talking point - christine toomey · 2010. 3. 29. · lagoon sea lagoon sea chioggia inlet two locks...

7
22 The Sunday Times Magazine 5 June, 2005 Talking Point

Upload: others

Post on 31-Dec-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Talking Point - Christine Toomey · 2010. 3. 29. · Lagoon Sea Lagoon Sea Chioggia inlet Two locks for fishing boats Gates in stand-by Bed protection position Lagoon Sea Water Air

22 The Sunday Times Magazine 5 June, 2005

Talking Point

Page 2: Talking Point - Christine Toomey · 2010. 3. 29. · Lagoon Sea Lagoon Sea Chioggia inlet Two locks for fishing boats Gates in stand-by Bed protection position Lagoon Sea Water Air

5 june, 2005 The Sunday Times Magazine 23

A multi-billion-pound scheme has been launched to save Venice from drowning. But will it? And why are the Venetians so sceptical about it? By Christine Toomey

Page 3: Talking Point - Christine Toomey · 2010. 3. 29. · Lagoon Sea Lagoon Sea Chioggia inlet Two locks for fishing boats Gates in stand-by Bed protection position Lagoon Sea Water Air

24 The Sunday Times Magazine 05 June, 2005

he siren that can often beheard wailing across the rooftops of Venicewhenever the sea threatens to engulf the city isredolent of a second-world-war air-raidwarning. But few people panic – most simplycalculate what footwear they will need that day.Venetians, or at least those who have chosen toremain in the city while many thousands haveleft, have become used to this. At the start of theprevious century, St Mark’s Square – one of thelowest points in Venice – flooded an average of10 times annually. Today the vast piazza can becovered in water more than 100 times eachwinter. In the past 10 years alone, the sirenheralding extreme high water has rung out froma network of towers across the city more than 50times, mostly in the winter months. It is then thatthe strong sirocco wind whips up the waters ofthe Adriatic, sending it surging into the lagoonand along the city’s canals virtually unchecked.

In the past 30 years, the population of Venicehas been haemorrhaging; the number of peopleliving here has declined from 130,000 to around60,000. And in this slow evacuation, the floodshave played their part. After centuries ofgradually raising the levels of the foundations ofmany of the city’s buildings and pathways totheir maximum height, the lowest part of Venicenow lies just half a metre above sea level. Homesand shops are frequently inundated with water;shopkeepers know they must move quickly toshift goods onto high shelves. In this city, there isno such thing as a basement flat.

Some Venetians actually welcome what theyrefer to as acqua alta – high water. “I love it,” saysAna Bianchi, 51, whose family has run arestaurant in the old San Jobbe slaughterhousedistrict of the city for generations. “It makes thecity seem somehow surreal. Besides, the saltwater cleans the streets.” Shaking his head andlaughing, her 77-year-old father, Lino, agrees:“When I worked in the meat-packing housesaround here, we used to welcome high water,because it drowned the mice and rats.”

But ask Venetians what they think about themulti-billion-pound engineering scheme nowunder way to check the flooding and they are farless phlegmatic. “Folly,” “Absurd,” and “A whiteelephant” were just three reactions confided tome. It is not that Venetians believe the floodsshould be ignored: many are simply scepticalabout both the motives behind the scheme andits long-term effect. Many now question: forwhom precisely is Venice being saved? Theanswer, they believe, is the tourists. Some fear the

30 years has received a proportion of theproceeds from every Veneziana pizza sold in thePizza Express chain of UK restaurants, hasdonated millions of pounds for the restoration ofthe city’s buildings and art works.

Construction of the latest flood-protectionscheme began two years ago. Known as Mose,after the Italian acronym for “experimentalelectromechanical module”, it has become thefocus of huge controversy. The scheme, costingaround £2.5 billion, is based on the creation of 78mobile underwater barriers – each weighingmore than 300 tonnes – which will for most of24

city is rapidly being turned into the museumquarter of the greater Venetian metropolitanarea. “Venice is a dying organism, it’s become acircus, a Disneyland for tourists, and who wantsthat?” laments Gherardo Ortalli, a historyprofessor at Venice University.

