Safety is essential while transitioning from response to recovery. The Oregon Health Authority, Public Health Division offers advice for flood response and recovery in this Press Release (January 20, 2012; media contact is Kathleen Vidoloff, email: Kathleen.G.Vidoloff@state.or.us)
January 20, 2012
Oregon Public Health gives tips for staying healthy and safe during winter storms
Several Oregon counties have experienced flooding due to the winter storms that moved into the area earlier this week. Oregon Health Authority’s Public Health Division wants to offer simple tips on how Oregonians can stay safe and healthy during inclement weather.
“The floods this week will leave devastation behind them, and people will want to clean up and repair their homes and communities as soon as possible so they can move forward with their lives and livelihoods. Some simple precautions can help protect their health as they do so,” said Mel Kohn, M.D., M.P.H., Oregon Public Health director.
Some tips to be safe during and after the storm:
• Injury prevention: Stay out of flood waters. Even the strongest swimmers can drown in flood waters. Do not drive through standing water. Never make contact with power lines or objects that are in contact with power lines. Wear eye protection when cleaning up storm debris.
• Water: Check for local boil-water advisories. Do not use contaminated water to wash dishes, brush teeth, prepare food, make ice or make baby formula.
• Well water: If your well has been affected by flood waters, it is recommended that you boil your water for at least one minute at a rolling boil, or purchase water from a safe source. Before resuming normal use of the well, have the water tested for possible bacteria and pollutants.
• Foods: Do not eat foods that have come in contact with flood waters. Throw away food that cannot be kept cold or properly heated due to lack of power.
• Carbon monoxide poisoning: Don't use a generator, pressure washer, charcoal grill, camp stove, or other gasoline- or charcoal-burning device inside your home, basement, or garage or near a window, door, or vent. Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless gas. If carbon monoxide poisoning is suspected, seek fresh air and consult with a health care professional right away.
• Home safety: If there is standing water in your home, never turn power on or off yourself – contact an electrician.
• Chainsaw safety: Wear appropriate clothing, such as safety glasses and heavy work gloves. Always cut at waist level or below. With an electric chain saw, use extreme caution to avoid electrical shock. Avoid contact with power lines.
• First aid: Immediately clean all wounds with soap and clean water. If your skin or eyes come in contact with hazardous materials wash thoroughly with decontaminated water. Avoid getting cut because cuts can lead to tetanus. If possible, make sure your tetanus vaccination is up to date.
• Mold: Remove mold by washing with soap and water and letting surfaces dry completely. Some materials such as moldy clothing, ceiling tiles and sheet rock may have to be replaced. If mold-related illness is suspected, consult a health care professional.
For more information about injury prevention, food safety, wells, drinking water, and carbon monoxide during and after flooding, go to public.health.oregon.gov.
Showing posts with label safety. Show all posts
Showing posts with label safety. Show all posts
Friday, January 20, 2012
Monday, October 4, 2010
Citizen Corp needs you
After September 11, 2001, America witnessed a wellspring of selflessness and heroism. People in every corner of the country asked, "What can I do?" and "How can I help?" A group named Citizen Corps was created to help all Americans answer these questions through public education and outreach, training, and volunteer service.
Citizen Corps has five programs where citizens may volunteer to be of service in their local areas. The five programs are Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), Fire Corps, Medical Reserve Corps, Neighborhood Watch (USAonwatch.org), and Volunteers in Police Service (VIPS). For information on all of these programs go online to www.citizencorps.gov
The group that I want to discuss with you today is the CERT program. CERT educates people about disaster preparedness for hazards that may impact their area and trains them in basic disaster response skills, such as fire safety, light search and rescue, team organization, and disaster medical operations. CERT members also are encouraged to support emergency response agencies by taking a more active role in emergency preparedness projects in their community.
Using the training learned in the classroom and during exercises, CERT members can assist others in their neighborhood or workplace following an event when professional responders are not immediately available to help. People will have to rely on each other for help in order to meet their immediate life saving and life sustaining needs.
