Revisiting SMS during Disasters.

Some recent email discussion, thoughts and meetings throughout the year, and the understanding of the context people seem to think in after a disaster¹ has me re-addressing the problem of the ARC, which became ARCTX. ARCTX was later abandoned because of lack of demonstrated interest, but I'm dusting it off for another run. After all, it's 2006. People are still recovering from the disasters of 2004 and 2005, and little has been put in place to allow them communication during the disaster.

The Problems

The main problem I saw last year was that the people affected by disasters directly did not have a voice. Disaster blogs were set up, which is good for getting information from agencies on the ground to people on the internet - but there was little or no focus on the communication between victims and agencies on the ground. Certainly one could consider a shovel a wireless device for communication, but it is a bit of a stretch. This was the premise of the Alert Retrieval Cache. Mind you, this was not an original concept. What was different was that it was set up within 2 hours after we got Dan Lane on board.

The problem in that evolution was that nobody used it.

During Hurricane Katrina relief efforts, communication was mainly done by Homeland Security. The 2005 Kashmir earthquake caused something along th lines of ARC to be deployed afterward. On all of the disasters, people emailed me about ARC/ARCTX. For the Kashmir Earthquake, Nathan Freitas - who I know through the MobileActive.org meeting we had last year - was the one who was instrumental for guidance on the Kashmir system, which was used.

The things that worked for communication in all disasters were Ham radio and SMS text messenging.

But still, nobody had a system in place on the ground before the disaster struck. This is the biggest problem here - people are focused on broadcasting messages, which is only one part of the problem (and one which, as Mike Grenville sent to the MA email list, is being resisted because of cost).

Victims of a disaster need to be able to send messages out so people can find them and help them. So any system would have to:

1. Broadcast an alert before the disaster, if possible.
2. Allow communication to a central number via a publicly known voice/SMS number.
3. Allow disaster agencies and governments to aggregate information, communicate between each other, and coordinate with each other.
4. Be active 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

The broadcasting is something everyone understands¹. Point 2 needs to be brought to the top of the list, so that points 3 and 4 follow.

Derivative issues are:

1. Internet Access when the infrastructure cannot support it
2. SMS->RSS/Email/website
3. Independent Power Source for centralized system.
4. Ability to recharge cell phones independent of infrastructure.
5. Awareness.

Point 2 is easy. It's been done, can be done, and is getting better because it's apparently more commercially interesting. Thus, I focused on points 1, 3 and 4 last year for experimentation and research.

Internet Access where the Infrastructure Cannot Support It

I did some shopping around on the web, and found many satellite internet access offerings for private use. It stands to reason that a government or non-profit could get a better financial deal to set something up; the problem remains power. The power requirements of the satellite systems couldn't be evaluated; I couldn't find the information on the web and it could be expected that power requirements would differ between different versions of equipment. Still, satellite phones are available and with a dial-in account, it's possible to get internet access.

Some places have good satellite coverage. Some do not. In the context of the Caribbean, the satellite footprint can be problematic. In South America, the satellite footprint is less of a problem. Perhaps the size of the market is a factor.

More research and experimentation on this aspect is necessary, in the context of the region it is to be used in.

Independent Power Source For Centralized Equipment

Aside from the internet connection itself, power requirements for the system are pretty well defined. I have successfully set up and run a laptop PC, wireless network and have operated with an ADSL modem (also powered by solar) after adjusting for the different voltage requirements for the different systems. The wireless router was the real power hog; the laptop wasn't too bad - and the truth is that you really don't need a wireless router to do this. A simple router could work if you want to use multiple machines, but just the ADSL router would be sufficient. I just went solar-crazy.

The laptop, for example, required 19 Volts DC. The ADSL Router and Wireless Router use 12 V DC. Thus, I configured the large solar system to 24V DC for the experimental setup, and ran a voltage splitter between the routers and a load resistor on the laptop to get everything to work. With 3 80 Watt panels connected in series, the charging of the system's solar bank (weighing in at 472 pounds!) proceeded well and the system worked for over 4 days, independently, after being fully charged.

Experimentation with a Simputer was also done successfully, though the USB power requirements for the network connection didn't allow long usage.

An independent solar light system was used. In all, lighting and powering the devices was about $2,200 U.S. with the equipment that my late father left behind. It could probably be done cheaper, but since I've been doing everything out of my own pocket, I haven't been able to afford much more experimentation. The net result is that I know that it can be done, and how to do it, and being able to share that information.

Cell Phone Recharging

This aspect had unpredicted issues. In the wake of Katrina, I posted How to Charge Your Cell Phone in an Emergency, which was too late to help people on the ground, but saved me a lot of typing. Then, after some email discussion with Graham Knight, I had to post the update: Cell phone manufacturers are changing things, and have changed some things already, such that you cannot charge a phone with anything but what they sell you.

So while older phones can be recharged, newer phones pose a special problem. The cell phone manufacturers say that these 'smart batteries' are for our safety, but if I cannot recharge one so that I can call someone to get rescued - to get to safety - then I have to wonder at this. It should be noted, however, that battery life has been prolonged in some of the newer phones through less power used by the phone itself. Using SMS also lowers power consumption.

Awareness

Awareness remains the key issue. Some geek getting all of this together is nice, but the real issue is getting the idea out to people who need it and the people who can implement it for them. I'm not making any money off of this, in fact, I've invested a lot of time and money into this - less than a government agency would need to do the same. The system can work, if only people would call for the ability to communicate should they be victims.

When it comes to broadcast warnings, that's fine if you have ample time to leave an area or make preparations. Yet in the disaster issues of 2005 and 2004, we saw that communication was a central problem and that advanced warning would have limited ability in helping people before, with the exception perhaps of the South East Asian tsunami, where moving a few hundred yards in shore in some cases could have saved lives. When Hurricane Ivan hit Grenada in 2004, the Prime Minister couldn't speak to his people for 3 days! And early warning didn't really help New Orleans; for whatever reason, people did not evacuate in time and could not communicate with the outside world.

Awareness. People need to know that a system that could allow them, when they would now have no hope, look to the small phone in their hand and see a ray of hope. I've taken this as far as I can without losing my shirt; it's up to the public now and the people who inform the public to do more.

Conclusion

People have to be interested in a disaster before a disaster occurs for change to happen, and agencies which they pay - governments, or disaster agencies that they donate to - also need to pay attention. There's no excuse. It can be done. People trapped in the wake of a disaster deserve a voice. If you were trapped in a building, or you were without food and water and didn't even know which direction to go... wouldn't you like to use that phone? Of course you would.

¹ And if I were a victim that got an SMS broadcast during or after a disaster - a likely scenario - I would probably be a little upset.