For decades, saving Venice has been the focusof international debate. Much of the impetusbehind the plans to safeguard the city has comefrom international bodies such as Venice in Peril,set up by the former British ambassador to ItalySir Ashley Clarke in response to disastrous floodsin Venice in 1966. This British charity, which for

The old methods of protecting Venice from high water — and the controversial new schemeAbove: workmen in Venice injectbrickwork with stabilisingmaterials. For centuries,engineers and builders inVenice have been preoccupiedwith reclaiming their city fromthe lagoon. Builders wouldcreate a dampcourse at thebase of buildings using non-permeable Istrian stone, a typeof marble. But as the waterlevels have risen, salt water has caused increasingdevastation; particles of salt

that entered into the brickworkhave expanded and increasedpressure on the bricks, makingthem crumble. Right: the Venicelagoon lies above unstable land– which is why its 9th-centurybuilders had to drive millions ofpiles made of oak, larch andalder into the more stable claysubsoil (caranto) underneath.Layers of wood were then laidonto the piles, followed byIstrian stone, which acted as abarrier against the water

Closely packedwooden piles

Istrianstone

Caranto(compressed clay)

Street level

Sandandclay

Brickwork

FOUNDATION WORK

TPR

EVIO

US

SPRE

AD: A

P. T

HIS

PAG

E, T

OP:

CO

URT

ESY

OF

INSU

LA S

PA. I

LLU

STRA

TIO

NS:

CH

RIS

WAT

SON

. MAI

N P

HO

TOG

RAPH

, OPP

OSI

TE: A

RCH

IVIO

DI S

TATO

Page 4: Talking Point - Christine Toomey · 2010. 3. 29. · Lagoon Sea Lagoon Sea Chioggia inlet Two locks for fishing boats Gates in stand-by Bed protection position Lagoon Sea Water Air

05 june, 2005 The Sunday Times Magazine 25

years by the Italian premier. Other projectsinclude the building of a giant bridge linkingSicily to the mainland, and a high-speed railwaylink between Turin and Milan. But it is thebarriers that Italians, and especially Venetians, aremost sceptical about. As Berlusconi preened,placing an elaborate scroll carrying his nameinside a hollow in the first massive stone to be laid at the inauguration ceremony, a miniarmada of protesters surrounded the site. Theyhave since regularly blocked water traffic on the Grand Canal with their flotillas of boats carrying placards denouncing the scheme. 25

the time rest on the sea bed. But when the hightide surges more than 1.1 metres above the meansea level, these barriers will be raised like a stringof giant medieval drawbridges. It is a fantasticallygrandiose scheme; but the grandiosity is not sucha surprise when you examine its provenance.The Italian prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, cutthe ribbon on this gargantuan project anddeclared it “the most important environmental-protection measure in the world”.

The scheme, which is due to be completed by2011, is the most ambitious in a series of grandengineering works given the go-ahead in recent

Row ofgatesin action

Lagoon

Sea

Lagoon

Sea

Chioggia inletTwo locks forfishing boats

Bed protectionGates in stand-byposition

SeaLagoon

Water

Air going inWater going out

PLAN FOR THE LAGOONLeft: the Mose system to saveVenice will be built at the inletsto the lagoons at (from top)Lido, Malamocco and Chioggia,where a row of mobile gates will be installed. In the stand-byposition, they are filled withwater (below left) and rest on

the sea bed; to block the tidalflow when the water levelsincrease, they are emptied ofwater and rise to the surface(below right). Top: the Chioggiainlet with the gates in standbyposition. Above: the gates in place during a flood warning

SeaLagoon

a

Page 5: Talking Point - Christine Toomey · 2010. 3. 29. · Lagoon Sea Lagoon Sea Chioggia inlet Two locks for fishing boats Gates in stand-by Bed protection position Lagoon Sea Water Air

5 june, 2005 The Sunday Times Magazine 27

Many Venetians, and environmentalorganisations including the World Wide Fundfor Nature, fear the barriers could impede tidalflushing and irreversibly damage the lagoon’sdelicate ecosystem. Others oppose them on thegrounds they will, at worst, be ineffective, and atbest, only a short-term solution, with rising sealevels owing to climate change rendering themobsolete within a few decades.

