Pelajaran dari banjir dan longsor

Citizen journalism yang berbasis di kota Solo melaporkan setidaknya 24 orang meninggal dunia, akibat longsor dan banjir di Jawa Tengah, sementara 26 orang hilang dan masih dalam pencarian. Ribuan rumah juga hancur disapu banjir atau tertimbun tanah longsor di 16 kabupaten dan kabupaten akibat hujan lebat yang turun sejak Sabtu (18/6) siang hingga malam dan pagi harinya (19/6).

Bencana banjir dan longsor yang tiap tahun terjadi di berbagai tempat sebetulnya menjadi peringatan penting untuk bangsa Indonesia bahwa bencana semacam itu kini terus mengintai kita. Makin banyaknya lereng-lereng gunung yang gundul, rusaknya hutan konservasi dan hutan lindung; makin luasnya alih fungsi lahan (dari pertanian menjadi kawasan industri, perumahan, dan perkantoran) serta habisnya pepohonan di sepanjang sempadan sungai-sungai besar menyebabkan bencana banjir dan longsor.

Kondisi tersebut diperparah dengan makin tingginya kenaikan suhu bumi akibat global warming dan naiknya permukaan air laut. Akibatnya, banjir tidak semata disebabkan air hujan, tapi juga kenaikan permukaan air laut (rob). Gabungan antara banjir akibat krisis lingkungan di darat dan rob air laut inilah yang menjadikan meluapnya air di kota-kota pantai berlangsung lama.

Fenomena banjir rob, khususnya, tiap tahun makin merangsek ke daratan dan skalanya makin besar karena manusia ternyata tak mampu mengatasi global warming. Keserakahan manusia untuk mengonsumsi energi fosil secara berlebihan masih berlangsung di mana-mana meskipun peringatan-peringatan akan bahaya meningkatnya kadar gas rumah kaca akibat konsumsi energi fosil yang rakus terus dikumandangkan.

Fenomena banjir yang makin dahsyat, gabungan antara "banjir darat" (karena hujan) dan "banjir laut" (karena mencairnya salju di kutub) akhir Mei dan awal Juni lalu, misalnya, melanda Eropa. Kota Paris nyaris tenggelam dengan korban mencapai 50 orang. Permukaan air Sungai Seine yang membelah Paris naik 6,5 meter dari biasanya. Begitu juga Sungai Danube yang membelah beberapa negara di Eropa. Akibatnya banjir melanda sejumlah negara Eropa.

Jos Delbeke, Direktur General for Climate Action at the European Commission, menyatakan dampak global warming sekarang jauh melampaui prediksi. Para pakar lingkungan dibuat kaget, ternyata dampak lingkungan akibat global warming jauh lebih besar dari yang diperkirakan. Delbeke mencontohkan banjir Eropa 2016 dan badai raksasa Katrina yang menghantam Miami, AS, 2005, yang menewaskan 1.500 orang dan menimbulkan kerugian US$ 95 miliar.

Memulai dari sederhana

Jika negara-negara Eropa yang punya kepedulian terhadap lingkungan dan global warming saja diterjang banjir besar yang tak terpetakan sebelumnya, apalagi Indonesia. Saat ini, pembangunan infrastruktur untuk menarik investasi (dalam bentuk pembangunan industri) sedang digencarkan di seluruh Indonesia. Di Jawa misalnya, pembangunan jalan tol sudah hampir menjangkau setiap kabupaten dan kota. Dalam beberapa tahun lagi akan banyak industri dan pabrik di Pulau Jawa. Dampaknya, Jawa yang mudah dilanda banjir. Berkurangnya lahan resapan dan hutan serta meningkatnya iklim mikro niscaya menyebabkan Pulau Jawa makin rentan banjir.

Menghadapi fenomena banjir dan longsor tersebut, semua stake holder di Indonesia harus punya keprihatinan dan kepedulian serius. Kini saatnya kita harus merenungkan bahwa hidup kita hari ini adalah untuk masa depan anak cucu kita. Jika kita tetap serakah, merusak alam, dan terus mengonsumsi energi berlebihan, dan membangun gedung-gedung raksasa tanpa memperhitungkan beban permukaan tanah, dunia akan dilanda badai dan banjir raksasa.

Banyak cara untuk mengatasi katastropik banjir dan longsor akan datang. Setiap orang kudu membuat biopori. Lalu menanam pohon dan menampung air hujan untuk dipakai untuk kebutuhan rumah tangga guna mengurangi pemakaian air tanah. Juga sedikit mungkin memakai kendaraan bermotor serta menghemat pemakaian listrik di rumah dan kantor.