One also expects that under these kinds of conditions, family members, fellow employees, and neighbors will spontaneously try to help each other. This was the case following the Mexico City earthquake where untrained, spontaneous volunteers saved 800 people. However, 100 people lost their lives while attempting to save others. This is a high price to pay and is preventable through training.
CERT is about readiness, people helping people, rescuer safety, and doing the greatest good for the greatest number. CERT is a positive and realistic approach to emergency and disaster situations where citizens will be initially on their own and their actions can
make a difference. Through training, citizens can manage utilities and put out small fires; treat the three killers by opening airways, controlling bleeding, and treating for shock; provide basic medical aid; search for and rescue victims safely; and organize themselves and spontaneous volunteers to be effective.
To find and join a CERT group in your area, go online at www.citizencorps.gov, click on programs and then CERT. You will be asked to enter the zip code for your area. Thank you for helping your community.
Citizen Corps has five programs where citizens may volunteer to be of service in their local areas. The five programs are Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), Fire Corps, Medical Reserve Corps, Neighborhood Watch (USAonwatch.org), and Volunteers in Police Service (VIPS). For information on all of these programs go online to www.citizencorps.gov
The group that I want to discuss with you today is the CERT program. CERT educates people about disaster preparedness for hazards that may impact their area and trains them in basic disaster response skills, such as fire safety, light search and rescue, team organization, and disaster medical operations. CERT members also are encouraged to support emergency response agencies by taking a more active role in emergency preparedness projects in their community.
Using the training learned in the classroom and during exercises, CERT members can assist others in their neighborhood or workplace following an event when professional responders are not immediately available to help. People will have to rely on each other for help in order to meet their immediate life saving and life sustaining needs.
One also expects that under these kinds of conditions, family members, fellow employees, and neighbors will spontaneously try to help each other. This was the case following the Mexico City earthquake where untrained, spontaneous volunteers saved 800 people. However, 100 people lost their lives while attempting to save others. This is a high price to pay and is preventable through training.
CERT is about readiness, people helping people, rescuer safety, and doing the greatest good for the greatest number. CERT is a positive and realistic approach to emergency and disaster situations where citizens will be initially on their own and their actions can
make a difference. Through training, citizens can manage utilities and put out small fires; treat the three killers by opening airways, controlling bleeding, and treating for shock; provide basic medical aid; search for and rescue victims safely; and organize themselves and spontaneous volunteers to be effective.
To find and join a CERT group in your area, go online at www.citizencorps.gov, click on programs and then CERT. You will be asked to enter the zip code for your area. Thank you for helping your community.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Officials Shouldn’t Be Afraid Of “Fear” In Effort To (Responsibly & Constructively) Inform, Engage & Prepare Public On Terror Threats;
← On National CPR & AED Awareness Week, A Training Video That Will Definitely Raise Some Heart Rates
June 1st, 2010 · No Comments
The word ‘fear’ has gotten a bit of bad rap this decade. And, I would argue that’s hurt the country’s public preparedness. Let me explain.
I think the fear of being accused of fearmongering has put a significant crimp in the ability of our leaders to communicate with and prepare Americans for terrorism. That’s a problem since the public’s current level of emergency readiness, is, in the words of a top federal preparedness official, “very concerning and frankly very frightening.”
Almost nine years after 9/11, government officials at federal, state and local levels have still not determined how best to communicate with the public on those threats. What is already a difficult task has been made even more challenging, I would argue, because officials are worried about being accused (by political opponents amplified by the media) of scaring the public.
The inability to raise the topic of potential threats in any detail has not only hurt the country’s citizen preparedness. But it has also made things more difficult for the government to get public input and buy-in on how best to allocate the nation’s resources and find the right balance of risk when it comes to disasters.
From the beginning of her tenure, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano has said that she wants to better inform Americans about the threats facing the nation and highlight the citizen role in the homeland security enterprise. She believes that addressing public complacency is one of the biggest challenges for her Department. When asked by the Washington Post what keeps her up at night, she said:
“Complacency…The fact that it has been eight years since 9/11, and people just assume the government is going to take care of that. . . Safety, security is a shared responsibility. It doesn’t take much for everybody just to take a deep breath and say, ‘Okay, what would I need to do to be prepared?’
