I think Arnold the Governator did a good job addressing the public in these press releases. His quotes showed great leadership and commitment to succeeding. The release was also informative giving information about how many agencies were working on controlling the fires and the amount of resources these agencies had to get the job done. I read the number of tankers and fire engines and felt a bit of reassurance they are doing everything they can to improve the situation. The press release also informed the public of severity of the fires and not downplaying the situation by taking precaution evacuating the public in some areas.
The press release that addressed the recovery was good as well. They give facts on what the government is doing to help providing medical assistance and transportation. It showed more of the governors’ commitments to his community even after the flames are out helping them with a 10,000 dollar grant. However the information about how to receive the grant could have been clearly defined not just stating FEMA forwards the application after you get FEMAs maximum help. I ask how much is their maximum help? How many families are estimated to receive this grant? Maybe this 10,000 will only affect 20 homeowner’s max if that’s the case I am not impressed with the grant.
Overall the press releases are well written, informative, show commitment, and have a great situational awareness.
Thanks,
John Cunningham
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Hurricane Katrina: What are the Environmental Impacts of Hurricane Katrina?
Hurricane Katrina's Flooding Contaminated Groundwater:
Household hazardous wastes, pesticides, heavy metals and other toxic chemicals created a witch's brew of flood water that quickly seeped down into and contaminated groundwater across hundreds of miles. "The range of toxic chemicals that may have been released is extensive," says Johns Hopkins University of environmental health sciences professor Lynn Goldman. "We're talking about metals, persistent chemicals, solvents, materials that have numerous potential health impacts over the long term."
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers Hurricane Katrina the biggest disaster it has ever had to handle. According to Hugh Kaufman, an EPA senior analyst, environmental regulations in place to prevent the types of discharges that occurred during Hurricane Katrina were not enforced, making what would have been a bad situation much worse.
The reason for the environmental disaster during Hurricane Katrina was that environmental regulations were not at a high priority. But how could environmental regulations be on any ones mind when a catastrophe like this occurs. How do you balance a catastrophe such as this one as wll as environmental regulations. That is something the EPA will have to plan for future crises such as this one.
Household hazardous wastes, pesticides, heavy metals and other toxic chemicals created a witch's brew of flood water that quickly seeped down into and contaminated groundwater across hundreds of miles. "The range of toxic chemicals that may have been released is extensive," says Johns Hopkins University of environmental health sciences professor Lynn Goldman. "We're talking about metals, persistent chemicals, solvents, materials that have numerous potential health impacts over the long term."
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers Hurricane Katrina the biggest disaster it has ever had to handle. According to Hugh Kaufman, an EPA senior analyst, environmental regulations in place to prevent the types of discharges that occurred during Hurricane Katrina were not enforced, making what would have been a bad situation much worse.
The reason for the environmental disaster during Hurricane Katrina was that environmental regulations were not at a high priority. But how could environmental regulations be on any ones mind when a catastrophe like this occurs. How do you balance a catastrophe such as this one as wll as environmental regulations. That is something the EPA will have to plan for future crises such as this one.
ETM494 --- Crisis Communications Analysis
Governor Schwarzenegger Announces Additional Assistance for Fire Victims
From: The Office of the Governor
Released: October 27, 2007
Despite major calamities to the ecosystem, public and private lands and infrastructure due to the fires, the recorded disaster estimates provide evidence of preparedness and situational awareness; in a press-release initiated by California's Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on October 27, 2007, just a few days after the initial wildfires. Fortunately, the number of casualties and injuries documented were significantly trivial in comparison to the environmental crisis they had faced. Inevitably, the strategies and functions of California's emergency management team effectively provided the public with accurate information, evacuation efforts and aide to prevent the loss of human lives and reduce the amount of injuries.
In specific, Governor Schwarzenegger exemplified leadership commitment throughout the mishaps of the disaster by prioritizing customer focus, stimulating mitigation and having an adequate emergency response plan. His press-releases in response to the events were concise, empathetic and informative. He also appeared and attended news conferences and interviews in order to alleviate statewide panic and passionately kept the citizens of California thoroughly informed. There was one thing the wildfires couldn't turn to ashes: hope and a sense of optimism.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) also played a vital role in the recovery process from the incident by awarding grants and funds of up to $10,000 for all victims that had damage to household property, transportation and health care as a direct result of the fires. Opportunities on obtaining governmental resources were clearly outlined in the press-release for the public to take advantage of.
