Tom Inglesby, director of the Center for Biosecurity, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, said that the U.S. first and foremost should continue its extensive initiatives to prevent a nuclear terror incident, but that we need to acknowledge the fact that those efforts may not ultimately work. He was interviewed by Randy Larsen, on Federal News Radio as part of its Science and National Security series.

Inglesby said that despite how difficult the scenario may be for Americans to imagine, we have to accept “this could happen” because then people “at least will be familiar with what it could be like” so they can be prepare.

The Center for Biosecurity, a leading academic hub for community readiness and engagement, recently held a conference, “Preparing to Save Lives and Recover After a Nuclear Detonation: Implications for U.S. Policy”. A focus of the parley was reducing the number of casualties in a nuclear incident and the role of the public in that effort. I previously wrote about the conference report highlighting the comments of White House aide, Dr. Tammy Taylor who “noted that it is essential to educate people in advance because officials will not have accurate information immediately, and protective action will be effective only if people know what to do directly following the detonation.”

In the interview (audio file here), Inglesby offered the public advice on what they should know about responding to a nuclear incident. He said the most important step is finding adequate shelter because taking protective actions for 24 hours reduces risk from radioactive fallout. Inglesby differentiated between “good shelter” (inside a building, deeper and lower the better) and ”bad shelter” (in a car or in small single-story structure).

He said that the government is beginning to more openly present this kind of information, particularly with the publication last year of the “Planning Guidance For Response To A Nuclear Detonation” guide from the U.S. Homeland Security Council.

The challenge, of course, as we’ve discussed frequently on the blog is how officials engage the public and the media on this delicate topic in a constructive way that is not dismissed as fearmongering.

“The high-altitude nuclear weapon-generated electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is one of a small number of threats that has the potential to hold our society seriously at risk and might result in defeat of our military forces. The damage level could be sufficient to be catastrophic to the Nation, and our current vulnerability invites attack.

Briefly, a single nuclear weapon exploded at high altitude above the United States will interact with the Earth’s atmosphere, ionosphere, and magnetic field to produce an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) radiating down to the Earth and additionally create electrical currents in the Earth. EMP effects are both direct and indirect. The former are due to electromagnetic “shocking” of electronics and stressing of electrical systems, and the latter arise from the damage that “shocked”-upset, damaged, and destroyed-electronics controls then inflict on the systems in which they are embedded. The indirect effects can be even more severe than the direct effects.”

At a U.S. House Homeland Security Subcommittee hearing earlier this Summer, “Securing The Modern Electric Grid From Physical And Cyber Attacks,” Chair Yvette Clarke (D-NY) noted in her opening statement: “Though we may no longer fear a nuclear attack from Soviet Russia, rogue adversaries (including North Korea and Iran) possess and test high altitude missiles that could potentially cause a catastrophic pulse across the grid.”

The EMP threat has also received more attention as a result of a best-selling novel about an electrical shutdown by William Forstchen, One Second After. Forstchen has a web site with information on EMP preparedness here.

There is some debate over the seriousness of the threat and how significant the nation’s response should be to it. Michael Crowley wrote a skeptical article on the subject for The New Republic earlier this summer:

“‘EMP is real,’” agrees Joe Cirincione, a nuclear weapons expert who now runs a pro-disarmament think tank, the Ploughshares Fund. But, as Cirincione notes, few analysts take the threat very seriously. The odds that Iran or North Korea would prefer a technologically untested Rube Goldberg scheme to merely nuking us seem slim. And any terrorist group able to execute such a plan was probably capable enough to get us one way or another anyhow.”

Beginning on Tuesday, there is a conference examining the EMP issue, “Protecting America from Permanent Continental Shutdown from Electromagnetic Pulse, in Niagara Falls, New York sponsored by EmpactAmerica.

