Posted on 01/01/2005 2:14:42 AM PST by bd476
If only people had been warned. An hour's notice for those living and vacationing along the coastlines of the Indian Ocean might have saved thousands of lives.
But predictions, and acting on them, are not simple, geoscience experts say.
"It's an inexact science now," said Dr. Laura S. L. Kong, a Commerce Department seismologist and director of the International Tsunami Information Center, an office in Honolulu run under the auspices of the United Nations.
According to a NASA Web site devoted to tsunamis, three of four tsunami warnings issued since 1948 have been false, and the cost of the false alarms can be high.
An evacuation in Hawaii could cost as much as $68 million in lost productivity, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Since the 1960's, Dr. Kong said, there have been two warnings of tsunamis in Hawaii that ended in evacuations, and both were false alarms.
Dr. Kong said the predictions of tsunamis were, in fact, accurate: the waves do arrive, whether they are 40 feet high or a mere two inches. It is the destructive power of the wave that is hard to predict. That depends on many factors, including the configuration of the ocean floor and the shape of a bay.
Tsunamis, which are common in the Pacific Ocean, are rare in the Indian Ocean. And the earthquake that set the giant waves in motion on Sunday was uncommonly powerful.
But an Indian Ocean tsunami was, to a certain extent, predictable - and scientists from Geoscience Australia, that nation's agency for earth science research, issued a paper last fall describing the tsunami generated by sea-floor disturbances after the explosion of the volcano Krakatoa in 1883, with charts that showed an uncanny resemblance to the wave of destruction that accompanied this week's disaster.
Australia has established a tsunami warning center of its own, which issued an earthquake alert 33 minutes after the quake occurred.
Dr. Kong said her e-mail box had filled in recent days with the signs of a scramble by United Nations organizations and affected governments hoping to create a new warning system for the Indian Ocean. Such a system could be cobbled together, in part, by depending on ocean-measuring sites that are already in place, she said.
The lowest-cost components are water-level gauges, which can be had for as little as $5,000 apiece but which can cost $20,000 or more if they are equipped with better instruments and quick communication abilities. A system could be put into place relatively quickly, she said, for "millions or tens of millions" of dollars.
She said such a system would not include the gold standard for tsunami measurement, a new generation of deep-sea sensors. These devices "wake up" when a tsunami passes over, and transmit data to satellites, which then pass the signal along to warning centers. There are only seven of these "tsunameters" in use so far, and they can cost $250,000 apiece - with annual maintenance costs of $50,000.
Richard A. Posner, a federal judge and author of "Catastrophe: Risk and Response," said tsunamis in the Indian Ocean had a low probability of occurring, but a high risk of damage if they do occur.
A disaster may occur only every 100 years and kill 40,000 people, Judge Posner said, but "one way to think about it is, that's an average of 400 people killed each year."
The problem, he said, is that less developed nations "have such urgent current problems" that worrying about long-term problems is a low priority.
Warning the public of disaster is an age-old problem with modern implications, said Kenneth Allen, the executive director of the Partnership for Public Warning, a nonprofit, public-private partnership devoted to improving crisis communications in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.
Education campaigns are an essential part of any warning system, Mr. Allen said. "You need to tell people how they are going to get information in an emergency, and what to do about it," he said. "If you wait until the emergency occurs, it's too late."
Phil McFadden, the chief scientist of Geoscience Australia, said warnings without such training were useless. "If all you do is phone up the local police station, they don't know what to do," he said. "And in fact, one of the problems is that if you tell untrained people, 'Listen - there's a tsunami coming,' half of them go down to the beach to see what a tsunami looks like."
Andrew C. Revkin contributed reporting fromNew York for this article,and Thomas Fuller of The International Herald Tribune from Paris.
An evacuation in Hawaii could cost as much as $68 million in lost productivity, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Since the 1960's, Dr. Kong said, there have been two warnings of tsunamis in Hawaii that ended in evacuations, and both were false alarms..."
At last here is rational discussion about the realities of tsunami prediction.
