Equipped To Survive Equipped To Survive® Presents
The Survival Forum
Where do you want to go on ETS?

Page 5 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#232545 - 09/21/11 09:06 PM Re: FEMA rethinks its approach... [Re: Andy]
Pete Offline
Veteran

Registered: 02/20/09
Posts: 1372
Thanks for the comments. I went back and took a look at the 1964 Alaska earthquake - which as you pointed out was a whopping BIG event. It's amazing really that Alaska came out as well as it did ... considering the enormous size of that 9.2 quake. Based on population estimates, it looks like there were about 90,000-95,000 people living in Anchorage at the time. It's pretty miraculous that only 9 were killed - there must have definitely been factors that helped to save lives.

Personally, when I computed those numbers above for Los Angeles, I was thinking that 20,000-30,000 fatalities was really not that bad [of course - it's not great if you're one of them!]. It still means that 99% of the residents of L.A. would survive the event. The predictions on homeless numbers may be too high, but I guess it depends on how widespread the fire danger is. I can think of some suburbs of L.A. where homes are VERY close together, and they are 2-story (or 3-story) dwellings. There certainly will be structural damage. And you know how people handle fire risks in their homes ... I doubt that many residents are taking strict precautions with fire dangers & flammables. So the possibility of fires seems very plausible to me, and there's no way that anyone will stop fires in those high-density communities. I'm less comfortable with how the outcome might work out down here.

But I do appreciate the counterpoints that you are making. I'd like to hope that you are right.

Pete2


Edited by Pete (09/21/11 09:10 PM)

Top
#232546 - 09/21/11 09:32 PM Re: FEMA rethinks its approach... [Re: Pete]
Am_Fear_Liath_Mor Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 08/03/07
Posts: 3078
Quote:
Personally, when I computed those numbers above for Los Angeles, I was thinking that 20,000-30,000 fatalities was really not that bad [of course - it's not great if you're one of them!]. It still means that 99% of the residents of L.A. would survive the event.


If LA was struck with a direct Mega quake (8+) on a hot Autumn day, which precipitated a true firestorm then your casualty figures, I suspect are probably an order of magnitude out.

1923 Tokyo Earthquake


Quote:
The fires spread rapidly due to high winds from a nearby typhoon off the coast of Noto Peninsula in Ishikawa Prefecture, and some developed into firestorms which swept across cities. As a result many people died when their feet got stuck in melting tarmac; however, the single greatest loss of life occurred when approximately 38,000 people packed into an open space at the Rikugun Honjo Hifukusho (Former Army Clothing Depot) in downtown Tokyo were incinerated by a firestorm-induced fire whirl. As the earthquake had caused water mains to break, putting out the fires took nearly two full days until late in the morning of September 3. The fires were the biggest causes of death.


The Tokyo Firestorm of 1945 has also had estimates off up to 1 million people dying although the figure of 100,000+ is more readily accepted historically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo_in_World_War_II

Quote:
These casualty and damage figures could be low; Mark Selden wrote in Japan Focus:
The figure of roughly 100,000 deaths, provided by Japanese and American authorities, both of whom may have had reasons of their own for minimizing the death toll, seems to me arguably low in light of population density, wind conditions, and survivors' accounts. With an average of 103,000 inhabitants per square mile (396 people per hectare) and peak levels as high as 135,000 per square mile (521 people per hectare), the highest density of any industrial city in the world, and with firefighting measures ludicrously inadequate to the task, 15.8 square miles (41 km2) of Tokyo were destroyed on a night when fierce winds whipped the flames and walls of fire blocked tens of thousands fleeing for their lives. An estimated 1.5 million people lived in the burned out areas.[7]






Edited by Am_Fear_Liath_Mor (09/21/11 09:58 PM)

Top
#232548 - 09/21/11 10:41 PM Re: FEMA rethinks its approach... [Re: Am_Fear_Liath_Mor]
hikermor Offline
Geezer in Chief
Geezer

Registered: 08/26/06
Posts: 7705
Loc: southern Cal
Again, consider that Japanese architecture, particularly domestic structures, were highly flammable, more so than such buildings in the United States. It is true, on the basis of several incidents, that fire after an earthquake, can present a serious hazard that may equal or exceed that of the quake itself.