Overall, the press-release was helpful, believably credible and successful in the effort to detain the fires along with eliminating any potential or proceeding risks associated with the disaster. In order to sustain awareness and execute emergency operations, the key is to be educated and willing to promote education throughout society in general.
“California stands ready to provide victims all the assistance they need to get their lives back on track. Even after the fires are extinguished, we will still be here to help fire victims in need.”
-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Three-Mile Island's Legacy
“Three Mile Island 29 Years Later: Nuclear Safety Problems Still Unresolved”
This press release expresses safety concerns related to the recent momentum towards constructing new nuclear power plants in the
My main comment focuses on details. I tend to be a “splitter” and not a “lumper”. I usually want to know much more about and item of interest I read. The level of detail I want is not necessarily conducive to an effective press release. In this case the press release should have provided links to unbiased historical information and current studies. The lack of detailed information makes release seem to be more emotional than technical. The fact that the release was posted on the
The press release could have cited a recent article or other source that demonstrated the current momentum for new power plan construction as a counter point and need for action. The release could also have reviewed some of important facts of the
The Press release should have at least laid out some goals to improve safe operation of existing facilities and to ensure safe operation of new facilities. It may have even pointed out ones which should be phase out – i.e.
My last comment has to do with coverage. My Google search only revealed 34 sites listing the title of this press release – and none was a major newspaper. I only got 3 sites where the Google search engine picked up specific unique phrases from the release. I am surprised that the story did not receive much wider attention, especially with the recent attention to non-fossil fuel energy sources and concerns about organized terrorism.
Three Mile Island
After reading the Three Mile Island 29 Years Later: Nuclear Safety Problems Still Unresolved I was astonished by how people aren't taking more precautions in nuclear power plants. One would think that if there is a meltdown at a power plant that people would go in and look at what went wrong and then do what they could to prevent it from happening again. If people only knew what was going on in power plants in their communities I'm sure there would be plenty of petitions to shut down these plants.
Not fixing safety problems is a major issue and they definitely need to be addressed and fixed in nuclear power plants. Just about every time there is a major issue that happens in this world people come up with ways to stop it. For example, after 9/11 happened airport security was increased and rules became stricter about what a person can bring on a plane and all that security was increased because a couple of planes flew into some buildings. Now I'm not saying that 9/11 wasn't a big deal and that we should be concentrating more on power plants than airport security, but the odds of having another nuclear power plant meltdown has a higher chance of happening again than another 9/11 attack.
When it comes to things breaking down in a nuclear power plant they should be replaced instead of finding alternative ways to deal with it. I bet if the nuclear power plant workers would have replaced the cooling systems valves, that had broken 10 times prior to the meltdown, then maybe the meltdown of the three mile island would not have happened.
Not fixing safety problems is a major issue and they definitely need to be addressed and fixed in nuclear power plants. Just about every time there is a major issue that happens in this world people come up with ways to stop it. For example, after 9/11 happened airport security was increased and rules became stricter about what a person can bring on a plane and all that security was increased because a couple of planes flew into some buildings. Now I'm not saying that 9/11 wasn't a big deal and that we should be concentrating more on power plants than airport security, but the odds of having another nuclear power plant meltdown has a higher chance of happening again than another 9/11 attack.
When it comes to things breaking down in a nuclear power plant they should be replaced instead of finding alternative ways to deal with it. I bet if the nuclear power plant workers would have replaced the cooling systems valves, that had broken 10 times prior to the meltdown, then maybe the meltdown of the three mile island would not have happened.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Katrina: Who's To Blame?
What happened to the citizens, tax payers, law abiding humans living in Louisiana during the Hurricane Katrina travesty? Where was the help? What happened to the help that was promised by former President Bush? What was the mayor, governor, and state officials thinking 3 days prior to the Hurricane?
