In Case Of Emergency, Read Blog

On Wednesday, China held its second National Day of Disaster Prevention and Reduction. May 12th is the anniversary of the 8.0-magnitude 2008 earthquake that hit the nation’s Sichuan Province. China joins Japan which has its Disaster Prevention Day on the anniversary of the catastrophic 1923 Tokyo earthquake.

Students drilling in Donghu Primary School, Nanchang City, Jiangxi Province

This blog has advocated the creation of a specific preparedness day in the U.S. in order to focus attention on citizen readiness. It would be the day each year that briefings would be held, drills would be conducted and emergency kits were filled. In a post last year, I explained why I believe it is the most realistic and effective way to implement officials’ citizen preparedness goals.

Students treating each other during an emergency drill held by Wanshouqiao Primary School, Yichang City

China’s preparedness day does not seem as extensive as Japan’s though there was public involvement. According to the Xinhua News Agency via ReliefWeb, the focus of the day (much in line with the current U.S. focus) was on building community preparedness:

[Read more →]

U.S Attorney General Eric Holder announced last week that Times Square bombing suspect Faisal Shahzad would likely be charged “with an act of terrorism transcending national borders, attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction [my italics], use of a destructive device during the commission of another crime, and explosives charges.”

I probably was not the only one struck by the use of “weapon of mass destruction” to describe the improvised explosive Shahzad was unable to detonate. Officials have said that the explosion and fire could have killed a lot of people in the busy area. But it would not have had nearly the scope of casualties resulting from some of the devices that are more commonly characterized as “weapons of mass destruction” (or WMD’s).

It may seem only semantic issue, but I would argue that the overly broad definition of WMD leads to confusion and a lack of public understanding of potential terror weapons. I have written about this subject before in regard to the WMD Commission. Its report last year argued that biological and nuclear weapons are much more serious (and are more accurately described as “mass weapons of destruction”) than chemical or radiological devices.

At present, it is most common to define a WMD for the public as a nuclear, biological, chemical and radiological device. The Commission report, however, pointedly focused primarily on the dangers of biological and nuclear terrorism, both of which could be absolutely catastrophic. By contrast, a chemical or radiological weapon could be very serious but would likely not cause as much lasting damage — closer in result to a more ‘traditional’ explosive such as the Times Square device. That’s why I think that the nuclear and biological should be put in a different category than the others.

Wikipedia details the range of definitions for “weapon of mass destruction” employed by different institutions. Most use the four weapon types. But under U.S  Criminal Law, “any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas—bomb, grenade, rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces [113 grams], missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce [7 grams]…” is considered a “weapon of mass destruction”.

I believe that a vital part of educating and engaging Americans on terrorism is to give them a more precise sense of potential terror weapons. Combining nuclear and biological with chemical and radiological (and then adding traditional explosives) just muddies that understanding (particularly if security officials and other experts themselves have already decoupled them).

And while it may only be a matter of words, I would argue that the confusion hurts public preparedness efforts. Getting citizens to understand these distinctions is important not only so they are better prepared for each of them, but because it allows policymakers and responders to focus time, money and attention on the most dangerous challenges. I’m not saying that Shahzad and other terrorists (ie. alleged ‘Christmas Day Underwear Bomber’ Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was charged under the same statute) should not receive any less punishment if they are convicted for using ‘conventional’ weapon. I just think there are valid public communications reasons for not calling their actions ‘use of weapon of mass destruction’.

If the Nashville flood, the Oklahoma tornadoes, the Gulf Coast oil spill and the Times Square attempted bombing haven’t persuaded the public to think about preparing for an emergency, maybe news that Accuweather forecaster Joe Bastardi is predicting this year’s hurricane season will be in the “Top Ten” with 16 to 18 “named” storms will help do the trick.

According to Examiner.com,

The 2010 Atlantic hurricane season may rival some of the worst in history with meteorological conditions mirroring the 2005 season, the record-breaking year that spawned the Mississippi/New Orleans devastating hurricane named Katrina. According to Accuweather.com’s chief hurricane meteorologist, Joe Bastardi, not only will it be a very active hurricane season ahead, but it could even rank in the top 10 most active seasons.

Bastardi is predicting a total of 16 to 18 named storms this season. If this prediction comes to past, the 2010 hurricane season will rank in the top 10 with only 8 years in 160 years on record with seasons of 16 or more named storms. He also predicts the season will begin early and remain active well into the month of October. He cited a rapid warming of the Gulf of Mexico and the collapsing El Nino pattern for the heightened forecast activity. Both situations were characteristic of the busy 1998 and record-setting 2005 hurricane seasons.

