Ten years later: The progress and future of integrating sustainable principles,practices, and metrics into remediation projects

In 2009, the Sustainable Remediation Forum released a white paper entitled “Integrating sustainable principles, practices, and metrics into remediation projects” (Ellis & Hadley, 2009, Remediation, 19, pp. 5–114). Sustainable remediation was a relatively new concept, and the white paper explored a range of approaches on how sustainability could be integrated into traditional remediation projects. This paper revisits the 2009 white paper, providing an overview of the early days of the evolving sustainable remediation practice and an assessment of the progress of sustainable remediation over the last 10 years with a primary focus on the United States. The current state of the sustainable remediation practice includes published literature, current practices and resources, applications, room for improvement, international progress, the virtuous cycle that applying sustainable remediation creates, and the status of the objectives cited in the 2009 white paper. Over the last decade, several sustainable remediation frontiers have emerged that will likely be a focus in advancing the practice. These frontiers include climate change and resiliency, weighting and valuation to help better consolidate different sustainable remediation metrics, programmatic implementation, and better integration of the societal impacts of sustainable remediation. Finally, as was the case for the 2009 white paper, this paper explores how sustainable remediation may evolve over the next 10 years and focuses on the events and drivers that can be significant in the pace of further development of the practice. The events and drivers include transformation impacts, societal influences, and the continued development of new technologies, approaches, and tools by remediation practitioners. The remediation industry has made significant progress in developing the practice of sustainable remediation and has implemented it successfully into hundreds of projects. While progress has been significant, an opportunity exists to implement the tenets of sustainable remediation on many more projects and explore new frontiers to help improve the communication, integration, and derived benefits from implementing sustainable remediation into future remediation projects.     

Debunking myths about sustainable remediation

Sustainable remediation concepts have evolved during the decade 2007–2017. From the establishment of the first Sustainable Remediation forum (SURF) in 2007, to publication of ASTM and ISO standards by 2017. Guidance has been developed around the world to reflect local regulatory systems, and much has been learned in applying sustainability assessment to contaminated site management projects. In the best examples, significant improvements in project sustainability have been delivered, including concurrent reduction of the environmental footprint of the remediation program, improved social performance, and cost savings and/or value creation. The initial advocates for the concept of sustainable remediation were quickly supported by early adopters who saw its potential to improve the remediation industry's performance, but they also had to overcome some inertia and scepticism from other parties. During the debates and discussions that occurred at numerous international conferences and SURF workshops around the world, various opinions were formed and positions stated. Some proved to be correct, others not so. With the recent publication of ISO Standard 18504 and the benefit of a decade's‐worth of hindsight on sustainable remediation programs implementation and project delivery, this paper summarizes a number of myths and misunderstandings that have been stated regarding sustainable remediation and seeks to debunk them. Sustainable remediation assessment shows us how to manage unacceptable risks to human health and the environment in the best, that is to say the most sustainable, way. It provides the contaminated land management industry a framework to incorporate sustainable development principles into remediation projects and deliver significant value for affected parties and society more broadly. In dispelling some myths about sustainable remediation set out in this paper, it is hoped that consistent application of ISO18504/SuRF‐UK (or equivalently robust guidance) will facilitate even wider use of sustainable remediation around the world.     

Nanoremediation and International Environmental Restoration Markets

Nanoscale zero‐valent iron (nZVI) is the most commonly used nanoremediation material. While there has been a reasonable level of application of nZVI technologies for in situ remediation in the United States, its utilization across Europe has been much more limited. There has been significant uncertainty about the balance between deployment risks and benefits for nanoparticles (NPs), which has affected the regulatory position in several countries. Some member states of the European Union (EU) take a strong precautionary view of the risks from the deployment of NPs into the subsurface, preventing the adoption of the technology. This article provides a risk–benefit assessment for nZVI based on published information and describes the steps that will be taken by a major European research project (NanoRem), as part of its work to provide a basis for better informed decision making in European environmental restoration markets. A key part of this process is dialogue between practitioners and researchers. NanoRem therefore has an active process of communication with different stakeholder networks (regulators, service providers, and site owners). NanoRem hopes to stimulate a consensus on appropriate use of nanoremediation and thereby stimulate effective technology transfer to the European remediation market. ©2015 The Authors     

