Author: Lucien Canton
Why your solar-powered home won’t work in a disaster
How much do you know about solar power? You may have considered converting your home to run on solar power so that you would be energy independent during a disaster. However, as I was reminded at a recent energy conference, solar power doesn’t work that way.
I am certainly no expert on the electrical power grid, but in speaking to those who are, it seems that there is a common misconception that merely installing solar panels on your home makes you independent from the local power grid. The problem is that in any electrical system power generation must be balanced by the load, that is, supply must match demand. What this means is if your solar power system is generating more power than you need and you are no longer connected to the grid, it is highly likely that your appliances will burn out. This is the reason why home solar power systems sell excess energy back to the electrical grid.
What is needed is storage capacity for the excess energy. Unfortunately, this is not usually feasible for the average homeowner. The typical home consumes roughly 33 kWh of energy in a day. Providing standard lead acid batteries sufficient to store this level of energy would require a small room and cost close to $10,000. Lithium ion batteries are even more expensive, costing something on the order of $36,000. Unless you’re located in an area remote from the electrical grid, installing the necessary battery backup is cost prohibitive.
There are alternatives. Like anything disaster related, the question you should ask is, “what do I need to power?” If all you are seeking is the means to recharge communications equipment or to use small electrical devices, there are self-contained solar power systems that could meet your needs. There are even solar powered generator systems although their size, weight, and cost are prohibitive for the average homeowner. For most homeowners, the most cost-efficient solution is to purchase a generator and install a transfer switch that will allow the generator to power your home. However, generators come with their own set of problems such as the need for fuel and periodic maintenance and you need to take these things into account in making your decision.
Solar power is a good thing and has many benefits to the homeowner and the environment. Unfortunately, it doesn't offer any advantages in a disaster.
The most common earthquake hazard is also the least known
In my article last week, I pointed out that nonstructural hazards are often a greater danger in an earthquake than structural collapse. One of the hazards that I mentioned in passing was the collapse of unreinforced masonry chimneys. I use that specific example because of the extensive damage from collapsed chimneys in the recent Napa earthquake. It turns out that I actually underestimated the risks involved.
According to the California Earthquake Authority, chimney collapse has historically been the most common type of damage observed in an earthquake both in California and in other earthquakes across the United States. A recent article in the San Francisco Chronicle offered the following representative statistics:
- 1965, Puget Sound earthquake, magnitude 6.5, 5000 chimneys destroyed
- 1989, Loma Prieta earthquake, magnitude 6.9, 10,000 chimneys destroyed
- 1992, Landers earthquake, magnitude 7.3, 2600 chimneys destroyed
- 1994, Northridge earthquake, magnitude 6.7, 15,000 chimneys destroyed
- 2001, Nisqually earthquake, magnitude 6.8, 1700 chimneys destroyed
Chimney failure doesn’t just occur in large magnitude events such as the recent magnitude 6.0 earthquake in Napa; it is observed in even low magnitude events. In fact, unreinforced masonry chimneys are one of the first things to fail in an earthquake. Unfortunately, many homeowners are unaware of this hazard. Even those homeowners who have their chimneys regularly maintained and serviced may not be safe. Chimney sweeps and inspectors focus on fire hazards and damage to the chimney, such as cracks in the masonry, but they are not engineers and are often not aware of the hazard that chimneys can pose in an earthquake.
Mitigation of unreinforced masonry chimneys is neither cheap nor easy. The chimney can be braced but this does not completely eliminate the hazard. The safest solution is to replace the chimney with a metal flue which can then be surrounded by a wood and brick façade. If this sounds drastic, repairs to chimneys damaged in earthquakes run well over $5000, not counting the high risk to you and your family. Having your chimney inspected and prepared for an earthquake is money well spent.
Earthquake safety: Two myths that can get you hurt
One of the things that we see during and after a disaster is a number of well-meaning people providing advice on how to protect yourself in future disasters. Unfortunately, a lot of this advice is based on what we term “disaster mythology” rather than factual evidence. The problem with myths is that there is sometimes enough of a kernel of truth contained within them to make them hard to lay to rest.
Case in point is the resurrection of two earthquake protection methods that have been around for years and have acquired a patina of truth even though they can actually cause harm.