In an another interview in the Post, the Secretary was asked “if the American people could see what you see — if they were privy to intelligence reports and they saw the whole spectrum of what was out there, do you think they would have a different view of preparedness?”
Her reply: “Oh, yes, perhaps. But on the other hand, I think what is important for them to recognize is that we have hundreds of thousands of people working on this every day.” Even as she would like to get the public’s attention, the Secretary understandably does not want to unnecessarily stoke concern.
Napolitano has pointedly emphasized that she does not want to scare people, rejecting what she calls the “politics of fear.” Finding that balance is key. Yet to address “complacency,” officials will have to find ways to better illustrate what is “out there.” And there is absolutely no way to do so without explaining in some detail why Americans shouldn’t be complacent. To me, being scared and being prepared are not mutually exclusive. In fact, I think the former is a necessary part of the process to achieve the latter.
In their recent books, both of Napolitano’s predecessors, Tom Ridge and Michael Chertoff, make the need to address public “complacency” by explaining the terrorist threat a major theme. Chertoff warns of returning to a “September 10” mindset” urging the government “be candid with American people, sharing as much information as possible about dangers we face.” Both acknowledge that they were not able to accomplish that goal. Both men have told me in interviews of their frustrations with the inability to communicate threats and engage in a more frank sustained dialogue with the American public about post-9/11 homeland security.
Their inability to do so was in large part due to the fact that the Bush Administration was viewed — sometimes fairly and sometimes unfairly — as using terror communications as a political tool. As a result, no Administration official could discuss any type of potential threat without it being seen as suspect by the media and the public.
President Obama has the chance to start over in this area tabula rasa. But to date, the Administration while expressing an interest of doing so has not done it. That’s understandable. This is not easy stuff. There’s nothing to pull ‘off the shelf’ for preparing the public for all the threats of the 21st Century, a number of which have never been faced by anyone let alone Americans. In addition, new technology has also changed message delivery. It will take some real thought in designing both the content and distribution of the information.
Both one thing is clear: if officials are going to have a discussion of potential disasters, they cannot avoid communicating some level of fear. Explaining what citizens would need to do in the event of a biological or chemical attack cannot be done without contemplating dire possibilities. But just for a moment. These are scary, unfamiliar topics. But the objective is to do so in a responsible and constructive manner — not stirring up more fear than is necessary, handling it with perspective, and providing concrete things people can do to prepare themselves and communities.
And, ironically in some cases, the threats — e.g. a ‘dirty bomb’ — is not as serious as most Americans currently perceive it is. However, that fact has to be communicated in advance to the public, because — due to general public distrust about government and instances such as the health precautions and reporting during the World Trade Center cleanup — Americans will be skeptical about anything said during and after such an incident.
One of the reasons I think we need to (and can) rehabilitate the word “fear” is that officials are already using it in other areas. In fact, currently there is a preparedness double standard. Officials are not allowed to talk about terrorism threats without being accused of scaring people. But we seem to have no problem when it is used to generate public interest in more traditional disasters.
For example, with hurricane season beginning this week FEMA’s Twitter feed sent out this message: “In an average 3-year period, roughly 5 hurricanes strike the US killing 50-100 people anywhere from TX to ME” Isn’t that fearmongering? But the ‘tweet’ makes the important and fair point that Americans shouldn’t be complacent during storm season since hurricanes can kill people, and they should prepare for them. The fact is that fear can be a useful lever (as one part of a communications effort) to encourage constructive behavior. So, why are officials allowed to use it for natural disaster preparedness and not for terrorism?
Further, why has the campaign against global warming been successful and grabbed public attention? In large part, it is because proponents have made the case that if we don’t do something the planet will become inhabitable. That’s a ’scare tactic’ if I’ve ever heard one. Why isn’t that labeled fearmongering? To me, it’s just presenting the public the facts, offering government’s response and providing ways people can contribute towards dealing with the problem. And, by the ways, I think the effort on climate change is very much related to disaster preparedness.
