Tohoku Earthquake 2011 – Case Study
In 2011, an undersea megathrust earthquake occurred off the coast of Japan. It was the most
powerful earthquake to ever hit Japan, and the fifth most powerful earthquake in the world
since modern record keeping began in 1900. The earthquake triggered a series of devastating
events including a Tsunami, and produced so much energy that low orbiting satellites in space
detected sound waves from the event.
Working with a partner, conduct some research to answer the following questions regarding
the Tohoku Earthquake and consequent Tsunami. Compile your research into a presentation
(such as keynote, informative report, news article), and submit to the teacher for feedback
and marking. Your presentation can include information and facts that go beyond the
questions below, and it is recommended you include pictures, images or graphs to support
your information. Some links to helpful resources can be found at the end of this document.
Your presentation must include a bibliography and the dates you accessed any websites. Any
images used should also be cited.
Part 1: Focus on the Earthquake
1. On what date did the earthquake occur?
2. What was the magnitude of the quake?
3. How much energy was released?
4. What was the location of the quake (nearest city and country)?
5. What was the location of the quake (latitude N/S and Longitude E/W)?
6. What was the depth of the epicentre?
7. What was the depth of the hypocentre?
8. What caused the earthquake? (Identify plates involved and specific plate interaction)
9. Include a seismogram of the Earthquake.
10. How many foreshocks were felt? (You may also need to define this term)
11. How many aftershocks were felt? (You may also need to define this term)
Part 2: Tsunami
1. What causes a tsunami to form?
2. What is the speed of the moving water in the deep ocean? In shallow oceans? (Using
diagrams here would be beneficial)
3. What happens to a tsunami when it approaches the shore?
4. How is a tsunami different to a tidal wave?
5. What is the Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre? Did they release a warning prior to the
tsunami that followed the Tohoku earthquake?
6. What was the average height of the tsunami wave produced by the Tohoku quake?
7. Where did the highest wave hit? What was its estimated height?
8. How far inland did the tsunami travel?
9. How long after the earthquake did the tsunami reach Japan?
10. What was the total land area (in metres squared) that was affected by the tsunami?
11. How high and long was the upthrust that caused the tsunami?
12. How much debris was swept offshore by the tsunami? What happened to this debris?
Part 3: Impacts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
How many people lost their lives? How many were injured?
How many people were displaced?
How many buildings were destroyed?
How far did the earthquake shift the Japanese island of Honshu? And in which
direction?
The energy released by the quake was so massive it physically shifted the Earth on its
axis and mass was redistributed across the globe. How far do scientists estimate the
Earth was shifted?
What is the estimated cost of the damage?
What was the extent of the damage? Consider the following:
a. Ports and shipping industry
b. Dams and water problems
c. Electricity
d. Oil and gas refineries (including explosions)
e. Fukushima meltdown
Has Japan fully recovered from this disaster? Explain your answer.
Part 4: Was Japan prepared?
1. How are Japanese buildings designed to withstand the impacts of an earthquake?
2. How are children prepared for earthquakes?
3. Do warning systems exist for disasters such as earthquakes and tsunamis? How do
they work?
4. What specialist structures (other than buildings) have the Japanese built to help
defend against disasters?
5. What are tsunami shelters and where are they located?
6. Given that Japan has numerous strategies in place to help protect against earthquakes
and tsunamis, why was the impact of the Tohoku earthquake so devastating? Evaluate
the preparedness of Japan for this disaster, and suggest possible ways preparation
could be improved in the future.
Useful links:
http://www.livescience.com/39110-japan-2011-earthquake-tsunami-facts.html
http://geol105naturalhazards.voices.wooster.edu/facts-about-the-2011-tohoku-japantsunami/
http://www.japan-talk.com/jt/new/21-scary-statistics-about-the-2011-japan-earthquake
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqinthenews/2011/usc0001xgp/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthquake_and_tsunami
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/17/world/asia/japan-earthquake---tsunami-fast-facts/
http://theweek.com/article/index/213101/japans-remarkable-disaster-preparation-4theories#axzz34qK7opjy
http://www.frumforum.com/japans-remarkable-disaster-readiness/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amy-chavez/japan-the-most-prepared-n_b_836033.html
http://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/structural/earthquake-resistantbuildings.htm
Marking rubric for Presentation
Assessment criteria
1
2
3
4
Knowledge of
content, ideas and
concepts
Basic grasp of
concepts and ideas;
points lack
development or
depth.
The answer is
relevant and
accurate. Reasonable
knowledge.
Sound and frequent
evidence of
thorough, detailed
and accurate
knowledge
Strong evidence of
thorough, detailed
and accurate
knowledge
Critical
understanding of
content, ideas and
concepts
Incomplete, basic.
Reasonable critical
understanding of
concepts and
principles with some
use of specialist
vocabulary.
Sound and frequent
evidence of critical
understanding of
concepts and
principles, and of
specialist vocabulary.
Strong evidence of
critical
understanding of
concepts and
principles and of
specialist vocabulary.
Use of examples to
support statements/
argument
Superficial
Examples show
imbalances and/or
lack detail or depth.
Examples are
developed, balanced
and support the
argument.
Examples are well
developed and
integrated.
Maps/Diagrams/
Images
None
Ineffective
Effective
Fully integrated
(referred to in-text)
Evidence of
synopticity (effective
summary of relevant
information):
No evidence
Limited
Strong
High
Some ability to
identify, interpret
and synthesise
limited information.
Some ability to
identify, interpret
and synthesise a
range of information.
There is a high level
of insight, and an
ability to identify,
interpret and
synthesise a wide
range of information.
Explanations,
arguments and
evaluation are direct,
focused, logical,
perceptive, mature,
purposeful, and are
expressed coherently
and confidently.
Connections
between different
aspects of the
subject
Quality of
communication –
the degree to which
the presentation is
constructed,
developed and
concluded
Language is basic;
statements/explanati
ons are partial, over
simplified and lacking
clarity.
Little or no sense of
focus of task.
Statements/explanat
ions and evaluation
are not fully
developed nor
expressed clearly,
and the organisation
of ideas is simple and
shows imbalances.
Some sense of focus
of task.
Explanations,
statements and
evaluation are
accurate, direct,
logical, purposeful,
expressed with
clarity and generally
balanced. Clear
sense of focus of
task.
Sourcing
information (other
than links provided)
Limited sources used
(up to 5)
More extensive use
of sources (up to 10)
Extensive use of
appropriate and
diverse sources
Bibliography
Referencing done
incorrectly – dates
not given for website
access,
pictures/images not
sourced.
Referencing is mostly
correct, but some
aspects are
incomplete or
missing information
Referencing is
detailed and includes
diverse sources,
dates of access for
websites and sources
for pictures/images
used.