If only we had a tsunami warning system... - DEC 30, 2004

If only we had a tsunami warning system... - DEC 30, 2004: "Day of the KILLER WAVE If only we had a tsunami warning system..." By Teh Jen Lee jenlee@sph.com.sg ONE big lesson may be learned from the tragedy. If South Asia had a comprehensive tsunami warning system in place, thousands of lives could have been saved. There could have been hours of advance warning, enough for evacuation of areas affected by killer waves. The technology is available. But there was no proper system to transmit the results to the affected areas. Sunday's tsunami hit nine countries in South Asia, reached Africa and even crossed into the Pacific Ocean. The Pacific Tsunami Warning System (PTWS), an international warning effort formalised in 1965, actually sent out warnings to Thailand and Indonesia. Comprising 26 countries, PTWS monitors seismological and tidal stations to evaluate whether earthquakes will produce tsunamis, and disseminates tsunami warning information to national authorities. But there was no system for translating the alerts into quick action. India and Sri Lanka, which were devastated by killer waves, are not even part of the system. US Geological Survey geophysicist Ken Hudnut told AFP: ''We knew that the whole coast of Sumatra was capable of large, damaging earthquakes and large tsunamis. ''There was sufficient time between the time of the quake and the time of the tsunamis hitting some of the affected areas to have saved many lives, if a proper warning system had been in place.'' One problem, perhaps, was that dangerous tsunamis are extremely rare in the Indian Ocean: The last appears to have been in 1883. And since 1509, Indian Ocean tsunamis have never hit more than one place at a time. Under the PTWS system, for any underwater earthquake exceeding 6.5 on the Richter scale, an alert is issued if a single wave gauge shows that the ocean is reacting. Such instruments are installed out at sea as well as near the coast. S'PORE IN NO DANGER Singapore's meteorological services division, under the National Environment Agency, joined PTWS so it would know of earthquakes and related phenomena (like tsunamis) in the region. It does not participate as a warning centre. An NEA spokesman said that, this time, no information was received as Singapore was in no danger. When asked how timely communication channels are maintained in case another tsunami happens, the spokesman declined to elaborate. The system has helped minimise the damage of tsunamis in Hawaii and Japan, said Dr Chew Soon Hoe, assistant dean of engineering in NUS, who has been studying earthquake and engineering geology for 15 years. Dr Chew, 44, told The New Paper that countries in the region should work together to install its own monitoring hardware such as sufficient wave sensors. He said: ''Implementing a system and maintaining the hardware is costly. Plus you must have the right technical expertise to interpret the data and send out necessary warnings. ''But there can be a trade-off, for example, there need not be too many tidal gauges, just enough for strategic locations such as major coastal town where tsunamis will have great tourism and industrial impact.'' Otherwise, scientists who detect earthquakes must scramble to get life-saving information out to countries or communities an ocean away: Just what happened on Sunday. About 15 minutes after the quake hit, calls were hurriedly made from the PTWS centre in Hawaii. But centre director Charles McCreery told reporters that the centre did not have direct contacts with Indian Ocean nations. In a scene right out of a movie, scientists desperately tried to warn Asian nations by calling the US embassies in their capitals. Ms Laura Kong, director of the United Nations' International Tsunami Information Centre, told the International Herald Tribune (IHT): ''Outside the Pacific, these things don't occur very often at all so the challenge is how to make people and government officials aware.'' DID NOT SENSE DANGER In the case of Thailand, officials of the meteorological department were at a seminar in Cha-am, when an emergency meeting was called, reported The Nation. The Bangkok office had told them the quake was 8.1 on the Richter scale so they didn't think there would be a tsunami: A quake of 7.6 which hit Sumatra two years ago did not affect Thailand. Since only four people out of 900 in the department are earthquake experts - and a tsunami had not hit Thailand in more than 300 years - they probably didn't know that a difference of 0.5 on the Richter scale represents 16 times more energy released. As it turned out, the quake was a devastating 9.0. Ironically, at a June meeting of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, experts said the Indian Ocean should have a warning network as it has a significant threat from both local and distant tsunamis. Mr Tad Murty, a tsunami expert from India based in Canada, told IHT: ''There's no reason for a single individual to get killed in a tsunami. The waves are totally predictable.''