This is also an article which lays no blame on the affected countries, nor on the United States for those countries' lack of foresight, premonition or awareness of the unexpected catastrophe which would move them from the low risk to the high risk category for destructive tsunamis.
Ping.
ping
Earlier I was thinking about the cost of installing and maintaining the actual final warning system, certainly some sort of siren system. Figure a 150 dB siren every mile of coast, $20,000 per unit, backup diesel generators, $10,000 per unit, multiply by what, 10,000 miles of coastline? Three hundred million dollars? About $60,000,000 a year in maintenance? Want to bet the maintenance would never get done?
It has been known for some time now that animals are extremely sensitive to events leading up to earthquakes and the earthquakes themselves.
Indeed, the entire world now marvels at reports that no animals perished in the during the recent devasting tsunami.
All that would be needed for an effective worldwide warning system would be based on small GPS tracking chips (recently developed and already variously deployed) implanted into thousands of wild and domestic animals that could be tracked by a computerized pattern recognition system.
When a sudden mass migration or other unusual pattern of movement of said animals is detected by the system, voile' -- it's time for humans to evacuate buildings and coastal areas and for ships at sea to prepare for tsunamis.
BTW, it would really suck if one of our aircraft carrier groups or even an oil tanker were ever wiped slick by an unexpected tsunami.
Further studies of animals' detection and migration in response to various seismic events would serve to fine-tune and increase the sensitivity, specificity, and overall reliability of such a system.
As long as our "experts" and "leaders" continue exhibit an ability to think "outside the box" that is less than that of many FReepers, the peoples of the world will continue to be sitting ducks as they were last week in around the Indian Ocean basin and beyond.
Sheesh. Do we have to tell them everything? Perhaps a government functionary trolling this forum could occasionally pick up a great idea or two from the Free Republic and become a hero by filching it for the common good. More power to him/her -- I would watch with a $#!t-eating grin the ceremony at which said troll received a major award for science in the public interest and would not bore anyone by claiming I had been "robbed."
The only scoreboard I'm concerned with is maintained by our Heavenly Father, who has blessed many with the grey matter necessary to bring to pass much good for the benefit of His children here on earth.....
We sent out a bulletin to all of the affected area's governments.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2004/s2357.htm
Dec. 26, 2004 — NOAA scientists acted quickly when a warning was issued about the powerful undersea earthquake in the Indian Ocean that triggered a devastating tsunami. Within minutes following an alarm signaling the strong earthquake, the NOAA Pacific Tsunami Warning Center in Hawaii issued an information bulletin to nations in the Pacific at 8:14 p.m. EST Saturday, indicating that a magnitude 8.0 earthquake (later upgraded to magnitude 9.0) had occurred off the west coast of Northern Sumatra, Indonesia. Because the earthquake, reported to be one of the strongest in the world in the past 40 years, occurred in the Indian Ocean, not the Pacific, there was no threat of a tsunami to Hawaii, the West Coast of North America or to other coasts in the Pacific Basin—the U.S. area of responsibility. (Click NOAA image for larger view of Indonesia tsunami epicenter map. Click here for high resolution version, which is a large file. Please credit “NOAA.”)
If NOAA had computer models of this Tsunomi and sent out information bulletins about it...why was the death toll so high? Any thoughts?
NOAA clips of Tsunomi hours before it happened that was sent out in bulletins can be seen here:
http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tsunami/time
ping
You also need to do drills (sirens-only), preferably monthly and certainly at least annually, so that everyone knows what the system sounds like, and particularly where you have heavy turnover in tourists. It would be good at least annually to have emergency folks also do a dry run on evacuation procedures during one of the sound drills.
Announcements prior to drills and the drills themselves are also going to cost some money that needs to budgeted.
Thanks for posting that link, I was thinking the same thing. I also hear that Japanese tourists recognized the meaning of the ocean drawing far away for the shore and were able to warn others to leave the beachfront.
Is that so? I haven't heard about that one.
