Environmental Management in Sheffield City - Case Study Example

Environmental Management Global warming had precipitated to the current climate change. Consequently, climate change produced floods and other new and rare natural calamities in unexpected places and time periods. In June 2007, Sheffield City experienced two spells of exceptionally heavy rainfall. This resulted to the unprecedented events in Sheffield City and the evacuation of a number of removable properties and people. It caused significant irreparable financial losses and damages to the environment. Kathy Maskell and Irving M Mintzer wrote in the British medical journal Lancet on the topic of the carbon cycle’s natural balance “Over the past 10,000 years, the concentration of CO2 and other greenhouse gases has remained fairly constant, and this represents a remarkable balancing act of nature. Every year natural processes on the land and in the oceans release to and remove from the atmosphere huge amounts of carbon, about 200 billion tons (gigatons) in each direction” (Johansen 2002;33). However, various human activities are continually destroying the natural balance in the environment. The activities are dangerously increasing the concentrations of several greenhouse gases, including the water vapor which is the main greenhouse gas. The increase in the temperature precipitated to the increase in the effects of the greenhouse gases. In addition, the increase in the human -induced global temperature (global warming) signal other natural occurrences to increase their change of pace in the course of biotic feedbacks. This includes the release of carbon dioxide and methane from the permafrost and continental shelves in the earth’s oceans. Based on the current trend, there is a probability that greenhouse gases will runaway during the year 2050. (Johansen 2002;33). Environmental Management is a cooperative activity that entails harnessing all avenues to predict, monitor, and maintain a safer environment (Uzawa 2003). • The contributory factors causing the floods. There were contributory factors the triggered the 2007 floods in several parts of England, specifically the community of Sheffield. The culprit, global warming, changed the entire global environmental landscape. Global warming had increased the intensity of the rainfalls as well as the number of rainfalls that occur during that fateful year, 2007. Flooding occurs when a high volume of rainfall falls on a locality within a short period of time and the drainage system is infective in its draining of the water overload because of the faster rainfall surge. In addition, the street, drainage, and community layout materially contributes to the occurrence, severity, and length of the life –stealing floods. In addition, the housing boom during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, generated an in appropriate construction of homes and offices within low level communities like Sheffield. Sheffield is the catch basin because it is located at the lowest portion within the community. Thus, nearby rain water would definitely flow into Sheffield. Homes had been installed with walls to keep away unwanted visitors. However these walls contributed to the intensity of floods by reducing the rainwater’s escape routes to sometimes dangerous flood levels. (Food and Rural Affairs Committee 2008; 6). • The immediate impact and significant risks caused by the flooding was catastrophic. The 2007 flood ravaged many geographical areas in England. The physical as well as economic damages were large –scale. The entire 2007 episode shocked the entire nation. The world could only watch as the rushing volumes of water plucked many homes, bridges, and other man –made structures like toothpicks. The global audience could momentarily do nothing as they watched television live feeds of the 2007 floods wreaking havoc on places like Sheffield City. In terms of comparison, this was the worst flood in terms of lives lost and property damage that had occurred for the past 60 years. Many of the 2007 places directly hit by the floods did not have a history of prior flooding. The residents, their cars, and other property were literary swept off because they were steadfast in their faith that trend analysis indicates that it flooding would encroach on their community. Further, the human toll was saddening. The floods unceremoniously took the lives of thirteen useful citizens of society. Thousands of lives lost their electric power. They also lost access to potable water. More than 44,600 houses were partly or wholly submerged in flood waters. Nine months later, thousands of people could still not return to their homes since the flood waters had not subsided to allowable levels. More than £3 billion worth of properties were damaged. In addition, 7,100 businesses were still partly or wholly submerged in flood waters. The psychological toll should also be taken in account; the residents fear when the next floods will envelope them (Food and Rural Affairs Committee 2008;5). More specifically, the 2007 floods were not expected; this increased statistical