Soft engineering solutions - examples of soft engineering methods include beach nourishment (taking sand from one location and piling it on top of the existing sand on the beach) and bunching old tyres together to absorb the energy of the waves.
Stop all development - this would include stopping all development. This would ensure that the actions of people do not increase the effect of erosion by, for example, material getting into the sea and then, with the waves, hitting back against the coast.
Move people away - moving people away from the area all together is an option. The population density is low and so not many people would be affected. Residents would be moved roughly ten miles away, so the land could continue to erode as it has been doing for a long time.
Do nothing - this would mean leaving the coast to erode as it has been doing so for 12,000 years now. It would be free, of course, but residents wouldn’t be too happy.
In order to decide which option was the best for the council to do, I did a cost-benefit analysis of them. This involved listing the benefits and costs of each. The results of my analysis are as follow:
The option I suggest the council uses is soft engineering as it scored a +13 on my cost-benefit analysis. This means that the benefits outweighed the costs when looking in more detail at the option.
Soft engineering methods often have very little visual impact. This means that the view isn’t destroyed, it doesn’t block access to the coast (as it won’t be in the way) and tourists aren’t deterred by the ‘ugliness’ of the method. Soft engineering tends to reuse materials we already have. For example, beach nourishment just takes sand that we already have, and transports it to another location. The picture to the right shows diggers moving sand down the beach. The beach will look ordinary and natural except when the diggers come every six months or so. Drainage, another soft engineering method doesn’t reuse materials, however the water it collects below the sand is often purified due to the sand filtering it as it trickles through which then means it can be taken inland and used. Also, to implement soft engineering doesn’t cost too much money, especially in comparison to other options, such as moving people away and hard engineering methods. This means it can be done for a longer stretch of coastline and maintained with little expense.
It was not only these advantages of soft engineering that led me to choosing it as the best option, but the disadvantages of the other options also pushed me towards it.
Finances are one of the biggest problems and disadvantages. Hard engineering methods are often extremely expensive. One metre of sea wall costs, as an average, £5000. Moving people away is also dear. To move one family away would cost over £100,000. Therefore, to move a whole village would be far too expensive. Also regarding money is the option to stop all development. If this was to be done, money from developments which could be built there would be lost.
Moving people away presents many problems. First off – would people want to move? When someone chooses to live in a certain area, it’s because they like that particular place. They would most probably have moved there because it was so close to the coastline, however if they were to move inland, it would take away the purpose of them living there. Also, Happisburgh is a rural area – this means that farming is a big source of income. If people are moved inland, there would be redundancy amongst the farmers, as they wouldn’t have a job to do. Then there’s the issue of where to move the people to. It would involve a lot of organising and again, would be very expensive.
Doing nothing seems out of the question. The cliffs will continue to erode at high rates, and soon, the coast will be much further inland. Also, residents wouldn’t be too happy about the council opting to do nothing, and so there’s a strong possibility that the current cabinet will not be voted again to rule the local council.
Therefore, due to the benefits of soft engineering and the many costs of all other options, with back up from my cost-benefit analysis, I conclude that soft engineering is the way forward for Happisburgh, and that it is the best option for the council to proceed with for the future.
