Addressing the Problem of Pollution in Tampa Florida

¶ … urban area of Tampa, Florida, and serves as an instrumental case study of how an urban locale can address problems of environmental health and safety. Specifically, this study assesses the failures and successes of Tampa to regulate and reduce water, air and waste pollution through various programs. Through quantitative analysis of city managers' statistics and survey of the population (random sampling), findings indicate that positive steps have been taken through initiatives like S.W.E.E.P. and the attention given to Tampa's estuaries and water sources so as to maintain healthy ecosystems. However, air pollution has yet to be addressed, as the state has eliminated its vehicle emissions testing. Coal-burning power plants like Big Bend also contribute to air pollution and a discussion of the beneficial impact of wind power is provided as a recommendation for addressing this issue.

Environmental Health and Safety Case Study: Tampa, Florida

Introduction

Urban areas in the U.S. are impacted by several types of pollutants, whether air or waste or water pollution. This study focuses on a specific urban area in Florida in the city of Tampa to assess how the city is addressing the issue of environmental health and safety and what its city managers could do to more effectively address these specific factors of air, waste and water pollution. This study will use an observation and survey methodology to analyze the findings of this instrumental case study, which is phenomenological in nature and helpful in determining both a quantitative and qualitative assessment of the overall situation (Creswell, 2007; Lin, 2013).

The problem addressed in this study is that water, air and waste pollution are problems that need to be addressed in urban areas. The research question posed is: What can an urban area do to address these problems? A survey method of a random sample of inhabitants of Tampa, Florida, was taken in order to assess on a scale of 1-5 (using the Likert model) the impact of the measures adopted by Tampa city managers to address issues of pollution in the city. This survey is designed to rate the consensus opinion on whether or not these measures have been effective or if the populace feels that the pollution problem is not being adequately addressed.

This study is limited in terms of locale and scope: its focus is on measures adopted to protect environmental health and promote safety engineering with regard to ensuring safe drinking water, safer air to breathe and a reduction of waste pile-up. The findings are both qualitative and quantitative in number, as figures that are incorporated into the analysis include the city's management team's own assessment of the projects undertaken to address the problems of pollution (which are quantitative) as well as the researcher's own assessment of the population's view on the projects' effectiveness (qualitative findings).

Background

Effective waste disposal has been a priority in Tampa, Florida for a number of years as researchers and engineers attempt to come up with technological advancements to better the surrounding coastal environment. Tampa is home to more than 300,000 people in a county area of almost 3 million. Statistically speaking, it is one of the largest metropolitan areas in the state of Florida, and for that reason, waste disposal is of eminent concern, as the community looks to preserve its coastal dignity while dealing with waste issues.

Annually, Tampa's Waste Department processes more than 350,000 tons of waste, which is used to generate electricity at the area's Refuse-to-Energy Facility. That is approximately one ton of waste per year per citizen within the county. To effectively deal with the amount of waste generated in Tampa, a new recycling program was initiated in 2013 in which large recycling carts replaced smaller bins for curbside recycling collection. This simple yet effective way of encouraging recycling has allowed recycling rates to double in the Tampa area (City of Tampa, 2013).

Another problem in Tampa is air pollution. This is, in fact, a global problem and is not isolated solely to urban areas. Outdoor air pollution is a leading environmental cause of cancer deaths. It is not safe to breathe because is harmfully impacts the lungs and the body. Indeed, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) under the World Health Organization (WHO) "has classified outdoor air pollution as a cancer-causing agent" (Simon, 2013). It is responsible for both lung and bladder cancer.

Particulate matter is also a carcinogen that the IARC has classified, and it can include anything from dust to chemicals to smoke. All of that contributes to air pollution -- whether smog, exhaust, fumes from factories, smoke, chemicals, dust, etc. Thus, the criteria for air pollution is anything that contaminates the air -- any particle that acts as a carcinogen (which is damaging to the lungs and cardiovascular system if inhaled) is a pollutant and causes air pollution. WHO (2013) notes that outdoor air pollution is not safe to breathe because it is "carcinogenic to humans" (p. 1).

