Sustainable remediation panel—Measuring the social and economic benefits of a sustainable remediation project

Remediation developed a Sustainable Remediation Panel in the Summer 2009 issue, which featured the Sustainable Remediation Forum White Paper. The panel is composed of leaders in the field of sustainable remediation who have volunteered to provide their opinions on difficult subjects related to the topic of how to integrate sustainability principles into the remediation practice. The panel's opinions are provided in a question‐and‐answer format, whereby selected experts provide an answer to a question. This issue's question is provided below, followed by opinions from five experts in the remediation field.

相似文献   

How to negotiate remediation projects with regulatory agencies

The news that a company has been identified as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at a federal or state Superfund site usually sends a current of fear through the company's management. Even executives with experience in Superfund projects foresee a lengthy, complicated process that involves enormous expenditures and a possible public relations disaster. The author argues, however, that the Superfund process can be managed in a cost-effective way, prevent reactive responses, inaction, and ineffective action, and applying the business acumen that enabled the company to prosper in the first place. This article explores a critical aspect of the remediation process—negotiation of settlements with regulatory agencies (EPA or a state department of environmental protection)—and details the practical steps needed to conduct those negotiations. It also describes common mistakes that can be avoided. For brevity and clarity, it is assumed that the company in question is the only PRP that has received a notice letter from the regulatory agency.     

Using community relations to reduce costs during remediation projects

Almost everyone who has been involved in a site remediation project has seen schedules slip and costs escalate due to political pressure from the public or the press. While focusing on remediation technologies and containment techniques to control costs, many organizations have neglected a major cost driver—public opinion. This article examines community relations from the perspective of an organization trying to control costs during a site remediation project. It details the strong correlation between the cost of a site cleanup and the level of public dissatisfaction and provides an organization with specific strategies on how to use proven communications techniques to lower costs. Examination of several case studies is provided, including a study involving a site in which community representatives actively worked to reduce project costs. It is clear that any responsible cleanup must be protective of public health and the environment. But it is becoming increasingly apparent that wise allocation of available resources has a profound effect on the program's ability to ensure public and environmental safety. In many cases, it has been proven that some costly cleanups—for example, involving excavation—sometimes actually increase risk by creating an exposure pathway where none existed before. In turn, such cleanups waste resources that are needed elsewhere. The challenge in dealing with this complicated issue is to help stakeholders understand the true ramifications of the choices that are faced at each site. If these stakeholders feel uninformed, powerless, or excluded from the process, it is likely that they will be unable to enter a productive discussion. The community relations programs outlined in documents such as a Superfund guidance can be helpful in familiarizing the community with site-related issues and with gathering public input. These activities act as a baseline for the programs discussed in this article. However, existing programs are not focused on providing a strategic advantage in reaching cleanup solutions and balancing health and environmental considerations with economic considerations.     

A data integration framework to support Triad projects

Cost‐effective and efficient site remediation and scientifically defensible decisions require site characterizations that are representative of site conditions. The Triad conceptual site model (CSM) is at the center of a continually improving site characterization process that begins during systematic planning and ends after the last data are developed. To gain the full benefit and greatest cost‐effectiveness, the process of CSM refinement should be performed in real time. Thus, the use of collaborative data is critical for evolving and maturing the CSM. In the field, through the use of all available data that are of known quality, a skilled and experienced field team can collect sufficient site information to mature the CSM in a timely manner. To facilitate the planning and execution of such a process, an easily understandable framework is needed to structure data quality that supports scientifically defensible decisions and efficient projects. This article explores such a framework. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Active capping technology—New approaches for in situ remediation of contaminated sediments

This study evaluated pilot‐scale active caps composed of apatite, organoclay, biopolymers, and sand for the remediation of metal‐contaminated sediments. The active caps were constructed in Steel Creek, at the Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina. Monitoring was conducted for 12 months. Effectiveness of the caps was based on an evaluation of contaminant bioavailability, resistance to erosion, and impacts on benthic organisms. Active caps lowered metal bioavailability in the sediment during the one‐year test period. Biopolymers reduced sediment suspension during cap construction, increased the pool of carbon, and lowered the release of metals. This field validation showed that active caps can effectively treat contaminants by changing their speciation, and that caps can be constructed to include more than one type of amendment to achieve multiple goals. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Pilot scale testing composite swellable organosilica nanoscale zero‐valent iron—Iron‐Osorb®—for in situ remediation of trichloroethylene

Iron‐Osorb^® is a solid composite material of swellable organosilica with embedded nanoscale zero‐valent iron that was formulated to extract and dechlorinate solvents in groundwater. The unique feature of the highly porous organosilica is its strong affinity for chlorinated solvents, such as trichloroethylene (TCE), while being impervious to dissolved solids. The swellable matrix is able to release ethane after dechlorination and return to the initial state. Iron‐Osorb^® was determined to be highly effective in reducing TCE concentrations in bench‐scale experiments. The material was tested in a series of three pilot scale tests for in situ remediation of TCE in conjunction with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency at a site in central Ohio. Results of these tests indicate that TCE levels were reduced for a period of time after injection, then leveled out or bounced back, presumably due to depletion of zero‐valent iron. Use of tracer materials and soil corings indicate that Iron‐Osorb^® traveled distances of at least 20 feet from the injection point during soil augmentation. The material appears to remain in place once the injection fluid is diluted into the surrounding groundwater. Overall, the technology is promising as a remediation method to treat dilute plumes or create diffuse permeable reactive barriers. Keys to future implementation include developing injection mechanisms that optimize soil distribution of the material and making the system long‐lasting to allow for continual treatment of contaminants emanating from the soil matrix. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Composting projects under the Clean Development Mechanism: sustainable contribution to mitigate climate change

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) of the Kyoto Protocol aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries and at the same time to assist these countries in sustainable development. While composting as a suitable mitigation option in the waste sector can clearly contribute to the former goal there are indications that high rents can also be achieved regarding the latter. In this article composting is compared with other CDM project types inside and outside the waste sector with regards to both project numbers and contribution to sustainable development. It is found that, despite the high number of waste projects, composting is underrepresented and a major reason for this fact is identified. Based on a multi-criteria analysis it is shown that composting has a higher potential for contribution to sustainable development than most other best in class projects. As these contributions can only be assured if certain requirements are followed, eight key obligations are presented.