The Issue of Environmental Risk - Assignment Example

Introduction There are a number of activities which take place in an environment that can result into risks to the people, plants and animals in a number of ways. In this paper, an investigation of the possible risks associated with an effluent water plant is explained. This is achieved through explaining the role of the effluent water in causing harm to the people, animals and plants in various measures. In order to achieve this, a risk assessment matrix of likelihood and consequence is used to assess the risks. This enables understanding the areas where risks are highest so that measures can be taken to prevent a possible harm to people, animals and plants. T also recommends the information needed in order to convert the estimates into probability estimates for a detailed risk assessment. Question 1. i. The following are the possible endpoints during risk assessment in this case: I. Aquatic life in the water course II. Vegetation for cattle use and breeding horses III. Housing development and Residential areas IV. Agricultural activities ii. Development of risk evaluation with respect to human health and the environment During the process if development of risk assessment, the characteristics of ‘likelihood’ and consequence’ were used. A five point scale was used to rank the risks and consequences to which the endpoints were exposed. The e characteristics of likelihood were classified into ‘Very unlikely’ with a score of 1, ‘Unlikely’ with score of 2, ‘Likely’ with a score of 3, ‘Very Likely’ with a score of 4 and ‘Totally Likely’ with a score of 5. In terms of the consequences, the consequences were classified as ‘Negligible’ with a scale of 1, ‘significant’ with a score of 2, ‘Highly significant’ with a score of 3, ‘disastrous’ with a score of 4 and ‘catastrophic’ with a score of 5. The combined score (CS) will them be obtained by multiplying the value for likelihood and the corresponding value for consequence. A value corresponding to the urgency of the need to mitigate the exposure is an indication of an area that requires immediate attention and low CS score is an indication that the impact will not be severe and does not require immediate attention. The assumption of this matrix is that the consequences are measured in terms of the amount of financial losses in terms of treatment cost for affected people, animals and plants as a result of being exposed to the effluent water. Thus, for a loss of $ 5000 and below, a value of 1 is assigned to the consequence, for a loss of between $ 5001-10000 a value of 2 is assigned, for a loss of $ 10001-15000 a value of 3 is assigned, for a loss of $ 15001-20000 a value of 4 will be assigned and finally for a loss above $ 20000 a value of 5 will be assigned. This was represented in tabular form as shown in the figure below. The aim of this matrix is to determine the risk that has the highest score so that it can be corrected before other are prevented. Likelihood Consequence Very Unlikely (1) Unlikely (2) Likely (3) Very Likely (4) Totally Likely (5) Negligible (1) Significant (2) Highly Significant (3) High concentration of chemicals such as chromium can cause drying up of plants when there is a spillage of the water into the nearby vegetation. CS = 3 X 3 = 9 Infiltration of the water with a high pH into the soil resulting into salinity of the soil which cause dehydrations of vegetation CS= 4 X 3 = 12 Disastrous (4) Residents may be exposed to chemicals from the plant which results into chemical poisoning and the possibility of contamination of domestic water with the stored water. CS = 2 X 4 = 8 Chemicals in water can result into poisoning of the water body thus killing aquatic life CS = 4 X 4 = 16 Catastrophic (5) According to the risk matrix above, it is found that ‘Chemicals in water can result into poisoning of the water body thus killing aquatic life’ is likely to contribute to the highest level of impact on animals, human beings and plants while ‘Residents may be exposed to chemicals from the plant which results into chemical poisoning and the possibility of contamination of domestic water with the stored water’ is likely to have the least impact on the people, environment, animals and aquatic life. This efforts aimed at controlling the impacts of the effluent water should be focused on ensuring little disposal of harmful water to the water system so that aquatic life is not harmed. iii. Information needed to convert the likelihood estimates into probability estimates for a detailed assessment Some of the information required if the likelihood estimates are to be converted into a probability include the amount of possible destruction likely to be cause such as cost of treatment of cattle and treatment of plants in case of poisoning of the soil with the water. It will also include the costs of retreatment of the ware body as a result of contamination with the effluent water. This will involve determining the amount of costs incurred in a particular time as a result of exposing the plants such as human, animals and aquatic life to the effluent water within a specified period of time. Information that would be of great importance is the possible number of deaths of animals and plants as a result of exposure to the chemicals. It will also include the possible number of people who might be poisoned by exposure to the water from the plant. Other information that will be used to convert the estimates into a more detailed analysis is that above estimates is the amount of contaminants in the water such as the amount of chemicals such as chromium and amount of detergents in a sample of the water. It will enable understanding of the level of concentration which can result into poisoning of animals and plants when they get into contact with the water. This will ensure the right amount of treatment chemicals are used to treat the water so that it is less destructive to people, plants, animals and aquatic life. Question 2. The stakeholder involved in the construction of the effluent water plant can be convinced about the need to implement the recommendations of the risk assessment in a number of ways. This can be achieved by informing him about the benefits that are likely to be derived from controlling the amount of harmful substances in the water. First, the above risk assessment provides the severity of risks that are likely to have a great impact on the people, plants and animals. By using the above risk assessment method, the stakeholders involved in the construction of the plant will be able to determine areas where immediate action of controlling harmful substances in water needs to be carried out. For instance, in this case it will be the need to ensure the effluent water does not flow into the water body that is located near the plant (Labatt and White, 2002). This is because it has been observed that this is the area where greatest impact of the affluent water will be experienced as has been indicated by the Combined score (CS) in the risk assessment matrix. Another area where the above risk assessment will be important is provision of severity of a particular event. This is where the most likely events will be identified so that measures are taken to prevent the most severe events and ensuring the culture of the healthy well-being of the people, plants and animals as well as the aquatic life. For instance, the matrix above provides the most severe effects with high scores and less severe effects with high score. This will ensure the management takes action for events that have the highest scores so that the effluent water does not result into much impact on the people, plants and animals. Thus, the project will be successful when measures are taken to prevent harmful impacts of the water. In addition, the consequences section of this risk assessment process provides the consequences that may result such as monetary losses that may be incurred as a result of the effluent water coming into contact with plants, animals and aquatic life. These losses have been estimated in terms of monetary expenditures that may be incurred during treatment of people, plants and animals as a result of getting exposed to this water. The stakeholder can be advised to observe the amount of consequences in terms of monetary losses so that he is able to determine areas where high financial losses are likely to be incurred so that measures are taken to ensure those losses are prevented (Leeuwen and Vermeire, 2007). By managing the anticipated financial losses are mitigated, the stakeholders will be able to control any possible losses while implementing the project such as losses in treatment of people, animals and plants. This will be an important facet for the success of the project and will also contribute to its authenticity and prevention of possibility of its abandonment due to harmful impacts. References Kapustka, L., Landis, W. G., and Wiley InterScience (Online service). (2010).Environmental risk assessment and management from a landscape perspective. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Labatt, S., and White, R. R. (2002). Environmental finance: A guide to environmental risk assessment and financial products. Hoboken, N.J: J. Wiley. Leeuwen, C. J., and Vermeire, T. (2007). Risk assessment of chemicals: An introduction. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. Linkov, I., and Ramadan, A. B. (2005). Comparative Risk Assessment and Environmental Decision Making. Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. Read More