figures in terms of property damage and lost of lives. The two floods unexpected dropped the large volume of rainwater during two summer months, June and July. The floods hit Yorkshire and the Humber, Lincolnshire and Worcestershire, and Derbyshire. The Urban northern Cities of Hull and Sheffield were badly damaged. In Hull, the one in 150 year rainfall overwhelmed the city’s pumped drainage and sewerage system. Consequently, 7,000 homes, 90 local schools, and several dozens of business establishment were drenched in knee –high and higher levels of flood waters. In Sheffield City, an estimated 2,180 homes and business establishments were closed due to flood waters. Sheffield City was literally cut half by the rising flood water intrusion. In South Yorkshire, more than 40,000 residents of the city had no electricity power after the community’s electricity substation had shut down. What is environmentally surprising is that the 2007 summer floods were triggered by surface water. On the other hand, the past floods were characterised as river –based floods. In Northern England, more than 94% of the Hull 2007 summer floods were surface water precipitation. On the other hand, Sheffield City experienced both river water flooding and surface water flooding processes (Food and Rural Affairs Committee 2008; 11). • Identifying the agencies involved and outlines their response and role during the event including the recovery phase. There are agencies tasked with responding to their responsible roles in the even and including the recovery phase. First, the environmental agency spearheads the flood control program. The environmental agency has successfully enhanced the country’s flood protection for an additional 100,300 homes between the period 2003 -2004 and 2004 – 2005 by investing £ 900 million in the installation of a more improved flood control system. The Environment Agency successfully balanced funding to maximise new flood control construction projects as well as continue repair and maintenance work on established flood control infrastructure. Directly, the Environment Agency should not be faulted for a 1 in a 140 year or 1 in 150 year rare flood disaster. The summer 2007 Sheffield flood caused the waters to overflow the barriers of Sheffield and Doncaster. The drainage system of Sheffield could not handle the sudden splurge of rainwater. The same Agency had been researching on the effect of climate change to the volume of rainfall in a specific time period within a fifty –year period when the 2007 flood occurred. The Environment Agency aims to permit a 20 percent increase in rain flow taking into consideration the increase or decrease in the future’s projected rainfall (Food and Rural Affairs Committee 2008; 11). Another of the Environment Agency’s ongoing projects, started in 2002 until the 2007 flood occurred, included setting the policy of flood risk management geared towards catchment study for the next 50 to 100 years; this takes into account all material influences in the monitoring and controlling of floods in the Sheffield and other United Kingdom flood –prone areas. The flood management program entails a scientific study of the effect of climate change and property development on the occurrence and intensity of floods within the Sheffield and other United Kingdom localities. Next, the Department for Flood Risk Management during 2006 – 2007 focused on the funding to prevent or reduce the damaging effects of floods within the United Kingdom territory. Specifically, the same management agency donated £483 million to the Environment agency for the implementation of its mandate to monitor, and control any flood control –related activities during the same 2006 to 2007 period. Part of the Agency’s funds, £ 25 million, was sourced from each local official’s financial levy (Food and Rural Affairs Committee 2008; 11). In terms of rescue operations, the responsive government agency should purchase the necessary disaster retrieval equipments to ensure quick retrieval of trapped flood and other environment –affected victims. The equipments should include extrication equipments that include: Pneumatic equipment, high pressure airbags, hydraulic rescue tools, winching techniques, hand tools, and electrical reciprocating saws. Medical and trauma care should also be given priority. This includes: trauma management, immediate care provider risk management, casualty assessment and management, airway –assessment and management, breathing assessment and management, and circulation assessment and management. In addition, the fire and rescue organization should maintain a harmonious relationship with the residents and teach them fire, flood, and other environmental safety procedures in a working relationship synergized with confidentiality that a cooperative stand will reduce victim statistics (Britain 2007;85). • Evaluating the effectiveness of environmental management systems in place at the time. The 2007 flood control program was an effective endeavor. However, the 2007 flood, described as a rare 1 in 140 years and 1 in 150 years environmental