A lot of families perished in this horrific incident and all they and the rest of America heard was blame on the "other guy" after the incident. So, who is really to blame? In a report by factcheck.org, a report was generated stating that there was a storm approaching and in the event it should touch Mississippi and Louisiana, there will be devastating results. The report also stated that there should be ample time allotted for evacuation. However, 2 days prior to Katrina, the evacuation was issued.
Do we fault FEMA (who initially reported the possible damage), the citizens of Louisiana, the President, the officials of Louisiana?
While everyone is blaming everyone, the main focus is being lost in all of this; the people. It did not matter who should have reacted first, who should be held responsible; the citizens of Louisiana were dying, hungry, thirsty, afraid, and without hope. There should have been reaction regardless of responsibility to because they are human and we have an innate responsibility to the classification of human. The people of Louisiana had a natural right to expect and receive help; not 3 or more days after the fact but much sooner.
After reading about what was said and done about Katrina, I felt that sensitivity and reaction was lacking from the officials and responsible parties. The report gave sufficient information for a novice to understand the various dynamics of the Katrina incident so that drawing a personal conclusion would be accurate.
Katrina: An Exercise in Sensationalism
Two weeks prior to the drowning of the French Quarter, I was touring the cobblestone streets marvelling at the unique melting pot of culture, art and architecture that is New Orleans. The local pubs and restaurants were all buzzing about how oppresively humid the weather had been, even for the notroiously damp Louisiana. It still gives me chills to think that if I had postponed my flight and stayed in the city, as I had wanted, I would've been caught in the middle of the destructive path of Hurricane Katrina. Imagine my shock as I returned home to Arizona to discover the hotel I had slept in mere days earlier was now submerged. Surreal to say the least.
As the "reports" poured in about the immense failure of FEMA and the local government, like many Americans, I became concerned, frustrated, then furious. How could the rescuers leave people behind? Why was there a shortage of emergency responders? Why couldn't the National Guard establish order inside the supposed refuge of the Superdome?
Much like a terrible reality television program, scenes of the destruction and aftermath were cut to appear as though nothing was being done. People who didn't leave the flooded areas were not left behind, they chose to stay. And those who remained and were seen "looting" were, in majority, taking supplies necessary to survive (i.e. food, water, etc.).
I was shocked to discover that on the streets of New Orleans, during the chaos, there was not a single murder commited. Reporters and anchors would have us believe that anarchy ruled the day in the parrishes. Even more surprising was the actual response effort was the largest and fastest rescue effort in U.S. history. Applause are due to those who helped in the aid.
The only thing I can truly comment on is the responsibility of our national news providers. We live in an age where an idea can travel the globe in seconds. The ability to send and receive information is a great, and terrible power for any individual. That being said, I feel that while the response to Hurricane Katrina may not have remedied the situation as quickly as people had hoped, the circumstances were exasperated by overly passionate reporters and news anchors.
During a national crisis such as this, we all have a responsibility to assist our fellow americans. For example, I was working for a large food chain at the time pf Katrina and our organization donated hundreds of tons of food products to those affected by the destruction. The least that those who deliver information all over america could have done was support responders, not cut them down from behind a microphone. Those who were in the trenches, fighting to help surivors and the people of New Orleans deserve better than being painted as contributors to an exercise in anarchy following a disaster.
-Cameron
As the "reports" poured in about the immense failure of FEMA and the local government, like many Americans, I became concerned, frustrated, then furious. How could the rescuers leave people behind? Why was there a shortage of emergency responders? Why couldn't the National Guard establish order inside the supposed refuge of the Superdome?
Much like a terrible reality television program, scenes of the destruction and aftermath were cut to appear as though nothing was being done. People who didn't leave the flooded areas were not left behind, they chose to stay. And those who remained and were seen "looting" were, in majority, taking supplies necessary to survive (i.e. food, water, etc.).
I was shocked to discover that on the streets of New Orleans, during the chaos, there was not a single murder commited. Reporters and anchors would have us believe that anarchy ruled the day in the parrishes. Even more surprising was the actual response effort was the largest and fastest rescue effort in U.S. history. Applause are due to those who helped in the aid.
The only thing I can truly comment on is the responsibility of our national news providers. We live in an age where an idea can travel the globe in seconds. The ability to send and receive information is a great, and terrible power for any individual. That being said, I feel that while the response to Hurricane Katrina may not have remedied the situation as quickly as people had hoped, the circumstances were exasperated by overly passionate reporters and news anchors.