VinylPlus, the new European PVC industry’s voluntary programme toward sustainability

Over the past 10?years, the Vinyl 2010 programme has been highly effective in assisting the European PVC industry tackling various stakeholder concerns related to PVC sustainability. The Vinyl 2010 partners decided in 2009 to launch a follow-up programme, VinylPlus. Vinyl 2010’s success was to a large extent due to the close cooperation of the entire PVC value chain, and to clear targets and deadlines allowing transparent progress monitoring. These key features have been retained. Climate change and availability of non-renewable resources are now widely recognised as major challenges. Health and safety concerns about chemical substances are increasingly prevalent. In this context, a fundamental assessment of the sustainability features of PVC as material and as industry was carried out. An in-depth reflection involving scores of business managers and industry experts, stakeholders and NGOs took place. It produced collective insights and a credible pathway for progress over the next 10?years. Both the reflection process and its results are described, with particular emphasis on recycling. The issue of “legacy additives”, a potential major hurdle of recycling, is given particular attention.     

Integrating the Social Dimension in Remediation Decision‐Making: State of the Practice and Way Forward

Sustainable remediation guidance, frameworks, and case studies have been published at an international level illustrating established sustainability assessment methodologies and successful implementation. Though the terminology and indicators evaluated may differ, one common theme among international organizations and regulatory bodies is more comprehensive and transparent methods are needed to evaluate the social sphere of sustainable remediation. Based on a literature review and stakeholder input, this paper focused on three main areas: (1) status quo of how the social element of sustainable remediation is assessed among various countries and organizations; (2) methodologies to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate societal impacts; and (3) findings from this research, including challenges, obstacles, and a path forward. In conclusion, several existing social impact assessment techniques are readily available for use by the remediation community, including rating and scoring system evaluations, enhanced cost benefit analysis, surveys/interviews, social network analysis, and multicriteria decision analysis. In addition, a list of 10 main social indicator categories were developed: health and safety, economic stimulation, stakeholder collaboration, benefits community at large, alleviate undesirable community impacts, equality issues, value of ecosystem services and natural resources, risk‐based land management and remedial solutions, regional and global societal impacts, and contributions to other policies. Evaluation of the social element of remedial activities is not without challenges and knowledge gaps. Identification of obstacles and gaps during the project planning process is essential to defining sustainability objectives and choosing the appropriate tool and methodology to conduct an assessment. Challenges identified include meaningful stakeholder engagement, risk perception of stakeholders, and trade‐offs among the various triple bottom line dimensions. ©2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Sustainable Remediation Considerations for Treatment of 1,4‐Dioxane in Groundwater

1,4‐Dioxane remediation is challenging due to its physiochemical properties and low target treatment levels. As such, applications of traditional remediation technologies have proven ineffective. There are a number of promising remediation technologies that could potentially be scaled for successful application to groundwater restoration. Sustainable remediation is an important consideration in the evaluation of remediation technologies. It is critically important to consider sustainability when new technologies are being applied or new contaminants are being treated with traditional technologies. There are a number of social, economic, and environmental drivers that should be considered when implementing 1,4‐dioxane treatment technologies. This includes evaluating sustainability externalities by considering the cradle‐to‐grave impacts of the chemicals, energy, processes, transportation, and materials used in groundwater treatment. It is not possible to rate technologies as more or less sustainable because each application is context specific. However, by including sustainability thinking into technology evaluations and implementation plans, decisions makers can be more informed and the results of remediation are likely to be more effective and beneficial. There are a number sustainable remediation frameworks, guidance documents, footprint assessment tools, life cycle assessment tools, and best management practices that can be utilized for these purposes. This paper includes an overview describing the importance of sustainability in technology selection, identifies sustainability impacts related to technologies that can be used to treat 1,4‐dioxane, provides an approximating approach to assess sustainability impacts, and summarizes potential sustainability impacts related to promising treatment technologies. ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Sustainable remediation: Quo vadis?

