Environmental Issues Facing Lewisham Council - Assignment Example

Environmental issues facing Lewisham Council Number Department Environmental issues facing Lewisham Council Lewisham Council faces several environmental problems including: domestic refuse disposal, slow recycling of waste, abandoned vehicles and scrap metals, animal waste, refuse in the streets and public walkways, soil erosion due to reducing vegetation cover, felling of trees, soil and water pollution by pesticides, graffiti, noise pollution, air pollution and landfills from demolition and construction projects. Demolition and Construction Environmental degradation due to demolitions and constructions is one of the environmental issues facing the borough. Both processes result in heaps of earth, rubbles and boulders lying precariously at or near construction sites, especially before completion of such projects. Even with proper construction management plans (CMP), pollutions arising from construction sites remain ubiquitous in the Council due to the inability to move the pollutants to their areas of disposal while projects are still on-going (Rodgers, 2011). Some more responsible constructors usually implement CMPs, but in most cases, lack of space and the need to reuse the material obtained from old buildings usually prevent early disposal of the pollutants. Owing to the presence of many construction sites within the jurisdiction of the Council, the local authorities are normally too overstretched to enforce environmental safety compliance. The end result is normally higher rates of pollution within the locality as compared to other localities. Noise pollution Apart from pollution from construction or demolition sites, noise pollution is also common within the Council’s jurisdiction. Noise nuisance according to local laws is noise that triggers serious and unwanted distraction to neighbours, hence hindering their right to use their homes and premises or one which impacts negatively on their health. Serious noise pollution is one which has the potential to cause hearing problems. The Council classifies different types of noise as constituting pollution including hooting aimlessly, playing loud music, industrial or commercial noise such as those coming from welders, carpenters, chain saw usage; and burglar alarms and anti-theft alarms installed on cars (Rodgers, 2011; Hodkinson, 2011). Noise from other traffic, aeroplanes and trains are also a major concern in Lewisham Council. Of these examples of noise, the Council has no powers over aircraft noise pollution. Similarly, the Council does register noise pollution from vehicles and other modes of public transport such as train, but it is normally ill-equipped to tackle the problem, hence the prevalence of the pollution within the council. Pesticide pollution Pesticide pollution mainly originates from a wide-ranging and confidential pest management program to all residents within the Council, local business premises and housing companies. The application of harsh chemicals to control different rodents and insects such as flies and mosquitoes usually impact negatively on the soil, water resources and air, especially when conducted in large scale (Pritam, 2011). When it rains after spraying pesticides, the rain waters normally sweep the chemical remains to water bodies within the Council. Other deposits infiltrate into the soil and harm important soil microbes, hence destroy the soil structure. As such, the Council faces the problem of reduced plant life, risks of soil erosion and air pollution. These risks are especially real because any harm to vegetative cover has a direct impact on other environmental issues such as air, water and soil (Kotsakis, 2012). Air pollution Air pollution transcends pollution at construction or demolition sites, pesticide pollution. In the Council, air pollution is very serious partly because of more human activity. Regardless, there are strict laws and regulations in place by higher levels of government which enable the Council to crack down on companies and individuals who allow carbon gases to leak into the air. In spite of these controls, the massive populations in the Council and its neighbourhood continue to place huge demands on the commercial sector and public transport, thus straining its resources and causing air pollution. The use of non-renewable energy such as charcoal continues to cause domestic air pollution. The air contaminated by greenhouse gases spreads to the environment and alters the natural qualities of the sky, hence causing acid rain and threatening to aggravate the problem of global warming, irrespective of the amount of the emissions. Indoor and outdoor cases of air pollution create breathing problems and respiratory diseases, which if not properly diagnosed and treated, can cause deaths of members of the public living within the locality (Pritam, 2011). Similarly, home warming equipment, motor vehicles, industrial complexes and fires sometimes cause huge smoke which fill the air, creating air pollution within the area covered by the Council. Pollutants of key concern to public health officers working at the local government level include; carbon monoxide, ozone damage, accumulation of nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide in the borough’s skies. Interventions Noise pollution The Council requires new buildings to install adequate sound insulators as a way of protecting closely-built hoses from noise pollution originating from neighbours. But where the standard sound protection measures between buildings