I keep my gas shutoff tool underneath my bed, where I can get to it very quickly.
_________________________
Geezer in Chief

Top
#232554 - 09/22/11 02:08 AM Re: FEMA rethinks its approach... [Re: Andy]
Susan Offline
Geezer

Registered: 01/21/04
Posts: 5163
Loc: W. WA
What I think of in the case of an earthquake, are the broken gas lines and water mains.

I remember watching the aftermath of the Northridge Quake, and the fires that soon followed, and wondered how many of them were started by nervous smokers who immediately pulled out their cigarettes and lighters.

Sue

Top
#232574 - 09/22/11 03:59 PM Re: FEMA rethinks its approach... [Re: Andy]
Pete Offline
Veteran

Registered: 02/20/09
Posts: 1372
Thanks for the various comments. I didn't start this thread ... but I kinda' hijacked the topic to the discussion of possible disasters in West Coast cities in America.

If you look at the spread of options for risks - you can see why this is a difficult problem for FEMA. Taking Los Angeles as an example, an optimistic scenario might lead to casuatlies in the hundreds or low thousands (assuming that most buildings do have capabilities to meet seismic vibrations from a quake). A moderate-risk scenario might involve casualties in the tens of thousands. And a worst-case scenario (major firestorm) could involve casualties in the hundreds of thousands. How is FEMA supposed to cope with this kind of spread in risks?? That's a pretty tough assignment, and so is the plan for dealing with the after-effects.

Still, I think there are some things that could be done - that aren't necessarily being done right now. I will probably post these ideas in a separate thread soon.

Pete2


Edited by Pete (09/22/11 03:59 PM)

Top
#232580 - 09/22/11 04:57 PM Re: FEMA rethinks its approach... [Re: Pete]
paramedicpete Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1920
Loc: Frederick, Maryland
One thing to keep in mind is that FEMA is a federal resource and must be requested by the state government to supplement in-state resources that become overwhelmed. So looking at FEMA as a supplemental responding agency, what resources are available locally/regionally (community, city/town, county and state) to meet the needs before calling in FEMA resources?

Pete

Top
#232584 - 09/22/11 05:18 PM Re: FEMA rethinks its approach... [Re: Pete]
AKSAR Offline
Veteran

Registered: 08/31/11
Posts: 1233
Loc: Alaska
Originally Posted By: Pete
.... If you look at the spread of options for risks - you can see why this is a difficult problem for FEMA. ..... How is FEMA supposed to cope with this kind of spread in risks?? That's a pretty tough assignment, and so is the plan for dealing with the after-effects.

Still, I think there are some things that could be done - that aren't necessarily being done right now. I will probably post these ideas in a separate thread soon.

Pete2


Yes it is a very tough problem, but I agree with you that much can be done.

One of my favorite quotes is from Dwight D. Eisenhower who was Supreme Commander for the Normandy Invasion during World War II, and later the 34th President of the United States. He said: "Plans are worthless, but planning is everything."

Emergencies will never happen exactly as you expect, therefore your plans will never be entirely right. However, having done the planning, you are in a much stronger position to respond to whatever has happened. You have evaluated your resources, and tried to fix areas where you are weak. It is usually much easier to modify an existing plan than to build one on the fly (under severe stress).
_________________________
"Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas any more."
-Dorothy, in The Wizard of Oz

Top
#232593 - 09/22/11 07:22 PM Re: FEMA rethinks its approach... [Re: paramedicpete]
AKSAR Offline
Veteran

Registered: 08/31/11
Posts: 1233
Loc: Alaska
Originally Posted By: paramedicpete
...... So looking at FEMA as a supplemental responding agency, what resources are available locally/regionally (community, city/town, county and state) to meet the needs before calling in FEMA resources?

