Sunday, August 24, 2014

Reflections on the San Francisco Bay Area�s largest earthquake since 1989

I only post articles here about once a month or less, but I�m posting just a few days after my previous article because the San Francisco Bay Area got woken up last night by a moderately strong earthquake, magnitude 6.0.  This is the largest quake to hit this region since the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, and the first since then to result in substantial damage to buildings and infrastructure (in Napa and Vallejo, north of the San Francisco Bay).  I don�t have any information about this earthquake that people aren�t already getting from the news, so I haven�t attempted to rush to post something.  Instead, having followed the news out of Napa during the day, a few thoughts have come to mind.

First, ironically, I had just given one of my talks earlier that afternoon, in the library in my own neighborhood.  I�ll bet the people who attended are marveling at my ability to deliver real live examples of my subject matter!

I do have a couple of more substantial observations though.  Nobody wants to experience structural damage and injuries at any level, but these moderately large quakes provide a good reminder of what can occur, if viewed through the appropriate lens.  Some of you may have read my article from 2011 about benefits and dangers of small earthquakes to our preparation for large earthquakes.  The bottom line was that when people who have never experienced a strong earthquake feel some small earthquakes, they might vastly underestimate the potential risks of the larger ones and not feel the urgency to prepare.  This Napa quake, at a 6.0, was roughly 10-fold smaller than the 6.9 Loma Prieta quake that caused substantial damage, injury, and mortality.  The residents in the hardest hit portions of Napa have a very good concept now of what may happen in an even larger quake, but for many of us in San Francisco and the rest of the Bay Area, our experience with a 6.0 quake was a rolling in the middle of the night, followed by going back to sleep.  Don�t limit your personal experience with 6.0 earthquakes to what you personally experienced; base it on what they experienced in Napa.

It is also notable that the photos and personal accounts from Napa are consistent with what you have been hearing all along from me and from emergency preparedness organizations: don�t attempt to run out of the building during an earthquake, and get UNDER something stable, not next to it.  The piles of bricks and other rubble directly next to buildings are what you could encounter if you were exiting the building, and the rubble also should remind us of the fallacy of seeking safety next to a sturdy object rather than under it.  Napa residents interviewed by the news described being hit by objects from the wall, and said that everything that could fall did fall; and there were lots of photos from inside people�s homes showing many objects that fell off of shelves or out of kitchen cabinets that swung open.  In fact, much of this interior damage could have been prevented by appropriate bracing, quake-resistant cabinet latches, sticking objects to surfaces with quake putty, etc.

That is, at the risk of hitting you over the head with it, you can greatly reduce the probability of many of the problems encountered in Napa by taking the recommended home preparedness precautions against earthquakes beforehand!

So, I hope that the worst is over for Napa and that they don�t experience strong enough aftershocks to cause more problems.  Nonetheless, we should derive as much benefit as we can from these occasional 6�s by imagining what we might experience in the 7�s and 8�s, and then taking the appropriate precautions now.

As for me, believe it or not, I slept through most of it.  Because I think about earthquakes frequently as I give my talks or write this blog, I occasionally wake up from an earthquake dream that simply consists of the whole room shaking, some of which are darned scary.  For the real thing, by the time I realized something was really going on, it was almost over.  I�m disappointed!


Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Most people don�t know about San Francisco�s emergency drinking water hydrants, but it�s probably just as well...

Apologies to most of my readers, but this article is specific to San Francisco.  For decades, I believe, this city has had a separate network of hydrants for drinkable water, in addition to the fire hydrants.  There are about 65 of these hydrants, identifiable by their blue drop logo, spread throughout the city, with the idea that if water supplies were disrupted and people didn�t have enough emergency water stored, they could go to these emergency potable water hydrants and fill up.

That�s a nice idea, but getting information about these theoretical hydrants in the last few years has been like trying to locate unicorns.  We keep hearing about this program, but official information has been next to non-existent.  There was one source for a while, drop2drink.org, that provided a map of the hydrants, but a few years ago, that site mysteriously turned into a Thai wedding site!  (And some emergency info resources still link to that!)  To make matters worse, when I looked around the vicinity of where our closest hydrant was supposed to be, I didn�t see anything obvious.

I thought we had a breakthrough just a few weeks ago when I learned through SFist.com about a new interactive map that had shown up on Foursquare that was really pretty comprehensive.  It even had photos of some of the hydrants like the one at the top of this article, so I really thought we were getting somewhere.

So, imagine my surprise today when I revisited SFist and found a new article in which they had interviewed San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (PUC) emergency planning director Mary Ellen Carroll, who called the program out of date and said that the water in the hydrants should NOT be used after an emergency unless the PUC certifies it as ok, with no guarantee that it would turn out to be ok.  In fact, the article quoted Public Outreach director Amy Sinclair as saying that there's "no way should ANYONE be opening these hydrants except the Fire or Water Departments.�  Ms. Carroll went on to say that �We've been working over the last three years to develop a different plan and to walk away from the blue-dot hydrants for the moment.�  The whole article can be seen here.

Well, I guess if you are being wise and saving emergency water in your home (official recommendation of 1 gallon per person per day for 7 days), you hopefully won�t be missing those hydrants (and if you don�t live or work in San Francisco, you would not have cared about them anyway).  Remember that as I reported last year, the FDA says that unopened commercially-bottled water jugs can be stored indefinitely, and that the �use by� date printed on the jugs is really a best-by date rather than an expiration date.  As for the legendary SF emergency drinking water hydrant program, it sounds like the legend is about all that�s left.