The discussed categories include health-related, transportation, and commercial facilities.
Health-related Facilities
The exhibition of disaster syndrome by survivors after a hazardous occurrence is a challenge to emergency planners. This syndrome is characterized by experiencing shock when insensitivity, apathy, and confusion arise because of an environmental factor. For instance, the Waco tornado, which killed many people, left children with emotional upset and trouble sleeping (Perry & Lindell, 2007). These persisting psychological issues depend on the nature of the hazardous event. Therefore, the emergency planners need to consider the needs of the survivors.
Despite the preparedness to tackle any arising eventuality, the emergency response unit may be uncertain of the unforeseen hazardous risks. This leads to the failure to incorporate the use of essential protective gear. For instance, the 9/11 terrorist attack in the U.S saw many rescuers in the early stages of evacuation failing to be equipped with protective gear (Perry & Lindell, 2007). The dispersed airborne debris emitted from the explosion and collapsing building was harmful.
The emission and generation of harmful particles inhaled by the rescuers result in health-related problems and life-threatening incidences. The exposure to inhalation of dispersed airborne particles from an explosion or collapse, such as volcanic ash, results in lung issues. For instance, the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center Towers exposed the surrounding community and the rescue workers to pulverized materials (Perry & Lindell, 2007). Information from the United States (U.S) Centers for Disease Control, and Prevention shows these individuals’ exposure resulted in pulmonary conditions.
The challenge of inadequate time to evacuate people within facilities such as nursing homes, hospitals, and mental institutions needs to be considered. These facilities require a lot of time for evacuees to be safely taken to hazardous accessible areas. For example, the evacuation process of people from a nursing home in Houston, Texas, in the year 2005 failed to lead to the deaths of 23 due to fire emanating from the improvised mechanism (Perry & Lindell, 2007). This was after the allocated time for evacuation was exceeded.
The evacuation from hospitals and nursing homes lacking vehicles is a challenge to the planners. The possession of vehicles would facilitate a more straightforward method of evacuating from the path of a hazardous occurrence. Planners are required to consider the means of transportation this group will use for successful evacuation (Perry & Lindell, 2007). Planners need to arrange this mobility through the preparation of specialized means of transport such as armored buses and ambulances.
Commercial Facilities
The variety of changing aspects that tend to affect the dispersion criteria of the particles to the atmosphere makes it hard to predict the actual emergency levels required. There exists a difference in time between detection and dispersion, therefore, exposing a substantial number of individuals at a particular time. For example, the 1995 Tokyo subway dispersion by the Aum cult underrated diffusion and quality effectiveness (Perry & Lindell, 2007). Planners need to consider such challenges to prevent deaths from future attacks.
The inability of the condition of the atmosphere to be depicted instantly is a challenge. This calls for the need to deploy the relevant technology to eradicate this threat. For instance, the acquisition of an APD2000, a chemical analyzer, would be effective in analyzing and detecting chemical agents by the provision of its molecular identity. This tool possesses no error and continuously acts as a monitor for sampling (Perry & Lindell, 2007). The possession of this tool by the health facility is necessary for a good planning process.
The discrepancies in the concentration levels of hazardous particles are an issue of concern. This is contributed by the failure to establish the likely spot where the leakage is taking place. Factors worth being placed under consideration include concentration, temperature, and the size of the release path. There still exists the inability to establish the source of the leakage, surrounding environment, and type of the affected material (Perry & Lindell, 2007). Appropriate tools are essential in solving these mysteries exposing lives to danger.
Hazardous components are placed for transportation and storage in containers considered highly protective. A breach of the container by a material compromises the safety levels of these components. For instance, the release of the plume results in the formation of airborne particles. It will, therefore, require a monitoring device operated by an expert to detect where it has been exposed (Perry & Lindell, 2007). This is costly for emergency planners in commercial sectors.
The utilization of the practical measures vital for protecting workers against a variety of threats fails to be effective in the cases of noble gases. These measures were found to drop pressure significantly when one utilized the materials for breathing purposes. This, in turn, would result in exhibiting breathing difficulties inhibiting their use in instances of an emergency (Perry & Lindell, 2007). This is a challenge to emergency planners who may be designing evacuation processes.
The possession of minimal guidance on organizations’ performance analysis of capabilities is challenging to the emergence planners. It is necessary to require the services of experts in the subject matter in cultivating knowledge of hazardous aspects. For instance, firefighters may be held captive by the belief that their experiences are essential for more dangerous significant incidents, which in reality will not be the case (Perry & Lindell, 2007). Planners need to assess hazardous situations and conditions to spot the discrepancies and recommend experts with the necessary skills to perform and correct this issue.
The inability to make a recommendable decision regarding whether individuals stay indoors or outside during the release of harmful elements into the air is a challenge. This results from the inability to tell which section contains a high level of contamination and how long people have to stay indoors or outside (Perry & Lindell, 2007). Planners are uncertain about the time spent by evacuees and the areas of the environment that have been contaminated.
Transportation Facilities
The changing course of a river is a challenge to the emergency planners. Similarly, it is a fact that rivers can adapt to their terrain. These changing features of a river prove problematic to the planners to make a probability assessment of the hazardous conditions. These factors have brought about a shift in floodplains that have existed for over 100 years. For example, Tempe City sits on the Salt River floodplain (Perry & Lindell, 2007). This is coupled with the difficulty in conducting proper risk assessments.
The challenge arising for the planners of an emergency process is the time required for the clearance of an impact site. This obstruction occurs from hazardous debris, which coincides with overflows blocking transportation roads. For instance, the excess number of road users significantly impeded the evacuation of people affected by Hurricane Rita from Houston, Texas, in 2005 (Perry & Lindell, 2007). This seriously made the evacuation process take a more extended period than anticipated.
The planners are faced with the challenge of completing an evacuation procedure. The evacuation process is easier for individuals who own their vehicles since they are flexible. People who do not own cars face difficulties because they are not assured of their means of transport to safety. The occurrence of Hurricane Katrina exposed about 100,000 persons who lacked transportation in 2005 (Perry & Lindell, 2007). Emergency planners need to take into consideration the total number of persons inhabiting a particular region.
The challenge of considering the number of persons who were relying on the available resources poses a challenge to the emergency planners. The exceeding number of people using public means of transport makes it hard to complete the evacuation process. For instance, 100,000 persons were exposed in 2005 in New Orleans to the hazardous path of Hurricane Katrina (Perry & Lindell, 2007). It would have been critical if the planners provided means of transportation to many people as possible.
The destruction of transportation infrastructure, which is vital for evacuees, has proven to be a challenge for emergency planners. Destruction of infrastructure makes an area affected by a hazardous phenomenon inaccessible. For instance, Hurricane Andrew, which occurred in Florida, led to infrastructure failure; this interfered with the lifesaving strategy put in place (Perry & Lindell, 2007). The emergency planners need to formulate alternative means of transport for the evacuees in these scenarios to avoid sabotage in the evacuation process.
References
Perry, R. W., & Lindell, M. K. (2007). Emergency Planning. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.