Two More Views on Recovery — the decisions are crucial to future of Japan

I accidentally ran across these newsletter reports that come from Pacific Forum CSIS. Now that the nuclear crisis has been elevated to a Level 7 rating, the pressure is all the greater on the Japanese to achieve an efficient, effective, and visionary recovery.

From CSIS newsletter, PacNet, #18, March 22, 2011. Facing a Complex Crisis: Thoughts on Japan’s Recovery, by Haruko Satoh. Excerpts:

Japanese public sentiment sways against nuclear power, the world would be losing one of most highly advanced producers of nuclear power plants. While development of alternative modes of electricity generation—such as solar and wind power—that do not rely on fossil fuel must be pursued, the nuclear option cannot be dropped as yet to meet the world’s growing demands for energy. In this context, the steps that Japan takes to recover from this will likely influence decision-makers, as well as people, around the world.

From PacNet #18A, March 25, 2011; Japan: Don’t Waste the Crisis, by Wm H. Overholt. Excerpt:

Nowithstanding heroic engineers, Tokyo Electric Power Company, the heart of the nuclear crisis, exemplifies the politically coddled corporations causing Japan’s malaise. No other nuclear company in the industrialized democracies has been allowed such a history of bungling, cover-ups, and systematic disregard of security recommendations.  If TEPCO is understood as the archetype of Japan’s problems, the nuclear crisis can provoke a rebirth. A refocused Japan, with its superior education, superior technology, superior companies, and superior civility, can teach the world how to manage a graying but growing society. Japan can once again inspire.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Reply

Recovery — a realistic account of what’s entailed

Tsunami wall at Tsu-shi, Japan

Image via Wikipedia

Debris, challenges pile up in Japan 1 month later. AP, April 11. This is a candid, gritty account of what recovery tasks are ahead for the Japanese.

A month after Japan’s earthquake and tsunami, the challenges seem as daunting as ever: Thousands are missing and feared dead, tens of thousands have fled their homes, a leaking nuclear plant remains crippled and powerful aftershocks keep coming. Vast tracts of the northeast are demolition sites: The stuff of entire cities is sorted into piles taller than three-story buildings around which dump trucks and earth-movers crawl. Ankle-deep water stagnates in streets, and massive fishing boats lie perched atop pancaked houses and cars. The occasional telephone poll or bulldozer is sometimes the only skyline.

“It’s a hellish sorrow,” said Numata Takahashi, 56, who escaped his home in Natori just before the waters came. “I don’t know where we’ll go, but I’m not coming back here. … We’ll go somewhere where there are no tsunamis.”

Two strong aftershocks have killed people and sunk thousands more households into darkness, while also delaying progress on restoring power to those in darkness since March 11. Facing the prospect of massive shortfalls in the hot summer months, the government is asking companies to cut their consumption drastically or face mandatory energy caps. Over this destruction and deprivation, the fear of radiation hangs. The tsunami knocked out power at the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant and reactors have been overheating since.

Progress in stabilizing the complex comes slowly most days, or not at all, as the new tremors and radiation repeatedly halt work. Monday’s aftershock briefly cut electricity to the plant and halted work while technicians took cover, but did not endanger operations, according to officials.

All the more reason for doing some recovery planning pre-event; and of course more recovery planning afterwards, when the specifics of the destruction are known.

Japan – working on recovery plan

THOUGHTS ABOUT JAPAN'S NATURAL DISASTER

Image by roberthuffstutter via Flickr

The disasters took place one month ago, so it’s not surprising the pressure is mounting for the Japanese government to devise a master plan for recovery. According to the Nikkei news article’s headline: Recovery Blueprint Needed – Soon. Since this is a subscription service, I cannot link to the full text article. The key point here is:

Japan must quickly present to the rest of the world its blueprint for how the country will rebuilding following the devastating earthquake and tsunami a month ago and stabilize the troubled …nuclear plants.

The disaster has dealt a sever blow to Japan’s globalization efforts. the quake and the nuclear crisis cared away foreign tourists...

Reconstruction can and should be more than just restoring things to their previous conditions. With creativity, the disaster could be an opportunity to enhance Japan’s strength.

Other reports have indicated that many Japanese businesses are hobbled due to the outflow of foreign workers. Plus, the many homeless citizens are growing despondent about a lengthy stay in shelters.