Everyone knows that the best place to be safe in an earthquake is to stand in a doorway. After all, Tommy Lee Jones did just that in the movie, Volcano, a movie acclaimed for its completely accurate and factual depiction of what emergency managers do in a disaster. Right and I can get you a good price on the Golden Gate Bridge. The theory behind standing in the doorway is that the heavy frame of the door will protect you from structural collapse. The reality is that in modern construction the doorway is no stronger than the rest of your home. Moreover, the swinging door can actually hurt you by slamming into you or crushing your fingers.
The other myth that circulates following an earthquake is the so-called “triangle of life”. Proponents of this technique encourage you to lie down beside heavy objects rather than seek shelter under them. The theory is that this will create a void space or pocket that will protect your when your home collapses. The reality is that while void spaces do form when a structure collapses, we cannot predict where these voids will form. More importantly, modern building codes in the United States are such that you are much more likely to be injured by nonstructural hazards such as light fixtures, bookcases, or ceiling tiles, than by an actual structural collapse. In examining the injuries from the recent Napa earthquake, we find most were caused by unreinforced brick chimneys falling through the roof of many homes rather than the home collapsing.
There is nothing that will guarantee your safety in an earthquake. However, the well tested “drop, cover, and hold” technique offers your best chance of avoiding injury. So don’t be taken in by disaster mythology. Understand the reality and stay safe.
Toledo’s experience a reminder to plan for water contamination
The recent water contamination issue in Toledo, Ohio, is yet another reminder of how fragile our infrastructure truly is, particularly as it pertains to water, and how interconnected our environment is. In the case of Toledo, the belief is that nitrogen and phosphorus from farm fertilizer runoff entered the Maumee River which drains into the Bay where Toledo is located. Together with the unseasonably warm weather, these chemicals stimulated the growth of blue-green algae which in turn produced the neurotoxin microcystin. Neurotoxins are not affected by the usual defense mechanisms within water systems and cannot be removed by boiling, making it particularly difficult to deal with.
However, there seems to be a misconception that this is the first time this sort of thing has happened. That’s not the case. For example, a Cryptosporidium outbreak in 1987 in Carroll County Georgia sickened over 13,000 citizens. Another outbreak in Milwaukee in 1993 killed 104 people and sickened over 400,000. The cause of the outbreak was traced to a sewer outfall 2 miles upstream on Lake Michigan. This incident remains the largest outbreak of waterborne disease in US history.
Since contamination of the water supply by parasites such as Cryptosporidium or neurotoxins such as microcystin is possible, it follows that it is yet one more thing for which emergency managers need to prepare. The question is how can we plan for a crisis that may be caused by events over we have no control (e.g. farm runoff miles from the jurisdiction for which we are responsible) and for whom such plan is clearly the responsibility of another agency (i.e. the municipal water department).
This really is no different from the myriad other threats for which we are expected to plan. It begins with raising awareness of the threat and providing solid information to decision-makers. We can push to make sure that such planning remains on agency radar screens. And finally, we can develop contingencies that make use of all hazard planning. For example, there are suggestions that the government in Toledo did not communicate as well as they could have; the experience of emergency managers in public notification and warning could have been of benefit.
The important thing to remember is that it is not possible for a single agency to plan for everything in detail. Emergency managers must leverage their influence and the skills they bring to the table to encourage and support others in accomplishing needed planning.
Learning from the past
If you’ve been reading this blog for any length of time, you know that I have a very strong interest in history, especially disaster history. I frequently make the argument that there is really nothing new under the sun when it comes to disasters. It is just that we often forget the lessons of the past.
One of my current projects is serving as a keynote speaker for a series of events around school safety. In preparing my remarks, I spent a considerable amount of time digging into statistics and anecdotal evidence on school shootings. We assume that school shootings, particularly the mass killings that have made headlines over the past few years, are a recent phenomenon. The truth is the first school shooting in the United States was a mass killing and it occurred in 1764 when supporters Pontiac’s rebellion raided a schoolhouse and killed the teacher and ten children.
Similarly, we often hear the phrase “everything was different on September 12th”. Yet September 11th was not the first instance of a foreign terrorist cell operating in the United States. In 1915, German intelligence set up a ring of spies and saboteurs operating primarily in New York and Washington DC that was responsible for the destruction of a considerable amount of war matériel bound for Europe, bombings in major cities, and the attempted assassination of J.P. Morgan. Five years later, an anarchist’s bomb exploded on Wall Street, killing 39 people and wounding hundreds more. Terrorism is decidedly not a new phenomenon in the United States.