During a national crisis such as this, we all have a responsibility to assist our fellow americans. For example, I was working for a large food chain at the time pf Katrina and our organization donated hundreds of tons of food products to those affected by the destruction. The least that those who deliver information all over america could have done was support responders, not cut them down from behind a microphone. Those who were in the trenches, fighting to help surivors and the people of New Orleans deserve better than being painted as contributors to an exercise in anarchy following a disaster.
-Cameron
Three Mile Island
The meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979 was a terrible blow to America's confidence in nuclear energy as the power source of the future. The web article Three Mile Island: 29 Years Later: Nuclear Safety Problems Still Unresolved highlights some of the impacts of this disaster.
What is most disappointing about the issue is that it does not appear to have changed emergency protocol at nuclear plants even 30 years later. Scientists know what went wrong but somehow that has not translated into more efficient emergency plans. In fact, it has yielded a system that only functions up to the point where an emergency is most likely occur.
Perhaps the only respectable measure taken during the accident was the halting of production on 74 more new plants. However, that is very limited in its merit. The chain of events that have resulted is not sustainable. Ideally, this scenario should have yielded useful information about where more attention is needed in the nuclear power producing process and resulted in greater measures to ensure that every mechanism is working properly. But that's not quite the case. We know a lot more about what needs to happen to keep a plant working properly but the network of entities that could put that into action have not been connected.
It is all so unfortunate. We have been able to implement changes to various other systems as a result of disasters, but this one seems to be stagnant and shrouded in fear.
Three Mile Island 29 Years Later.
I was surprised by this article and how loose the regulations are and how laid back the regulators attitudes towards public safety really are. I wasn't aware of how common meltdowns are or could be.
Although supplying power to our cities is important, I think public safety should over rule short term profits. Plant owners over look what seem to be minor problems and turn into near catastrophes and its completely wrong to ignore even the smallest problems if the safety of our public is involved.
If nuclear power is meant to be, I think we should perfect process of making that energy without catastrophic consequences before starting to construct new plants all over our country. I am 100% for finding new ways to produce energy for our country more efficiently but it needs to be done responsibly, and taking away from the article the nuclear safety regulators are not being responsible.
Although supplying power to our cities is important, I think public safety should over rule short term profits. Plant owners over look what seem to be minor problems and turn into near catastrophes and its completely wrong to ignore even the smallest problems if the safety of our public is involved.
If nuclear power is meant to be, I think we should perfect process of making that energy without catastrophic consequences before starting to construct new plants all over our country. I am 100% for finding new ways to produce energy for our country more efficiently but it needs to be done responsibly, and taking away from the article the nuclear safety regulators are not being responsible.
2007 California Fires
When looking at the public announcements and stories related to the 2007 Southern California wildfires it is interesting to note how well prepared the response seemed to be.
Starting with http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/7786/ we see that Governor Schwarzenegger is doing a very good job about explaining the possible relief options and shelters available. He describes how he is planning to help families in need financially and physically. The primary issue I see with this announcement is that there is no indication of where the shelters will be; how to apply for aid; or who to contact if you are in need of aid. This basically makes the gesture seem more of a political nature rather than one targeting the best interests of those in need. The announcement should have clearly identified what is available and how to get it so that anyone who is in need who heard or read the announcement could receive the described aid.
Moving on to the next announcement 6 days later, http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/7946/
We see that the announcement of aid is actually being backed up with descriptions of what the aid is as well as who's eligible and how to get it. There are both phone numbers and web links to FEMA so that those who are in need can contact them to receive aid. Moving on from the additional 10,000$ being offered to families who are receiving the maximum amount of FEMA aid we see that there is an announcement of what kind of recovery and medical services are being offered in the areas affected by the fires. There is a very in depth description of who is offering the help and what they are doing towards the relief. However, there are still several loose ends left in regards to where licensing facilities are. This of course is getting nitpicky as the announcement is very thorough. However it would be nice for each specific area in the bullet points to have links to more information. This would allow those expecting medical supplies to know if their request had been expedited and how to apply to have your request expedited; what services are offered at what facilities and where to go if you are located near one of the four facilities still closed; where CALMAT teams are operating and what services they are providing; and the location of the facilities that offered disability services. Overall all I think the October 27th announcement is a much better representation of what is needed in a public announcement but there are the areas I mentioned above that could be better.
