Environmental Impact Assessment in the Construction Industry - Case Study Example

Environmental Impact Assessment in the Construction Industry By Professor Class University City Date of submission Environmental Impact Assessment in the Construction Industry The concept of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) The major objective of carrying out an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to assist in protecting the quality of environmental condition through ensuring that the local planning authorities while deciding whether or not to grant the planning permission for the incoming project. The environmental regulations set out the procedures meant to identify meant to identify these projects, which needs to be subject to EIA. In addition, EIA also ensures that there is public participation at early stages of the project for effectiveness in the decision-making procedures. However, the EIA procedures should not be a barrier to any growth and development activities since it only applies to small proportion of the project. Throughout the U.K., the local planning authorities have been able to establish well the general responsibilities to consider while undertaking an environmental screening and implications associated with the development activities that are subject to the planning control. The 2011 Regulations tend to integrate the EIA procedures into the frameworks that control the environmental quality and should be applicable to the projects that are likely to impose significant effects on the environmental processes (Cook, 2007, 188). Therefore, the local authorities and developers need to consider carefully if the proposed requires an EIA. If the project requires an EIA, the developers need to limit the scope of their assessment to the environmental processes and aspects on the areas likely to affect the environment negatively. The pre-application engagement also plays a significant role when identifying if the proposed project requires an EIA. Environment Statement for the Construction of Forestfield-Airport Link The analysis will focus on the EIA project prepared by the Department of Transport. Direction 2031 and Beyond and Draft Public Transport for the Perth in 2031 identified that the currently used transport infrastructure in Perth might not be sufficient to cope with the ever-increasing population and highlights the priorities for infrastructural investment including the rail line to Perth Airport. With the focus on the EIA report of the Forestfield-Airport Link, the Transport Department believes that its development would assist in reducing the challenges of the transport sector (Department of Transport, 2014). The link forms an important component of the long-term public transport of Perth with the design of meeting the existing and future demands within the sector. In addition, the proposed line was to enhance connectivity between the eastern suburbs and Central Business District of Perth. The conducted feasibility in 2010 was able to identify some of the alignment alternatives and methods of constructing the link from Perth to the Midland rail line to the Airport, and eastern suburbs (Moroney et al., 2010, 123). In addition, a detailed evaluation of all the projects components was carried out with much focus on the cost, social, environmental, and the heritage impacts. Based on such evaluation, the stakeholders in the transport sector selected a subterranean option due to the declined environmental and social impacts particularly inadequate impact to the Swan River and limited amount of noise emitted during the operations of the rail line. The conducted EIA addressed matters relating to the state’s land to support section 38(1) under the Western Australian Environmental Protection Act of 1986. Within the state, any impact on the environmental quality of Commonwealth land or the Matters of the National Environmental Significance are often referred to the Environmental Department that exists under the federal Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act of 1999 (Government of the United Kingdom, 2013). Nonetheless, according to the submitted EIA report, the experts designed the Forestfield-Airport Link to prevent the occurrence of serious environmental ad heritage effects where possible. Construction of the rail resulted into numerous pollutions, which the experts underestimated. For many years, most projects have been estimating and criticizing the laws on environmental protection considering it insufficient and inefficient in enhancing and protecting the environment against sub-standardized projects (Convention on Biodiversity, n.d.). Even if such laws exist within the state, it is uncommon that the laws themselves are without the flows and loopholes, which often render pollution control impossible. As a result, such practices give room to the pollution ethics to come to play. Project developers need to acknowledge some of the corporate social responsibilities that its activities owe towards the environment with regard to monitoring of the involved activities to prevent harm to the environment. However, if the identified harms are inevitable, the means of mitigating or minimizing its consequences needs to be part of the project’s objectives. This entails establishing a practical disaster management system identified as the ecological ethics. The process involved excavation and clearance of vegetation, which resulted in soil disturbance, loss of habitat, and deterioration of environmental quality, which the project designers failed to consider while conducting an EIA. The area