Geoinformation Technology and Disaster Management

Paper to the Interexpo Geo-Siberia-2012

by Gottfried KonecnyEmeritus Professor

Leibniz University Hannover, Germany

Geoinformation Technology and Disaster Management

1. Introduction – the Role of ISPRS and EARSeL

2. Possible Actors in Disaster Management

National Actors (EMERCOM)International Actors (UNOOSA & Space Agencies)

3. Conclusion

ISPRS and EARSeL Experiences

- The Oder (Odra) Flood with impacts for Poland,

Czech Republic and Germany (EU application)

- Council of Europe Support to EMERCOM,

Ministry of the Russian Federation (Review)

- UN-OOSA Charter for Disasters and cooperation

with the Space Agencies

Successful Model 1:

a powerful national agency

with the needed infrastructure

Required Disaster Mitigation Infrastructure

of EMERCOM

1. Central Emergency Decision Centre

2. Real Time Satellite Imagery Reception (NOAA, etc.)

3. Seismic Networks

4. GIS Information of all endangered regions based on:

- digital topographic maps

- population data as a GIS layer

- evacuation routes

- layer on building material type used

5. Fire, Contamination or Accident reporting system

6. Computer enhanced Analysis capabilities

7. Studies on frequency of disasters

8. Preparation of Manuals for Disaster Actions

Natural Disasters in Russia

Technical

Disasters

In Russia

1996 &

1997

Human Induced Hazards:

Nuclear Power Plants

Chemical Hazards

Industrial Fires

Pipelines

Transport

Hydraulic Stuctures (dams)

Municipal engineering construction

Municipal engineering energy and water supply

Combined effects (water, oil or gas extraction causing

subsidence, earth quake damages)

Seismic Danger Zones in Russia

Decision Support Room at EMERCOM, Moscow

Lessons Learnt from past disasters:

Examples: Indian OceanTsunami 2004

New Orleans Flood 2005

Wenchuan Earthquake 2008

Sendai Tsunami and Fukushima 2011

Attempts for bilateral technical cooperation:

India refused foreign cooperation, it claimed to

have national facilities, while Sri Lanka, Thailand

and Indonesia did not have them

German (GFZ) installation of

Tsunami Early Warning system for Indonesia

difficulties: complexity of system operations,

local acceptance?

Wenchuan Earthquake, China, 2008

Satellite Images before and after Tsunami in Japan 2011

SO2 Distribution after Volcanic Eruption in Iceland May 2010

Tsunami Early Warning System

Seismometer Tidal Stations Pressure Gauges GPS Buoys Earth

and GPS Observation

Data

continuous continuous after significant seismic event post event

Use in Decision Support System for - prediction

- determination of risk areas

- evacuation plans

- use of earth observation data for

emergeny mapping

Successful Model 2:

Cooperation with the United Nations

(International Charter for Disasters)

and the Space Agencies

Bridging the Gap From Data to

Informationcalibrate,

georeference,

retrieve, map,

validate,

assimilate,

model,

analyze,

assess,

Utilize

archive,

access,

Over 40 Analysis Products and Maps in

Two Weeks

Elbe Flood, Torgau, Germany

Pre and Post Disaster Image Banda Aceh, Indonesia

Earthquake Damage Assessment Muzaffarabad, Pakistan

Monitoring of Refugee Camps, Camp Mille, Chad

Conclusion:

the two operational models discussed are effective

Model 1: a national model has the advantages:

the entire chain of disaster aspects, from

prediction, preparedness, obervation,

relief strategies to damage assessment.

It needs a national infrastructure backed

by politics, finances and a strong relief

force

Model 2: an international model restricted to

observation, managed by the UN and

by specialized global agencies (e.g. for

rapid observation from space in cooperation)