Critics are also incensed that the barriers arebeing built by the same consortium of industrialand engineering concerns that proposed them –a consortium that operates with little control orrestraint. They say there are no proper safeguards,and that the project is simply another example ofpolitical opportunism by a perma-tannedpremier who once compared himself to JesusChrist. Long embroiled in scandal, Berlusconisees investment in infrastructure as a way ofstimulating the economy – and saving hispolitical skin. Many of the scheme’s critics are,however, reluctant to shout too loudly. They fearthat if this project is scuppered by opponents –given the amount of time the Mose scheme tookto progress from drawing board to construction –it could take decades before an alternative systemof protection is approved. “There is absolutely noalternative to the barriers at present,” arguesAnna Somers Cocks, chairman of Venice in Peril.“They must go ahead. They should not become avictim of stop-go government.”

If construction is stopped, experts predict thecity that was once Europe’s most powerfulmerchant empire could be uninhabitable by theend of this century. Far-fetched as it sounds, theyargue, Venice could become a real-life Atlantis,only visible from a glass-bottomed boat.

) ) ) ) )

For centuries, Venetians have tried to hold at baythe water that has threatened to engulf what hasalways been one of the world’s most fragile cities.Engineering work began as early as 1501, whenlegions of workers toiled for nearly 200 years,diverting the three main rivers and scores ofsmaller ones that flowed into the lagoon. Theproblem then was that the rivers brought somuch debris with them from the surroundingplains that they were silting up the lagoon andslowly raising water levels.

The rate of human intervention in the naturaldynamics of the lagoon speeded up dramaticallywith the advent of the industrial era, particularlyin the first half of the 20th century. From the1920s, factories on the mainland around theperimeter of the lagoon started tapping intounderground freshwater, causing serious landsubsidence over a wide area, and depressing landunder Venice so that the city started slowlysinking. By the time pumping was stopped in1970, Venice had sunk by more than 12centimetres – a significant change. In addition,the lagoon itself was reduced in size by almost athird when the giant industrial port of Margheraexpanded in the 1940s and 50s; with this camehighly polluting chemical and petrochemicalplants. Large sections of the lagoon were also lost

lagoon, accelerating the speed with which hightides could rush towards Venice. It also led to thefloor of the lagoon becoming further eroded,with unknown quantities of sediment washedout to sea each year.

A freak confluence of low atmosphericpressure and torrential rainfall, along withexceptionally high tides exacerbated by theseconditions, caused Venice to succumb to itsworst recorded floods on November 4, 1966.Back then, there was no siren system to alert thecity’s population to impending disaster. It was leftto a handful of volunteers to run through thestreets shouting a warning through megaphones.

It was around 7am when Ranieri da Mostoheard someone calling at the door of his palazzoin the heart of Venice. Da Mosto was then acorrespondent with the Rai broadcastingcorporation, and the caller was a technician whohad come to pick him up – by sailing a smallgondola right through the front door. When daMosto heard the warning an hour or so earlierthat an exceptionally high tide was expected, hewas, he says, “alarmed, but not too much. We hadno idea then what would happen later that day”.

With the water rising to 1.27 metres above sea level at the height of that morning’s tide, da Mosto was taken by gondola to his office nearthe train station. He was able to make a singlebrief broadcast about the city’s exceptional floodbefore the phone lines and electricity went 27

when they were separated off for use as fishfarms. Perhaps the harshest blow to the stabilityof the lagoon, however, was the construction in1952 of a 15-metre-deep channel in one of thethree main inlets leading from the Adriatic. toallow oil tankers to berth at Marghera. Deepshipping channels were also dredged through thetwo remaining inlets.