If the government isn’t allowed to discuss serious threats, there is no way that we can have the important discussion about what we expect the government to protect us from and what risks are we willing to accept. It would have been useful to have a debate on the costs/benefits of building levees before Katrina or an unprecedentally large oil well in the Gulf before the recent spill. Again, it may not have prevented worst case scenarios but it would have at least laid out for the public, elected officials and the media the real risks and the financial tradeoffs. In fact, the media has a major role in both explaining the threats more fully and not reflexively calling officials who talk about it “fearmongers”.
One way to mitigate the fearmonger attack is to offer people something they can do rather than place them into a victim, dependent mentality. The more information given will better empower the public and also underscore that citizens have a role in disaster preparedness. There is a role for fear. But it needs to be part of a broader effort of strengthening communities and citizens and making more resilient. (This blog attempts to find that balance. I don’t shy away from difficult or scary topics but I try to handle them in a way that is responsible, have a purpose and offer suggestions on how citizens can become involved.)
Officials have to give the public more credit for dealing with scary topics. With apologies to Jack Nicholson’s Colonel Nathan Jessep in A Few Good Men, “We can handle the truth.” Here in New York City, after the Times Square attack New Yorkers may have been frightened briefly, but then we moved on and went back to worrying about quotidian urban concerns like being hit by a taxi running a red light. And, as someone who is currently dealing with a life-threatening disease, I want to be told the truth however scary it might be.
What adds to the communications challenge is that security officials sincerely do not know how, when, and where future attacks will occur? But again, Americans can handle that uncertainty if we’re told that and are able to develop a trusting, transparent and ongoing dialogue with the government. Again, officials using fear frequently and irresponsibly is very wrong. But let’s not throw the baby out with bathwater. But fear does have a role public preparedness.
http://incaseofemergencyblog.com/2010/06/01/officials-shouldnt-be-afraid-of-fear-in-effort-to-responsibly-its-used-for-hurricanes-global-warming-why-not-terrorism/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+InCaseOfEmergencyReadBlog+%28In+Case+Of+Emergency%2C+Read+Blog%29
June 1st, 2010 · No Comments
The word ‘fear’ has gotten a bit of bad rap this decade. And, I would argue that’s hurt the country’s public preparedness. Let me explain.
I think the fear of being accused of fearmongering has put a significant crimp in the ability of our leaders to communicate with and prepare Americans for terrorism. That’s a problem since the public’s current level of emergency readiness, is, in the words of a top federal preparedness official, “very concerning and frankly very frightening.”
Almost nine years after 9/11, government officials at federal, state and local levels have still not determined how best to communicate with the public on those threats. What is already a difficult task has been made even more challenging, I would argue, because officials are worried about being accused (by political opponents amplified by the media) of scaring the public.
The inability to raise the topic of potential threats in any detail has not only hurt the country’s citizen preparedness. But it has also made things more difficult for the government to get public input and buy-in on how best to allocate the nation’s resources and find the right balance of risk when it comes to disasters.
From the beginning of her tenure, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano has said that she wants to better inform Americans about the threats facing the nation and highlight the citizen role in the homeland security enterprise. She believes that addressing public complacency is one of the biggest challenges for her Department. When asked by the Washington Post what keeps her up at night, she said:
“Complacency…The fact that it has been eight years since 9/11, and people just assume the government is going to take care of that. . . Safety, security is a shared responsibility. It doesn’t take much for everybody just to take a deep breath and say, ‘Okay, what would I need to do to be prepared?’
In an another interview in the Post, the Secretary was asked “if the American people could see what you see — if they were privy to intelligence reports and they saw the whole spectrum of what was out there, do you think they would have a different view of preparedness?”
Her reply: “Oh, yes, perhaps. But on the other hand, I think what is important for them to recognize is that we have hundreds of thousands of people working on this every day.” Even as she would like to get the public’s attention, the Secretary understandably does not want to unnecessarily stoke concern.
