? Lightning ?Hair Raising Stuff! ?

These boys were smiling at the time that this photo was snapped, thinking how amusing it was that for some reason, their hair was standing on end.

Yet here they are, completely unaware as to the great danger that was being announced to them, and which ordinarily should have served as a warning that they were in fact seconds/ microseconds away from a life ending/changing moment.

Shortly after this photo was taken, there was a blinding flash, and then the fun stopped!

I mention this as some 43 years after this photograph was taken, this image still speaks volumes as to the wider public's lack of understanding surrounding lightning, and their lack of understanding surrounding "visible" and "invisible" risks posed by lightning.

In the seconds after this photograph was taken, on a rocky mountain crag in a Californian national park, it had been reported that the temperature dropped dramatically, and hail had begun to fall, where only then did the two (2) brothers and their 16 year old sister (see image below) then make a retreat down Moro Rock in the Sequoia National Park, only to have lightning strike with tragic consequences.

                      Image Courtesy Michael McQuilken

The older brother "Michael McQuilken" recalled finding himself on the ground like many others around him, including his younger brother "Sean", who he found was unconscious with smoke coming off his back and suffering third-degree burns.

Sean McQuilken was one of at least three (3) people hit "directly" that day, including another man who was nearby who died, and another man who was nearby who also survived. The sister also survived.

14 years later Sean McQuilken committed suicide, tragically a not so uncommon occurrence for survivors of lightning injury.

 Courtesy Alamy: Moro Rock, Sequoia National Park, California

As a technical person, I look at the image of Moro Rock (pictured above) and see it as a solid volcanic rock outcrop, and I then conjure up thoughts surrounding "Ohms Law" and wonder how the incident wasn't a lot worse than it already was.

The AS/NZS:1768 Lightning Protection standard states that "solid volcanic rock" has a resistivity that typically sits in the range between 10,000 to 50,000 Ω-Mtrs.

So if we consider that a 50 percentile lightning event will have a current magnitude of approx 30 kA (30,000 Amps), we can use this current and model the results where it was then injected into lets say the lower range of the resistivity (being 10,000 Ω-Mtrs), and we can then hypothesize the magnitude of voltage that could have been developed around the local area of the lightning strike.

Ohms Law states:

I (Current) x R (Resistance) = V (Voltage)

So where: I = 30,000 Amps

R = 10,000 Ohms

then: V = 300,000,000 Volts

that would have been developed, and which would have been bouncing around the top of the mountain searching for the lowest impedance path to dissipate its charge to ground.

The earth potential rise (EPR) developed would have been significant and would have covered a large area.

If we think of the land area that such a large "earth potential rise" (EPR) potentially greater than 300,000,000 volts would need to dissipate down to 0 volts at some remote point, anyone caught within the differential voltage gradients of such an EPR "Hot Zone" would be in some serious trouble from "step potential" injury .

Lightning risk mechanism statistics:Courtesy:Cooper,M.A., Holle,R.L.& Andrews,C.,2008, “Distribution of lightning injury mechanisms”, Proc. 20th ILDC / 2nd ILMC, Tucson, AZ, USA.

Additionally the risk of "side-flash" off the metal hand rail adds another dimension to the overall lightning risk, whilst a transfer potential could also occur where a person was in contact with the metal handrail which was at some different electrical potential than the local ground which risks a "touch/contact potential" injury.

So many risk mechanisms, and not including the non-competing streamer leaders category which clearly were being launched off the children's heads and subsequently causing their hair to stand on end. It was also reported that when Michael McQuilken lifted his arms into the air, his ring would start buzzing and produced a "loud" audible noise.

The danger signs where everywhere, but they still had no clue!

                          Image Courtesy LightningMan Pty Ltd

It is my view that "our" children, and the wider general public are equally unprepared and unaware as to their susceptibility to lightning risks, and if faced with a similar hair raising phenomena, they would also find such hair raising imagery to be equally amusing. Our children would not be aware of any imminent danger.

So the conundrum is:

• How do our children ever become armed with what is pretty simple knowledge, that is to know what is a potentially unsafe condition during localized thunderstorms?
• Who is responsible to educate our children to be aware of their disposition to high risk factors during thunderstorms, and how to reduce their exposure to risk factors?
• Is there some level of government that can/should take responsibility for educating the public to such common environmental risks that can endanger lives?