Sustainable remediation is at a crossroads. In a few short years it has become a mainstream topic while simultaneously maintaining its chimeral status. Sustainable remediation is a term claimed by many yet a concept apparently understood by few. Its characterization has necessitated the development of a plethora of metrics and tools yet its essence readily emerges. U.S.‐led initiatives have been adopted around the globe. Relative sustainability appraisal is easy to carry out and potentially sufficient for most site circumstances. The need to adequately protect human health and the environment has been recognized. Now the industry needs to focus our attention on protection and restoration that itself has a reasonably maximized net benefit. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Cover design for radioactive and AMD-producing mine waste in the Ronneburg area, eastern Thuringia

At the former uranium mining site of Ronneburg, large scale underground and open pit mining for nearly 40 years resulted in a production of about 113,000 tonnes of uranium and about 200 million cubic metres of mine waste. In their present state, these materials cause risks to human health and strong environmental impacts and therefore demand remedial action. The remediation options available are relocation of mine spoil into the open pit and on site remediation by landscaping/contouring, placement of a cover and revegetation. A suitable vegetated cover system combined with a surface water drainage system provides long-term stability against erosion and reduces acid generation thereby meeting the main remediation objectives which are long-term reduction of radiological exposure and contaminant emissions and recultivation. The design of the cover system includes the evaluation of geotechnical, radiological, hydrological, geochemical and ecological criteria and models. The optimized overall model for the cover system has to comply with general conditions as, e.g. economic efficiency, public acceptance and sustainability. Most critical elements for the long-term performance of the cover system designed for the Beerwalde dump are the barrier system and its long-term integrity and a largely self-sustainable vegetation.     

A multi-criteria decision analysis assessment of waste paper management options

The use of Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) was investigated in an exercise using a panel of local residents and stakeholders to assess the options for managing waste paper on the Isle of Wight. Seven recycling, recovery and disposal options were considered by the panel who evaluated each option against seven environmental, financial and social criteria. The panel preferred options where the waste was managed on the island with gasification and recycling achieving the highest scores. Exporting the waste to the English mainland for incineration or landfill proved to be the least preferred options. This research has demonstrated that MCDA is an effective way of involving community groups in waste management decision making.     

Effective Communications for Project Success

Successful soil remediation depends on many factors that project managers know well: accurate assessments as to the extent and nature of contamination; the right choice and proper implementation of remediation technologies; and, deft negotiation of regulatory requirements and review. One equally important factor that often receives too little attention is stakeholder communication. Effective communication strategies and tactics can help avoid project delays and cost overruns related to stakeholder concerns and opposition, and inoculate owners and others against frivolous litigation. Remediation projects also offer opportunities to bolster the brands and images of engaged parties, including owners, engineering and environmental contractors—and even the regulatory agencies that oversee them. Understanding the skills and techniques necessary to communicate effectively when people are angry, upset, and suspicious of everything you say is essential to project success. This article will explore six rules for effective communication—brought to life by genuine case studies where they have been followed to positive effect—that encapsulate the skills and techniques project managers can apply in difficult situations involving the remediation of contaminated sites. ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Alternative contracting strategies for controlling costs and avoiding performance disputes on remediation projects

It is critical that all participants in the remediation effort develop comprehensive contracting strategies aimed at controlling remediation costs and avoiding performance disputes. Initially, greater emphasis should be placed on negotiated, cost-type contracts that fairly address the allocation of risk between contractor and owner. This article examines the use of this contracting method and discusses industry studies on contract risk allocation, reviewing several typical contract clauses. Moreover, the participants in the remediation process should commit to the use of partnering as a framework for contract performance, as well as alternative dispute resolution techniques to swiftly settle disagreements. Through partnering, the owner and contractor work cooperatively throughout performance, rather than focus solely on their contractual rights and remedies. The article examines the mechanics of the partnering process, identifying the critical stakeholders as well as potential pitfalls, and relates industry applications. Relying on an extension of the partnering concept to the resolution of performance disputes, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques are designed to encourage negotiated settlements of disputes. The article examines various ADR methods, including the use of a dispute escalation network, job-site dispute resolution, and post-performance ADR techniques.     

