Search

I'm interested in better understanding the ongoing geological processes that shape St. Louis and the Mississippi Valley region. So far, I've been looking into the history of seismicity in the region, focusing on the fascinating but little known history of the New Madrid earthquakes of 1811 and 1812 -- the most devastating earthquakes to have hit the US east of the Rockies. I've also been exploring how St. Louis and surrounding areas are dealing with the possibility of another earthquake occurring in the future. According to one article I read, one of the biggest uncertainties is what would happen to the heavily engineered Mississippi River in the case of another major tremblor. The shaking could break the levees, flooding wide areas along the river and creating cascading effects. The flow of the river might also reverse completely, as occurred during the New Madrid earthquakes.

On these possibilities and the lack of scientific consensus surrounding intraplate seismicity in this zone, see this article in The Atlantic.

On current efforts to create earthquake hazard maps in St. Louis, see this overview on the US Geological Survey site.

For a deeper dive into the history of the New Madrid earthquakes, see this book by historian of science Conevery Bolton Valencius. 

Community leaders and professionals across various countries and communities to prepare them to lead their communities during disaster management.

The platforms provides online video sessions with healthcare professionals as well as quick assessments that can be taken anytime, anywhere as well as sensors that can be worn. These assessments are tracked (privately) and turned into graphical data that can be easily analyzed by both the patient and the provider.

It has been cited 39 times as of 10/23 according to google scholar, the majority of these being disaster/mental health related articles.

The author of this article is Sonja D. Schmid.  Sonja has degrees in science, technology and society (STS) as well as experience in organizational theory, disaster social issues, and studied risk in relation to different societies and cultures throughout the world.

The report data covers from April 26th 1986 (the date of the disaster) to 2006 (the year the report was published).

The IAEA failed to properly prevent the Three Mile Island or Chernobyl incidents. After these events the IAEA started two conventions for notification and response to nuclear disasters. Since the Fukushima incident, the IAEA has evolved the way they approach disaster and health to include even the most outlandish scenarios and actively trains first responders how to deal with such occurrences.  (iaea.org)

Emergency response is not addressed in this article. But the information provided could be useful for disaster relief workers operating in evironments like these.

                The object of the study “Epidemics After Natural Disasters” by John T. Watson, Michelle Gayer, and Maire A. Connolly is to dispel common misconceptions about disasters and communicable diseases. Further, the study seeks to identify the real leading causes of diseases after a disaster: population displacement, clean water and facilities availability, the amount of crowding, the baseline health of the population, and the availability of healthcare to mitigate the disease risks to the population.

While most hospitals would provide stabilizing, lifesaving treatment to those that needed it, there were some that did not. This act really helps the good hospitals (the majority of them) that were already doing what this policy made law, but there were enough instances and examples of hospitals that were not, so the legislature acted. It is also important to note that this act was part of a larger bill (COBRA) that dealt with national healthcare and social security policy.