Lightning Advice Error on Meritbadge.org Electricity MB

[BrusselsSprout]

One of the links on the Electricity merit badge page points to an encarta article with bad advice for reducing the risk from a lightning strike.
http://meritbadge.org/wiki/index.php/Electricity
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761 ... ng.html#s3

The article advises correctly to:
Avoid trees
Take shelter in a car

and incorrectly to:
Lie flat on the ground

This bad advice is based on the idea that you are less of a target for a direct lightning strike by staying low to the ground. While this is true, there is little to be gained between lying flat and squatting. However, by lying flat you insert your body as a parallel conductor for any ground surface currents from a nearby lightning strike. Being near a lightning strike is much more likely than being directly hit with lightning.

Because the energy in lightning is so high, typically currents in the ten's of thousands to hundreds of thousands of Amperes are developed. This current largely dissipates across the surface of the earth. Because the currents are so high the potential difference across the dimension of a human body is more than sufficient to develop a lethal current and induce heart failure.

The better advice is to squat on the balls of your feet on an insulated surface such as a life jacket or doubled up sleeping pad. Keep your feet close together and avoid touching the ground with your hands. By squatting, you also reduce the possibility of a direct strike without increasing your risk from a nearby strike.

If you are in a group, spread out so that risks from a very near strike are minimized, and the possibility of survivors being able to assist any injured is maximized. Avoid trees as they are a likely target for a strike and bring the lightning current into close proximity to all nearby.

So how do I get this link with bad advice removed from the Electricity merit badge page?

[smtroop168]

There are two gentlemen at National that you can contact. Bill Evans is the Director of BSA Advancement and Frank Ramirez is on his staff and deals with MBs.

[BrusselsSprout]

Maybe I am mistaken, but I thought Meritbadge.org is run by volunteers, not by National.

[smtroop168]

It is. I misinterpreted your request and thought it was something erroneous in the MB pamphlet.

milominderbender2 (aka Craig Lincoln) has done alot of the heavy lifitng in setting up the individual MB pages and writes the worksheets that are on the site.

[biglou]

milominderbender2 (aka Craig Lincoln) Just wanted to let you know that you do a great job with the worksheets. Thanks.

[wagionvigil]

This has been corrected I believe

[BrusselsSprout]

Yep, a change is in the works the page currently reads:

1d. [s]What to do in an electrical storm[/s] —This Microsoft Encarta link contains incorrect safety instructions. Correct information will be posted soon.

Man you gotta love scouters. They are so on top of things.

Now if I can just figure out how BBC codes for strikethrough work.....

[BrusselsSprout]

Here is an excelent resource fo Lightning safety:
http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_pls/lst.html

Specifically:
http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_pls/lst.html

Note that there is a comment here:
http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_pls/ploutdoor.htm
stating the myth, "Rubber tires or a foam pad will insulate me from lightning." While this is correct with regards to a direct lightning strike, it may mislead people to not employ an insulating barrier to the ground.

An insulating pad such as a lifejacket or doubled over sleeping pad are effective means of minimizing injury from ground currents induced by lightning. Since we are more likely to be near a lightning strike and subjected to ground currents than actually struck by lightning, they are still effective tools to employ.

[milominderbinder2]

I replaced the Encarta Encyclopedia lightning link with links to three of the light safety standards: NLSI, NOAA, and FEMA.

Thank you for your feedback.

If anyone would like to be able to edit and help us with MeritBadge.Org, please send an email to wagionvigil or RWSmith.

Click here for button to send them emails:
memberlist.php

-Craig

[RWSmith]

If interested, see: http://meritbadge.org/wiki/index.php/Talk:Electricity for details.

Also, much thanks to BrusselsSprout.

[AquilaNegra2]

That's the problem with LINKING TO WIKIPEDIA. Poor choice.

[kwildman]

That's the problem with LINKING TO WIKIPEDIA. Poor choice.

Wikipedia like any other site is only as good as the information on it and the people doing the work. But just like a class text book you cant assume that everything you read is correct. I am sure that we could all find errors on MB.org. The scope of wiki is much larger and there is no way to really cross check every page. I am sure if you contact the author of that page it will be revised as well.

[BrusselsSprout]

That's the problem with LINKING TO WIKIPEDIA. Poor choice.

Actually, the issue is with Encarta, a Microsoft offering. I am pursuing getting the Encarta article updated as well. Surprisingly, I got the following reply from rkithil at Lightning Safety regarding the myth busting on their "Lightning Safety for Campers and Hikers" page:
http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_pls/ploutdoor.htm

"No place outside is safe. And since lightning cannot be quantified we maintain it best to avoid mentioning details specific to situations."

To which I will be replying with:

" I agree outdoors (and some places indoors) are not safe places to be in a lightning storm. Since this page is titled "Lightning Safety for Campers and Hikers" you likely intend it to cover that subject well. Many people camp and hike well away from shelter. Short of never going outdoors there inevitably will be situations where people are outdoors and subject to lightning injury.
My understanding of lightning risks have been greatly advanced with information from your lightning safety site and in depth discussions with other electrical professionals. It is clear to me that much lightning safety advice is focusing on mitigating the lower percentage risk of a direct lightning strike. What I hear you saying is that your major concern is giving people a false sense of security and that you want people to get out of a hazardous area.
This is well and good given infinite resources. However, given that this page is titled, " Lightning Safety for Campers and Hikers," there is an assumption that the resources at hand are limited and the advice should be tailored to that environment.
Even if I have not reduced my aspect to avoid being a direct target by squatting, it could be argued that a person is much more likely to be near a lightning strike than directly hit by lightning. Following all the lightning advice on this page likely leaves a kill zone hundreds of feet from a lightning strike in normal soil conditions across the majority of the United States. This kill zone may be reduced by half or better if additional barriers to conduction from the ground are put in place. Unfortunately, the myth busting on this page discourages positive behavior that can dramatically reduce risks further.
The human body has an impedance in the range of hundreds of ohms depending on surface moisture levels. Increasing the resistance even moderately with whatever insulating materials are at hand can increase the impedance dramatically and have a proportionate reduction in the size of the kill zone.
I think we should provide the best advice possible to match the circumstances. Since this page is specifically set up to provide advice for situations where shelter may not be an option it should reflect the very best practices for that environment in its advice."

[joat]

That's the problem with LINKING TO WIKIPEDIA. Poor choice.

That implies that Wikipedia, or Encarta, is "wrong". What I'm hearing is a difference of opinion, not correct versus incorrect information.

[BrusselsSprout]

That implies that Wikipedia, or Encarta, is "wrong". What I'm hearing is a difference of opinion, not correct versus incorrect information.

“Wrong” is probably not the term I would choose. I think the Encarta reference is better characterized as out of date and now provides outright dangerous advice. The LightningSafety article is simply not as good as it could be.
The LightningSafety site is an excellent resource. They have made an editorial choice to keep the advice simple and thereby advance the basics of lightning safety which are not generally followed. This has lead, in this one case, to glossing over a fine point.
There is an effort to move the understanding of lightning safety to account for the higher likelihood of being near a lightning strike rather than directly struck by lightning. This understanding makes a difference in design of buildings and electrical systems in addition to personnel behaviors. It also obsoletes the Encarta advice and suggests some tweaking to the LightningSafety article.
When our understanding of a phenomenon changes there is some lag in disseminating and integrating the knowledge into behaviors. With regards to mitigating the effects of lightning, portions of the electrical and safety industries are in the midst of a renewed effort to do just that.