Sederhana memang. Tapi bila itu dilakukan secara massal oleh penduduk dunia niscaya hasilnya sangat signifikan: mampu meredam kenaikan suhu bumi, mencegah banjir, dan menahan longsor! Memang tidak langsung, tapi melalui perubahan ekosistem yang mengakibatkan bumi makin sehat, kuat, dan aman.

oleh Nyoto Santoso

disadur dari Kontan, Kamis, 23 Juni 2016

Disaster Preparedness: It's Not the Earthquake that Kills Us

The earthquake that shook Yogyakarta on Saturday morning, May 26, 2006, seemingly did not affect Nurul Khusna's house in Jejeran Hamlet, Wonokromo Village, Pleret District, Bantul Regency. The house stood tall without any cracks. All the glassware and furniture was still in their original places. This was despite the fact that almost all the houses in the surrounding area had collapsed.

"The earthquake felt strong, but I thought it was just a regular earthquake. All my kids slept through it and none awoke. It was only after I went outside that I was shocked that all the other houses had collapsed, including my mother's house right next to ours," said Nurul, who teaches at the Madrasah Tsanawiyah 1 Islamic junior high school in Wonokromo.

Despite the earthquake, the epicenter of which lay about 15 kilometers east of the Opak River, being only of a magnitude 6.4 in the moment magnitude scale (Mw), it was highly destructive. Apart from the epicenter being in a shallow land area, the soil in Bantul has a thick alluvial sedimentation layer that amplifies the shocks.

Thousands of buildings collapsed. More than 6,000 died and 40,000 more were wounded in the strongest earthquake in Yogyakarta's modern history. Jejeran Hamlet was among the worst-hit regions. Of the 156 houses in the hamlet, only three withstood the quake. Twenty-two residents died from being crushed under the rubble and dozens of others were injured. "At first, my husband and I thought it was just a coincidence that our house was left unscathed," Nurul said.

However, that miracle was in fact the work of construction foreman Ismawan, who lives across the road from Nurul. Without being asked, Ismawan applied the barrataga earthquake-resistant construction technique when he got the order to build Nurul's home back in 2004. The two other houses that survived the earthquake in Jejeran had also been built by Ismawan using this technique.

Barrataga, an acronym for "bangunan rumah rakyat tahan gempa" (earthquake-resistant people's housing), is a local engineering technique. Ismawan learned the barrataga technique from construction expert Sarwidi, who serves as a professor of civil engineering at the Indonesian Islamic University in Yogyakarta. Since 2004, Sarwidi has been actively training construction workers and foremen in earthquake-resistant construction techniques.

"My husband (Ghoizon) and I only knew that my house was earthquake-resistant after a group led by Pak Sarwidi came to my house in the afternoon after the earthquake to see if there was any damage to my house," Nurul said, "When we built the house, we gave free reign to Pak Ismawan to do what he wanted to do with the available budget."

According to Sarwidi, the barrataga principle that he invented involved pouring a 20- to 30-centimeter layer of sand under the foundation. "The function is to withstand the shakes of an earthquake," he said.

Reinforced concrete must also be used in every part of the construction, including foundation blocks, columns, roof blocks and lintels. These blocks are connected to each other and are anchored with steel reinforcement bars to the walls. The walls need to be constructed with good-quality bricks. Light-but-strong materials are suggested for the roofing so that it can withstand shocks.

Houses constructed with the barrataga technique, according to Sarwidi, can withstand shocks of VIII-IX on the MMI scale, equivalent to earthquakes of magnitude 8 as measured by the Richter scale. "Currently, we are still conducting more research to simplify and make cheaper the implementation of the barrataga technique," he said.

After the earthquake, many locals asked Ismawan to build their homes using the Barrataga technique. They realized that it would not be the earthquake that killed them. Instead, it would be the houses constructed not using earthquake-resistant methods.

According to Sarwidi, apart from educating construction workers, changing people's mindsets to be more aware of the importance of earthquake-resistant buildings is also important.

Preserving the memory

Ten years after the Yogyakarta earthquake, the signs of destruction are almost gone from Bantul. Life has completely gone back to normal and the destroyed villages are thriving and even more densely populated nowadays.

This is the unique resilience of Indonesians in the face of calamity, just like in Aceh, Pangandaran and other disaster-stricken regions. However, this resilience and optimism is often fostered at the expense of the awareness to reduce the risks of possible disasters in the future.

Some five kilometers away from Jejeran Village, in Potrobayan Hamlet, Srihardono Village, Pundong, a monument to remember the 2006 Yogyakarta earthquake tragedy stood by the Opak River. The monument was publicly revealed in the earthquake's 10th anniversary commemoration ceremony on May 26, 2016.

Four Panjang Rejo junior high school students visited the monument on Friday (10/6/2016) morning. When asked about her reason to visit the monument, Atikah (13), said: "I wish to know the center of the earthquake that destroyed my home."

What would she do with the knowledge? "Well, so that we can always remember and prepare ourselves if the earthquake strikes again. At school, we are trained on what to do when earthquakes strike," said Dewi (13), firmly.

The answer gives us all a new hope...

