by Dmitriy Generalnickiy
Even though floods bring plenty of destruction in this world, for most modern people it seems ridiculous that a big city could be ruined by a flood. Thatâ€TMs why many governments donâ€TMt take the problem seriously. According to the Financial Times, Mr. Bush acknowledged that authorities had not been prepared for the catastrophe in Louisiana: funding for plans to strengthen the levees and prevent floods in the New Orleans area has fallen by nearly half in the past four years. Those plans could have saved many lives.
This experience shows us that we canâ€TMt reach sustainable development without trying to prevent such catastrophes. Saint-Petersburg, the city where I study, is always in danger of being flooded. In this article I would like to share our experience.
Saint-Petersburg has lived through a lot of flooding. 295 times capricious waters of the Neva river would rise over 1.6 meters above the sea level, destroying bridges and houses, destructing people from their daily routine. Even Peter I, the founder of the city, had to face 6 serious floods in the beginning of the 18th century and struggle to save his baby-town. Thatâ€TMs what it costs to build a New Amsterdam!
Modern Saint-Petersburg is not that easy to harm. Scientists figured out that the Neva has to rise 3 meters above its bed to do serious damage. Still five floods have been close even to that extent since 1824. (Some long-livers may remember the horrible flood of 1924 when the Neva rose 3.8 meters above the sea level!) Moreover, the global warming has caused the number of floods per year to double for the last 25 years.
People who know all these facts are beginning to panic. Professor A. Goroditskiy predicts that Saint-Petersburg will have sunk like Atlantida by the end of the 21st century. Maybe his prognosis lacks optimism — but there always is a chance, especially in Russia.
The idea to protect Saint-Petersburg from floods is almost as old as the city. The first man to suggest it was field marshal Minich back in 1727. Prominent scientists and statesmen of the Russian Empire have left us considerable heritage of various drawings where they tried to develop the savior-plan. But it was only for the Soviet people to give the idea some practical implementation.
The flood of 1955 made it absolutely clear that Saint Petersburg needs a protection dam. Plenty of variants were considered but the government decided on a 25.4 kilometer complex of 11 dams. (To make it simple weâ€TMll call it “the Dam†). Finally, in 1978 the project was officially approved.
1978 was also the year when the Soviet Union ratified the Helsinki convention to protect the Baltic Sea from pollution. This event must have drawn special attention of ecologists to the project. Numerous protests followed from their side as they feared that accumulation of dirty waters in front of the Dam would do a lot of harm to the environment. Their protests were fairly reasonable: even nowadays of all the 60 rivers and canals in Saint Petersburg only the Nevaâ€TMs water is drinking as 30 per cent of the cityâ€TMs drains arenâ€TMt cleaned properly. Due to these protests and financial problems the Dam turned out to be one of the Soviet Unionâ€TMs most famous long term constructions. John Melack from Santa Barbara University described the complex as a Soviet way to answer the question “How to control the Neva?†. Several times the project was frozen and stayed unfinished even after the Union collapsed.
In contrast with the fabulous Neva embankments downtown, the Dam was a chaos-construction of stones, concrete, steel and dirt that didnâ€TMt have any aesthetic qualities. It was spoiling the scenery without fulfilling its protection functions. More over, the unfinished Dam contributed a great deal to water pollution: it almost destroyed the whole population of smelt, a traditional delicacy in Saint-Petersburg; caused a huge increase in ground precipitation in the Finnish Bay; simply turned the Nevaâ€TMs delta into a stinking swamp. Something had to be done about it and it was obvious that destroying the Dam would do much more harm to nature than trying to complete and improve it. Therefore, in 2001 the construction was officially reanimated for the last time by the government of the Russian Federation.
Nowadays the estimated cost of completing the Dam is about 426 million dollars. The construction has two sources of finance: the federal budget and the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development. (The Bank is going to invest 245 million dollars). It is supposed that the government will spend about 33 million dollars annually. Thatâ€TMs why there are good prospects to finish the project in 5-6 years.
It is worth mentioning that several improvements have been made to protect nature. First of all, a big complex of facilities to treat wastewaters is about to start working. That will solve the problem of wastewater stagnation in the Nevaâ€TMs delta, decrease the content of phosphorus in the harbor area and provide the fish with forage. Secondly, special areas are going to be arranged for waterfowl species. Thatâ€TMs how a small nature reserve ‘The sea shoreâ€TM will be created. Thirdly, a 6-lane highway, as part of Saint Petersburg ring highway, will be built on top of the dam. That will partly solve the problem of heavy traffic and air pollution in the city. It will also connect Saint-Petersburg with Kronshtadt Island where a yacht club is going to be set.
Conclusion:
In my opinion, completing the Dam is one step towards sustainable development made by Russia because:
- it will protect Saint-Petersburg from possible floods;
- improve the regionâ€TMs infrastructure;
- contribute to tourist business in the region;
- promote cooperation (Vinci Construction, a French company, along with numerous Russian companies will take part in the project) and integration (through the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development) with European countries;
- reduce greatly the harm done to the environment by the Soviet project;
Thatâ€TMs why I strongly believe that in spite of all the difficulties in the past, the Dam is going to be very useful in the future.
Wed, Dec 21, 2005
Vision Journal