Joshua Gunhner
9/4/2010
Starting with http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/7786/ we see that Governor Schwarzenegger is doing a very good job about explaining the possible relief options and shelters available. He describes how he is planning to help families in need financially and physically. The primary issue I see with this announcement is that there is no indication of where the shelters will be; how to apply for aid; or who to contact if you are in need of aid. This basically makes the gesture seem more of a political nature rather than one targeting the best interests of those in need. The announcement should have clearly identified what is available and how to get it so that anyone who is in need who heard or read the announcement could receive the described aid.
Moving on to the next announcement 6 days later, http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/7946/
We see that the announcement of aid is actually being backed up with descriptions of what the aid is as well as who's eligible and how to get it. There are both phone numbers and web links to FEMA so that those who are in need can contact them to receive aid. Moving on from the additional 10,000$ being offered to families who are receiving the maximum amount of FEMA aid we see that there is an announcement of what kind of recovery and medical services are being offered in the areas affected by the fires. There is a very in depth description of who is offering the help and what they are doing towards the relief. However, there are still several loose ends left in regards to where licensing facilities are. This of course is getting nitpicky as the announcement is very thorough. However it would be nice for each specific area in the bullet points to have links to more information. This would allow those expecting medical supplies to know if their request had been expedited and how to apply to have your request expedited; what services are offered at what facilities and where to go if you are located near one of the four facilities still closed; where CALMAT teams are operating and what services they are providing; and the location of the facilities that offered disability services. Overall all I think the October 27th announcement is a much better representation of what is needed in a public announcement but there are the areas I mentioned above that could be better.
Joshua Gunhner
9/4/2010
Erica Swain - Critique - Governor Schwarzenegger Issues Statement on Wildfires in Southern California
Governor Schwarzenegger’s press release published on October 21, 2007 (http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/7786/) has both positive and negative attributes. The positive is that the release tells the facts of what the fires destroyed. The information was not sugar coated to lessen the fear of the community. The number of structures destroyed and the areas destroyed by the fire was released through the Governor and is a fact that would be released at some point in time. I think that being honest about the hard facts is good, since the truth will eventually come out at the end. And being quick to respond before untrue gossip got out was very smart on their part. The problem with this article is that the current status of the fire is not stated. Where the fire currently is and where it is headed is not mentioned. I think a point should be made about the number of firefighters and what methods they are using to control the fires. Also a statement should have been made about the outcome from this event. In general I think that a press release should be short and state the facts without misleading the public and this article did just that.
3 Mile Island*** Public Notification
ETM494 Blog Assignment 9/4
CALIFORNIA WILDFIRES OF 2007
Governor Announces Aid (Press Release)
http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/7946/
Governor Recognizes Needs (Press Release)
http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/7786/
After reading about the wildfires in Southern California and from what I read when it initially happened, I was impressed about how quickly the state was addressed and also about Governor’s attention to the detail that was given. He was very thorough in explaining what was going on, who was affected, and who will be helping to contain the wildfires. However, one thing that I thought he could have done a better job on was reaffirming the population of a positive outcome. That they would quickly contain the fires and that they would be doing everything to ensure the least amount of damage and catastrophe was done.
I do believe that one great thing that the State of California did do was offer up cash grants of up to $10,000 to help some of the individuals who suffered losses due to the fires. Overall though, I do believe that a good job was done to be proactive about the situation, and to me, that is the most important part; not leaving people in the dark helps to keep them informed.
-John Harvill
Assistance for Fire Victims..... Jon Crowe, 1st entry
On October 21st 2007 California Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger issued a statement in response to the wildfires within the southern region.