of the project has acid sulphate soils, which affect the survival of most organisms. During the project, the EIA estimated that approximately 777,000 m3 of the materials would be excavated during the construction of the tunnels, stations, and associated infrastructure. The preliminary laboratory analysis of the excavated materials categorized them as PASS. However, the exposure of these materials might result in the oxidation that in turn releases sulphuric acid and metallic elements that upon mobilization, they could affect the waterways, wetlands, vegetation, and cause corrosion and degradation of the built structures (Glasson, Therivel, & Chadwick, 2012, 177). These metals might also lead to serious heath complications like cancers that contribute greatly to the cost of the projects. Therefore, it is important to have action plans for the methods of reducing these impacts to prevent the detrimental effects on the both the humans and environment. While undertaking the project that touches on the groundwater, the Environmental Protection Agency requires consideration of the hydrological processes and the inland water hydrological qualities. Therefore, the proponent and expert needed to establish the methods of maintaining the hydrological regimes of both the groundwater and surface water to ensure the protection of the potential uses like ecosystem maintenance. Furthermore, there was need for measures of maintaining the quality of the underground water, sediment, and biota to protect the value of environment including both the ecological and social components. Projects construction requires huge sum of water drawn from the river. Moreover, temporary dewatering is important in constructing the stations and the emergency egress shafts. These activities are likely to contribute to the temporary drawdown of the groundwater levels below the areas considered to contain the pass. As a result, there is ability to cause the acidic sulphide minerals within the soil to oxidize and to acidify the ground water. However, the project proponent and the EIA experts failed to account for these negative consequences, which result when the metals leach into the underground water systems (Baxter, 2011). Besides the impact on the underground organisms, such leaching also contributed to the bio-magnification concept within the aquatic organisms whose environments are in contact with the contaminated underground water. The affected groundwater has potential effect on the sensitive environmental receptors like the wetland ecosystems that the project neglected considering them as the wasteland. The wetlands are never wastelands considering the amount of environmental resources they have and environmental processes that they undertake including acting as carbon sinks. Therefore, destroying the quality and destabilizing the processes of both underground water and wetlands are likely to have serious environmental consequences. Contamination of the underground water might as well affect the borehole users and other structures that depend on the quality of the underground waters like the pipes. More importantly, there is no dewatering required in the construction of the tunnels of the cross passage. Another aspect of the environment that the project failed to consider was the groundwater flow whose potential effects include alteration of the groundwater regime from the temporary watering activities and the construction of the subsurface structures. These activities could affect the sensitive receptors of the environment including the wetlands, ecological communities, and water courses that depend on the shallow groundwater for replenishment annually. However, these cases often occur in conditions where the drawdown goes beyond the normal seasonal fluctuations and for the extended duration without the application of supplementary water (Department of Environment, 2016). Although the project identified the risk associated with the interruption of the underground water supply to the bore users, it failed to account for the other processes that utilize the water like the surrounding buildings and infrastructures. The project assessed the potential for the tunnel to modify the flow of the groundwater regime through instigating an obstruction of the flow. Geological consideration is also important while conducting an EIA. From the conducted assessment, the tunnel was to occupy about 7m thickness of the aquifer making it alignment suitable in a parallel direction to the flow of the groundwater direction. Being close to the Swan River, such alignment might assist in reducing the obstruction effect compared to constructing the tunnel perpendicular to the flow direction of the groundwater. Improving the Environmental Statement The main aim of environmental statement (ES) is to provide environmental information to the public and any other interested party on the matters relating to environmental impact and performance of the project (Seacourt, 2013). As a result, it allows the public to contribute their views on the project in question, thus, its foremost responsibility is to assist in the quality decision making to prevent the projects that have strong negative environmental effects from continuing. Furthermore, the ES also helps to inform them of the development decisions through mandating a consideration of the available option presented by the public and methods of preventing, mitigating, and controlling the potential negative environmental and social impacts. Moreover, ES is an assessment of the likely significant effects of any proposed project on the environment