Strategies for Promoting Positive Environmental Behavior

The strategy utilized by Tampa's local government in promoting recycling is one way of encouraging positive environmental behavior within the community. The call for larger recycling receptacles is indicative of an overall progressive mood among citizens and an awareness of the environmental impact of waste. Recycling programs such as the one in Tampa provide concerned members of the community with the ability to take matters into their own hands: it is a simple exercise of informed wills. As researchers Jenkins, Martinez, Palmer, and Podolsky (2003) observe, "access to curbside recycling has a significant positive effect" when it comes to glass, plastic, aluminum and yard waste (p. 294). Their quantitative study of twenty metropolitan areas, including Tampa, shows that communities that provide curbside pick-up of materials designated for recycling make a significantly positive impact on environmental behavior. For Tampa, which has recently enlarged its designated receptacles from small bins to large carts, the sense that positive environmental attitudes are becoming wider and more popular is evident.

Another strategy being utilized in Tampa is the S.W.E.E.P. program which allows residents to place larger items, such as carpets, furniture, appliances, tires, toilets, and mattresses to curb for recycling pickup. This program allows the city to maintain an added degree of waste disposal responsibility. Tampa has also partnered with Habitat for Humanity, which restores old items and gives them to the needy. So this waste disposal program kills two birds with one stone: it helps to decrease unnecessary waste pile-up and it helps to serve the needs of the local community's impoverished.

Both of these strategies are effective in Tampa, as the statistics indicate (City of Tampa, 2013).

As for addressing the issue of air pollution, Tampa has more work to do. State and local laws concerning air and water pollution were ineffective, leading the federal government to pass legislation in the 1970s, primarily because they did not address consistently across the nation the issue in the same manner. There was no uniformity. So while one area of one state could be strict on air and water pollution in terms of laws, another area could be lax and with more relaxed laws. Facilities and factory owners would go to the areas with less strict laws in order to operate. Thus, the air and water of the world would continue to be polluted.

Because of this lack of uniformity at the state and local level, the federal government was obliged to pass across-the-board legislation that made the law the same no matter where one was. The federal law trumped the state and local laws. However, it has proven to be not enough in terms of deterring people from producing air pollution. Thus, the federal government should take even more steps to curb this problem. As Kessler (2014) notes, "Everybody is exposed to it," and in just 2010 alone there were 223,000 "lung-cancer deaths" caused by air pollution (Kessler, 2014). That is an overwhelming figure. Air pollution is virtually an epidemic in terms of disease: it is deadly and spreading and everyone is at risk because there is no way to contain it. Thus, the policies which allow it to happen should be reversed. Governments should step up and take control of the situation by outlawing productions that contribute to air pollution, no matter what good they are providing.

How Positive and Negative Consequences Can Increase Pro-Environmental Behavior

Positive consequences of recycling are evident in the satisfaction and confidence that a community like Tampa evinces when it embarks on programs like S.W.E.E.P. and the addition of large recycling carts for curbside pickup. Cleaner streets and cleaner communities go a long way in instilling communal pride.

Negative consequences of not recycling are evident in such places as e-waste landfills where toxic chemicals seep into the ground and make their way to water supplies. Likewise, Tampa's beaches are very important to the city and keeping them free from pollution is important to its citizens and visitors.

Also, there are expenses that residents must pay for consuming energy, and energy-conservation is related to environmental preservation. For example, as researchers Hauck, Kemp and Going (2013) note, Tampa has grown rapidly over the last several decades and the "cost of wastewater and water treatment processes" has risen. As a way of lowering these costs, consideration is given to "renewable electrical energy produced from municipal solid waste" (Hauck, Kemp, Going, 2013, p. 501). Thus, in this program one sees both the positive and negative consequences regarding effective and ineffective environmental policies impact communities. A greater concentration of people in one area means a greater burden on the immediate environment and more waste. But by using that waste to relieve part of the burden of the environment (by using it to generate energy rather than relying on the environment, water for instance, as a generator), energy consumers can alleviate negative symptoms of environmental footprints and more effectively control that waste products at the same time.

