZONE / GREEN ZONE BOUNDARIES WRONG

Although much of the red zone areas obviously had significant damage again, some of the marginal red zone areas had next to no liquifaction while many former ORANGE zone (now GREEN) areas particularly the north end of Bower Ave and much of Queenspark/Parklands had the worst liquifaction this time round.

The fact is that the direction and location of the earthquake makes the most difference to where liquifaction occurs.

With the scale of liquifaction in Bower Ave in both February and June there is no way that the land in that area should have been green zoned IF areas in Avondale, Dallington, Richmond etc which had minimal liquifaction were zoned red.

CERA simply don't know what they are doing. 

Now insurers have got more excuses to buggerise round.  A solution is needed which doesn't involve more stupidity.

Even the slightest suggestion that slab on ground foundations are suitable in liquefiable areas is nonsense.

An entire rethink needs to happen to prevent a mass exodus.  Because there is no doubt large numbers of people leaving ChCh won't move to other parts of NZ but will leave to Aussie.

Another good little rumble just now.

But has anyone noticed the uncanny coincidence that the June 13 earthquakes occurred at:

1pm for the first high 5s quake followed by a big low 6s at 2.20pm

Today:

we had a the first high 5s quake at 1.58pm daylight saving time (= 2minutes to 1pm NZ standard time) and a big low 6s quake at 3.18pm (= 2minutes before 2.20pm NZ std time).

I find that a little uncanny!

Purely a coincidence but... yet again the big quake is hitting on or near the highest tide of the month much like June 13, April 16, March 20, Feb 22, Jan 20.

That's a bit uncanny too.

Can I just say that some of the reports of damage are nonsense.

People "trapped" at Windsor house - they simply evacuated the building because they didn't want hospital patients stuck on the second floor in case of a more major event.  The building isn't remotely compromised (a near new seismically strong building).

The house at Aynsley Tce part collapsed in February, it has sustained little new damage.

I haven't seen it, but I suspect the old bank building on Williams/Charles corner Kaiapoi isn't much worse.  It was on a major slope after September and has withstood the previous 3 quakes with only modest damage.

These Civil Defence people love hyping thing up so they can get out the bulldozers and take control.

We need the bureaucrats out so that sensible decisions get made.

Interesting that there have been about 75 shakes in total since 1.57pm when the major one struck - all off Brighton in the Pegasus Bay generally. None recorded in the city or to the west of the city.

Prior to the 1.57pm event there had been a few small ones a day, generally to the west of the city. Too small to notice in the city.

The Canterbury Quake Live website is excellent for the above information.

 "The quakes and resulting zoning decisions are likely to see thousands of Canterbury families on the move in the next year with many hoping to build a new home on solid ground"

 http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/business/your-property/5656558/Looking-for-a-section-in-Canterbury

First find your solid ground!...then look at the gst theft on a new home....and factor in the option of moving south or north to buy a sound old heart native timber bungalow on a larger section...no gst apart from on the legal bills.

Its rather remarkable when checking out Canterbury Quake Live how nearly all the aftershocks are focused pretty much off Brighton. Nothing much elsewhere - thankfully.

THE STAR GAZING ANZ ECONOMIST BAGRIE

So said the entetaining economist / astrologer Cameron Bagrie of the ANZ -

 "At this juncture, there is nothing much other than to look at the sky above" - as he lifted his 5% prediction of population loss up to 10%.

Who said economics is a "dismal science"?

In rough terms, up from about 20,000 people to something in the order of 40,000 leaving Christchurch. At roughly 2.5 people per household, that means what was about 8,000 less houses being required to now 16,000 less.

Bagrie could be right - because Key and Brownlee to date, have had no intention of allowing affordable housing to be built, on the fringes to the west, north and south, where the good ground is - something I have been exhorting them to do since the 4 September 2010 earthquake, near 16 months ago.

The sad reality is that Key and Brownlee are like scared bubble bunnies, rabbiting on about "preserving equity"  and doing their best to ensure that there is no affordable new housing supply ALLOWED to be supplied to people who are suffering extreme stress in their lives.

Their irresponsible behaviour, in my view, is beyond contempt.

 It is very clear to me, that their REAL interest is to protect the welfare of the Banks and their bubble mortgage books. And whatsmore - intend to persist in protecting the Banks interests, so that they can continue loading Kiwis up with grossly excessive mortgages. Particularly callous I think.

Deputy Prime Minister Bill English had spoken with uncharactaristic passion a few years back, about the desperate need for us to become a wealth creating economy - and to wean us off the illusory wealth addiction of flicking houses to each other.

Likely too - the Banks are huge contributors to the National Party - and when they say jump, all Key and Brownlee have to say is - "How high?".