are inadequate such as in flats, the residents are required by the Council to guard against noise pollution from common domestic noises to neighbours by taking reasonable steps to reduce pollution (Russel et al, 2013; Burt et al, 2011). Playing music at ordinary volume is one of the reasonable ways which the Council creates awareness on among the residents. Other reasonable ordinary noises in a domestic setting which people can cope with include; short games; ordinary discussions; shutting doors, and opening the taps. Still, children playing; moving household items; vacuum cleaning and using lawn mower or launder are equally ordinary sounds which people can cope with (Cotton et al, 2014). As such, the Council recommends these activities during the day in order to avoid cases of disturbance to neighbours. Air Pollution As for air pollution, the Council ensures it controls the emissions. This the Council does by obligating developers to seek discussions with it regarding how safely the emissions can be limited or disposed of. The recommended interventions for dust emissions from construction sites, for instance, can be resolved by sprinkling the rubble or all-weather roads with water as a way of keeping the air free from dust particles throughout the period of construction (Bailey, 2007; Lees, 2007). The Council requires that such measures be coupled by issuing quality alerts to it and to the public. The Council has established Aittext free air quality compliance communication platform for protecting the precious lives of victims of respiratory complications such as asthma, emphysema, cardiac disease or bronchitis (Dahlmann et al, 2008; Cotton et al, 2014). The service provides alerts on how best the victims can limit health risks by making appropriate plans for managing these complications. For vehicle owners, the Council implements the London carbon emission restrictions on diesel engines and automobiles at the local levels (Rostron, 2008). Pest control Owing to the many environmental risks associated with pest control to the soil, water and the air, the Council takes it upon itself to conduct pest control within its jurisdiction (Turnpenny, Russel, & Rayner, 2013). The Council deploys well-trained professionals to do the job in order to limit environmental impacts which would be worse if the job was outsourced to other companies. Construction sites The Council limits pollutions at construction sites by requiring large projects to use Construction management plans (CMP). CMP enables the Council to assess the scope of the projects and the safety precautions in place to guard against environmental pollution by way of unnecessary landfills, emissions or disposal of waste. The plans enforce good practice among companies working on construction or demolition sites. These safety requirements stem from Section 61 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974, requiring prior consent before construction projects can proceed in a way that is ecologically friendly (Mio, & Venturelli, 2013). What needs to be done? The local Council should establish stricter and more effective guidelines for reducing noise pollution within its jurisdiction as part of an elaborate plan to end pollution. The Council should affirm its obligation to conservation of the environment and take appropriate steps to institute probes whenever reasonable allegations of pollutions are reported (Taylor et al, 2012). To improve compliance, the Council should pass bylaws specifying clear penalties for statutory nuisance in order to ensure effective enjoyment property rights and adequate preventions against personal health complications (Khalastchi, 1999). In addition, by specifying hefty penalties for statutory nuisance, the Council will be more capable of limiting cases of environmental pollution by negligent parties. For commercial facilities, the Council should issue eligible premises with licenses in order to ensure compliance with environmentally sustainable practices. The requirement should be extended to any developer as part of approval for the development plan in order to maximize compliance (Carpenter, 2014). In addition, commercial pollution should be handled differently from domestic cases because the former are normally severer, judging by the long-term repercussions on the environment. The Council requires burglar and car alarms which give shorter and more effective alerts. Statistics The Office for National Statistics (ONS) indicated in mid-2014 that 6.5% of deaths in Lewisham Council are caused by air pollution. According to the Department for Health, the death rate is at 7.1%. The staggering statistics call for the prohibition of carcinogenic diesel emissions from the specific areas within Lewisham which are hardest-hit by the problem in the same way coal was outlawed more than six decades ago after the damaging impacts of the Great Smog became real (Rostron, & Parry, 2008). Pollution levels in Lewisham Council are above Bromley at 5.6% and Bexley at 6%. The top five killers in Lewisham Council according to a comprehensive report by the ONS are related to pollution including heart disease, cancers of the respiratory system and other respiratory complications, cerebrovascular disease, dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Environmental health According to the World Health Organization (WHO), environmental health concerns all the tangible, chemical, and organic factors found within the human external environment, and all the interconnected factors affecting social behaviours. It includes the review