Napolitano has pointedly emphasized that she does not want to scare people, rejecting what she calls the “politics of fear.” Finding that balance is key. Yet to address “complacency,” officials will have to find ways to better illustrate what is “out there.” And there is absolutely no way to do so without explaining in some detail why Americans shouldn’t be complacent. To me, being scared and being prepared are not mutually exclusive. In fact, I think the former is a necessary part of the process to achieve the latter.
In their recent books, both of Napolitano’s predecessors, Tom Ridge and Michael Chertoff, make the need to address public “complacency” by explaining the terrorist threat a major theme. Chertoff warns of returning to a “September 10” mindset” urging the government “be candid with American people, sharing as much information as possible about dangers we face.” Both acknowledge that they were not able to accomplish that goal. Both men have told me in interviews of their frustrations with the inability to communicate threats and engage in a more frank sustained dialogue with the American public about post-9/11 homeland security.
Their inability to do so was in large part due to the fact that the Bush Administration was viewed — sometimes fairly and sometimes unfairly — as using terror communications as a political tool. As a result, no Administration official could discuss any type of potential threat without it being seen as suspect by the media and the public.
President Obama has the chance to start over in this area tabula rasa. But to date, the Administration while expressing an interest of doing so has not done it. That’s understandable. This is not easy stuff. There’s nothing to pull ‘off the shelf’ for preparing the public for all the threats of the 21st Century, a number of which have never been faced by anyone let alone Americans. In addition, new technology has also changed message delivery. It will take some real thought in designing both the content and distribution of the information.
Both one thing is clear: if officials are going to have a discussion of potential disasters, they cannot avoid communicating some level of fear. Explaining what citizens would need to do in the event of a biological or chemical attack cannot be done without contemplating dire possibilities. But just for a moment. These are scary, unfamiliar topics. But the objective is to do so in a responsible and constructive manner — not stirring up more fear than is necessary, handling it with perspective, and providing concrete things people can do to prepare themselves and communities.
And, ironically in some cases, the threats — e.g. a ‘dirty bomb’ — is not as serious as most Americans currently perceive it is. However, that fact has to be communicated in advance to the public, because — due to general public distrust about government and instances such as the health precautions and reporting during the World Trade Center cleanup — Americans will be skeptical about anything said during and after such an incident.
One of the reasons I think we need to (and can) rehabilitate the word “fear” is that officials are already using it in other areas. In fact, currently there is a preparedness double standard. Officials are not allowed to talk about terrorism threats without being accused of scaring people. But we seem to have no problem when it is used to generate public interest in more traditional disasters.
For example, with hurricane season beginning this week FEMA’s Twitter feed sent out this message: “In an average 3-year period, roughly 5 hurricanes strike the US killing 50-100 people anywhere from TX to ME” Isn’t that fearmongering? But the ‘tweet’ makes the important and fair point that Americans shouldn’t be complacent during storm season since hurricanes can kill people, and they should prepare for them. The fact is that fear can be a useful lever (as one part of a communications effort) to encourage constructive behavior. So, why are officials allowed to use it for natural disaster preparedness and not for terrorism?
Further, why has the campaign against global warming been successful and grabbed public attention? In large part, it is because proponents have made the case that if we don’t do something the planet will become inhabitable. That’s a ’scare tactic’ if I’ve ever heard one. Why isn’t that labeled fearmongering? To me, it’s just presenting the public the facts, offering government’s response and providing ways people can contribute towards dealing with the problem. And, by the ways, I think the effort on climate change is very much related to disaster preparedness.
If the government isn’t allowed to discuss serious threats, there is no way that we can have the important discussion about what we expect the government to protect us from and what risks are we willing to accept. It would have been useful to have a debate on the costs/benefits of building levees before Katrina or an unprecedentally large oil well in the Gulf before the recent spill. Again, it may not have prevented worst case scenarios but it would have at least laid out for the public, elected officials and the media the real risks and the financial tradeoffs. In fact, the media has a major role in both explaining the threats more fully and not reflexively calling officials who talk about it “fearmongers”.