“Currently there are a number of fires in Southern California, being driven by strong Santa Ana winds, which have destroyed several homes. In Los Angeles County, the Canyon Fire has burned several hundred acres so far and poses a serious threat to nearby communities. My administration is working closely with federal and local officials; we will continue to mobilize the necessary resources to fight all of these fires,” said Governor Schwarzenegger. “I am continuously receiving briefings on the situation and have committed to sending additional personnel and equipment, if needed, as well as setting up evacuation centers to help those who have been displaced from their homes. I commend those individuals who have acted quickly to evacuate from the dangerous areas, for the safety of themselves and their families.”
I believe the statement issued by the Governor was well communicated, he first recognizes the crisis and implies the threat level of the situation. Secondly, Arnold communicates what he and his administration is doing whether directly or indirectly in efforts to show his commitment and concern over the crisis. Finally, the Governor relays his appreciation to the residents within the area that have complied with the evacuation request to ensure their safety.
Although the article gives more detail regarding which areas are directly effected and what actions need to be taken, I felt the Governor should have elaborated on the which areas could possibly be effected next and why..... (wind/weather/containment)..... also, what precautions need to be taken and emergency contacts, hotline, ext.......
Additionally, the Governator has offered cash and medical assistance, disaster food stamps, transportation, and prescription replacements for those affected. He issued this statement:
“California stands ready to provide fire victims all the assistance they need to get their lives back on track. Even after the fires are extinguished, we will still be here to help fire victims in need."
The statement was brief and to the point, the rest of the article provided good information regarding qualifications to receive the financial benefits, contact information for multiple relief and assistance organizations and so on. Overall all I feel the crisis communications within the provided information was delivered in a appropriate and honest way that people would understand and appreciate on all levels.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UM0MBhOZ6c&feature=fvw
Schwarzenegger Declares State Of Emergency
-Jon Crowe
California Wildfires of 2007
The following video shows Governor Schwarzenegger discussing the wildfires and their frequency.
The announcement that Governor Schwarzenegger seemed to be very comprehensive, including specific details about the program that has been put into place to help the fire’s victims. This release briefly spoke to the assistance on the federal level and what is also being implemented on the state level. There was a link embedded in the text which directed readers to local assistance centers and a phone number to contact for additional information. The bullet points encompassed the teams of specialists that were helping victims and what their missions were. This statement appears to be very well done and includes quite a bit of information for being sure a brief statement. I would classify this announcement as successfully achieving the goal of informing the reader.
Three Mile Island: Too Soon To Forget
The article, Three Mile Island 29 Years Later: Nuclear Safety Problems Unresolved, addresses the fact that though it has been nearly three decades since the partial meltdown of the nuclear facility located on Three Mile Island, safety measures are not in place that could ensure safe expansion of United States' nuclear capacity. Released at a time when nuclear energy is being reconsidered as a power resource it addresses concerns directly relevant to public in language that is both scientific and logical yet written simply enough for the layman to understand. It points out that as old facilities reach their intended limits and new nuclear ventures are undertaken proper measures are more pertinent than ever as these two stages pose highest risks. However, the lack of quotes deprives the article of authority though it may be absolutely factual and accurate.
Three Mile Island
Three Mile Island is a prime example of companies taking priority in profit over safety. Although no event can be predicted and not all safety measures can prevent the unknown, Three Mile Island was no exception. The partial meltdown of one of the two units was caused by a faulty cooling system valve, which not to mention was an ongoing issue. In one of the reports a worker at the plant warned of the possible consequences if the valves were not fixed but nothing was done in time.
The similarities are too common in today’s world of lightly regulated, irresponsible corporations. BP for example could have most likely prevented their accident on deep sea drill Horizon if a minor issue was fixed. Unfortunately due to the lack of response for minor issues accident happen and blame must fall somewhere.
In the responses to the public on the nuclear power plant issue, reported by Union of Concerned Scientist (UCS) and Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), they clearly provide different stand points to the situation. UCS does an excellent job explaining to the public the changes in safety and regulation for nuclear power plants. Further going into the average life span and high risk points of time for a nuclear plant. Obviously the article is against the opening of more nuclear plants till the issues are addressed further and proof is given to the public that proper safety measures are in place.