In normal affordable housing markets - mortgages should not exceed about 2.5 times gross annual household income. Anything above that should be considered a "donation", to the Bankers Welfare Support Society.

Christchurch however is a low income city, where the median household income is in the order of $55,600 (this years Demographia Survey www.demographia.com ), while for example Auckland is nearer the $70,000 mark - around 25% higher.

And there are plenty of places in Australia people can go, where the incomes are higher and house prices are becoming increasingly affordable - particularly the smaller Australian cities.

As the co author of the Annual demographia International Housing Affordability Survey www.demographia.com , I am heartened to see how these smaller Local Authorities in Australia are waking up and dealing with these issues. The Kiwis in contrast prefer to watch the outwards migration numbers every month - and their kids leaving this country.

So it was CRITICALLY IMPORTANT for Brownlee and the Tired Tories (the first term policy management was a disgrace) to get on, to open land on the fringes to ALLOW (that's all) affordable supply - to ensure the population loss is arrested and reversed as quickly as possible.

STILL we have building tradespeople standing around in Christchurch, fantasizing that there is going to be a building boom at some stage - when there is no affordable land.

Dreamers.........Cargo Cult thinking.

In the east (where most of the damage is by a country mile), the median household incomes are in the order of $45,600. New sections currently out on the fringes are in the order of $200,000 - our disrupted construction costs are an inflated $1,200 per square metre plus - so that means a 200 square metre new home will cost $440,000 plus.

Thats near some 10 times the median household income of those in the east. This appears too much for Key and Brownlee to comprehend.

Christchurch is already rated "severely unaffordable" at a Median Multiple of 6 (Demographia Survey). New Orleans is close to 3.0 Median Multiple in contrast - so that it has greater capacity to recover.

I am strongly of the view, that Key and Brownlee are more interested in protecting the bubble values in Christchurch, so that the Banks are not "disadvantaged" - rather than actually dealing with the real issues, to allow Christchurch to recover and become an affordable opportunity city.

It really is difficult to understand how Key, Brownlee, Parker and Sutton can be so callous.

And no credit to the remnant Chardonney Socialists in Labour either - for treating this land supply issue, as an ideological opportunity to beat up on developer margins. Without of course, dealing with the artificial land scarcity and infrastructure financing issues.

No wonder they polled so badly in Christchurch. They deswerved to.

David Shearer clearly has a lot of fast work to do.

Mr Bagrie of the ANZ needs to understand (as he clearly has no development experience or knowledge), that the bubble values are a "goner" - as we either build new affordable housing stock or bust (with population loss) out of it.

If its the latter - it will be Key who will wear the political consequences - and deservedly so.

Its not the earthquakes that wear most of us down here in Christchurch. It is instead, the never ending incompetent political management at both central and local level.

Christchurch will sadly and UNNECESSARILY become "Ghost City" if this irresponsible political behaviour is allowed to continue.

Hugh Pavletich

www.PerformanceUrbanPlanning.org

The solutions for building in earthquake zones are there already, but they do cost. NZ is one of hte leaders in earthquake design, and learnt a lot from the kobe earthquakes.Things such as base isolation etc are one lateral resistant measure . It is used extensively in Wellington on the museum and old pariment buildings. But these are all about 'preserving life' and 'contents in the building' and not really about saving the building itself. The problem is that each time there is a quake, then a significant cost then must go back into the building to get it back up to standard. I don't think there is any easy solution for what is happening.

Prepare for the post xmas chch rebuild rehash promises....expect early 2013 to feature widely followed by mid 2013 and in the end ...late 2013..

Me...I favour a whole new pitch to the spin with some goof starting the "well the rebuild has been going well"  BS line.

Notice the way the media avoids discovering the Cantabs who moved asap to Ashburton and Rangiora or further afield....no more liquid factions for them to make piles out of.

Anyone seen English lately...I hear he is working out the finer points of a blather on why gst will be cut to 10% on new builds and how the IRD and councils consent records will fit in...seems the important bit is to spin the change as great govt policy from great ministers doing great things.

"so that we are in a better position to weather external shocks"

Well said, Hughey.

That's in the future, then? Not the past? We're agreed on that?

.Google images:   club of rome graph.

It's on track so far, Hughey.

Those who decried it (note the timelines) did so "because it hasn't happened", and did so in the 1970's. Why?  Ignorance? Fear? Belief? They were clearly too early to make a judgement, yet folk like Morgan continue to take that ignorant 'judgement' for 'gospel'.

How's that crowded 1/4 acre coming on?  Everyone richer yet? Got more oil/gold/food? No? Maybe you haven't packed enough people in yet

    :)