and management of those environmental issues that can likely to impact on health. The faculty is geared towards preventing illnesses and establishing health-supportive ecologies. The WHO’s definition leaves out any conduct not associated with environment (Taylor et al, 2012). Environmental health can also be associated to the ecological effects on human health and illnesses. “Environment,” connotes things existing naturally such as air, water and soil as well as the geographical, chemical, living and social aspects of human surroundings (Depledge, 2013). The latter definition also examines the physical structures made by man and which have a greater level of impact on the ecology. Industries and infrastructures fall under this category. Government interventions In light of the massive impacts of human activity on environmental health, the government is seeking to conserve the environment by limiting damaging human activity. Part of the conservation programs include; limiting settlements to approved places, ensuring effective work designs, farming and construction of factories in demarcated industrial zones as well as limiting the negative impacts on the environment by enforcing strict environmental policies (Carpenter, 2014). In addition, the government has elaborate plans with clearly demarcated road reserves and other infrastructure networks, effective land use and waste collection and processing systems. Yet, the government responds to negative impacts of human activity by mandating environmental conservationist bodies to monitor compliance and impose appropriate fines on those who are not compliant (Morse, 1983; Al-Najjar, & Anfimiadou, 2012). The government also creates awareness programs on ecologically sustainable practices for long-term benefits. Conclusion Generally, Lewisham Council is one of the lowest administrative units of government whose primary mandate among others is to enforce environmental policy and laws within its jurisdiction. The Council grapples with disproportionate cases of deaths caused by environmental pollution such as respiratory complications. Despite its efforts, the Council is among the leading in cases of deaths caused by pollution. This calls for the enactment of stricter policies and oversight role in order to ensure more compliance. References Al-Najjar, B., & Anfimiadou, A., 2012. Environmental Policies and Firm Value. Business Strategy & the Environment, 21(1), pp.49-59. Bailey, I., 2007. Market Environmentalism, New Environmental Policy Instruments, and Climate Policy in the United Kingdom and Germany. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 97(3), pp.530-550. Burt et al, 2011. Nitrate in United Kingdom Rivers: Policy and Its Outcomes Since 1970. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(1), pp.175-181. Carpenter, J., 2014. Charge of the conversions. Planning, pp.14-19. Cotton et al., 2014. Shale gas policy in the United Kingdom: An argumentative discourse analysis. Energy Policy, 73, pp.427-438. Dahlmann et al., 2008. Barriers to proactive environmental management in the United Kingdom: Implications for business and public policy. Journal of General Management, 33(3), pp.1-20. Depledge, D., 2013. Whats in a name? A UK Arctic policy framework for 2013. Geographical Journal, 179(4), pp.369-372. Hodkinson, S., 2011. The Private Finance Initiative in English Council Housing Regeneration: A Privatisation too Far? Housing Studies, 26(6), pp.911-932. Khalastchi, R., 1999. International Environmental Law in the Courts of the United Kingdom. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, 8(3), p.301. Kotsakis, A., 2012. The Regulation of the Technical, Environmental and Health Aspects of Current Exploratory Shale Gas Extraction in the United Kingdom: Initial Lessons for the Future of European Union Energy Policy. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, 21(3), pp.282-290. Lees, C., 2007. Environmental Policy in the United Kingdom and Germany. German Politics, 16(1), pp.164-183. Mio, C., & Venturelli, A., 2013. Non-financial Information About Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy in the Annual Reports of Listed Companies: Evidence from Italy and the UK. Corporate Social Responsibility & Environmental Management, 20(6), pp.340-358. Morse, C.W., 1983. Environmental Regulation: Some Lessons from British Policy. California Management Review, 26(1), pp.25-36. Pritam, A., 2011. Clear-up Act. Occupational Health, 63(2), pp.12-13. Rodgers, C., 2011. Environmental Impact Assessment: Mapping the Interface between Agriculture, Development and the Natural Environment? Environmental Law Review, 13(2), pp.85-99. Rostron, J., & Parry, J. 2008. The law and technique of environmental impact assessment in the United Kingdom. Environmental Quality Management, 17(4), pp.11-29. Rostron, J., 2008. The law and regulation of waste in the United Kingdom: A review. Environmental Quality Management, 18(1), pp.47-65. Russel et al., 2013. Reining in the executive? Delegation, evidence, and parliamentary influence on environmental public policy. Government & Policy, 31(4), pp.619-632. Taylor et al., 2012. Selecting Policy Instruments for Better Environmental Regulation: a Critique and Future Research Agenda. Environmental Policy & Governance, 22(4), pp.268-292. Turnpenny, J., Russel, D., & Rayner, T., 2013. The complexity of evidence for sustainable development policy: analysing the boundary work of the UK Parliamentary Environmental Audit Committee. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 38(4), pp.586-598. Read More