which makes it better placed to promote environmental legislation especially the High Speed two (HS2) that provides the powers to construct, operate, and maintain the rails. Upon the presentation of the ideas from the public, the government receives the ES based on the recommendations regarding the project in question to avoid, reduce, or remedy the likely effect of the identified environmental consequences (Jalava et al., 2010, 25). These activities ensure that the Parliament scrutinizes the EIA report and ES provided by the public before making decisions on whether the project should receive the development consent or not. For an effective ES, the state needs to ensure that all the EIAs are available for the public to present their views on the project in question. Moreover, to some extent, technicality of the environmental concepts contained in the EIA and accessibility of the documents might be the factors hindering the contribution of the public to the developmental projects (McCabe et al., 2002, 187). Availing crucial information to the public would allow them to identify the documents and problems that relevant to their different cases. This non-technical summary (NTS) ensure that the various projects embrace consultation approach, considers various project aspects, construction methods, and operational assumptions that are useful while eliminating the consequences of environmental activities. In addition, it ensures that the state considers various alternatives while considering permitting the project to continue. The Environmental Protection (The Environmental Permitting) Regulations 2016 meant for England and Wales if properly implemented would ensure reduction in the negative consequences of most construction works. The state is committed to ensuring that all the projects that require EIA undergo through the ES as a means of upholding environmental integrity and quality (Bastmeijer & Koivurova, 2008, 56). Moreover, the practices also ensure prevention of pollutions and reducing the impacts of construction activities on the environment. To strive towards meeting these commitments, the environmental department and other involved state agencies meet all the necessary legislations, regulations, and consent requirements associated with the activities likely to affect the aesthetic value of the environment. Upon identification of these regulations, the state needs to raise awareness of these regulations and laws to allow the public participate effectively and allow them to understand their responsibilities. During the construction of the Forestfield-Airport Link, the transport department violated some of the rules. In the Western Australia, the principle legislation that governs and approves all environmental activities is the EA Act whose Section 38(1) requires that any activity likely to have a significant negative environment impact be referred to the EPA for a decision on whether it should undergo the assessment or not. Other regulations violated include Contaminated Sites Act 2003, the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, Environmental Protection (Clearing of Native Vegetation) Regulations 2004, Planning and Development Act 2005, Land Use in the Vicinity of the Perth Airport, and Swan and Canning Rivers State Planning Policy. There is need to enhance the method of communicating the environmental regulations and the roles of public in ensuring the better environmental conditions. References Bastmeijer, C. J., & Koivurova, T. 2008. Theory and practice of transboundary environmental impact assessment. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Baxter, M. 2011. Special Report: The State of Environmental Impact Assessment Practise in the U.K. Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 14(3), 55-56. Convention on Biodiversity. n.d). What is Impact Assessment? Retrieved from https://www.cbd.int/impact/whatis.shtml Cook, M. 2007. The design quality manual: Improving building performance. Oxford: Blackwell Pub. Department of Environment. 2016. The Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/454427/epr-draft-regs-consult-regulations.pdf Department of Transport. 2014, November. Forrestfield-Airport Link: Environmental Impact Assessment. Retrieved from https://consultation.epa.wa.gov.au/seven-day-comment-on-referrals/forrestfield-airport-link/supporting_documents/CMS14380%20EIA%20document.pdf Glasson, J., Therivel, R., & Chadwick, A. 2012. Introduction to environmental impact assessment. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge. Government of the United Kingdom. 2013, November. Understanding the environmental statement. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/274594/Understanding_the_Environmental_Statement.pdf Jalava, K., Pasanen, S., Saalasti, M., & Kuitunen, M. 2010. Quality of Environmental Impact Assessment: Finnish EISs and the opinions of EIA professionals. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 28(1), 15-27. McCabe, M., Sadler, B., United Nations Environment Programme, Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, & Australia. 2002. Environmental impact assessment training resource manual. Geneva: UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics Economics and Trade Branch. Moroney, R. A., Windsor, C. A., & Aw, Y. T. 2010. Evidence of assurance enhancing the quality of voluntary environmental disclosures: An empirical analysis. SSRN Electronic Journal, 4(7), 121-127. Seacourt. 2013, December. environmental statement. Retrieved from http://www.seacourt.net/6th_EMAS_Environmental_Statement_2013.pdf Read More

 

Read More