One way to mitigate the fearmonger attack is to offer people something they can do rather than place them into a victim, dependent mentality. The more information given will better empower the public and also underscore that citizens have a role in disaster preparedness. There is a role for fear. But it needs to be part of a broader effort of strengthening communities and citizens and making more resilient. (This blog attempts to find that balance. I don’t shy away from difficult or scary topics but I try to handle them in a way that is responsible, have a purpose and offer suggestions on how citizens can become involved.)
Officials have to give the public more credit for dealing with scary topics. With apologies to Jack Nicholson’s Colonel Nathan Jessep in A Few Good Men, “We can handle the truth.” Here in New York City, after the Times Square attack New Yorkers may have been frightened briefly, but then we moved on and went back to worrying about quotidian urban concerns like being hit by a taxi running a red light. And, as someone who is currently dealing with a life-threatening disease, I want to be told the truth however scary it might be.
What adds to the communications challenge is that security officials sincerely do not know how, when, and where future attacks will occur? But again, Americans can handle that uncertainty if we’re told that and are able to develop a trusting, transparent and ongoing dialogue with the government. Again, officials using fear frequently and irresponsibly is very wrong. But let’s not throw the baby out with bathwater. But fear does have a role public preparedness.
http://incaseofemergencyblog.com/2010/06/01/officials-shouldnt-be-afraid-of-fear-in-effort-to-responsibly-its-used-for-hurricanes-global-warming-why-not-terrorism/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+InCaseOfEmergencyReadBlog+%28In+Case+Of+Emergency%2C+Read+Blog%29
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Last minute cleanup of yard debris can be dangerous
October 14, 2009
Jennifer Bailey • October 14, 2009
Summer is gone, and even though there is still some good weather, we know the rains are coming.
You might be doing some last-minute cleanup of the yard now, so here is a little safety reminder.
According the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health each year, about 36,000 people are treated in emergency rooms for injuries from using chain saws.
Last-minute summer cleanup and debris removal after storms can be hazardous. Chain-saw use is extremely dangerous, especially because of power lines, carbon monoxide from equipment or injury from falls.
Chain saws are widely used to remove fallen trees and tree branches after storms. One way to avoid injury is to follow manufacturer's instructions and properly sharpen and lubricate chain saw blades with bar and chain oil. The operator should periodically check and adjust the tension of the chain saw blade to ensure good cutting action.
Choose the proper size of chain saw to match the job, and include safety features such as a chain brake, front and rear hand guards, stop switch, chain catcher and a spark arrester. Wear a hard hat, safety glasses, ear protection, heavy work gloves, and cut-resistant leg wear.
Avoid power lines. This is important for everyone, not just chain saw users. Always cut at waist level or below to ensure that you maintain secure control over the chain saw. Keep bystanders away. If injury occurs, apply direct pressure over the site of the bleeding; this act may save lives.
Remember that all gasoline-powered engines produce carbon monoxide, which can rapidly build up in a closed-in area, and individuals can be overcome without even realizing it.
Confusion, headache, dizziness, fatigue, and weakness may set in too quickly for victims to save themselves and can be deadly.
Jennifer Bailey, formerly of FEMA, is the public affairs coordinator of Oregon Emergency Management. She may be reached at (503) 378-2911, Ext. 22294 or jbailey@oem.state.or.us.
Jennifer Bailey • October 14, 2009
Summer is gone, and even though there is still some good weather, we know the rains are coming.
You might be doing some last-minute cleanup of the yard now, so here is a little safety reminder.
According the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health each year, about 36,000 people are treated in emergency rooms for injuries from using chain saws.
Last-minute summer cleanup and debris removal after storms can be hazardous. Chain-saw use is extremely dangerous, especially because of power lines, carbon monoxide from equipment or injury from falls.
Chain saws are widely used to remove fallen trees and tree branches after storms. One way to avoid injury is to follow manufacturer's instructions and properly sharpen and lubricate chain saw blades with bar and chain oil. The operator should periodically check and adjust the tension of the chain saw blade to ensure good cutting action.
