Transcript Document

Presented by:
Felix CHOI Fuk Sing
Terence CHING Chun Ying
David HO Ka Yan
Amanda NG Yu Yan
(1988221513)
(2005920188)
(2000264979)
(2005920243)
Picture source: http://www.pka.gov.my/Intro.htm
1
Flow of presentation
• Background
• The risk assessment approaches
– Retrospective risk assessment
– Prospective risk assessment
– Comparative risk and uncertainty
assessment
• Assessment of socioeconomic drivers
• Recommendations and proposed
actions
2
Background
Introduction
• Initial risk assessment – one of the
component activities of the Port
Klang Integrated Coastal
Management (ICM) Project
• Inter-agency,
multi-disciplinary
Technical Working
Group
Picture Source: Port Klang Integrated Coastal
Management National Demonstration Project, 2005
4
Objectives
• Evaluate the impacts of various
pollutants
• Identify activities that contribute to
pollution
• Identify gaps and uncertainties for a
refined risk assessment
5
• Make recommendations
• Identify significant agencies and
institutions which can contribute to
refined risk assessment and longterm management
• Identify priority concerns
6
Study area
• Project area:
1,484.53 km2
• Population:
742,837 (Year 2000)
• Population density:
500 people/km2
• Two main rivers
– Sg. Klang
– Sg. Langat
Picture Source: Port Klang Integrated Coastal
Management National Demonstration Project, 2005
7
• Huge land use conflicts
• Pollution from upstream sources
• Industrial and housing projects in
the upstream areas
8
The risk assessment approach
• A combination of retrospective and
prospective approaches
– To indicate the relative importance of
different adverse effects and their
causes
– Lead to appropriate, cost-effective
management programmes
9
• Principles
– Identify problems and causes based on
systematic and transparent way
– Can be justified by community and can
be revisited when more information
available
10
• Key concept
– Comparison between environmental
conditions and threshold values likely
to cause adverse effects in the targets
under consideration
11
Retrospective Risk
Assessment
“What evidence is there for harm being
done to targets in the Port Klang”
Retrospective Risk Assessment ?
• Ecological effects   Stressor (s)
Significant
effect
Extinction
Land clearing for Ascribe
causation
agriculture
Picture source: http://www.css.cornell.edu/ecf3/Web/new/AF/ASB_01.html
http://www.rictus.com/viz/photos/nature/elephant.jpg
13
Aim

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Damage
Human activities
  
(Observed effects)
(Suspected agents)
• Decline in number of species
Overexploitation
• Decline in population of
Land clearing/reclamation
selected species
Oil spillage
• Extinction of specific species
Discharge organic wastes
• Increase in invader species
Discharge inorganic wastes
Use of pesticides
Discharge of heavy metals
Degradation & decline in
Use of tributyltin (TBT)
biodiversity
14
Methodology
• Review various studies, reports &
projects to collect relevant data on
identified targets
• Problem formulation
• Conduct retrospective risk
assessment
15
Problem Formulation
• Define targets
• Identify suspected (or known) agents
that cause adverse effects on targets
• Evaluate linkage between agents and
targets
16
Agents   Targets
1. Is the target exposed to any of the agents?
2. Was there any loss/es that occurred following
exposure? Was there any loss/es correlated through
space?
3. Does the exposure concentration exceed the threshold
where adverse effects start to happen?
4. Do the results from controlled exposure in field
experiments lead to the same effect? Will removal of
the agent lead to amelioration?
5. Is there specific evidence in the target as a result of
exposure to the agent?
6. Does it make sense (logically and scientifically)?
17
Possible Answers
•
•
•
•
•
•
Yes (Y)
No (N)
Maybe (M)
Unknown (?)