According to the Citizens Corps website, the event “will allow attendees to share best practices on collaborative emergency planning, discuss preparedness outreach and education for targeted populations, learn innovative approaches to funding, hear updates on DHS/FEMA initiatives, get updates on findings from citizen preparedness research, network with other Citizen Corps participants and much more.” The conference schedule can be found here. The first-annual National Citizen Corps Achievement Awards will also be presented; the list of finalists (which includes, I mention proudly, my own New York City Citizen Corps) in the various categories can be found here.

I am looking forward to attending, because it is one of the only national events focused solely on citizen and community preparedness. I am also excited to meet some fellow CERT members from around the U.S.

You can follow the conference proceedings on the Citizen Corps Twitter feed here or on its newly-revamped website here. Information can also be found on the website of the International Association of Emergency Managers here. I will be posting written and video reports on the blog as well.

“Scientists and public health experts forecast that the impact of H1N1 may well worsen in the fall – when the regular flu season hits, or even earlier, when schools start to open – which is only five or six weeks away in some cases,” Secretary Sebelius said. “The goal of the Summit is to launch a national influenza campaign by bringing federal, state and local officials, emergency managers, educators and others together with the nation’s public health experts to build on and tailor states’ existing pandemic plans, share lessons learned and best practices during the spring and summer H1N1 wave, and discuss preparedness priorities.”

I think getting everyone in the room and around the table is a great idea in advance of the Fall. I hope and expect that there will be a good deal of focus on some of the citizen-related issues and questions that we have been discussing on the blog, such as school closings, work place sick leave and other community mitigation policies and procedures.

The National Congress is a part of the ReadyCommunities Partnership which was created by the Corporate Crisis Response Officers Association (CCROA) “as a non-profit, non-partisan organization that promotes best practices of the private and community sectors to augment local response capabilities and reinforce local infrastructure in the first 72 hours of a large scale crisis.” The conference is an opportunity for local responders, business, political, and community leaders to come together to make contacts, exchange information and best practices as well hear from national officials. (DHS Secretary Chertoff gave last year’s keynote address.) 

Organizers are now assembling the sponsors for the upcoming Congress in December. Sponsorships range from $1000-$5000. They include tickets to the event as well as the chance to participate in the event’s program development. To learn more about the sponsorship opportunities, contact Rosalie Wyatt at 703-399-6929 or rosaliejwyatt@gmail.com. You can also find out more about the Congress and the ReadyCommunities Partnership at rosaliejwyatt@gmail.com. You can also find out more about the Congress and the ReadyCommunities Partnership at www.nationalcongress.org.

The three-day Aspen workshops bring together the area’s leading officials and experts from the government, business, academic and non-profit sectors to present and discuss the status of preparedness.

The project is described on the Aspen Institute website:

Thanks to a generous grant from the Ford Foundation, the Aspen Institute’s Homeland Security Program has launched a two-year project that will assess five cities’ (namely, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, and New Orleans) preparedness for another 9/11-scale terror attack and another Hurricane Katrina-scale natural disaster. Moderated by program director, Clark Kent Ervin, the first of several roundtable discussions (at least one in each targeted city) was held in New York City on December 3-5 at the Ford Foundation’s offices.

Among the speakers and panelists were New York City Police Department Commissioner Ray Kelly; Deputy NYPD Commissioner for Intelligence and former top CIA official David Cohen; and the top FBI counterterrorism official in New York City, Mark Mershon. The invited guest list included homeland security think tank experts; foundation representatives; area university representatives, and key congressional staffers.

A report will ultimately be prepared that will identify best practices in these cities that can be replicated elsewhere in the nation. Gaps in preparedness will also be highlighted in this report, along with recommendations for closing such gaps. The report is intended to help set the homeland security/counterterrorism agenda for the new president and the new Congress taking office in January, 2009.

The Houston and New Orleans roundtables will be held later in the year.

The workshops are off-the-record so I cannot quote anything here. But the information I learn at the these discussions already have and will continue to help inform my work on this blog.