I guess I'm a lurker. Thought this was an interesting take on 3-Day storms. Hope I'm not jumping the gun. I just stumbled across it at Westergaard:

Three-Day Storms (or less) of 1999 By Charlie Register December 20, 1999 Speaking at the control center of Potomac Electric Power near Washington, DC on Thursday of last week, Energy Secretary Bill Richardson declared that the nation's electric utilities were 100 percent ready for possible Y2K related computer problems. He added that contingency plans were in place in ensure power would continue to flow smoothly.

Upon delivering this news, Richardson then made a rather startling declaration. According to the Reuters account, Richardson said, "My advice to the America people is, you don't need to buy power generators. If you can get a good deal on a return, do it."

But then later Richardson cautioned "that while all American utilities are ready for Y2K computer problems, there still could be brief outages caused by severe winter storms of other non-Y2K accidents or mishaps." "We simply cannot guarantee against outages," Richardson said.

Setting aside for the moment that generators are generally viewed as a short term solution to Y2K power failures (unless one plans to store on their property several hundred gallons of fuel), let's look at the recommendations posted in the Department of Energy's Y2K readiness news release:

"While utilities have reported their Y2K readiness, Richardson advised that the public take the advice of the American Red Cross, which suggests that families prepare as they would for the possibility of a storm."

Y2K being compared once again to a storm. How many times have we seen this comparison trumpeted in press releases and media stories? Y2K will be akin to a "severe winter storm" says Richardson. Be prepared for a "three-day storm" reads another account. We have been so successfully pummeled with the storm analogy that Americans haven't really considered the ramifications of a "three-day storm." No big deal, right?

Consider the "storms" or "natural disasters" of 1999, compiled again by Reuters and occurring well within the "three-day" period. See if these storms were "no big deal" (Earthquakes are included because they are natural events that have the same capacity to affect infrastructure as hurricanes and other severe storms):

January 25 - A powerful earthquake rips through Colombia's central coffee-growing region killing at least 1,170 people. It measures 6.3 on the Richter scale.

May 3 - As many as 76 tornadoes rake Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas and Tennessee, killing 54.

May 20 - A tropical cyclone hits southern Pakistan killing at least 127 people with about 1,200 missing presumed dead.

May 30 - At least 52 people are crushed to death when hundreds run into an underground railway station to escape a storm in the Belorussian capital of Minsk.

August 2 - The worst rains in decades slice across Asia, killing almost 1,000 people.

August 17 - An earthquake measuring 7.4 on the Richter scale strikes the northwestern city of Izmit, some 55 miles east of Istanbul killing 17,118.

September 7 - An earthquake measuring 5.9 on the Richter scale strikes the Greek capital of Athens killing at least 139 people.

September 16 - Hurricane Floyd strikes the eastern United States, killing at least 48 people and causing widespread power outages and flooding from Florida to New England.

September 21 - A giant earthquake strikes Taiwan, killing 2,321 people.

October 29 - In India, a "super-cyclone" slams into northeast state of Orissa. At least 9,885 are killed.

November 12 - An earthquake strikes Turkey's province of Bolu measuring 7.2 on the Richter scale killing at least 749 people.

And on the day of Richardson's announcement: 100 Feared Dead in Venezuela Floods

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) - With heavy rains in Venezuela showing no sign of subsiding, houses crashed down hillsides and frightened residents fled for their lives amid flooding and mudslides that are feared to have killed more than 100 people. With much of the country paralyzed by the torrential rains, at least 50 bodies had been recovered, and authorities said another 100 people were reported missing. The death toll was probably much higher, though, since rescue workers were concentrating on evacuating survivors rather than digging out bodies. More than 36,000 people were left homeless. The origin of the federal government's "three-day storm" scenario can be largely attributed to its recognizing New Year's as a three-day weekend, not because of some methodical disaster scenario calculations. "And since New Year's is a three-day weekend, Americans should prepare as they could for any other such holiday, with the right amount of food, water and other necessities," writes the DOE in their release of Dec. 16.

With that in mind, it's a somewhat dubious conclusion they draw in comparing the effects of Y2K to a "severe winter storm." Certainly, with all the uncertainty surrounding this man-made storm that is brewing on the not too distant horizon, accepting the government's conclusions of a three-day event could mean anything short of the end of time.

These storms and disasters of 1999 where quick and sudden, like that thief in the night. Yet the associated recoveries have been drawn out over many months. Just last week, the state of North Carolina appropriated nearly $850 million to help victims of Hurricane Floyd, a storm of decidedly intense but short duration. If we are to expect similar "Y2K storms" in every state next year, the "recovery costs" alone could exceed $42 billion, almost five times what it took the federal government to "fix" the problem in the first place.

Hurricane Floyd may provide the best example of what to expect in the final outcome of Y2K when it comes to embedded systems rollover problems. It was an event occurring in a short time frame but with a recovery period taking weeks, months and for some, years before being fully restored. And certainly many North Carolinians were want for a generator during those early days after the rains stopped.

To a large extent, the media has ignored this potential aspect of the Y2K problem. While the issue in the press is what problems might occur, their severity has been consistently downplayed. Thus, much less attention has been directed on the process of recovery. If a examination of real disaster possibilities (not planes and elevators falling to the ground) had been the focal point from the beginning, more Americans might have made prudent preparations for the coming year, and some of the Y2K natural disasters, should they occur, would be far less catastrophic that the list of 1999.