These modifications had a complex anddevastating effect on the lagoon. Pollution of itswater from industrial waste and pesticidescontained in agricultural runoff from thesurrounding area killed off much subaquatic life,including sea grass that once helped anchorsediment on the lagoon bed. This lack of aquaticvegetation, together with the deeper channels,allowed stronger currents to flow into the

Venetians clean up beside the Doge’s Palace, following the flooding that hit the city in November 1966

aGRA

ZRA

NER

I

Page 6: Talking Point - Christine Toomey · 2010. 3. 29. · Lagoon Sea Lagoon Sea Chioggia inlet Two locks for fishing boats Gates in stand-by Bed protection position Lagoon Sea Water Air

05 june, 2005 The Sunday Times Magazine 29

dead. As torrential rain continued, strong siroccowinds prevented the morning tide from leavingthe lagoon before the afternoon tide rushed in.By 7pm the water had risen to nearly two metresabove sea level. “There were boats in many of thestreets, a total electrical blackout and, becausemany underground oil tanks had burst, there wasthick black fuel floating on top of the floodwater,” da Mosto recalls.

When his loyal technician finally managed toget one phone line working that evening, daMosto broadcast a report, written by candlelight,alerting the world to the fact that Venice wassubmerged in the worst floods for over 1,000years. Paolo Canestrelli, the current director ofthe city’s tidal forecasting and warning centre,also remembers that day in 1966 clearly, thoughhe was just 14 at the time. He recalls makingpaper boats with his brother, which the boyslaunched from the first-floor window of theirhome, carrying lighted candles. “Looking back I realise how dangerous this was, given theamount of raw fuel floating on the water. But forus at the time, it was an adventure.”

Few others saw it as such. When the floodwater eventually receded 20 hours later, Venicewas devastated: 5,000 people had lost theirhomes, businesses had been destroyed, and someof the city’s unique treasure chest of art andarchitecture was irreparably damaged. ButVenice was not the only Italian city to havesuffered that day. Torrential rain and floodingacross the country, particularly in Florence, hadcaused widespread destruction. In the followingweeks and months it was Florence, not Venice,that became the focus of national andinternational efforts to salvage precious art worksand buildings damaged in the floods.

Once this work was under way in Florence,however, art and architecture experts fromaround the world turned their attention to theproblem presented by Venice. Organisationssuch as Venice in Peril were formed, and theyhave kept the city’s plight in the internationalspotlight ever since. In the wake of the 1966disaster, the government provided funding forrestoration projects and for work to find long-term measures to protect Venice from futureflooding. Under the auspices of Unesco, expertsfrom around the world gathered to discuss whatcould be done to “save Venice”.

Italy’s unstable political scene – 60 changes ingovernment in as many years – did little to easedecision-making in the search for definitivesolutions. It was not until Berlusconi was re-elected four years ago that he threw hisweight behind the Mose barriers mooted fordecades. Other, less costly proposals – whichwere also easier to reverse if found to beineffective – were dismissed. One of thealternatives was to make the three inlets to theAdriatic shallower, to reduce the amount ofwater flowing in and out of the lagoon. This, itwas argued, would restore its naturalequilibrium. This proposal was rejected on thegrounds that it would block the passage of deep-

to have as expensive a project as possible,” saysStefano Boato, professor of city planning atVenice University and another keenenvironmentalist, who has been trying tochallenge the legality of the Mose project.

He questioned the conflict of interest that thesame consortium proposing a solution toVenice’s flood problem was then charged withexecuting that solution. More recently, he haslaunched a legal challenge on the grounds, hecontends, that the scheme contravenes urbanplanning laws. Maria Teresa Brotto, the engineerwho co-ordinated the final design of the barriersand one of the chief spokespeople for ConsorzioVenezia Nuovo (CVN), the consortium ofprivate companies behind the Mose project,dismisses critics such as Boato and Ortalli as “a small but noisy minority”. Dressed in a white-and-silver leather jacket, jeans and cowboy boots, Brotto eases back in her chair as she fieldsquestions about the scheme with an exasperatedlook on her face. “I am amazed that people keepasking me the same things after all this time. Thisis the most studied project in the world. I amstrongly convinced it is the best solution to thiscity’s problems. It has all the necessary approvals,”she concludes, looking at her watch.