In the workplace, government mandates the responsibility of "due diligence" upon the "Person Conducting a Business Undertaking" (PCBU), yet there is no similar requirement for the wider public, let alone schoolchildren who are simply not mature enough to understand the concept of risk, or mortality, and who inherently believe they are bulletproof and that "it will never happen to them".

Yet children will be exposed to the same localized thunderstorms that everyone else will be exposed to, and whereupon ANY workplace, employers are mandated to warn, show diligence, and provide "duty of care" to their employees.

So why are governments, through their agencies/ departments, not held up to the same level of scrutiny for "non workers" but its citizens? Isn't it the primary role of government to protect all of its citizens against known and inferred risks?

This then opens up another conundrum;

• Where do PCBU's learn to understand the invisible and visible lightning risks?
• Where in WHS legislation or any other published health and safety guidelines, is there any detail pertaining to lightning risk mechanisms, and how lightning injuries manifest?
• Where in the public domain do PCBU, or HSE professionals find accurate and useful lightning safety information in which to develop their WHS policies and procedures?
• Why is useful "lightning safety" information NOT included within relevant Australian Lightning Protection Standards?
• Why is lightning safety/public safety information NOT included within the Australian Education curriculum.

A few years ago (Maybe around 2015) I had witnessed school children conducting outdoor physical activity classes whilst localized thunderstorms were occurring. I immediately approached the schools administration office to inquire as to why their students were still outdoors during high risk periods, and why students would not have been immediately brought indoors whilst localized thunderstorms were occurring. I never received a response other than they went off to investigate with the teacher involved.

I later followed this instance up with a telephone call to the Education Department where I inquired as to the likelihood of there being some documentary weather/lightning procedure in place for schools, and was put through to a lady who in her condescending manner, scolded me for even raising anything that would put the professionalism of school teachers in question.

She then went on to instruct me as to how school teachers were all highly trained professionals, and of course they would know what was required to keep children in their care safe.

Yet she did not answer my original question as to whether there was a written lightning policy/ procedure (or not), and which set out the departments requirements for dealing with lightning safety related issues.

Earlier today ( August 2018) I contacted the Education Department so as to inquire as to the currency of any Lightning Procedure for Western Australian schools. I spoke to a very nice person who took keen interest in my call but the only advice was that if lightning was deemed a risk, those schools should undertake a Risk Assessment process to determine if there was in fact a need to develop any procedure.

• Where do schools learn to understand the invisible and visible lightning risks that they could competently undertake a Risk Assessment ?
• Where in the public domain is there any detail pertaining to lightning risk mechanisms, and how lightning injuries manifest?
• Where in the public domain can HSE professionals find accurate and useful lightning safety information in which to undertaked Risk Assessments and then develop suitable policies and procedures?

Incidentally.

In recent years a 40 year old Western Australian school teacher, and a 19 year old teachers aide were killed by a lightning strike, whilst escorting a group of fifteen (15) x local Perth students who were undertaking a cultural exchange excursion to Thailand (2008), which also killed three (3) Thai national students aged 14,16 &17.

This incident involved five (5) fatalities and several injuries !

Local media reports at the time suggested that the effects of the lightning strike affected a large number of the Australian student group to varying degrees, some who were hospitalized with abnormal heart arythmia, some with burns, temporary memory loss, and other relatively minor injuries, and many others having felt the electrical effects, but without injury. This could have been so much worse if it wasn't bad enough.

It was also reported that after the first bolt of lighting struck, the excursion group of around thirty (30) students and teachers, retreated from the nearby waterfall and sought shelter under a big tree It was also reported that a second lighting bolt then struck that tree.

Any "lightning procedure" would have, or should have, highlighted that trees increase the disposition to lightning risks and should have been avoided during localized thunderstorms. Yet out of a group of THIRTY (30) people, it would seem that not one person thought that sheltering under a tree was a bad idea.

So some pertinent questions;

• What could have been learnt from this incident?
• 10 years on, why haven't we learnt from this incident?
• What should we do about it?

Lightning, Its pretty hair raising !

Grant Kirkby - Lightningman