No Data (ND)
Not Relevant (NR)
18
Likelihood of Harm
Based on knowledge of exposure to the agent;
available information about exposure and effect
levels
•Likely (L) – agent is likely a cause of the decline
•Possibly (P) – agent cannot be excluded as a
cause of the decline
•Unlikely (U) – agent is unlikely to have caused
the decline
•Unknown (?) – Not enough information available
19
Decision Criteria Table
Question
3
4a
4b
5
6
ND
ND
ND
ND
1
N
Y
2a
N
Y
2b
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
ND
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
ND
ND
N
N
N
Y
M
Y
Result
Conclusion
U
No correlation
P
Just correlation
Correlation but negative evidence
U
for cause-effect
U
Spurious correlation
Correlation with some evidence of
L
cause-effect
Correlation but lack of evidence for
P
cause-effect
Correlation with evidence for causeeffect and recovery does not
L
always happen
Correlation with very strong
VL
evidence for cause-effect
correlation with strong evidence for
VL
cause-effect
Correlation but scientific/logical
P
justification lacking
Cause-effect relationship known to
be possible in principle, but no
?
evidence in this case
Source: Pork Klang Initial Risk Assessment – Appendix 5
20
Other Activities
M Y M
M Y M
M ND M
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
M
M
M
TSS
Land Reclamation
1. Is the target exposed to any of the agents?
2a. Was there any loss/es that occurred following exposure?
2b. Was there any loss/es correlated through space?
3. Does the exposure concentration exceed the threshold where
adverse effects start to happen?
4a. Do the results from controlled exposure in field experiments
lead to the same effect?
4b. Will removal of the agent lead to amelioration?
5. Is there specific evidence in the target as a result of exposure to
the agent?
6. Does it make sense (logically and scientifically)?
Likelihood
Sedimentation
Mangroves of Klang Island
Pollution
Decision Table
Y
M
ND ND ND NR NR
Y
Y
ND Y
Y
?
Y
P
Y
Y
Y
ND Y
Y
N
?
Y
L
Y
L
Source: Pork Klang Initial Risk Assessment – Table 4
21
Scope & Findings
• Resources – fisheries (?) &
aquaculture (technology, water
contamination and diseases)
• Habitat – mangroves (removal of
forest reserve & land reclamation)
• Wildlife – mammals, birds, aquatic
fauna (change in land use 
loss/degradation of habitats)
22
Limitations
• Insufficient quantitative data
• Agents   Targets – not clearly
defined
• Difficult to correlate between the
agents and resources
23
Recommendations
• Conduct more comprehensive researches
• Allow sufficient time to detect changes in
number of species/population
• Determine exposure, correlation &
cause-effect relationships between
potentially significant agents
24
Retrospective Risk Assessment
Manage
HARMFUL
ACTIVITIES
HARMFUL
ACTIVITIES
Identify
PAST
Observe
Reduce harm to
ECOLOGICAL
SYSTEM
ECOLOGICAL
PROBLEMS
PRESENT
FUTURE
25
Prospective Risk
Assessment
Prospective risk assessment
• Involves predicting likely effects on targets
from knowledge of a particular agent.
• Involves comparison of exposure and effect
concentrations
• Aims to determine if measured or predicted
levels of environmental parameters are
likely to cause harm to targets of interest.
27
Start Point
• a comparison of measured environmental
concentrations (MECs) and predicted noeffect concentrations (PNECs) in order to
obtain risk quotients (RQs).
28
Risk Quotient
• For ERA:
RQ = MEC (or PEC) / PNEC
• For human health
RQ = MEL (or PEL) / LOC
Where
RQ < 1 Low risk
RQ >= 1 High risk
29
• Study area
– Water column contaminations
– Air quality
• 3 types of RQs are constructed
– RQmax
– RQmin
– RQave
30
Preliminary Study
– Water Column
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD),
Ammoniacal nitrogen (AN),
Total suspended solid (TSS),
E. coli.,
Arsenic (As),
Mercury (Hg),
Oil and grease.
31
Preliminary Study
– Water Quality
– Data analysis from the reports of DOE-Selangor
with monthly monitoring observations from 24
stations from 1990 – 2000 (Klang River, Klang
River estuary and Straits of Klang).
– PNECs from Malaysia standards.
– Result: RQave > 1 (except As)
– Further investigation on 5 coastal zones.
32
Further Investigation
• 5 coastal zones are identified
–
–
–
–
–
Pantai Morib (recreation),
Kuala Langat at Jugra (aquaculture),
Kuala Langat,
Kuala Klang,
Selat Klang Utara.
• Data: DOE-Selangor
• PNECs: Malaysia / ASEAN standards
33
Agents Studied
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Dissolved oxygen (DO),
Suspended solid (SS),
pH,
Turbidity (NTU),
As, Hg, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb,
E. Coli,
Oil and grease
34
Findings
– RQave of E. Coli., suspended solid and oil and
grease of 5 coastal zones are all over 1.
