This summer, Europe, in particular the nations of Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Germany, were hit by flash floods as a result of intensive rainfall. The resulting devastation that struck central Europe, in particular, the regions near the Rhine River, has been the worst faced by Europe in decades with over two hundred deaths reported thus far. Torrential rainfall has also struck England with flash floods hitting London streets leaving train stations submerged and bus passengers stranded. While it is too early to determine if the cause of these floods can be directly linked to climate change and the resultant rise in water levels, there has been a consideration in the aftermath of the floods of how much of the devastation and loss of life has been the result of poor planning by the affected governments.

Created in 2002, the European Flood Awareness System (EFAS), a part of the Copernicus emergency management service, has been at the center of Europe’s early response system for natural disasters. In particular, the system serves to provide warnings for flood events throughout Europe. Despite the implementation of the EFAS, the catastrophic disaster that unfolded with billions in property damage, as well as hundreds of lives lost, brings to question the effectiveness of the system. Some members of the public have even questioned whether or not the system works and if notifications were provided. However, an examination of the EFAS notification process reveals that not only did the EFAS system work, it also provided warnings up to 48 hours in advance of the actual floods that struck the Rhine and Meuse River basins. Instead, the problem lay largely with what happens after the EFAS notification is given. Over 25 notifications were triggered for different regions of the Rhine and Meuse River basins; these notifications were sent to EFAS partners - the national, regional, or local authorities that are mandated to manage flood risk in their territories. As stated on the EFAS website itself, “the primary responsibility for preventing, preparing for (including early warning and public warning), and responding, to natural and man-made disasters lies with the Member States.”

One of the largest reasons behind the scale of the devastation was the fact that many people in the regions affected by the floods were unable to recognize the seriousness of the rainfall. As Karsten Haustein, a climate scientist and meteorologist at the Climate Service Center Germany (GERICS) stated, “People thought ‘yeah, I guess it’s going to rain a lot.’ But they don’t know what that means.” To a certain degree, many citizens in the affected regions of Europe possessed the thought that “somehow extreme and severe weather cannot impact us.” This level of “climate hubris” has led some citizens to hope that what happened this past summer was merely an unusual event that is out of the norm. However, as long as carbon dioxide continues to be released into the atmosphere in industrial-scale quantities, people around the world should expect that further incidents of catastrophic weather disasters will continue to occur “unexpectedly” around the world. 

이채운 강남포스트 학생기자  webmaster@ignnews.kr

<저작권자 © 강남포스트, 무단 전재 및 재배포 금지>