A week after the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, more news articles and discussions are focusing on why so many buildings – in particular the over 9000 destroyed schools – collapsed.
The answer to that question is very simple and has nothing to do with prejudgement: absolutely no construction quality.
That was my very first thought when I heard about the quake (I didn’t feel it myself in Hong Kong though many others did). Sadly but true, Mainland China is well-known for saving wherever it can even if enough money is available, and most of the times the savings go into some local officials’ and constructors’ pockets.
How would you interpret the following sentence?
“All 61 schools funded by Hong Kong charity group Sowers Action were still standing after the quake and no casualties were reported at them – including 7 near the epicentre in Wenchuan County.”
You would probably come to the same conclusion as I did. As the group’s chief executive Johnny Leung Kin-wah points it out: mainland authorities were particularly concerned about the quality of projects involving foreign capital.
In theory, all constructions in China are required to meet certain seismic standards designed to protect buildings from a shaking level measured on a scale of 1 to 9. While these requirements vary among counties according to their geology, it is a general rule that kindergarten and primary schools are up 1 level from other buildings in that same region. Ironically, mostly schools suffered the greatest damage. Furthermore, why won’t secondary schools have to meet the 1-up requirement?
The best magnitude level system can’t protect buildings which can be teared down with a hammer by a single man. “Schools built in the 1980s were mostly made of wood and stones. It was not until the 1990s that they started to build concrete houses,” says Philip Lam Chak of the Amity Foundation.
Comments