Comment pubs.acs.org/est
Responding to the New Normal bounce back from future floods, we need better tools for rapidly assessing the risks that citizens face from flood-borne environmental contamination. In the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, and other agencies invested billions of dollars in sensors for monitoring chemical and biological agents. Advances from these efforts as well as recent developments in medical diagnostics can be repurposed to create inexpensive, portable devices that can be used to detect chemicals and pathogens in the immediate aftermath of urban floods. The existence of such tools will improve the ability of first responders and citizen scientists to rapidly respond to hazardous conditions. They also will increase public confidence and protect exposed populations. Detection kits and portable analyzers target only a limited suite of contaminants. Even the slow turnaround, standard laboratory methods used for drinking water and hazardous waste are only capable of detecting a few hundred contaminants. Recognizing that many thousands of toxic chemicals are manufactured, used, and stored in cities, new approaches are needed to rapidly detect the pesticides, industrial chemicals, and other compounds that might be carried by floodwaters. Recent advances in mass spectrometry make it possible to employ non-target analysis to quickly characterize a broader range of contaminants. However, these methods have yet to be applied widely to the complex matrices encountered in sediments and urban floodwaters. Finally, we need a better way to rapidly assess the fate of contaminants at flooded hazardous waste sites. Although there may be few practical ways of reducing risks from floods at low lying sites while remediation is underway, residents should not have to wait months or years to find out whether or not floods have spread contamination to their neighborhoods. Geochemists have developed approaches for fingerprinting soils and sediments that might be useful in assessing whether or not the sediments deposited by floodwaters came from a hazardous waste site. Moreover, it may be possible to add easily detectable markers (e.g., fluorescent beads) to contaminated soils to make it easier to find them after a flood. A rational response to climate change-driven urban floods would involve powerful policies to get at the root cause of the problem by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. A rational response would also involve allocation of resources to help cities adapt to the effects of changing weather patterns. But climate rationality is not on the agenda of the Trump Administration or Republican leaders. If our new normal includes more flooded cities, the least we can do is ensure that they rapidly and safely recover after the water recedes.
F
irst, came Hurricane Katrina. Then Superstorm Sandy. And now, the United States is grappling with the aftermath of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma. Knowing that the ocean is only getting warmer and that sea level will continue to rise, it is time to acknowledge that coastal cities are going to experience catastrophic flooding more frequently. Absent leadership on climate change adaptation from the federal government, the best hope for vulnerable communities will be the enlightened self-interest of mayors, governors, civic groups, and local business leaders who recognize the need to adapt. But even if these groups manage to create the necessary political consensus, raise enough funds, and start building, U.S. coastal cities are going to remain vulnerable for decades. Catastrophic floods are not limited to the southeast coast of the United States: rivers worldwide are more frequently overtopping their banks and coastal megacities, like Guangzhou, are just as vulnerable to floods as New Orleans, Tampa, and Houston. In addition to loss of life and damage to property, floods create chaos that takes months or years to resolve. The Environmental Science & Technology (ES&T) community can aide in the recovery process by supporting the rapid and accurate assessment of contamination caused by urban floods. For example, following Hurricane Katrina, researchers from our community dropped what they were doing to characterize the receding floodwaters. Results from their efforts provided citizens of New Orleans with the good news that most of the sediments that had been deposited by floodwaters were relatively clean. ES&T community members also provided timely information on the hazards associated with mold, lead, and arsenic in damaged homes, assuring that reconstruction efforts would not cause further suffering. In these early days following our most recent set of floods, researchers are once again mobilizing to characterize floodborne contamination. Their presence is especially comforting in light of the slow response of the U.S. EPA in assessing flooded hazardous waste sites in Houston. Rigorous peer review and rapid publication of data on the nature and extent of contamination will be critical to decisions that local leaders will make in the coming months about how to safely rebuild their cities. In support of these efforts, Environmental Science & Technology Letters will provide its usual rapid turnaround (typically under 2 weeks) on manuscripts characterizing the effects of the flood. Over the longer term, ES&T will serve the community by providing a venue for comprehensive assessments of the fate, transport and effects of contaminants released by the floodwaters. Reflecting on the challenges posed by urban flooding, it is evident that the approach we are using is inadequate. We must continue working on this problem during the intervals between floods. Civil engineers are already making progress here by developing strategies for increasing the resiliency of transportation, power and water infrastructure. We need to engage this community, particularly in the area of green infrastructure, but it is our responsibility to lead the discussions about environmental contamination from urban floods. To help cities © 2017 American Chemical Society
Published: September 26, 2017 10925
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b04763 Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 10925−10926
Comment
Environmental Science & Technology
■
David Sedlak,* Editor-in-Chief AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected] Notes
Views expressed in this editorial are those of the author and not necessarily the views of the ACS. The author declares no competing financial interest.
10926
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b04763 Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 10925−10926
