download PDF - Imaging Notes

hindsight(continued from page 38) helping tomitigate the effects of these disasters.The 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake andtsunami were among the first eventswhere satellite and airborne imageryof all types was being captured andstudied. For example, the commercialhigh-resolution satellite data providerDigitalGlobe captured and immediatelyIn the same way, a more rapidresponse after Hurricane Katrina— especially in understanding the extentof flooding in New Orleans and theinundation areas along the Mississippi— could have provided a more realisticassessment of the needs and priorities inthe first few days and weeks after Katrinamade landfall. There were many usefulFirst responders must receive adequatetraining and education on howbest to interpret and use this informationfor response and recovery.Damage detection methodologiesmust be more robust. That is, theymust be able to work with variouslevels of data resolution or sensortypes. In the ideal case, data fusionshould be emphasized, or at the veryleast, conclusions should be drawnbased on independent assessments.More emphasis needs to be placedon integrating simulation technologies(models that predict damage orimpacts) with post-event imagery anddata. Using simulation models as aninitial a priori estimate of impacts andrevising or calibrating this estimatebased on real, post-event data willlikely lead to the more accurate assessment.released images of the tsunami wavetrain hitting the shores of Sri Lanka. Also,spectacular before and after images ofBanda Aceh showed very clearly to theworld the level of devastation that hadoccurred in this event. Had these types ofimages been captured for all areas alongIndonesia, Thailand, India and Sri Lankain the first few days after the earthquake,a much better situational assessmentcould have been made and, perhaps,could have assisted in providing a morerapid and coordinated response to thosemost severely affected areas. This morerapid response would not have saved themajority of individuals who were killedin the tsunami, but it definitely wouldhave alleviated much of the suffering andperhaps some of the lingering healthissues that occurred weeks and monthsafter the disaster.w w w . i m a g i n g n o t e s . c o mimages of these areas — and many takenvery quickly after the initial onslaught ofthe hurricane. However, these imagescould have been more useful if they weregeo-referenced to be more compatiblewith GIS systems.We certainly have not seen the last oflarge natural catastrophes, and we certainlywill not abandon the development anduse of advanced technologies for disasterresponse. However, in order for these technologiesto be effective in responding to thenext wave of disasters, they must addressthe following issues or requirements:First-responders and those individualswho provide technical support tothis group must have timely access toall images collected after the event.This is especially true for sensorsoperated by all levels of government.We need to work towards online solutionswhere post-event imagery andany analyses of the event are postedon the internet and as close to realtimeas possible. This way, a muchlarger audience will have access tothis information, which will also helpwith response in many ways.We must document our successesand failures with respect to the useand adoption of these technologies inevery event, so that we can continueto improve the application andimplementation of new and advancedtechnologies for disaster response.Finally, more government support isessential— especially in the researcharea — to design, develop and testmethodologies, systems, platforms,and other components, so that robustdisaster response tools can be developedand deployed throughout theU.S., as well as around the world.s u m m e r 2 0 0 6 37