Source Kompas, Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Disaster Risks Ignored - Fatalities Continue to Occur

The high number of deaths and material losses caused by various disasters shows the poor prevention and risk reduction aspects of Indonesia's construction engineering. A change of perspective and disaster management, from focusing on responses after the fact to risk reduction, is urgently needed.

The nine deaths caused by hot ash clouds from Mount Sinabung in May and the destruction of 1,955 houses by a small-scale earthquake in West Sumatra on June 2 are just the latest additions to the already long list of deaths and material losses caused by natural disasters. This is despite the fact that deaths and losses can be reduced by focusing disaster management on mitigation efforts.

According to the National Disaster Mitigation Agency (BNPB), from January to June 6 in 2016 natural disasters claimed 154 lives and affected 1.6 million others. Disasters also damaged 14,500 houses and 462 public facilities. Losses caused by these disasters are estimated to be between Rp 50 trillion (US$3.75 billion) and Rp 100 trillion every year.

However, last year the losses induced by forest fires alone reached Rp 221 trillion," BNPN spokesman Sutopo Purwo Nugroho said in Jakarta on Monday (13/6/2016).

Disaster researcher Eko Yulianto from the Indonesian Science Institute's (LIPI) Geotechnology Research Center said that the high number of deaths and material losses caused by disasters occur because risk reduction was not yet mainstreamed in development efforts.

The deputy for geophysics, Masturyono, from the Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics Agency (BMKG) shared this sentiment. "In budgeting, for example, disaster is not a national priority even though it is in the mid-term development plan (RPJM)," he said.

Earthquake and tsunami researcher Widjo Kongko from the Agency for the Assessment and Application of Technology (BPPT) added that the failure to mainstream disaster planning in development projects is clearly on display in a number of national strategic projects that have no serious foundation of mitigation aspects. He cited the Jakarta-Bandung high-speed railway project and the airport development project in te tsunami-prone area of Kulon Progo, Yogyakarta, as examples.

"Despite Law No. 24/2007 pushing for a paradigm shift in disaster management from reactive to preventive, in reality disaster management is too focused on responding after the fact," Eko said.

There are only a few activities focused on risk reduction and prevention. As a result, the people and government, especially in regions, have a limited capacity to reduce disaster risks.

This failure is due to the relative lack of coordination of disaster management efforts between the BNPB and other state agencies. "We should emulate the Women Empowerment and Child Protection Ministry's strategy of mainstreaming gender issues. Disasters should not only be managed by the BNPB alone, but should be mainstreamed in every ministry and state agency," he said.

Limited funding

Sutopo highlighted limited funding as a major problem in disaster management in Indonesia. The BNPB's budget in 2016 is around Rp 1.1 trillion, consisting of Rp 807.8 billion for disaster mitigation programs and Rp 292.2 billion for infrastructure management support, monitoring and improvement of state officials' accountability.

The reserve funds for disaster management in the Finance Ministry are Rp 4 trillion, consisting of Rp 2.5 trillion for emergency management and Rp 1.5 trillion for rehabilitation and reconstruction. "The budget is too small compared to the needs, especially with increasing threat of disasters," Sutopo said.

Ideally, the BNPB gets an annual budget of between Rp 10 trillion and Rp 15 trillion for disaster management. "This was initiated by the National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas), which proposed a 1 percent allocation in the state budget for disaster management. Compare this to Japan, which allocates 6 percent of its state budget every year for disaster management efforts," he said.

Disaster management budgets in regions are also limited. In Lampung, for instance, the regional budget is only enough to cover operational expenses, victim evacuation and logistics during disasters. As a result, it is difficult for the region's disaster mitigation agency to hold disaster simulations for regional officials.

However, Eko said, the main issue in disaster management in Indonesia is more about a wrongheaded perspective. "Disasters are seen more as a purely technical problem so that the focus of disaster mitigation efforts is on providing physical infrastructure and not on improving the people's preparedness," he said.

Behavioral change

According to Eko, the ultimate goal of development is human development. This perspective must be the foundation in disaster risk reduction. "The managers of disaster risk reduction (especially the BNPB and its regional counterpart, the BPBD) must see human behavior as the main cause of disasters.

In regard to this, disaster risk reduction must be focused on improving people's behavior, which ultimately involves reducing the people's social, physical and economic vulnerabilities. "The office that is most responsible for disaster risk reduction must be the Office of the Coordinating Human and Culture Development Minister," Eko said.

The issue of human capacity was clear in the deaths caused by hot ash clouds from Mt. Sinabung. The government had set a no-entry danger zone, but this was ignored by the people.

A volcano expert who was the former head of the Volcanology and Geological Disaster Mitigation Center (PVMBG), Surono, highlighted the nation's lack of disaster management. "This reflects our poor disaster management. If the PVMBG recommends relocation, the people must be immediately relocated. The government must be present," he said.

A number of Sinabung evacuees complained about the slow relocation process that has resulted in several residents returning to their fields.

source Kompas, Tuesday, June 14, 2016