Thanks to Phil Palin for pointing out the Nikkei article.


The High Personal Cost of Disaster

Fateful Choice on a Day of Disaster; When the Tsunami Struck, a Mayor Had to Decide Between His City and Family; WSJ, April 9, 2011.  Mayor Futoshi Toba of Rikuzentakata, Japan, lost his wife and his house in the Japan tsunami, but stayed on his job at city hall.  This article highlights the conflict between personal and professional demands.

More than 2,300 people—a tenth of the population here—were dead or missing.

A month later, Mr. Toba finds himself in a role of bewildering complexity and responsibility, as Japan struggles to recover from the worst natural disaster of its modern history and its leaders debate how—and even whether—to rebuild a part of the country that was already in steep decline. The decisions Mr. Toba and other local politicians make now may well determine whether the hard-hit areas on the northeast coast survive and thrive, or never recover.Mayor Futoshi Toba’s house in Rikuzentakata was destroyed in the tsunami.

Four New Issuances of Interest this Week- update

  • Presidential Policy Directive (PPD)#8 the full text document (6 pp.)  was issued on April 8th; click here to access it. So far (April 9) the only discussion of the meaning and implications of this document is taking place on the Homeland Security Watch blog; the blog posts there are generating some interesting commentary.
  • FEMA Strategic Plan for 2011-2014 and FEMA’s Capstone Doctrine (dated Nov. 2010) are available here.

Why Can’t We Figure Out How To Do Disaster Recovery in the U.S.?

Flag of San Francisco

Image via Wikipedia

We have had lots of time, we have many well-educated people, we are a wealthy country, and we have frequent major disasters. So why don’t we have the knowledge and guidance — at the federal, state, or local levels — to do recovery planning effectively and efficiently, either before or after a disaster? 

California Looks to Update Quake Plans, Wall St. Journal, April 1.

But San Francisco officials admit they have undertaken far less planning for what to do after an earthquake to ensure that residents are resettled and buildings are reconstructed quickly. Rob Dudgeon, deputy director of the city’s Department of Emergency Management, said the issue was driven home by the slow pace of rebuilding New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, adding “there’s not a city in the United States” prepared for such recovery.

In 2008, then-city administrator Edwin Lee, who now is interim San Francisco mayor, began heading an effort to increase the city’s focus on recovery planning. Since then, San Francisco has tapped experts at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government and the San Francisco Planning & Urban Research Association. “We don’t want to lose our people” to other cities by not rebuilding quickly enough, said Sarah Karlinsky, deputy director of the nonprofit think tank.

One aim is to find ways to ease bureaucracy after a catastrophe, such as the city’s cumbersome building-permitting process, Mr. Dudgeon said. He said officials also intend to develop proposals that the city’s Board of Supervisors could approve immediately after a disaster, to streamline decision making about issues such as whether to demolish the remains of historic buildings and rebuild on unstable land—processes that often take years.

San Francisco, he said, is in the “toddler stages” of that effort.

So, here is why I posed the question in the heading of this post:

  • San Francisco had a major earthquake in 1906, which is 105 years ago.
  • FEMA was formed in 1979, which is 32 years ago.

Just how long does it take to get beyond the toddler stage of recovery? And who and what are needed to do that? Your comments are invited!
So far, we have 3 perspectives on the issue; please write in with your opinion.

Shifting into Recovery Phase in Japan

For a truly compelling set of photos of the devastation, see those taken by an EERI (Earthquake Engineering Research Institute) team, posted March 26. They will give you some feel for what the victims experienced and a better appreciation of what recovery will entail.

See Phil Palin’s blog today in HLSwatch.com titled Japan moves from response to recovery. In the Prime Minister’s speech, he notes the following actions to be taken:

  • elevate new structures
  • eco focus for new construction
  • special council to be establish regarding needed land use decisions
  • nationalization (essentially eminent domain powers)  of devastated land that is abandoned or excluded from past uses
  • coordination with local government

Some of these are quick bold measures, and ones we have not seen used in the U.S. for recovery.  In my view, the emphasis on expediting land use change and rebuilding are something the U.S. should be paying attention to.