Many of the tropical named storms are forecast to be long lived storms that may track far across the Atlantic and Caribbean from the coast of Africa to the U.S. Coastline with at least 6 possible strikes.

Colorado State forecaster William Gray also has predicted an above average season though not as severe as Bastardi’s prediction. Thanks to the Twitter feed of @Break_Glass for bringing this to my attention. Accuweather.com also has a related article that asks “What If A Hurricane Were To Slam Into The Oil Slick?”: The answer: nothing good.

The challenge of citizen preparedness is well illustrated by this letter to the editor to a newspaper in Canada during that nation’s Emergency Preparedness Week. I think anyone involved in public preparedness will empathize:

To the editor:

I guess everyone in Scugog Township is prepared for any emergency that may arise.

They must be, because at the end of Emergency Preparedness Week, on Saturday May 8, the No. 1 fire hall in Port Perry was open to everyone to learn about numerous ways to prepare for emergencies, and no one came.

I know my wife and I were not the only ones disappointed with the turnout. Five speakers were lined up to discuss anything and everything needed to prepare for disasters and emergencies of all kinds.

Some of the emergency situations noted in the past that have affected residents of Scugog were H1N1, increasing windstorms and severe summer weather numerous times, resulting in downed trees and other damage as well as the blackout of 2003.

Do you remember what you and your family went through during that blackout? Were you prepared? It could happen again. Will you be ready? Have you ever considered what could happen if flooding were to occur here? Think about broken dams, torrential rain and backed-up storm drains and septics.

At the seminar, tables were set up with giveaway information and supplies. Volunteers were on hand to inform and assist with information and to answer questions. Enbridge set up and prepared hot dogs, hamburgers and pop for visitors.

We want to thank the chief, the mayor and councillors and all the volunteers that were on hand for this event.

Bruno and Darlene Gauweiler Caesarea

Thanks to the Twitter feed of READYColorado for bringing this my attention.

Speaking at the Center For National Policy recently, Timothy Manning, FEMA Deputy Administrator for Protection & National Preparedness, said that the current statistics on citizen readiness “very concerning and frankly kind of frightening,” and he spoke about some of the agency’s efforts to strengthen the nation’s resilience to disasters.

At the Center’s event, “Disasters & Resilience,” Manning was questioned by the moderator Stephen Flynn, the Center’s new President, and one of the leading experts on the subject. The full text can be found here. It’s worth reading for those interested in preparedness policy.

In response to a question from Flynn about making preparedness and resilience part of the national culture, Manning acknowledged the challenge:

…the numbers are very concerning and frankly kind of frightening I think. We did a survey last year as part of our community preparedness programs, where we found the same numbers we’ve seen for a great number of years. So what we’ve been doing, we’ve been trying to engage the public for about 50 years in roughly the same way, all through the civil defense era, the Cold War, and to traditional emergency management now. And it’s really about PSAs and talking to the public about – some variation on have a plan, get involved. It’s really been about the same message and engaging the same way. And we’ve always seen the response engagement of the public in about 50 percent, hasn’t really moved. Slides a little bit here and there.

But what’s most concerning is that when you actually deconstruct that number and you ask, “have you actually done this, have you done this, have you done this,” the things that we mean when we say “are you prepared,” the number’s actually in the 30s. It’s actually about 37 or 40 percent. Most people, as like 67 percent of respondents, say that they plan on relying on government, that they won’t take any actions and they plan on relying on government in the first couple of days.

It’s very concerning. And we’re just discussing that the best response is the one we don’t have to mount. What we need to do is build our communities, build our societies to a point where they are prepared. But I think, like we’re trying to do across the whole spectrum of homeland security preparedness, we have to recognize our communities and we have to plan for the community, not just plan for easy. So we have – we say preparedness means this. Maybe we need to be a little bit more sophisticated than that. Maybe what we need to say is these are the things you can do to be prepared. But work at a more – work through our actual communities.

One interesting community-based initiative that Manning mentioned is an effort to build the preparedness of Los Angeles firefighters and their families to develop them as leaders (along the lines of the CERT program) in a potential disaster response.

FEMA’s Timothy Manning and Center for National Policy President Stephen Flynn

There were a number of preparedness and resilience related topics covered during the discussion. But I wanted to highlight one point that Manning addressed on whether the agency was embracing an “all hazards” philosophy:

[Read more →]

Jeannette Sutton, who writes the informative Disaster Sociologist blog for the Emergency Management magazine website, has a post about last week’s Information Systems for Crisis and Response (ISCRAM) conference. She reports that the role of new media in emergencies received more attention this year:

In the past, social and information scientists seemed to be on the outer margins of the conference. This year, there were four sessions focusing on collaboration and social networking – many of which discussed the use of new media in disaster and crisis response, specifically examining the use of Twitter.