Choose the proper size of chain saw to match the job, and include safety features such as a chain brake, front and rear hand guards, stop switch, chain catcher and a spark arrester. Wear a hard hat, safety glasses, ear protection, heavy work gloves, and cut-resistant leg wear.
Avoid power lines. This is important for everyone, not just chain saw users. Always cut at waist level or below to ensure that you maintain secure control over the chain saw. Keep bystanders away. If injury occurs, apply direct pressure over the site of the bleeding; this act may save lives.
Remember that all gasoline-powered engines produce carbon monoxide, which can rapidly build up in a closed-in area, and individuals can be overcome without even realizing it.
Confusion, headache, dizziness, fatigue, and weakness may set in too quickly for victims to save themselves and can be deadly.
Jennifer Bailey, formerly of FEMA, is the public affairs coordinator of Oregon Emergency Management. She may be reached at (503) 378-2911, Ext. 22294 or jbailey@oem.state.or.us.
Friday, June 5, 2009
News Release from FEMA on Power Outages
News Release
THUNDERSTORMS AND LIGHTNING CUT POWER IN POCKETS ACROSS PACIFIC NW
Preparedness Tips When the Lights Go Out
SEATTLE – Last night, a massive line of thunderstorms struck across the Pacific Northwest, knocking out power in over 100 communities across Washington, Oregon and Idaho. But all power outages can cause a number of safety concerns as residents seek to light, heat, cool or power their homes from alternative sources, and emergency management officials urge residents to exercise caution.
“Our region is prone to natural disasters ranging from windstorms and lightning strikes, to seasonal flooding, wildfires, earthquakes, and even volcanic activity,” said FEMA Acting Regional Administrator Dennis Hunsinger. “Power grids, generating plants, transformer stations, power poles and even buried cables are vulnerable. As we all review our family disaster plans and disaster kits, emergency power needs can rank right up with food, water, first aid kits and shelter, but we need to be careful!”
When the power fails, resist the temptation to call 9-1-1 for information—that’s what your battery-powered radio is for. Keep refrigerator and freezer doors closed as much as possible to prevent food spoilage. Turn off electric appliances to protect against power surges when power is restored. Turn off all lights but one (to alert you when power resumes). Plan on cell phones or corded phones for emergency calls—cordless phones require electricity. Keep your car fuel tank at least half-full (gas stations rely on electricity to power their pumps). Candles can be dangerous fire hazards. Flashlights and electric lanterns are safer by far. Battery operated radios and clocks are other essentials, along with a supply of fresh batteries. If electric wheel chairs or electric life support devices are part of the equation, consider extra battery packs or a prearranged agreement from local police or fire stations for priority support.
Never use a portable generator in a garage, carport, basement, crawlspace or other enclosed or partially-enclosed area, even with ventilation. If you start to feel sick, dizzy, or weak while using a generator, get to fresh air immediately. Install home Carbon Monoxide alarms that have battery back-up. Store fuel safely.
When the power comes back on, wait a few minutes before turning on major appliances to help eliminate problems that could occur if there’s a sharp increase in demand. If you think that electric power has been restored to your area but your home is still without power, call your local power company.
FEMA leads and supports the nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation, to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the nation from all hazards including natural disasters, acts of terrorism and man-made disasters
###
THUNDERSTORMS AND LIGHTNING CUT POWER IN POCKETS ACROSS PACIFIC NW
Preparedness Tips When the Lights Go Out
SEATTLE – Last night, a massive line of thunderstorms struck across the Pacific Northwest, knocking out power in over 100 communities across Washington, Oregon and Idaho. But all power outages can cause a number of safety concerns as residents seek to light, heat, cool or power their homes from alternative sources, and emergency management officials urge residents to exercise caution.
“Our region is prone to natural disasters ranging from windstorms and lightning strikes, to seasonal flooding, wildfires, earthquakes, and even volcanic activity,” said FEMA Acting Regional Administrator Dennis Hunsinger. “Power grids, generating plants, transformer stations, power poles and even buried cables are vulnerable. As we all review our family disaster plans and disaster kits, emergency power needs can rank right up with food, water, first aid kits and shelter, but we need to be careful!”
