Link between natural and technological risks(Scira Menoni, Politecnico di Milano)

1. Link between natural risks and technological risks looking at two case studies

2. Why soil and water contamination may be considered in the sphere of risks we are analyzing in the course

The Hallandsas case in SwedenThe Hallandsas case in Sweden

1. Modernization of Swedish railways between Gothenburg and Malmo;

The Hallandsas case in SwedenThe Hallandsas case in Sweden

2. The Hallandsas horst: A mass of the earth's crust that lies between two faults and is higher than the surrounding land (200 mt asl)

3. Critical geological factors, the solutions

The Hallandsas case in The Hallandsas case in SwedenSweden

critical geological features• Crumbly soil, fructured rocks, sand and porous material• Escavation lower the water

groundtable

Water shortage for agricoltural use

Figure 3. The slope of the Hallandsås ridge towards the north-west. Thenorthern tunnel mouth is situated to the right of the photo. Photo: H-GWallentinus, January 2000The second EIA document

Figure 4. The northern tunnel mouth. Photo: H-G Wallentinus, January 2000

Figure 5. The working tunnel on the Hallandsås ridge. Photo: H-GWallentinus, January 2000

The Hallandsas case in SwedenThe Hallandsas case in Sweden

Chemical hazard:• The Rhoca-gil product containing large percentage of

acrylamide contaminates soil and groundwater

Contaminated water: declaration of crisis area

Figure 6. Work going on in the northern part of the tunnel to stopgroundwater leakage. Photo: H-G Wallentinus, January 2000

The Hallandsas case in SwedenThe Hallandsas case in Sweden

Chemical hazards:• Agricultural crisis, impossible to sell the Hallandsas products• More than ten years of project stop

Why environmentalists did not “react”?• Railways = environmentally “friendly”• Perceived as a “technical” problem

A relevant problem of planning is that everything has to be done so quickly .…

My experience is that the overall time of design and implementation is shorter if there is enough time to think to the entire project

(M. Andersson, Swedish Railway Adm.)

The Love Canal case

The Love Canal case

In the 50s the HookerChem. discharges21.000 t toxic

materialsIn the canal of the

“utopian” city of William Love

The Love Canal case

1954: the area is sold for $1 to the school administration of the Niagara City Municipality.

A school is built on the canal and around it a residential quartier develops

The Love Canal case

1978: “disaster discovery”: Lois Gibbs, consultant Beverly Paigen

The Love Canal caseAt the beginning:1. Only pregnant women and children below 2 years are

evacuated;

Then:1. 1980: Carter declares Love Canal

the first chemical disaster in the USA

2. 1980: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)

3. New York State acquires residential properties at market value

The Love Canal case

In the meantime:1. 26 families decide to remain in the area2. The New York State develops a “revitalization

master plan” in the period 1982-1988.3. 1988 EPA Habitability declaration for the area4. Some works have been carried out in the lifelines

systems (water particularly), basements were cleaned and houses re-sold at around $50.000 (prices mid 90s)

The Love Canal case: contamination risk, controversy

In light grey the 100 RP flood for the Niagara river

The contamination path according to residents and to Beverly Paigen

The Love Canal case: contamination risk, controversy

The Love Canal case: the master plan

The Love Canal case: contamination risk, the controversy

Difficulties in demonstrating the relationship between exposure and helth effects:

What proof do we need? How the probability estimation is considered in courts?

The concept of “disaster incubator particularly relevant in this case, where there is a specific site origin of the threat (even though there is no x hour or moment)

Fundamental difference between epidemiology and toxicology