occurrence was an unexpected occurrence that caught everyone sleeping. Trend analysis was used as a basis for predicting that Sheffield and other localities would not suffer the same fate that occurred only in 2007. As proof, there is no news that a floods of similar intensity and character occurred in 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, as well as 2010. For example, the established drainage system in Sheffield City was more than adequate to squeeze out the normal volume of flood water out of the streets of Sheffield (Food and Rural Affairs Committee 2008; 11). However, the increase in the construction of homes and other infrastructure created a big toll on the drainage system. More drainage space had to be converted to home space and street space. There was a tug of war between the housing development czars and the environment proponents in terms of ensuring that the current drainage system would be feasible enough to handle the normal flood inflows. It would unwise to infuse large amounts of scarce money resources to create a flood program when statistical (trend) analysis indicates that the Sheffield flood of 2007 is a 1 in 140 or 1 in 150 year occurrence. However, the Sheffield local officials could have installed a flood warning system, which is not too costly, to sound the alarm whenever an approaching flood threatens the lives, limbs, and property of the Sheffield residents. This will allow the residents to escape into higher ground and move their belongings to escape being drenched by the incoming flood onslaught (Food and Rural Affairs Committee 2008; 11). • Lessons to be learnt and recommendations to be made. There are many lessons learned from the rare 2007 Sheffield flood that destroyed property and stole many lives. First, everything in life is full of probabilities. However, no one can predict the future 100 percent. The 2007 Sheffield tragedy is proof to this concept. Likewise, people should not completely rely on the local authorities or the government for their safety and security. The people should research the internet and other resources in order to predict for themselves the veracity or falsity of the government’s interpretation and prediction of future floods. In addition, the government must monitor and control the influx of housing units within the Sheffield and other flood –prone communities. Lastly, the local officials of Sheffield should increase their efforts in maintain a safe Sheffield community by increasing environment –based research. The agency should have gone that extra mile in ensuring that the Sheffield community is spared from the devastation of the unexpected 2007 summer flood. There are a few recommendations to prevent future flooding or mitigate its effects on the environment. First, everyone from all facets of United Kingdom society should impress upon themselves that everything in life is full of probabilities; no one can predict the future 100 percent. In addition, people should not completely rely on the local authorities or the government for their safety and security. Further, the people personally delve into painstaking research from the internet and other resources in order to predict for themselves the truth or falsity of flood and other environment –based reports. In addition, the government must increase the tenor of its research, monitoring, and control of the cropping up of housing units within the Sheffield and other flood –prone communities. Lastly, the local officials of Sheffield must take charge of their community, being its directly responsible leaders, by funding an increase in the quantity and quality of their own research on global warming flood, and other environment issued, instead on relying on the Environment Agency and the other interested organisations. The Environment Agency should have gone that extra mile in its mandate to do whatever it takes to ensure the safety and security of the residents of the Sheffield community and other parts of the United Kingdom in order to be spared a deadly recurrence of the devastation reminiscent of the unexpected 2007 summer flood. BRIEFLY, global warming had precipitated to the current climate change. As a result, climate change produced floods and other rare natural disasters in unexpected places and time periods. The aftermath of the 2007 summer flood included loss to many human lives, destruction to property, and global shock. It is highly recommended that changes in affected organizations be implemented to ensure there is no repeat of the 2007 summer floods. Indeed, Environmental Management focuses on harnessing all avenues to predict, monitor, and maintain a safer environment. REFERENCES Britain, Fire Service Inspectorate of Great. Fire and Rescue Service Manual: Volume 2. London: The Stationery Office 2007, 2007. Food and Rural Affairs Committee, House of Commons. Flooding Report. London: The Stationery Office Press, 2008. Johansen, B. The Global Warming Desk Reference. London: Greenwood Press, 2002. Uzawa, H. Economic Theory and Global Warming. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Read More