Unit 9 - Essays - One Hazardous Environment UPDATED Flashcards
Using a case study, evaluate the attempted or possible solutions to the problems of sustainable management of a hazardous environment
Paragraph 1: Challenges of Sustainable Hazard Management in Montserrat
Main Idea: Explain the problems Montserrat faces that make managing volcanic hazards difficult.
Frequency and intensity of eruptions:
The Soufrière Hills Volcano has erupted multiple times since 1995, making it difficult to predict when future eruptions will occur.
Hazards include pyroclastic flows (fast-moving hot gas and ash), lahars (mudflows), and ashfall, which destroy buildings, roads, and farmland.
Some eruptions occur with little warning, making long-term planning difficult.
Monitoring and prediction difficulties:
Volcano monitoring helps track activity, but scientists cannot predict exactly when and how large an eruption will be.
The unpredictable nature of eruptions means that even with warnings, people may still be at risk.
High costs of hazard management:
Montserrat is a small island with limited financial resources.
Managing hazards—such as building emergency shelters and maintaining monitoring technology—costs millions of dollars annually.
Montserrat is heavily dependent on the UK for financial aid, raising concerns about sustainability.
Environmental and governance challenges:
The island’s ecosystem has been damaged, affecting agriculture and water supplies.
Government responses have varied in effectiveness, with early evacuations in 1995 being disorganized.
Spatial variation: Some areas, such as the north, have better facilities, while others remain underdeveloped.
Paragraph 2: Using Technology for Monitoring and Early Warnings
Main Idea: Evaluate how monitoring and early warning systems have helped reduce risk.
How technology helps:
The Montserrat Volcano Observatory (MVO) was set up in 1995 to monitor volcanic activity using GPS sensors, satellites, and gas emission studies.
This improves early warning systems, allowing people to evacuate before an eruption.
Example: The 2010 eruption was detected early, and warnings were issued in time to prevent casualties.
Limitations and sustainability concerns:
The cost of maintaining monitoring systems is high, requiring millions of dollars in annual funding.
Montserrat relies on UK support to maintain its monitoring systems—what happens if this funding stops?
The scale of effectiveness is limited: scientists can only predict general activity trends, not exact eruption dates.
Evaluation (Effectiveness vs. Cost-Benefit):
Effective in saving lives and improving response times.
However, long-term sustainability is uncertain because the government does not have enough resources to fund monitoring independently.
Paragraph 3: Zoning and Resettlement Strategies
Main Idea: Discuss the success and problems of moving people to safer areas.
How zoning works:
The island was divided into hazard zones, with the Exclusion Zone (southern 2/3 of the island, including Plymouth) completely abandoned.
People were moved to the northern safe zones, such as Brades and Little Bay.
Positive impacts:
Casualties have been significantly reduced, as people are no longer living in the most dangerous areas.
Long-term safety is improved, as the government enforces strict rules on where people can live.
Challenges and sustainability concerns:
Overcrowding in the north: Only 40% of the island is now habitable, leading to housing shortages.
Economic loss: Plymouth was the island’s economic center, and its destruction has weakened the economy.
Rebuilding takes time and money: The UK has spent over $200 million on recovery, but progress is slow.
Evaluation (Spatial Variation and Cost-Benefit):
Safer in the long term, but economic sustainability is a major concern.
The strategy works well in protecting lives but has left Montserrat struggling economically.
Paragraph 4: Emergency Infrastructure and Services
Main Idea: Discuss efforts to improve roads, shelters, and evacuation plans.
Infrastructure improvements:
Stronger roads, evacuation routes, and emergency shelters have been built in the north.
These have helped ensure quicker evacuations during eruptions.
Challenges and sustainability concerns:
Rebuilding is slow and expensive: New infrastructure takes years to complete.
Unequal access: Some remote villages still lack direct access to emergency services.
Evaluation (Effectiveness vs. Economic Burden):
Has improved evacuation efficiency but is difficult to maintain without external funding.
Works well in some areas, but not all communities benefit equally.
Paragraph 5: Education, Drills, and Community Engagement
Main Idea: Explain how disaster education has helped prepare residents.
How education helps:
Schools and local organizations teach people how to respond to eruptions and evacuate safely.
The Montserrat Red Cross runs community drills and awareness programs.
These programs have reduced panic and improved preparedness.
Challenges and sustainability concerns:
Some groups, such as elderly residents and new migrants, may not fully understand evacuation plans.
Since the volcanic activity changes over time, education and training must be continuously updated.
Evaluation (Effectiveness vs. Cost-Benefit):
One of the most cost-effective solutions, as it does not require major infrastructure spending.