When the power fails, resist the temptation to call 9-1-1 for information—that’s what your battery-powered radio is for. Keep refrigerator and freezer doors closed as much as possible to prevent food spoilage. Turn off electric appliances to protect against power surges when power is restored. Turn off all lights but one (to alert you when power resumes). Plan on cell phones or corded phones for emergency calls—cordless phones require electricity. Keep your car fuel tank at least half-full (gas stations rely on electricity to power their pumps). Candles can be dangerous fire hazards. Flashlights and electric lanterns are safer by far. Battery operated radios and clocks are other essentials, along with a supply of fresh batteries. If electric wheel chairs or electric life support devices are part of the equation, consider extra battery packs or a prearranged agreement from local police or fire stations for priority support.
Never use a portable generator in a garage, carport, basement, crawlspace or other enclosed or partially-enclosed area, even with ventilation. If you start to feel sick, dizzy, or weak while using a generator, get to fresh air immediately. Install home Carbon Monoxide alarms that have battery back-up. Store fuel safely.
When the power comes back on, wait a few minutes before turning on major appliances to help eliminate problems that could occur if there’s a sharp increase in demand. If you think that electric power has been restored to your area but your home is still without power, call your local power company.
FEMA leads and supports the nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation, to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the nation from all hazards including natural disasters, acts of terrorism and man-made disasters
###
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Spring Cleanup can be dangerous
According the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [NIOSH] each year, approximately 36,000 people are treated in emergency rooms for injuries from using chain saws.
Spring cleanup activities can be hazardous but the use of chain saws is one of the most dangerous. Hazards that could be encountered include downed power lines, carbon monoxide from equipment, injury from falls, or being hit by motor vehicles.
Chain saws are widely used to remove fallen trees and tree branches after winter weather. One way to avoid injury is to follow manufacturer’s instructions and properly sharpen and lubricate chain saw blades with bar and chain oil. The operator should periodically check and adjust the tension of the chain saw blade to ensure good cutting action.
Choose the proper size of chain saw to match the job, and include safety features such as a chain brake, front and rear hand guards, stop switch, chain catcher and a spark arrester. Wear a hard hat, safety glasses, hearing protection, heavy work gloves, and cut-resistant leg wear.
Avoid power lines. This is important for everyone, not just chain saw users and always cut at waist level or below to ensure that you maintain secure control over the chain saw. Keep bystanders away. If injury occurs, apply direct pressure over site(s) of heavy bleeding; this act may save lives.
Remember that all gasoline-powered engines produce carbon monoxide. This gas can rapidly build up in a closed in area, and individuals can be overcome without even realizing it. Confusion, headache, dizziness, fatigue, and weakness may set in too quickly for victims to save themselves and can be deadly.
Spring cleanup activities can be hazardous but the use of chain saws is one of the most dangerous. Hazards that could be encountered include downed power lines, carbon monoxide from equipment, injury from falls, or being hit by motor vehicles.
Chain saws are widely used to remove fallen trees and tree branches after winter weather. One way to avoid injury is to follow manufacturer’s instructions and properly sharpen and lubricate chain saw blades with bar and chain oil. The operator should periodically check and adjust the tension of the chain saw blade to ensure good cutting action.
Choose the proper size of chain saw to match the job, and include safety features such as a chain brake, front and rear hand guards, stop switch, chain catcher and a spark arrester. Wear a hard hat, safety glasses, hearing protection, heavy work gloves, and cut-resistant leg wear.
Avoid power lines. This is important for everyone, not just chain saw users and always cut at waist level or below to ensure that you maintain secure control over the chain saw. Keep bystanders away. If injury occurs, apply direct pressure over site(s) of heavy bleeding; this act may save lives.
Remember that all gasoline-powered engines produce carbon monoxide. This gas can rapidly build up in a closed in area, and individuals can be overcome without even realizing it. Confusion, headache, dizziness, fatigue, and weakness may set in too quickly for victims to save themselves and can be deadly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