Sutton highlights four papers presented at the meeting “about how Twitter is actively used by members of the public on the ground”:

[Read more →]

On the Canadian Red Cross’s blog, Red Cross Talks, John Saunders, “Disaster Dude/Director of Disaster Management, Ontario,” has a post, Twittering About Emergency Preparedness. Saunders says that Twitter has helped the organization reach an audience — “Upward mobile, professionals between ages 30 – 45″ — which he says is often difficult to get to on preparedness:

“I’ve been on Twitter (@CRCSaunders) for a few months now, and I can already see the benefits. The audience that I engage with there are the group hardest to get with the preparedness message. Upward mobile, professionals between ages 30 – 45 are busy with their career, dating, family, mortgages, etc. Getting this group to think about ‘bad stuff’ that might happen while they are struggling with the current is a challenge.

Twitter’s not a great place to spout off 140-character tips on emergency preparedness, but it is a great place to network and talk with people. Twitter is really about #ICE – Interact, Communicate and Engage. When those who follow your tweets get to know who you are, beyond your avatar, they are more likely to listen when you do provide timely suggestions.

If you get enough of the right kind of followers, then your preparedness message will get out there more than any fridge magnet could.”

Thanks to the CrisisSocMedia Twitter feed for bringing this to my attention.

Anyone interested in participating in the 2010 National Preparedness Month (NPM) may want to sign up for a webinar held by the FEMA’s Ready Campaign. It will introduce the 2010 Toolkit and offer information on how to be a take part as well as become a Coalition partner. September will mark the the seventh annual NPM.

Details about the webinar are below (you don’t have to register in advance). If you have any questions or if you need special accommodations to view or listen to this webinar, email the Ready Campaign at npm@dhs.gov.

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

3:00 p.m. EDT

Webinar Computer Log-in: https://connect.hsin.gov/npm2010/

(NOTE: Once you enter the URL, log in as a guest by using your first and last name. Please log in 10-15 minutes before the call to ensure the program and PowerPoint work properly on your computer. )

Telephone Dial-in: 1-888-437-2685 (domestic) & 1-412-317-2500 (international) Pin: 45612

At a White House press briefing yesterday, FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate reported that many Tennessee flood survivors who had been displaced from their homes were accessing the agency’s new mobile version of its website, M.FEMA.gov, with their mobile phones and PDA’s to get information and register for recovery relief.

It underscores the fact that the mobile device may be the most important tool people can have during a disaster. Yet, many state and local emergency management websites still do not recommend it on their lists of what every citizen should have for an emergency. Last year, FEMA and the Red Cross added it to their recommended list. (As I have witnessed first hand, including at a Red Cross relief shelter, having a phone charger is also very important, as would be an extra cellphone battery.)

There had been some hesitation in the past about putting mobiles in the minimum recommendations due to “digital divide” concerns, but their widespread proliferation has made that objection anachronistic. In fact, if anything the need now is for government emergency officials to put far more of an effort into explaining to the public how best to utilize their devices to communicate with each other and the authorities in emergency situations (including social media). Employing case studies, such as during the Tennessee flood cited by Fugate, to help educate the public might be useful.

FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate Briefed Reporters At The White House Yesterday.

Nathan Hodge of Wired.com’s Danger Room blog has a good post, Preparing For The Next Haiti, With Maps, Texts, And Tweets, which discusses the impressive high-tech volunteer response to the earthquake. Hodge attended the Haiti Tech Meetup yesterday at the U.S. State Department yesterday and spoke to a number of those involved in the recovery effort:

In the weeks following the January 12 earthquake, the relief effort in Haiti relied in part on crowdsourcing: an army of volunteers in the United States and elsewhere helped sift through emergency text messages, translated them and send them on to first responders on the scene. According to Rob Munro, a graduate fellow at Stanford who works with the nonprofit Energy for Opportunity, about 40,000 useful text messages came through the system in the first six weeks, meaning that thousands of Haitians received timely requests for food, water or medical help.

At the height of the crisis, texts were arriving every few seconds. But volunteers were able to receive a message, translate it and and send a grid location to teams on the ground within a matter of minutes. But the high-tech Haiti volunteer response also depended in large part on personal connections, and the mobilization of the Haitian diaspora in North America, for it to work. Now development agencies, relief workers and even the U.S. government are looking at ways to reproduce the experiment in the next emergency…

The full article can be found here.