– RQave of pH, As, Hg, Cd, Cr, Cu and Pb of 5
coastal zones are all below 1.
– RQave of NTU varied between 0.3-2.69
– RQave of DO varied between 0.8-1.25
35
Risk from E. Coli
– Contamination to aquaculture products and risk
to human health.
– Recreation in marine water poses human health
risk.
36
Risk from Suspended Solid
– Affect aquaculture industry, especially shrimps
– Affect aesthetic nature and recreational use.
– Reduce light penetration and inhibit
photosynthetic process
– Identified causes: land reclamation projects,
aquaculture, agriculture, upland forestry,
mining, discharge of wastes from various
sources, dredging, trawling and mangrove
conversion.
37
Risk from Oil & Grease Wastes
– Adverse impacts on marine flora and fauna.
– Lab. study shows that fish exposed to sublethal
levels of petroleum experienced negative
effects on reproductive, development,
behaviour, subcellular structure, premature
death.
38
Sources of Uncertainties
– Data collected from each station at different
periods were combined to provided single
estimates of means and worse-case RQs.
– Use of standards and criteria from other
locations might not be totally suitable for Port
Klang.
39
Further Investigation
• Further investigation was carried out for the
water column of the Klang and Langat
Rivers to confirm the risks identified in the
risk assessment of coastal areas and the
linkage with the major river systems.
40
Priority Concerns
• The priority concerns identified in the risk
assessment of Klang and Langat Rivers are
consistent with the priority concerns for
selected coastal areas, showing the strong
influence of the two rivers on the water
quality of these coastal areas.
41
Air Pollution
– Risk assessment: suspended particulate (PM10),
sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2),
carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3).
– Primarily due to automobiles, industrial
activities, domestic combustion and thermal
power plant operations.
42
Data Sources
• Data collected from database of Sekolah
Menengah Perempuan Raja Zarina station.
• PEC data are average data collected from
Dec. 1996 – Mar. 2000.
• PNECs are based on air quality standards
recommended by DOE Malaysia.
43
Result
• The result of the initial risk assessment
show that except for CO, all worse-case
RQs exceed 1
44
Comparative Risk
Assessment
45
Comparative Risk Assessment
Objective:
• Compare RQs in
Prospective Risk
Assessment
• Identify agents with
highest risks
• Decide management priority
Picture source: http://www.entershanghai.info/country/Ci_20_set.htm
46
Assessed areas:
1. Coastal water
2. Klang River & Langat River
3. Sediment
4. Ambient air
Methodology:
- Compare between RQAve (average) & RQMax (worst
case)
- List all RQs in a summary table
- Make a bar chart to compare the RQAve & RQMax
47
Comparative Risk Assessment of Water-Borne
Substance in Coastal Areas
Worst
case
Average
RQ
Agents
0-1
DO
1-10
0.8
SS
Turbidity
Heavy
0.02
Metals
E. Coli
Oil
10-100
1.3
1.4
7
0.3
8
0.5
1.8
1.6
34
5.5
48
Comparative Risk Assessment of E. Coli in
Coastal Areas
RQ
0-1
1-10
10-100
Site
Pantai Morib
Kuala Langat
at Jugra
Kuala Klang
Kuala Langat
Selat Klang
Utara
49
Findings
1. Coastal water
- high risk agents: E. coli, oil, SS, turbidity & DO
- high risk sites:
SS – Kuala Langat
E.coli – Kuala Klang, Pantai Morib, Langat
Oil – Jugra, Selat Klang Utara, Pantai Morib
50
2a. Klang River
- Higher organics (BO, BOD, COD), nutrient
(NH3) & iron at middle stretch & estuarine of
the river.
- Higher nutrient P & metal As at the middle
stretch.
- E. Coli extremely high (RQ = 300 -2,000)
along the river including catchment area
- Immediate management is needed starting
from catchment area.
51
2b. Langat River
- Higher organics (BO, BOD, COD), SS,
turbidity, NH3 at middle stretch & estuarine of
the river.
- E. Coli higher at the catchment area than the
estuarine area
- Immediate management is needed starting
from catchment area.
52
3. Sediment
- Port Klang: Highest RQ (28-235) in Oil
& grease.
