Natural environmental tragedies and catastrophe are events which humans and our environment have had to live with for thousands of years, with humans doing our best - although most probably not as much as we are capable of doing - to contend with and defend ourselves as best we can.
When a catastrophe such as the recent earthquake which has devastated several Italian villages and towns, including those of Amatrice, Accumoli, Arquata and Pescara del Tronto, we are required to take notice and feel a sense of sadness for the people who have had the misfortune of being dealt with so cruelly by fate. With over 200 people having reportedly killed and many more injured and probably thousands being left homeless and possessionless, this disaster is probably the most, or one of the most serious ones Italy has suffered in recent years. It is probably instructive that, even the massive flooding which Italy - and other European countries - has suffered not many years ago, had not resulted in such a high death rate. Probably the damage was greater, but not the loss of life.
One source has it that, between 2000 and 2013, Italy had 9 major floodings, which, it is reported, resulted in under 50 deaths. It would seem, therefore, that, while floodings, with all that mass of water and landslides rushing through villages and towns, seem spectacular, and doubtlessly result in massive damage to property and infrastructure, thankfully, it is not nearly as costly in loss of life as are earthquakes.
So, what does this say about how us humans need to improve our attempts to protect ourselves from the immense risk that earthquakes pose to our lives? We are able to build our infrastructure and our dwellings - atleast, for those with the resources to do so - with a certain amount of flood-proofing. To what extent people who live in less hospitable terrains, such as, in some cases, the people of Italy, Pakistan, Napal, Parts of China, and some countries in the Americas, are able to do so, is debatable. Many of the structures and buildings which have been destroyed by the Italian earthquake, will have been build decades, if not hundred of years ago. As such, it would not have been feasible to make them more 'earthquake proof', due to cost and lack of space.
The fact that earthquakes tend to be probably the biggest killer of the 'natural disasters', except for those such as Tsunamis, poses an unenviable dilemma for people living in terrains and in dwellings which are susceptible to earthquakes. For these people, particularly those who do not have the option of moving out, taking what measures they can to make their homes as 'earthquake-proof' as they can, and hoping that fate will not decree that they be visited by any horrendous earthquake, is probably as much as they can do.
Of course, their governments could also ensure that 'earthquake shelters' are build in those areas which are most vulnerable.
But for now, may the people of the Italian towns and villages which have been devastated by this earthquake, recover from their injuries and find the strength and support to rebuild their lives and livelihood. It will be a painful and probably time consuming process, but there should probably be little doubt that their indubitable spirit will prevail over this adversity; as it most probably has done, for centuries.
The armed forces of these countries could be employed in helping to 'earthquake-proof' and build 'earthquake shelters in the areas which are at risk.
No comments:
Post a Comment