How Technological Advances Have Impacted the Environment: Positive and Negative

The ability to recycle a vast array of materials is one positive way that technology has impacted the environment. Tampa now has the ability to run facilities that can essentially save more waste from the scrap heap and use it to create new goods. Likewise, as researchers, Hu, Chen, Clayton, Swarzenski, Brock, and Muller-Karger (2005), the technology to monitor the environment in order to better understand its health levels is now available. These researchers, for example, discuss "the potential for using MODIS medium-resolution bands for estuarine monitoring" in Tampa (Hu, Chen, Clayton, Swarzenski, Brock, Muller-Karger, 2005, p. 425), noting that sensor calibrations need improvements to better understand the constituents of Tampa water bodies. The technology of remote sensing has made monitoring of the environment even easier -- so as the technology improves so too does our understanding of where our land and water bodies are in terms of health and activity.

One negative way that technology has impacted the environment, however, is in the levels of e-waste that are destroying environments far from those which use the electronic machines before disposing of them. Electronic equipment that is old or discarded does not decompose the way other solid waste materials might. It rusts and leaks toxic chemicals into the earth, which can then pollute water streams and harm natural habitats, etc. This sets off a chain reaction of environmental devastation. So while technology can assist us in developing better ways to understand our environment, it can also lead to environmental destruction. Another example of this sort of destruction is seen in the implementation of huge earth-moving machines, which can completely reshape an environment and disturb its natural inclinations, upsetting whatever balance heretofore may have existed.

The Impact of Environmental Policies According to Survey Results

The impact of environmental policies in Tampa is evident across many sectors. In the economic sector, it is now commonplace to purchase goods and items whose packaging is labeled as made of recycled products or is labeled as suitable for recycling. Consumers are more and more interested in purchasing goods that are capable of being reused and recycled into the environment rather than sent to a scrapheap or left to pollute the earth. There is an awareness that is cultivated in the residents supported by sound environmental policies like recycling programs or S.W.E.E.P. According to survey results analyzed according to the Likert scale, 90% of participants in S.W.E.E.P. feel that the project is making a positive impact on the urban environment. The majority of the population sampled (54%) asserted that the city was making strides in combating pollution. Of the 46% who asserted that it was not, the majority were not participants in S.W.E.E.P.

The survey also addressed the issue of clean air and focused on vehicle emissions testing. As the DMV reports, the state of Florida abolished all emissions testing, but it does reward eco-friendly cars. EPA-certified vehicles that are classified as Inherently Low Emission Vehicles are allowed to drive in High Occupancy Vehicle lanes (DMV, 2016). While this is an obvious incentive, the overwhelming majority of those surveyed did not find that this was an incentive that made them want to purchase hybrid vehicles. In terms of combating air pollution, 38% of those surveyed asserted that vehicle emissions testing should be brought back.

One of the most important influences of environmental policies in the Tampa area, however, is evident in the revitalization of Tampa's ecosystem and estuaries, according to researchers Greening, Janicki, Sherwood, Pribble, and Johansson (2014). These researchers conducted a study of "restoration trajectories" of "nutrient management strategies" that involved the revitalization of local water supplies (Greening, Janicki, Sherwood, Pribble, Johansson, 2014, p. 1). This program came about after residents of the area called for a movement for cleaner water and a more proper disposal of waste in the 1970s. The program resulted in the immediate funding by both "private and public sectors" (Greening, Janicki, Sherwood, Pribble, Johansson, 2014, p. 1). As the population of Tampa increased, it was feared that the risk of water contamination would increase as well. However, a system of nutrient management continued on resulting in a "steadily declining TN load rate ... with concomitant reduction in chlorophyll -- a concentrations and ambient nutrient concentrations" (Greening, Janicki, Sherwood, Pribble, Johansson, 2014, p.2). The end result of this program has been a restoration of water clarity, total nitrogen concentration and seagrass coverage equal to that which existed in mid-20th century, prior to the population boom in the Tampa area. In short, the active support of residents in every sector helped to contribute to the regeneration of the ecosystem (Greening, Janicki, Sherwood, Pribble, Johansson, 2014).

