S98-7
THE USE OF REAL-TIME SEISMIC INFORMATION IN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

Moderator: Jim Goltz, California Institute of Technology
Recorder: John Carroll, California State University, Fullerton
Discussants: Woody Savage, Pacific Gas & Electric Company; Constance Perett, Los Angeles County Office of Emergency Management; Ed Bortugno, California Office of Emergency Services; Tom Durham, Central U.S. Earthquake Consortium

Jim Goltz began the discussion by outlining the types of real-time data that might be available from regional seismic networks, including source data (magnitude, location, depth), GPS data, rapid loss estimation, ground shaking maps, rapid information from instrumented structures, and earthquake early warning. Goltz listed the potential users of real-time seismic information as government agencies with emergency response/recovery functions, utility companies, transportation and telecommunication organizations, large corporations with geographically distributed assets, media, and educational institutions.

The discussants were asked to address four questions from their agency's perspective.

  1. In closely monitored seismic regions, what earthquake information is now becoming available within a few minutes of an earthquake's occurrence?

  2. How can such rapid earthquake information be used in response and recovery operations? What are the limitations of such information and its use?

  3. What rapid earthquake information is most desired in response and recovery operations? What type of training is necessary to ensure its optimal utilization?

  4. What are the best methods to transmit rapidly available seismic information from networks to users? What are the most effective means of obtaining user feedback to promote optimal use of such information.

Woody Savage described Pacific Gas and Electric's (PG&E) rapid earthquake notification systems for northern California. When a spike in the system occurs, managers ask:

  1. What happened? Was it lightning, an earthquake, etc? Managers need to know the answer within 10 seconds.

  2. How large is the region affected? Managers need a rough, but accurate, estimate in a few tens of seconds.

  3. How much damage occurred? This is the most critical information emergency responders need so they can make resource deployment decisions.

The bottom line from the utility's perspective is useful information is needed as fast as possible. Savage cited limitations of the PG&E system. He noted that the reliability of the system is questionable as there has been no big quake to test it yet, the value of the information provided by the system decreases quickly with time, and keeping personnel trained is an important challenge.

Constance Perett recounted examples from the Northridge earthquake that highlighted where better real-time information could have been useful. She identified several areas where shake maps combined with GIS data could have speeded aid, streamlined the building inspection process, and resulted in better deployment of resources. Perett emphasized the relationship between faster damage assessment and federal assistance by stating that "quicker damage assessment equals quicker loss estimates equals quicker federal relief." The limitations of this type of system include an unrealistic belief that problems can be immediately fixed because they can be immediately identified, dependence on vulnerable technology, and a problem in not letting this technology replace mitigation. She closed by indicating a big challenge is to develop policy and training that will minimize panic and inappropriate response on the part of the public who we are trying to protect.

Ed Bortugno assessed the past accomplishments and future prospects of real-time seismic networks. Past efforts, particularly in Northridge, were successful enough to warrant future investment. Tri-Net is a seismic network that will be able to produce accurate shake maps within 10 minutes of an event. He reiterated others' comments that this information will allow more efficient emergency response resource allocation. Also, Bortugno discussed the possibility of early warnings from Tri-Net and possible applications in schools or other public facilities. He stressed that because the information is going to come fast, in order to use it effectively, there is a need for well trained users. Finally, he cautioned that accuracy should not be sacrificed for the sake of speed. Bortugno believes that if it takes 30 minutes to produce reliable information, that is better than inaccurate data in a shorter time frame.

Tom Durham highlighted the different set of challenges faced by the Midwest. It is a multi-state seismic zone and there has been no recent earthquake experience. The region has a large rural population and very little infrastructure inventory data available. HAZUS and other models are being used to create loss estimations that can be used as planning baselines with the hope of galvanizing multi-jurisdictional planning. Durham also stressed the need for training and data collection.

The question and answer period began addressing the efficacy and speed of HAZUS and then focused on the problems associated with false alarms that might happen with early warming systems.

Return to Hazards Center Home Page

Return to Index of 1998 Session Summaries

August 28, 1998

hazctr@colorado.edu