Has had a positive impact on public safety, but long-term engagement is needed to keep people informed.
Conclusion
Overall evaluation: Montserrat’s hazard management strategies have been partially successful.
What works well?
Early warning systems, zoning, and education have saved lives and reduced disaster impacts.
What are the problems?
Economic dependence on the UK, slow rebuilding, and limited land for resettlement make long-term sustainability uncertain.
Final judgement: Montserrat’s approach has been effective in the short term, but for long-term success, it must focus on developing an independent economy, improving infrastructure, and ensuring continued funding for monitoring and disaster preparedness.
“With reference to a case study of a hazardous environment, assess the view that some of the problems of that environment are more difficult to manage than others.”
- The Immediate Physical Impact: Ash Falls vs. Pyroclastic Flows
Ash falls: Covered homes, roads, and farms, making breathing difficult and damaging agriculture.
Could be managed by cleaning up and wearing masks.
Pyroclastic flows: Extremely dangerous (600°C, 200 km/h).
Buried Plymouth (capital) in 1997, making it permanently uninhabitable.
No possible management solution—only avoidance through evacuation.
Evaluation: Managing ash was possible, but pyroclastic flows were impossible to stop, making them far harder to handle. - The Humanitarian Crisis and Population Displacement
Before the eruption: Montserrat had 12,000 residents.
After the eruption: Over 7,000 people forced to migrate (mainly to the UK).
Problems caused by displacement:
Families were separated.
The workforce declined, slowing recovery efforts.
Emotional trauma and uncertainty about returning home.
Short-term management: Evacuations were successful, with shelters and aid provided.
Long-term problem: Many people never returned, leading to population decline.
Evaluation: While the immediate response worked, long-term social and economic effects were much harder to manage. - Economic Collapse and Long-Term Struggles to Recover
Before the eruption: Montserrat had a stable economy, relying on tourism and agriculture.
After the eruption:
GDP declined by 50% due to lost businesses.
Plymouth’s destruction wiped out commercial activity.
UK government provided £240 million in aid, but mainly for short-term relief.
Short-term management: Emergency funds helped survivors, but only temporarily.
Long-term problem:
Tourism collapsed, and businesses were reluctant to return.
Economic stagnation, with slow investment in a new capital (Little Bay).
Evaluation: Unlike immediate aid, fixing an economy is slow and complex, making it a much harder problem to manage. - Environmental and Infrastructure Challenges
Spatial impact: Over 60% of Montserrat became an exclusion zone.
Infrastructure damage:
Airport destroyed in 1997, cutting off international connections.
No air travel for nearly a decade until the new airport opened in 2005.
Limited road and utility access slowed redevelopment.
Ongoing environmental hazards:
Lahars (volcanic mudflows) continued for years, damaging roads and buildings.
Short-term management: Temporary transport solutions (boat access), but inefficient.
Long-term problem:
Rebuilding infrastructure took decades.
Investors hesitant to fund projects due to continued volcanic activity.
Evaluation: Infrastructure takes much longer to rebuild than short-term solutions like providing aid, making it a more difficult challenge. - The Role of Hazard Prediction and Long-Term Uncertainty
Montserrat Volcano Observatory (MVO) set up to monitor activity.
Provides early warnings to prevent loss of life.
Short-term management: Monitoring has reduced casualties in recent eruptions.
Long-term problem:
Future eruptions cannot be prevented, only predicted.
Ongoing volcanic activity deters investment and rebuilding efforts.
People remain uncertain about the safety of resettling.
Evaluation: Scientific monitoring helps, but the inability to stop eruptions creates long-term uncertainty that is impossible to fully manage.
Conclusion
Restate the argument: Some problems were easier to manage than others.
Summarize key points:
Short-term solutions like evacuation, aid, and hazard monitoring were relatively successful.
Long-term challenges—economic recovery, rebuilding, and population displacement—were much harder to resolve.
Final judgement: The scale and lasting impact of economic and social problems make them significantly harder to manage compared to immediate hazards. Montserrat still faces these difficulties decades later, showing that while some problems can be solved quickly, others require long-term solutions that are much harder to implement.
With the aid of a case study of a hazardous environment, assess how prediction and preparedness can reduce the impacts of the hazard(s) on lives and property.
Monitoring and Prediction: The Role of Science and Early Warnings
Main idea: Scientific monitoring is crucial in predicting volcanic eruptions, but its effectiveness depends on accuracy and government response.
Key points:
How the volcano was monitored:
The Montserrat Volcano Observatory (MVO) was set up in 1995.