-- Johnny Lonesome (sitting@home.com), December 17, 1999

Answers

What do we have, maybe 250M people in the US? What are the odds of dying in a big storm, like a Midwest blizzard? If you're caught wrong, odds might be a couple percent, but for most the odds are lower.

Let's say (as a mental exercise) you have a 1/10 of one percent chance of getting killed in a 3-day storm, whatever that means in your area. That would be 250,000 dead in the US for a 3-day storm that hits the whole country. Or 6,000,000 dead for a worldwide 3-day storm.

I've long predicted 50,000 dead in the US in the coming winter months, which works out to just 1/50th of one percent. (My estimate is just for cold and hunger, no riots or other hazards.) Maybe I'm not so far off.

-- bw (home@puget.sound), December 17, 1999.

Enough with this "three day storm" nonsense!

Johnny, thanks for the listing. The only "three day storm" that comes to my mind was the Montreal ice storm (it took that look for the ice to accumulate), which resulted in up to 5 or 6 weeks of power outages in the more rural areas.

I agree that the "three day" moniker reflects that it is a three-day holiday weekend. Beyond that, however, the only reasonable analogy that comes to mind is a winter storm of sufficient impact that people are still digging out after three days. In other words, three days during which you can't conveniently get to the grocery store. My experience has been that that is a 1 or 2 day storm at most.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), December 17, 1999.

Here's my take on why the 3 day storm scenario given to use by TPTB should be seen as bunf by any reasonable person.

If the power fails, then unlike other power failures, which are usually caused by damged equipment that can be easily found and seen, y2k type failures will be more difficult to find. Then the parts have to be ordered and brought in. If there are wide spread failures that probably is not going to happen in a hurry. But lets say it does. And lets say that the exact parts needed are available. Ands lets also say the failures were localized so the utility companies don't need to send any one out to the field to check anything. This alone will take about 3 days to happen (unless someone is planning flying the parts in F14s and the like).

AFTER this has been done, every body else can begin to figure out what their problems are and fix them. Water/Sewer and Gas can't and won't know what problems they've got until power is back. Then they begin the above process. Which will probably take another 3 or 4 days.

This all assumes that everything can be done this quickly. Even in Quebec where the ice storm only affect that province, it took a week just for power to the main areas to be restored.

Therefore, to me, it seems it is reasonable to assume that there will be a 2 week serious interruption to major infrastructure services.

BTW while the US is telling the public to return the generators, Ontario hydro said that buying generators would not be bad idea if I remember correctly from a week or so ago.

-- Intereseted Spectator (is@the_ring.side), December 17, 1999.

I wonder how our goobermint bureaucrats came up with the "three-day storm" warning? I can envision bureaucrats in endless meetings and task forces to determine what to tell the public when no one really knows what will happen. I suppose there was a "tell-them-we-don't-know-team", a "tell-them-Y2K-will-be-like -a-three-day-storm-team" and a "tell-them-Y2K-will-be-like-a-two-week -storm-team". I bet the bureaucrats were surprised when their three-day-storm warning (a three day national storm sounds very serious to me) was usually interpreted as 'Y2K will be no big deal'.

-- Richard Greene (Rgreene2@ford.com), December 17, 1999.

A 3 day storm does not sound like much compared to TEOTWAWKI the public was told was going to happen. That's why y2k is not being taken seriously. Its all relative.

-- Interested Spectator (is@the_ring.side), December 17, 1999.

I arrived on Kaua'i almost 2 years after hurricane iniki hit. It was here for only a couple of hours, with perhaps another half a day of rain after. However, the 219 mile/hour winds did major infrastructure damage...and the island was still recovering when I arrived. It has taken even longer for the economic recovery. Economically, we are back about where the island was in 1991 and early 1992..."before iniki." It took months to get all the power and water restored...but then that was only a few hours of storm, and not three days...

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), December 17, 1999.

Richard - the 3-day storm comes from long tradition. I attended a conference of emergency management folks, where we discussed the Y2k-vs-3DayStorm issue. The emergency-trainers said that THEY used the 3-day storm phrase because they always had, and that changing the message would confuse people. It gives people a hittable target that isn't intimidating, and it does cover most emergencies.

I told them that Y2k was a different kind of emergency and that they were clueless about it. They immediately said they were all ready for a month, minimum, and they understood that Y2k was a bigger deal than a 3-day storm. (They were very ruffled that an outsider called them clueless.) Then I called them "dishonest". They didn't like that, either.

-- bw (home@puget.sound), December 17, 1999.

Something from FEMA's Web site:

http://www.fema.gov/library/emfdwtr.htm

[snip]

Emergency Food and Water Supplies

If an earthquake, hurricane, winter storm or other disaster ever strikes your community, you might not have access to food, water and electricity for days, or even weeks. By taking a little time now to store emergency food and water supplies, you can provide for your entire family.

This brochure was developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Community and Family Preparedness Programs which provides information to help families prepare for all types of disasters.

WATER: THE ABSOLUTE NECESSITY

Stocking water reserves and learning how to purify contaminated water should be among your top priorities in preparing for an emergency. You should store at least a two-week supply of water for each member of your family.

[snip]

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), December 17, 1999.

Brooks,

I think Register's point is none of these "storms" were really over in three days. The recovery period takes much longer.

By the way, do you guys think this guys name really is Register? Seems awfully strange to me. Hey, I'm Johnny, but my last name isn't really Lonesome.

-- Johnny Lonesome (sitting@home.com), December 17, 1999.