[bytesforall_readers] Re: RE: [Telecentres] how many / emergency systems

[donc at internode.on.net]

Dear Peter,

As always a belated response to people in great need,
however to maybe offer some hope - Yesterday the Australian
Federal Govt announced that Geoscience Australia
(http://www.ga.gov.au/) was now tasked with constructing a
Tsunami early-warning system for SE Asia similar to that in
the Pacific. They are seeking international partners however
if necessary will go it alone to see the project completed
(as reported).

This is mostly in acknowledgement that as with the US,
Geoscience Aus was well aware of the Tsunami’s approaching
Asia through their network of seismic and oceanography
sensors and had notified EMA (Emergency Management
Australia) who in turn had a capability to provide at least
30 minutes advance warning to most of the impacted areas,
and in the case of India more than 1.5 hours warning. Sadly,
and to the great frustration of all involved, despite
frantic attempts EMA were unable to contact any coordinated
Asian authorities to let them know about the threat. We also
must acknowledge that even if they had been so able, there
was no mechanism in place to notify the people. It all comes
down to communications (it’s the same with any civil
emergency).

So to your second point about communications, not only is
the technology available; it has been available for nearly a
century making the lack of a coordinated communications
network throughout SE Asia even more tragic for those
involved. 

The reality is that emergency technology is not expensive;
it just requires management, coordination and cooperation to
become a reality. From a technological perspective
Australia’s primary emergency notification system consists
of nothing more complex than common house-hold radios.
Emergency alerts are broadcast across the public spectrum.
Emergency notifications (calls from people needing help when
telephony and other techno-based systems fail during
Cyclones or floods etc.) are mostly carried by a very old,
yet inherently very reliable UHF citizens band radio network
monitored by volunteer emergency groups throughout the
nation. People are notified about threats on or near our
beaches by old air-raid sirens. This is not a system
requiring computers or any other form of advanced technology
other than a few UHF repeaters at strategic locations to
provide nation-wide coverage (you will find fixed and
portable UHF transceivers at every remote community or
settlement on the continent). The reason it’s so reliable
during civil emergencies is because it does not rely on
computing technologies.

The real problems yet to be addressed are those of
priorities, coordination and cooperation – the systems
themselves are very cheap, however they only work if
emergency mitigation is deemed a priority and accompanied by
appropriate management and support processes. Whilst we
continue to see limited resources being prioritised towards
what are mostly ‘recreational technologies’ like the
Internet at the expense of life-preserving systems we
probably will not see any true developments. 

Rgds, Don