Dec. 29, 2004 — NOAA scientists at the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center in Hawaii went to work within minutes of getting a seismic signal that an earthquake occurred off the west coast of Northern Sumatra, Indonesia. NOAA issued a bulletin indicating no threat of a tsunami to Hawaii, the West Coast of North America or to other coasts in the Pacific Basin—the area served by the existing tsunami warning system established by the Pacific rim countries and operated by NOAA in Hawaii. (Click NOAA image for larger view of tsunami buoy being deployed in the Pacific Ocean from the NOAA ship Ronald H. Brown. Click here for high resolution version, which is a large file. Please credit “NOAA.”)
NOAA scientists then began an effort to notify countries about the possibility that a tsunami may have been triggered by the massive 9.0 undersea earthquake. The Pacific Basin tsunami warning system did not detect a tsunami in the Indian Ocean since there are no buoys in place there. Even without a way to detect whether a tsunami had formed in the Indian Ocean, NOAA officials tried to get the message out to other nations not a part of its Pacific warning system to alert them of the possibility of a tsunami. However, the tsunami raced across the ocean at speeds up to 500 mph. Below is the timeline of agency's actions once the undersea earthquake was detected by the NOAA Pacific Tsunami Warning Center in Hawaii.
(All times listed below are Hawaii Standard Time or HST.)
At 2:59 p.m. Hawaii Standard Time (HST) on Christmas Day a large earthquake occurred in the Indian Ocean near Sumatra, Indonesia.
At 3:07 p.m. the resulting seismic signals received at the NOAA Pacific Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC) from stations in Australia triggered an alarm that alerted watchstanders.
NOAA REAL TIME Generated Animation of Deep-Ocean Assessment and Report of Tsunamis Mooring System.
At 3:10 p.m. PTWC issued a message to other observatories in the Pacific with its preliminary earthquake parameters.
At 3:14 p.m. PTWC issued a bulletin providing information on the earthquake and stating there was no tsunami threat to the Pacific nations that participate in the Tsunami Warning System in the Pacific (ITSU). These member nations are part of the UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) and the International Coordination Group for the Tsunami Warning System in the Pacific (ICG/ITSU). India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives are not part of the Pacific system.
At 4:04 p.m. PTWC issued bulletin No. 2 revising the earthquake magnitude to 8.5. That bulletin stated no tsunami threat to the Pacific but identified the possibility of a tsunami near the epicenter. No additional information regarding the formation of a tsunami was available.
At approximately 4:30 p.m. HST PTWC attempted to contact the Australia Met Service with no luck but were successful in contacting Australia Emergency Management. They confirmed they were aware of the earthquake.
At approximately 5:30 p.m. Internet newswire reports of casualties in Sri Lanka provided PTWC with the first indications of the existence of a destructive tsunami. Indications are that the tsunami had already struck the entire area by this time, although we have not been able to obtain arrival times.
At approximately 5:45 p.m., armed with knowledge of a tsunami, PTWC contacted the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) in Hawaii.
At approximately 5:45 p.m., PTWC received a call from a Sri Lanka Navy Commander inquiring about the potential for further tsunami waves from aftershocks.
At approximately 6:00 p.m. the U.S. Ambassador in Sri Lanka called PTWC to set up a notification system in case of big aftershock. He said they would contact Sri Lanka Prime Minister's office for such notifications.
Continuing news reports gave increasing and more widespread casualties.
At approximately 7:25 p.m. the first reading from the Australian National Tidal Center gauge at Cocos Island west of Australia gave a reading of 0.5m crest-to-trough.
At 7:25 p.m. the Harvard University Seismology Department reported its preliminary Centroid Moment Tensor solution that indicated a magnitude of 8.9.
At approximately 7:45 p.m. PTWC contacted the Australia Bureau of Meteorology and advised them about the increased earthquake magnitude and the 0.5m reading at Cocos Island, as well as the possibility of a destructive tsunami impact on Australia's west coasts.
At approximately 8:00 p.m. PTWC re-contacted PACOM to advise of increased earthquake magnitude and potential for further tsunami impacts in the western Indian Ocean.
At approximately 8:15 p.m. Australia Bureau of Met called PTWC to advise they had issued an alert to their west coast.
