Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
programmatic EISs have the potential to develop a successful SEA approach,
and the application of SEA can benefit from experience and supportive case
law of successful programmatic and tiered EISs. The European Union has man-
dated an established general protocol for SEA and requires member countries
to develop guidelines and specific requirements. Japan and several other Asian
governments have also developed SEA procedures, and in southern Africa
there is some progress in this area (Sadler et al. 2011). However, developing
frameworks is one thing and demonstrating progress by implementation is
another matter. SEA has experienced constrained and limited progress due
largely to the lack of tested guidelines, the lead time required to develop SEA,
and the magnitude and controversy of most policies, plans, and programs that
are most amenable to the SEA approach.
There are numerous advantages to nationwide or even regional SEA
requirements and approaches. Probably the greatest advantage is the broad
and comprehensive environmental evaluation conducted under SEA. If a PPP
is developed and then no environmental review is conducted until individual
projects are proposed, there is no mechanism to achieve the greatest environ-
mental benefit or least environmental damage from a comprehensive policy.
An alternative with the least environmental damage or greatest benefit could
be selected for an individual project implementing a PPP, but this selection
could preempt even consideration of a far superior alternative for another
aspect of the broader initiative.
A hypothetical example of a regional planning agency developing a long-
term drinking water supply program for an entire river basin illustrates the
preemption of comprehensive environmental benefits of the program with
the lack of an SEA. A goal of the hypothetical example is to maintain ecologi-
cal characteristics of the water resources within the basin, primarily by not
exporting or importing water. Because of available funding and an organiza-
tional structure that is firmly in place, a project to develop a large reservoir
that would supply the projected water demand for the basin is the first pro-
posal under the river basin water supply program. The EIS for the reservoir
considers alternative locations, sizes, construction methods, operating meth-
ods, and even includes a somewhat cursory consideration of other sources
and conservation methods. But there is no mechanism or requirement to
force conservation or implement other water supply management approaches
by the implementing entity. Consequently, these are dismissed and a combi-
nation of specific reservoir location, size, and operation that meets the pro-
jected water supply need and has the least environmental impact is selected.
In this hypothetical example, it would appear that environmental pro-
tection has been maximized at the project level, but this is not necessarily
true at the program level. After an unavoidable delay, perhaps due to lack of
funding, non-acceptance of a new technology, or inability to develop political
consensus, the next project to address the policy is a relatively new technol-
ogy to utilize ground water resources. This technology, aquifer storage and
recovery (ASR), withdraws water from either a surface or a ground water
Search WWH ::
Custom Search