Scientists used seismometers to detect earthquakes, gas analysis to measure sulfur dioxide levels, and GPS to track land deformation.
Early signs of volcanic activity were detected in 1995.
Why early warnings were important but flawed:
Scientists warned of a possible eruption, leading to partial evacuations.
However, they underestimated the scale of the eruption, so not everyone left the danger zone.
In 1997, the eruption became more violent than expected, leading to 19 deaths and mass destruction.
Spatial and scale analysis:
Monitoring covered the whole island, but predictions were more focused on immediate areas like Plymouth, which was later destroyed.
At the global scale, scientific research on the eruption helped improve future predictions worldwide.
Evaluation:
Prediction helped give warnings, but the lack of precise forecasting meant that the government didn’t take full action in time.
Monitoring improved after the major eruption, showing how prediction evolves over time.
- Evacuation and Emergency Preparedness: Saving Lives but Facing Challenges
Main idea: Evacuations helped reduce deaths, but poor planning led to unnecessary casualties and suffering.
Key points:
The evacuation strategy:
In 1995, around 5,000 people (half of Montserrat’s population) were moved to the northern side of the island.
Temporary shelters were set up, but conditions were poor (overcrowding, lack of water and food).
Why some people ignored evacuation orders:
Many evacuees returned to their homes because of poor living conditions in shelters.
In 1997, 19 people were killed when pyroclastic flows reached their villages.
Spatial and scale analysis:
Different areas faced different levels of risk: the south was completely destroyed, but the north remained habitable.
At a national scale, the UK provided aid, but some argue it was slow and insufficient.
Evaluation:
Evacuations saved thousands of lives, but better government planning could have prevented all deaths.
Short-term preparedness was effective but incomplete.
- Long-Term Preparedness: How the Island Recovered and Adapted
Main idea: Long-term preparedness is essential for rebuilding after a disaster, but it can have major economic and social impacts.
Key points:
Government and international response:
The UK provided £75 million for reconstruction.
A new capital (Little Bay) was planned in the north.
Economic consequences:
Before the eruption, Montserrat’s economy relied on tourism and agriculture.
The eruption destroyed farmland and stopped tourism, leading to a 50% drop in GDP.
Over 7,000 people (⅔ of the population) left Montserrat permanently.
Spatial and scale analysis:
At a local scale, the exclusion zone in the south remains empty today.
At a global scale, Montserrat became a case study for future volcanic disaster management.
Evaluation:
Long-term preparedness was essential for recovery, but economic losses and depopulation were severe.
- Protecting Property: The Impact on Buildings and Infrastructure
Main idea: While prediction and preparedness can protect lives, physical damage is harder to prevent without strict building laws and exclusion zones.
Key points:
Extent of destruction:
Plymouth was buried under ash; 80% of buildings were destroyed.
Roads, electricity networks, and airports were damaged, leading to a cost of over £1 billion.
How preparedness improved later:
A strict exclusion zone was enforced in the south to prevent rebuilding in dangerous areas.
Stronger buildings were constructed in the north with improved designs to withstand ashfall.
A new airport (John A. Osborne Airport) was built to ensure better connectivity.
Spatial and scale analysis:
Southern Montserrat was permanently abandoned, while the north remained safe.
At the national level, rebuilding took years and required UK financial aid.
Evaluation:
Buildings cannot be moved like people, so property damage is inevitable in major eruptions.
Zoning and infrastructure investment help reduce long-term damage.
- How Prediction and Preparedness Improved Over Time
Main idea: The effectiveness of prediction and preparedness changed at different stages of the disaster.
Key points:
Early prediction (1995): Warnings were given, but underestimated the full scale of the eruption.
Evacuation (1995–1997): Lives were saved, but poor living conditions led some people to return, causing deaths.
Post-eruption recovery (2000s): Montserrat rebuilt infrastructure and improved its preparedness.
Ongoing monitoring: The Montserrat Volcano Observatory (MVO) continues to track volcanic activity, making future warnings more accurate.
Evaluation:
Disaster preparedness is a long-term process.
Initial mistakes led to losses, but adaptation over time reduced future risks.
- Conclusion
Key Judgement: Prediction and preparedness significantly reduced the impact on lives, but were not perfect.
What worked well: Monitoring gave warnings, evacuations saved thousands, and new infrastructure helped the island recover.
What failed: Predictions were not accurate enough at first, evacuations had flaws, and economic losses were huge.
Final thought: The Montserrat case study shows that while natural disasters cannot be stopped, early warnings, government action, and long-term planning can greatly reduce their effects.