But the scientific community remainsdivided. In 1996 the Italian governmentcommissioned two exhaustive studies on theMose project: one environmental-impactassessment by Italian experts, and another byscientists from Brussels, the Netherlands and theMassachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).The former issued a negative report, not onlyquestioning the efficacy of Mose, but saying itwould be too detrimental to the environment.The latter concluded, with reservations, that itwas the best solution for Venice. Some have since questioned the independence of theirverdict, noting that several of the MIT professorshad previously been paid as consultants 29

draught oil tankers to Marghera, and of giganticcruise liners. Yet many believe the largest shipsshould be banned from entering the lagoonanyway. Their powerful wash, together with thewaves from the growing number of motorboatsconstantly ploughing along the canals, is one of the biggest causes of crumbling foundations.Plans have long existed for building a marinabeyond the lagoon’s perimeter, from whichpassengers could be ferried into Venice, and forlaying a pipeline between Marghera and adocking station for tankers in the Adriatic.

“These cruise ships are like skyscrapers,”argues Gherardo Ortalli, who is also a member ofItalia Nostra, one of Italy’s foremostenvironmental organisations. “It is both stupidand dangerous to allow them into the lagoon.People say tourism is important for Venice, yet itis not Venetians but international shippingcompanies that profit from these ships.”

In common with many Venetians, Ortallibelieves it is because of the “enormous financialinterests invested in the Mose project” that it wasgiven the go-ahead while other cheaper, possiblymore effective solutions were shelved.

“It is obviously in the interest of the bigcompanies and industrialists who proposed theMose scheme, and are now contracted to build it,

Anti-Mose protesters with a sign featuring Berlusconi that reads ‘He throws the first stone into the sea’

aEPA

PHO

TO

Page 7: Talking Point - Christine Toomey · 2010. 3. 29. · Lagoon Sea Lagoon Sea Chioggia inlet Two locks for fishing boats Gates in stand-by Bed protection position Lagoon Sea Water Air

June 05, 2005 The Sunday Times Magazine 31

by the consortium that is building the barriers. This is the crux of much of the controversy

that continues to engulf the Mose project. As faras many are concerned, the consortium behind it– set up by the Italian government 20 years agoas an “exclusive concessionaire” charged withuniting private companies vying for fat public-works contracts – is simply too powerful andoperates with too few checks and balances.

In theory, the activities of the consortium aresupervised by a local authority in Venice calledthe Magistrato alle Acque. In practice, criticsargue, this thinly staffed local body acts as avirtual rubber stamp. “It is an empty box. Theconsortium controls everything and, like ourpresent government, it is very interested in bigbusiness,” says Silvio Testa, a seniorcorrespondent with one of Venice’s mainnewspapers, Il Gazzettino. “People here are bothperplexed and dubious about Mose, and thosewho are more informed are very critical of thescheme. They simply don’t want it. I amconvinced that as people come to realise theimpact it will have on the environment, hostilityto it will grow considerably.”

Even people such as Somers Cocks, of Venicein Peril, recognise that the barriers are likely tobe only an interim measure. “The barriers willprobably only buy Venice some time to searchfor longer-term solutions,” says Somers Cocks.“But I believe their construction should goahead. People are living in a state of denial abouthow Venice is being irreparably damaged by theconstant flooding.”

Two years ago, the British charity, whichfunded a research project into the problemsfacing Venice, organised a conference inCambridge aimed at clarifying the state ofscientific research into these problems. SomersCocks admits that some Italians initially viewedsuch efforts by outsiders, particularly the British,as “interference”. Some even went as far as tosuggest it smacked of “colonial arrogance”. Butthe Cambridge conference was considered agreat success. It brought together 130 scientistsand engineering experts from around the worldwho specialised in lagoon processes and floodcontrol. Among the accusations levelled at theMose scheme, when alternatives to it were beingmooted, was that crucial data that should havebeen made available to the scientific communityfor independent analysis were not released by theconsortium. One of the principal conclusions ofthose who attended the Cambridge conferencewas that it was essential that those in charge ofMose – already by then given the green light –remain flexible enough to adapt to improvedunderstanding of the lagoon, advances intechnology and unforeseen consequences of theconstruction of the barriers.