At approximately 8:20 p.m. NOAA National Weather Service Pacific Region director contacted PTWC to report PACOM said no tsunami was observed at Diego Garcia in the Pacific.
At approximately 10:15 p.m. PTWC spoke with U.S. State Department Operations and advised them about the potential threat to Madagascar and Africa. They set up a conference call with the U.S. embassies at Madagascar and Mauritius, and PTWC advised them of the situation.
At 5:36 a.m. on December 27 PTWC issued a third Tsunami Information Bulletin for this event informing the Pacific that small sea level fluctuations from the Indian Ocean tsunami were being observed in the Pacific, probably from energy that wrapped around south of Australia.
The Pacific Warning System
Pacific warning network is comprised of (1) hundreds of seismic stations worldwide; (2) coastal tide gauges and sophisticated Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunamis (DART) buoys in the Pacific Basin capable of detecting a centimeter's difference in ocean height.
However, it is important to note that without similar gauges and buoys in the Indian Ocean PTWC officers were not in a position to detect a tsunami there.
NOAA's Responsibility to the International Community
The U.S. has demonstrated the effectiveness of its warning system within the Pacific region. It has also demonstrated that the warning system can provide initial earthquake information to other nations and is most willing to share that information with all concerned. With national dissemination and water level networks in place, NOAA’s information can be used to mitigate future disasters.
It is also important to recognize that tsunamis can come ashore within minutes of nearby earthquakes. In those instances, people must know what to do in the event of a "felt" earthquake in low lying coastal areas.
The need for a tsunami warning program outside the Pacific region has been raised since 1985 with little result. It now appears that there is new interest in this issue within the international ICG/ITSU community. The U.S. strongly supports such an effort.
Furthermore, the development of the Global Earth Observing System of Systems (GEOSS) led by the United States, Japan, South Africa and the European Commission—with 53 nations currently participating at the ministerial level—should help fill the sensor gap for other regions of the world. Two key focus areas of the GEOSS initiative are addressing "reducing loss of life and property due to disasters" and "monitoring our oceans."
For just the “maintenance cost of $50,000” per year they could hire 3 sharp 3rd world guys at a PC watching the news wire for earthquakes. They then make a quick line of site judgment call of the wake probability and sound the alarm. No underwater pressure sensors (that are unable to tell the difference between a 4 and 40’ wave) needed.
“Herds of animals” do not “migrate” before a tsunami comes, and they did not do it this time. They were simply less likely to be on the populated coast, more agile in avoiding the water and the story sounds too cool to not report it despite its minimal truth factor.
And BTW, if this tsunami passed under our aircraft carrier battle groups at sea it wouldn’t have been noticed. And all ports capable of berthing them are sheltered.
It is much more simple and could have been done in this case (in fact the U.S. government issued the warning but no one listened). It is known that when you have an earthquake of over a 7.5 or so magnitude, there might be a tsunami. Issue warnings based on that. It is not a big deal to keep people off the beaches for a day or two.
As a biologist, I don't think your animal sensor idea would work, is not cost-effective and could be highly inaccurate
without better understanding of animal behavior.
In Japan I have seen cockroaches swarming just before a major earthquake. This is an effect worth investigating, but it's hardly something you would want to base a warning system on. In any case, the effects of a tsunami extend far beyond the affected radius of the earthquake that caused it.
Agreed. We and the animal know when earthquakes are occurring. But neither got the word out to others in the tsunami’s path.
We wouldn’t even have to do that. At 500 mph, it would travel the ocean in less than half day. A warning could let distant people know of the possibility and a watch could get the people off nearby beaches or distant ones of waves actually hit shore anywhere.
I think that a generation of people are now better protected just for knowing what to do if water recedes.
True, but you are forgeting that aftershocks are quakes that can produce further tsunamis, if they are of sufficient strength.
The other thing I find people unable to comprehend is that a tsunami is more than just a big wave. It is a big bulge in the ocean that produces a huge surge of water that continues in several waves over a long period of time. Then the receding water causes more havoc.
The best way to prevent huge loss of life would be to restrict building on the coasts. But tsunamis occur so infrequently, it probably is not necessary except for those that can accept zero risk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.