In reading the discussion of elastomerics and triethylene glycol, it seems to me that the emergency logistics would be extremely challenging to pull off on a short time frame. I know particularly little about the latter, so I’ll comment on the former instead.
When compared to a mundane FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency in the US) action, I think a biodefense nightmare scenario would be a significantly more difficult scenario in which to execute quickly (e.g., within 24 hours as stated in the victory condition for elastomerics). One major difference would be the global (as opposed to local/regional) nature of the extreme emergency.
I think you’d have have the elastomerics stored in the right locations, know exactly where they need to go, have enough willing hands and other resources to move them from the stockpile to end users quickly, protect them against diversion, and so on. Not sure who would be charged with this, but I wouldn’t want to put the country (or world’s) survival on (e.g.) FEMA’s shoulders in light of the logistics complexity and FEMA’s mixed past performance.
Does the estimate of less than $500M for achieving a elastomeric victory condition include everything necessary for a solution that could reliably pull off a quick distribution?
Distribution would likely be coordinated with the Defense Logistics Agency, which manages global supply chain and distribution for DOD and other federal agencies. They have an extensive national distribution network and are often responsible for ensuring emergency supplies reach domestic natural disaster sites.
Recent biodefense plans included high levels of DOD action. I don’t know where the current admin stands on the existing plans, but I would feel much more comfortable if Defense played a significant role.
In reading the discussion of elastomerics and triethylene glycol, it seems to me that the emergency logistics would be extremely challenging to pull off on a short time frame. I know particularly little about the latter, so I’ll comment on the former instead.
When compared to a mundane FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency in the US) action, I think a biodefense nightmare scenario would be a significantly more difficult scenario in which to execute quickly (e.g., within 24 hours as stated in the victory condition for elastomerics). One major difference would be the global (as opposed to local/regional) nature of the extreme emergency.
I think you’d have have the elastomerics stored in the right locations, know exactly where they need to go, have enough willing hands and other resources to move them from the stockpile to end users quickly, protect them against diversion, and so on. Not sure who would be charged with this, but I wouldn’t want to put the country (or world’s) survival on (e.g.) FEMA’s shoulders in light of the logistics complexity and FEMA’s mixed past performance.
Does the estimate of less than $500M for achieving a elastomeric victory condition include everything necessary for a solution that could reliably pull off a quick distribution?
Distribution would likely be coordinated with the Defense Logistics Agency, which manages global supply chain and distribution for DOD and other federal agencies. They have an extensive national distribution network and are often responsible for ensuring emergency supplies reach domestic natural disaster sites.
Recent biodefense plans included high levels of DOD action. I don’t know where the current admin stands on the existing plans, but I would feel much more comfortable if Defense played a significant role.