To ensure this happens, Somers Cocksbelieves an international commission should beset up – under the auspices of the Europeanparliament, perhaps – not only to oversee theproject as it is being built, but to monitor how itis working once construction is complete. “This

Lack of jobs, rising housing costs and theinconvenience of living in such an unusual cityhave driven young people, in particular, to themainland, leaving it with an ageing populationand an ever-expanding influx of tourists – anestimated 15m a year. Although tourismprovides a vital source of income for Venice, itmakes life almost unbearable for many who livehere. Testa reflects the view of many Venetians indescribing tourism as a “cancer” that is destroyingthe fabric of the city. Initiatives such as tax breaksfor businesses that are relocating here, and theprovision of affordable housing for youngworkers and their families, could revitalise thecity’s economy and make it less dependent ontourism. Plans for an underwater metro linelinking Venice to the mainland – known as thesublagunare, or sub-lagoon railway – are alsomooted as a solution to the island-city’s transportdifficulties – though some fear this would simplyincrease the influx of tourists.

But here again, the expense of the Mosescheme comes under attack. For as soon as theproject was approved, nearly all state funding forVenice, which once went to projects such asreinforcing the foundations of the city andrepairing its buildings, was funnelled through theconsortium constructing the barriers. Thosewho run it now virtually control the city’s pursestrings, deciding how all government moneyallotted to preserving Venice is allocated.

One of the most startling sights for any visitorto Venice is the spectacle of sections of canalsdrained of water, as workmen using the latesttechnology shore up the city’s rottingfoundations. Such work follows a traditiondating back to the 9th century, when Venice wastransformed from temporary refuge topermanent settlement, as millions of woodenpoles of alder, oak and larch were sunk into thelagoon floor so that Istrian-stone and marbleplatforms could be laid on top. But what moneywill be available now for such feverishrestoration activity is in doubt.

Since the very first plans for the Mose schemewere first mooted, the retired architect PinoRosa Salva has campaigned vigorously againstthem. Sitting in front of a large draughtsman’stable scattered with photographs of Veniceduring its many floods, Rosa Salva unfurls one ofthe posters he and other members of ItaliaNostra have repeatedly plastered up on the city’scrumbling walls over the years.

In stark black and white, the poster depicts thebarriers as giant teeth stretching across the threeinlets of Venice, denouncing them as “monstrousdentures” that will destroy the lagoon anddevour millions in state funds. “This scheme is afolly. There are cheaper and simpler solutionsthat should at least be tried,” concludes RosaSalva, now in his nineties. “If man cannot saveVenice, what can he save? But I am an old mannow and do not have much energy left to fight.”

It is a weariness echoed by many in LaSerinissima, which, when it comes to the falloutfrom the Mose project, is anything but serene s 31

will not happen unless there is enoughinternational pressure to push it forward,” shesays. “But I believe passionately that the Italiangovernment needs to wake up to itsresponsibility, and to realise that you cannot dealwith the problem of Venice on an ad hocgovernment-by-government basis.

“Venice is a microcosm,” she adds. “Some ofthe problems the city faces now, and will face inthe future as a result of global warming, willeventually confront other cities around theworld. We all need to wake up to this. We needto get it right here, of all places.”

It is a conclusion echoed by Jane da Mosto, anenvironmental scientist and co-author of a book,The Science of Saving Venice, that resulted fromthe Cambridge conference: “Venice is a preciouslaboratory for dealing with complexities. Manand the environment have co-existed here for athousand years. Whatever is done to safeguardVenice, we need to take into account all theinterrelationships that exist here.”

What Venice lacks – and, most agree,desperately needs – is a long-term strategic plan.Because saving the city from flooding has beenthe focus of attention for so long, the question ofwhat sort of city is being saved has been ignored.

Above: a poster by Italia Nostra, which describesthe barriers across the Lido, Malamocco andChioggia as ‘monstrous dentures’. The group hascampaigned against Mose for over 20 years

CO

URT

ESY

OF

CH

RIST

INE

TOO

MEY