This is the kind of pre-planning that doesn't cost a lot to do, but can be hugely valuable after a disaster occurs. This can be done at the local level, and that planning in turn can be incorporated at the FEMA level. Some specific examples, by no means inclusive:

1. Communications inventory & pre-plan. Inventory what equipment, frequencies, procedures etc each agency has. There will be incompatabilities, so try to create a comm plan that will minimise problems and enable agencies to communicate with each other as best as possible. Disseminate this plan so that all agencies can pull it out in a hurry and put it into action.

2. Medical resources inventory. What hospitals are located where, what capabilities do they have. Integrate them into the comm plan. After an earthquake or other disaster, you want to find out as quickly as possible what medical resources are still functional, and which are knocked out.

3. Helicopter resources. Who has what aircraft, where are they based, and what are their capabilities. As with hospitals, integrate into comm plan so that those still operational can be most efficienly used.

4. Private resources (aircraft, bulldozers, etc). Again, inventory what and where. When FEMA (and Federal dollars) comes into the picture, contracting these will be important. Have contracts already agreed upon, which can be quickly activated when the need arises. (Wildland fire fighting agencies already do this kind of thing.)

5. Volunteer agencies. Local SAR teams, Red Cross, etc. As above, what is available, where are they, what are the capabilities, how to communicate.

6 ..Etc.... Etc

Hold regular table top drills to get all of the agencies practice in working together. Nothng smooths a rapidly changing response as much as knowing the faces of those you are called upon to work with.
_________________________
"Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas any more."
-Dorothy, in The Wizard of Oz

Top
#232603 - 09/22/11 11:21 PM Re: FEMA rethinks its approach... [Re: AKSAR]
hikermor Offline
Geezer in Chief
Geezer

Registered: 08/26/06
Posts: 7705
Loc: southern Cal
The annual local drill, the California Shakeout, is coming up on Oct 20. This thread is prompting me to inquire a bit more closely into the state of planning for the Big One. I actually suspect that some fairly extensive gaming has occurred.

One thing about California. We should be able to cooperate effectively in the event of an earthquake-induced firestorm, fires being fairly common occurrences around here. Santa Ana season is on the horizon.
_________________________
Geezer in Chief

Top
#232604 - 09/22/11 11:43 PM Re: FEMA rethinks its approach... [Re: hikermor]
Susan Offline
Geezer

Registered: 01/21/04
Posts: 5163
Loc: W. WA
Quote:
Santa Ana season is on the horizon.


How's this for an awful double-whammy: Major earthquake during Santa Ana Winds?

I've been through enough Santa Anas for just the idea to make me feel sick.

Sue

Top
Page 5 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >



Moderator:  MartinFocazio, Tyber 
March
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Who's Online
0 registered (), 324 Guests and 6 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
GallenR, Jeebo, NicholasMarshall, Yadav, BenFoakes
5367 Registered Users
Newest Posts
What did you do today to prepare?
by dougwalkabout
Yesterday at 11:21 PM
Zippo Butane Inserts
by dougwalkabout
Yesterday at 11:11 PM
Question about a "Backyard Mutitool"
by Ren
03/17/24 01:00 AM
Problem in my WhatsApp configuration
by Chisel
03/09/24 01:55 PM
New Madrid Seismic Zone
by Jeanette_Isabelle
03/04/24 02:44 PM
EDC Reduction
by EchoingLaugh
03/02/24 04:12 PM
Using a Compass Without a Map
by KenK
02/28/24 12:22 AM
Newest Images
Tiny knife / wrench
Handmade knives
2"x2" Glass Signal Mirror, Retroreflective Mesh
Trade School Tool Kit
My Pocket Kit
Glossary
Test

WARNING & DISCLAIMER: SELECT AND USE OUTDOORS AND SURVIVAL EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES AND TECHNIQUES AT YOUR OWN RISK. Information posted on this forum is not reviewed for accuracy and may not be reliable, use at your own risk. Please review the full WARNING & DISCLAIMER about information on this site.