I firmly believe that we can learn a lot from the study of past disasters. However, let me add a caveat. We must not use events of the past as predictors of future events. That is, we cannot assume that because something happened a certain way that it will happen that same way in the future. The past can provide us with ideas of what could occur and how our predecessors either successfully dealt with the crisis or failed to deal with it. In the end, however, the lessons of the past cannot substitute for solid situation assessment and sound decision-making in a crisis.
Language as a precision instrument
A few days ago, I was reading an article in the San Francisco Chronicle when the following sentence caught my eye:
The investigation concerns the actions of (the accused), a 24 year veteran of the… County Sheriff’s office who shot (the victim) in an unincorporated area just outside (the jurisdiction) on (the date).
Now to many, there doesn’t seem to be anything wrong with this sentence. It is reasonably clear that the author is referring to the location of the shooting. However, I’m of a generation that was taught in grammar school how to diagram sentences and this particular sentence had me chuckling and wondering just what part of the body was “an unincorporated area”.
Before you write me off as another nitpicker, recall that one of the three basic skills required of an emergency manager is the ability to write persuasively. We are frequently the authors of important reports and summaries as well as the originators public warnings. It is important, therefore, that we are both precise and concise in our writing.
There is a good reason for this. We live in a world in which much of our messaging is now stripped down to 144 characters or less or given in short soundbites. We need to be able to condense our messages to the shortest possible size that still preserves clarity.
But this is nothing new. Anyone who’s written a report knows that senior executives rarely read past the first page of the executive summary. Advertisers both in print and online know how important it is to get your message “above the fold”. In print journalism, this means the upper section of the publication that is first seen by the reader. To online marketers, this means the section of the screen that can be seen without scrolling down.
It behooves us, then, to keep in mind that language should be a precision instrument and not a blunt one. This means considering carefully what you are saying not only from your perspective but from that of the recipient. You need to be certain that what they are hearing is what you actually meant to say. Taking the time to review your message or, even better, have others review it if time permits will go a long way towards preventing miscommunication.
Not just don’t get me started talking about terms such as “free range eggs” and “organic produce”…
Get out of your comfort zone – A Tail from the Dog Park
Cookie challenges the big dogs
Cookie's a fairly recent addition to our group of friends at the dog park. An immigrant, she was born in India and rescued by her current guardians. Coming to the United States wasn't easy. Cookie spent most of her young life in quarantine, something on the order of four months.
Arriving at a park where she had never been before and being greeted by more dogs than she had ever seen in one place before was, to say the least, a bit traumatic for her. She spent much of that first morning cowering between her guardian's legs and avoiding her new friends.
But Cookie is not a quitter. By the next day, she was sticking her nose out, just a bit, and engaging with the smaller dogs. By the third day she was venturing further away from the protection of her guardian and spending more time getting to know the rest of the pack. Within a week or so, Cookie proved herself completely fearless, eagerly joining the big dogs in their games and completely integrating with her canine pals.
Cookie became a valued member of our group by stepping outside her comfort zone. Interestingly enough, this same issue was discussed in a recent leadership coaching conference I attended. The point made at the conference was exactly that demonstrated by Cookie: to achieve anything requires that you step outside your comfort zone and take risks. This not only helps us grow as leaders but can improve our overall quality of life.
So give it a try. Do one thing today that makes you stretch your talents and makes you just a bit uncomfortable. You never know where it might lead.
One small change can improve your emergency message
Dr. Dennis Mileti
You may recall that several weeks ago I talked about the three critical elements of an emergency message. I said that any message had to have three elements: what has happened, what does it mean to the recipient, and the action that you wanted the recipient ent to take. I'd like to expand on that with the benefit of some new research.
I'm just back from the Natural Hazards Workshop in Broomfield, Colorado, where I had the pleasure of hearing Dr. Dennis Mileti speak. Dr. Mileti is professor emeritus at the University of Colorado Boulder and former director of the Natural Hazards Center. His book, Disasters by Design, summarized scientific and engineering knowledge about natural hazards and made recommendations for national policies and programs. It is considered a "must read" for new emergency managers. Mileti is also considered a national expert on risk communication and public warning.
Dr. Mileti's latest research suggests that not only is the content of the message important, the order in which elements are presented can also affect how the recipient perceives the message. Dr. Mileti believes that it is important that the message be seen as coming from a credible source. For this reason, he suggests that the first element in a message should be the identity of the sender. Mileti advises that an emergency message follow this format:
- the source of the message
- a description of the hazard, i.e. what has happened and what it means to the recipient
- what actions the recipient needs to take
In his research, Mileti found that messages presented in this format were significantly more likely to be acted upon.