Thus, one sees in this instance the clear effect of environmental policies in the Tampa area: a sincere and objective consideration for proper water management coupled with a desire to see the area rejuvenated and restored to its former ecological condition before the rise of population. This was brought about by a scientific focus on monitoring the nutrient levels and seagrass coverings and developing a waste disposal strategy that would not harm the ecosystem.

On the other hand, the issue air pollution remains one that needs attention. An appropriate governmental role in preventing cancer that can be linked to air pollution would be to establish carbon controls. Proponents of this governmental intervention, like Al Gore, have demonstrated how carbon credits could be distributed by the government to factories and facilities that burn fossil fuels and the like and release carcinogens into the air thus contributing to cancer causing pollution. Gore has suggested that carbon controls and the exchange of carbon credits would help the government to keep a moderate "cap" or lid on the amount of pollution being released into the air. Of course, this is only a moderate step, and if one wanted to really eliminate cancer causing air pollution, one would propose that the government ban all operations that are linked to causing air pollution. If this were the case, we would probably all be required to drive electric cars. The government could mandate the manufacturing and usage of electric cars and shift the public away from the gas-guzzling vehicles that are responsible for so much air pollution (as well as wars). This would be a positive step in eliminating cancer causing air pollution in this urban area.

In short, Tampa citizens have encouraged ecosystem recovery for decades and so it is no surprise to see that recycling programs and better waste disposal methods are popular among residents, where calls and demands for even more recycling services are made every year. Meeting these demands is part Tampa's local government's job and the concern to do so is seen in both private and public sectors -- namely because so much is at stake. Not only does the ecosystem benefit from a better program but so too do the residents and business owners who recognize that their city is an important tourist destination and that the best way to keep it one is to maintain a safe and responsible waste disposal program and environmental policies that the entire community can rally behind and support.

Results

The city of Tampa, Florida, has long understood the value of ecological balance and the need for sound environmental policies. Today, those policies take many shapes -- from the monitoring of water bodies to the curbside collection of large cart recycling to an ambitious S.W.E.E.P. program that provides a removal service for large items typically dumped but in this case destined for recycling and repurposing. Tampa understands the impact that technology can play on the environment, both good and bad, and it attempts to use it for good ends, both by managing healthy nutrient levels in the water, controlling water waste, and promoting efficient solid waste disposal. In this manner, Tampa promotes and supports environmental awareness among its residents. Still, progress needs to be made in terms of combating cancer-causing air pollution and with the state's abolishment of the vehicle emissions testing program, there is little reason to suspect that this fight is being taken up in earnest.

In terms of combating waste and water pollution, Tampa is on course to produce positive results as both quantitative and qualitative findings indicate. However, in terms of combating air pollution, Tampa is still in need of progress. The following recommendations mainly address this issue of air pollution and the utilization of alternative sources of energy as a method of addressing this problem.

Recommendations

More could be done in Tampa to promote clean energy and environmental health. Vehicle emissions, for instance, are only one aspect of air pollution. Energy-producing plants are another major form of air pollution. Regarding such plants, Tampa could look into forms of green or renewable energy that is clean. For example, wind energy could be identified as a solution to the problem of air pollution, as there is no more vehicle emissions testing program. As Sahin (2004) notes, wind energy is a "clean, practical, economical and environmentally friendly alternative" to energy created from other sources which damage the planet and ruin the health of individuals, such as the burning of fossil fuels (p. 501). Wind power is effective at cutting energy production costs, it has been utilized in industries around the world, and it is now viewed as a direct competitor of other energy producers (Sahin, 2004).