Some additional information about the focus on clean energy and other measures aimed at promoting recovery and restoration will be noted in the next few postings.

Japan Government to Buy Stake in TEPCO

South-Yokohama Powerplant (Yokohama,Japan)

Image via Wikipedia

According to Reuters, via the HuffPost on April 1, the Japanese government will buy a partial state in TEPCO, in an effort to gain more control over response and recovery activities. See : Japan Government To Reportedly Buy Partial Stake In Tokyo Electric Power, Owner Of Nuclear Plant

Japan’s government plans to take control of Tokyo Electric Power Co., the operator of a stricken nuclear power plant, by injecting public funds, the Mainichi newspaper said on Friday. But the government is unlikely to take more than a 50 percent stake in the company, an unnamed government official was quoted by the daily as saying. “If the stake goes over 50 percent, it will be nationalized. But that’s not what we are considering,” the official was quoted by the paper as saying.

The company, also known as TEPCO, has come under fire for its handling of the emergency at its Fukushima Daichi nuclear complex, triggered by a March 11 earthquake and tsunami that left more than 27,500 people dead or missing. Mainichi quoted an unnamed government official as saying: “It will be a type of injection that will allow the government to have a certain level of (management) involvement.”

Disaster Preparedness Deficiencies in Japan

Two other bloggers have captured some useful information about the deficiencies now coming to the fore about the Japanese disasters, so I will point you to their articles:

(1) Eric Holderman, Disaster-zone.com, cited this article: in Scientific American: Japan Faces Up to Failure of Its Earthquake Preparations;Systems for forecasting, early warning and tsunami protection all fell short on 11 March. Posted on March 29.

(2) This is an excerpted version of a posting on the Homeland Security Watch blog (hlswatch.com) on April 1., by Arnold Bogis. I removed the baseball analogies in order to save space.

Some obvious lessons for homeland security planning in general.  Yet, just as in baseball, this balance between best and worst case scenario planning can be difficult in even the best prepared of countries–or simply ignored.

Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s disaster plans greatly underestimated the scope of a potential accident at its Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, calling for only one stretcher, one        satellite phone and 50 protective suits in case of emergencies.

Hard to believe, but it seems that in a nation often lauded as among the best, if not the best, in terms of preparation for a natural disaster simply dropped the ball regarding catastrophic planning for nuclear facilities. More from the Wall Street Journalarticle describing the lack of proper planning:

Disaster-response documents for Fukushima Daiichi, examined by The Wall Street Journal, also contain few guidelines for obtaining outside help, providing insight into why Japan struggled to cope with a nuclear crisis after an earthquake and tsunami devastated the facility. There are no references to Tokyo firefighters, Japanese military forces or U.S. equipment.

The main disaster-readiness manual, updated annually, envisions the fax machine as a principal means of communication with the outside world and includes detailed forms for Tepco managers when faxing government officials. Much hinged on the fax machine. One section directs managers to notify the industry minister, the local governor and mayors of nearby towns of any problems “all at once, within 15 minutes, by facsimile.” In certain cases, the managers were advised to follow up by phone to make sure the fax had arrived.

Obviously one could take up several blog posts to simply unpack these and other related revelations. Undoubtedly, other Japanese efforts at disaster readiness saved thousands, if not tens of thousands, of lives following the earthquake and tsunami.  I have serious doubts about the current ability of the United States to manage a similar size catastrophe–both the immediate impact and long term consequences.  And I agree … that the nuclear crisis is needlessly overshadowing the larger natural disaster.

Yet it still boggles the mind that a society so prepared could allow such a substandard state of planning to exist.  The current disaster would not have been avoided if much of the response plan had been improved–only moving the back-up generators to higher ground would have saved the plant from the loss of power that initially drove events.  However, this disaster did underline the deficiencies in planning and hints at the difficulties that it caused in responding to this maximum of maximums event.

What the managers of the Fukushima plant failed to do was honestly consider even a bad, never mind worst, case scenario. * * *   Perhaps planning for an earthquake and resulting tsunami stronger than the reliable historical record indicates would not have been feasible before current events.  But the existence of a decent Plan B may have helped ameliorate the consequences of this Godzilla-esq black swan that fell on the people of Japan.

I suggest readers to the hlswatch.com website to see the comments and discussion today.