4. Air Quality
- RQAve are all lower than 1
- But mean API = 1.08
- Forest fire in 1997, leads to haze
phenomenon & high PM10
53
Uncertainty
• Differences between average & worst
case
• Data gaps (e.g. lacks of MECs & local
standards)
54
Socioeconomic Drivers
Socioeconomic Drivers
for the changes
•
•
•
•
Change of land-use policy
Population increase
Agricultural development
Increased waste generation rate
Picture source: http://www.foudroyan.com/fonds_ecran/port_01.html
56
Change of land-use policy
•
State Government
policy to develop as
a developed state
• Rapid changes of
land use
• Mangroves & peat
swamp forests 
other land uses
Picture source: http://www.cid.harvard.edu/cidbiotech/ag
57
Illegal forest clearing leads to forest fires
- Slash (cut) & burn!
Picture source: http://www.css.cornell.edu/ecf3/Web/new/AF/ASB_01.html
http://www.the-human-race.com/pages/toc.htm
http://www.biology.duke.edu/bio217/2005/tnb/anthropogenic.html
http://www.hibdonhardwood.com/Ecology/BlzEco02.html
58
Impacts of land use change
• Shrinkage of mangroves
& peat swamps
• Habitat loss
• Loss of shoreline
protection
• Increase sedimentation
rates
• Reduced biodiversity
Picture source: http://www.nri.org/InTheField/bolivia_s_b.htm
59
Population increase
900000
800000
700000
600000
500000
400000
300000
200000
100000
0
= More
energy &
resources
needed!
1991
2000
Klang
Kuala Langat
2005
60
Agricultural development
• Mangrove in 1998
Klang: 12,301 ha  10,871 ha = 88% left
Kapar: 4,865 ha 410 ha = only 8% left!
Picture source: http://veganimal.info/article_imprime.php3?id_article=18
http://www.peninsulaflyfishers.org/Fishing_Tales/castingEyeBahamas02
61
Agricultural activities bring ecological
stress by…
• Use of pesticides & fertilizers
• Generation of wastes
• Illegal clearing of forest (forest fire!)
…which lead to:
• Air pollution
• Habitat loss
• Reduced biodiversity
Picture source:
http://cwfis.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/en/background/bi_FM3_Intro_e.php
http://www.inapg.inra.fr/ens_rech/bio/biotech/textes/societe/economie/ogm/mefia
nce-du-sud.htm
62
Increased waste generation rate
(tons/day)
700
600
500
400
Klang
Kuala Langat
300
Problem
in landfill availability!
200
100
0
1994
2001
2005
63
Recommendations & proposed
actions
• Socioeconomic drivers
– Wastes; industrial activities; agriculture;
land use
– Further assessment is needed, especially
their linkage to the environment
• Human health
– Determine risks from consumption of
contaminated aquatic food products and
exposure to contaminated coastal waters
65
• Quality of water, sediment and aquatic
food products
– A comprehensive control programme to
prevent wastes discharges
– Collecting data on heavy metals and
tributyltin (TBT)
– Extend risk assessment throughout the
whole river basin
– Wider application of the RQ approach
– Review of the interim marine water quality
standard
66
• Resources and habitats
– Fisheries
• Get the data for the indicators of fisheries
conditions
– E.g. Catch per unit of effort (CPUE), stock density,
demersal biomass, changes in catch composition,
maximum sustainable yield (MSY)
• Evaluation of the fisheries management
framework
– Aquaculture
•
•
•
•
Deliberately use of indicators
Evaluate existing aquaculture practices
Develop management guidelines
Designate coastal aquaculture zones
67
– Mangroves
• Assess the ecological, economic and social effects
of the degradation of mangrove ecosystems by
using a systematic studies
• Benefit-cost analysis of proposed development
plan
• Mangrove reforestation
– Wildlife
• Comprehensive researches and cause-effect
studies are needed
68
• Air quality
– More detailed assessment for all existing
parameters
– Include other potentially-important
parameters
• Data gaps
– Verify identified concerns
– Fill the data gaps by primary data collection
• E.g. sediment load study; toxicology study
69
• Risk management
– Develop long-term strategies and action
programmes
• Integrated land and water-use zoning
• Large financial investments and technological
resources are needed for environmental services,
facilities, and clean technologies
• Integrated environmental monitoring
programme (IEMP)
• Collaboration of stakeholders
• Institutional arrangement
70