On the other hand there is the NEI who gives statistics of the previous year dated on the article proclaiming that nuclear power plants are at the safest in the industry and industry goals have exceeded their end of the year expectations. I believe that they are withholding crucial information for people to make an educated decision and in order for anything to move forward they need to disclose this information. Giving a previous year’s industry expectations and achievements do not qualify for enough information for the public. The NEI do an excellent job sugar coating the industry with glorified statistics of exceeding goals but it’s not enough without a plan for the future and a straight forward company.
To me personally it comes down to being properly informed and there are groups that will help and lead astray the education of the public. As a person who realizes the drive for profitability I tend to not believe what a corporation says but rather an external group doing research from the outside looking in, who have not been paid by the company for there statistics.
Three Mile Island
The nuclear power provided at Three Mile Island which is located in Pennsylvania is composed of two cores TMI1 and TMI2. The TMI2 core was shut down after a partial meltdown which occurred in 1979. Retrospectively, has the plant caused any environmental problems since the accident, or is it a time bomb waiting to devastate the east coast.
Since the meltdown the following incidents have occurred:
- For eleven days during June and July 1980 approximately 43,000 curies of radioactive Krypton-85 were released into the air.
- During 1984 while fixing TMI2 radioactive gases had been released in the environment.
- 1993 TMI2 radioactive water was evaporated into the air.
Though stricter safety standards have been imposed on the nuclear plant to reduce health and environmental problems, it can be viewed more as a band aid approach used to keep the plant active. There has been no significant modernization of the plant which could guarantee containment of radio active gases in the event of another melt down. It also needs to be considered that the plant is privately owned where profits could trump safety.
Considering the fact that nuclear energy has been around for less than 60 years, but nuclear reactor components like uranium235 have a half life of over 700 million years. Odds are against nuclear energy being safe in the long term.
Friday, September 3, 2010
2007 California Wildfires
Wildfires in California are not rare occurrences or something way out of the ordinary. With southern California's strong Santa Ana winds and dry terrane its only a matter of time before something sparks. There have been several large wildfires in California over the past decade and responses and suppression efforts have improved overtime, but fires of 2007 were more devastating than anyone could have expected. 
With the wildfires burning more that half a million acres the response to these fires were overwhelming. From the two press releases I read by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger I felt that he was handling the situation the best of his ability. After the fires started FEMA and President Bush both took action to help with the situation out side of what Governor Schwarzenegger could handle. In Governor Schwarzeneggers press releases he is very reassuring in that he is doing everything in his power to help the citizens of California. He set up grants and resources to aid the people who's lives have been directly effected by the fire. The one thing I noticed that I thought Governor Schwarzenegger did good was all the additional resources he brought in. From what I felt and understood by his press releases was that even though his administration was in charge, he was handing a lot of the responsibilities and decisions off to people who were more qualified in these disasters. A few things I think he could have talked about in these releases was what his actions were going to be immediately after the fire.
Communication is the biggest factor when dealing with any kind of disaster like the 2007 California Wildfires. From first contact with the people about the situation to what will be done six months after the disaster is over. You can have the greatest leader taking control of a situation but if they do not know how to communicate there plan, it will do no good. I think Governor Schwarzenegger did a good job keeping the people informed of the situation, and I am sure any mistake that was made will be learned from for the future.
Hurricane Latrina...er Katrina Myths rebuffed analysis
The biggest issue I can see from the entire mess was the lack of infrastructure and resources allocated to obtaining up to date information. From what I understand simply knowing what is going on is the first step to doing anything. For example during the interview with the FEMA director 3 days after landfall he said that they had just discovered a convention center with people in it, that was near to one of the large refugee centers of the disaster… The entire thing was a catastrophic failure in preparation.
Another major issue that I can see is that the people who are best at handling intense large scale situations like that were not even used until several days after the incident. This was confirmed in a statement from President Bush at the bottom of the article. (I sort of wrote this before I had read that part.) My uncle was in the logistics division of the Army and he was telling me how much more organized they are compared to most any civilian entity. His example was in Haiti, where they sent in his old team to take charge because all the non-governmental entities had much less training than the military for routing supplies and people around. They are trained to be the most efficient because they are expected to be able to do it while somebody is shooting at them.
I would have to say is that you really couldn’t blame the FEMA director Michael Brown for the job that he did. It was probably the best job that anyone could have done with the resources that were in place.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)