Skip to footer

4 ways to get phone service the next time a hurricane Sandy calls

In the aftermath of a disaster such as superstorm Sandy, two-way communication is essential. People need to be able to receive news and updates, and to request assistance and provide status updates to loved ones.

Yet after hurricane Sandy, large portions of New York, New Jersey, and other areas lost their communication systems – their mobile phone network, cable TV, and Internet. Some sought out the last few pay phones as the only equipment that worked.

Here are four ways to better prepare our phones and other devices for the next disaster:

1. Aim for a resilient power supply

Eduardo Munoz/Reuters
A man works on local phone lines during the arrival of the nor'easter in Hoboken, New Jersey, Nov. 7. The winter storm dropped snow, wind, and flooding to a region still climbing out from the devastation of superstorm Sandy.

Above all, America's telecommunications system depends on the electric grid. It is possible to protect the grid by burying power lines and creating alternate lines of supply. The cost of this should be balanced with the benefits of improved reliability and safety.

Alternatively, we could place permanent backup generators at each cell site, effectively isolating them from the power grid. But that just changes the nature of the challenge to one of distributing fuel to the site's generators. As we saw in the aftermath of Sandy, even procuring fuel can be difficult after a disaster.

The aim should not be to fully counter each situation, but to focus instead on making the communications system more resilient. We need to take steps that would make the communications system capable of operating at a predetermined level of usefulness even in the face of some loss of capacity.

1 of 4
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.