Integrating Remediation and Reuse to Achieve Whole‐System Sustainability Benefits

This perspective article was prepared by members of the Sustainable Remediation Forum (SURF), a professional nonprofit organization seeking to advance the state of sustainable remediation within the broader context of sustainable site reuse. SURF recognizes that remediation and site reuse, including redevelopment activities, are intrinsically linked—even when remediation is subordinate to or sometimes a precursor of reuse. Although the end of the remediation life cycle has traditionally served as the beginning of the site's next life cycle, a disconnect between these two processes remains. SURF recommends a holistic approach that brings together remediation and reuse on a collaborative parallel path and seeks to achieve whole‐system sustainability benefits. This article explores the value of integrating remediation into the reuse process to fully exploit synergies and minimize the costs and environmental impacts associated with bringing land back into beneficial use. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Brownfield Sites Remediation Technology Overview,Trends, and Opportunities in China

Over decades of economic development, China's industrialization has led to significant environmental issues due to unregulated discharges into air, water, and soil. As cities continue to expand (i.e., urbanization trend) and awareness/concerns about environmental pollution rises, many industrial facilities along the edge of or within the city boundaries have been relocated or closed. This urbanization trend leaves behind idled and abandoned land that is contaminated from the former industrial activities and unregulated discharges. China released its first nationwide soil quality survey in April 2014, and the survey suggests that soil conditions in China represent a significant challenge. China has encouraged local engineering firms to demonstrate soil treatment technologies through pilot‐scale studies, but the outcomes of many demonstrations have not been promising due to the lack of remediation experience and underdeveloped technical guidelines that are needed to guide the remediation processes. During the past decade, some local soil remediation experience has been established, but it is limited for certain technologies that address their primary contaminants of concern: heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants. In 2014, national technical guidelines were published regarding environmental investigation, risk assessment, monitoring, and remediation; however, regulations and funding systems are still underdeveloped. Thus, the remediation processes that should maximize economic and environmental benefits are not streamlined. This article provides an overview of the latest regulatory developments, remediation technologies applied, technology trends, and market opportunities in China. The provided information aims to allow international remediation practitioners to better understand and appreciate this unique and emerging remediation market, which is growing fast, and to highlight the importance of developing a sustainable model that not only provides for cleanup of the environment but also supports economic development. ©2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Comparing the Adoption of Contaminated Land Remediation Technologies in the United States,United Kingdom,and China

In many locations across the world, land contamination poses a serious threat to human health and the wider environment. For instance, a report published on April 17, 2014, revealed that China now has 16.1 percent of its land contaminated by various organic and inorganic contaminants, posing a range of challenges from human health risk to food security. The innovation and adoption of suitable remediation technologies is critical for solving land contamination issues. However, little is known about the pattern of remediation technology adoption, as well as its determining factors. This study uses a questionnaire survey in the United States, United Kingdom, and China to examine the spatial variation of remediation technology adoption. It further explores the temporal trend of remediation technology adoption using secondary data from the U.S. Superfund program. The study identified significant differences in remediation technology adoption among these countries, which are attributed to the different environmental, social, economic, and regulatory contexts. It is argued that the full implications of remediation technology adoption to sustainable development should be further studied, and policy instruments should be designed accordingly to promote those remediation technologies that align the best with long‐term sustainability. Technology developers may also use these implications to adjust their research and development priorities. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Integrating multi-criteria decision analysis for a GIS-based hazardous waste landfill sitting in Kurdistan Province, western Iran

The evaluation of a hazardous waste disposal site is a complicated process because it requires data from diverse social and environmental fields. These data often involve processing of a significant amount of spatial information which can be used by GIS as an important tool for land use suitability analysis. This paper presents a multi-criteria decision analysis alongside with a geospatial analysis for the selection of hazardous waste landfill sites in Kurdistan Province, western Iran. The study employs a two-stage analysis to provide a spatial decision support system for hazardous waste management in a typically under developed region. The purpose of GIS was to perform an initial screening process to eliminate unsuitable land followed by utilization of a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to identify the most suitable sites using the information provided by the regional experts with reference to new chosen criteria. Using 21 exclusionary criteria, as input layers, masked maps were prepared. Creating various intermediate or analysis map layers a final overlay map was obtained representing areas for hazardous waste landfill sites. In order to evaluate different landfill sites produced by the overlaying a landfill suitability index system was developed representing cumulative effects of relative importance (weights) and suitability values of 14 non-exclusionary criteria including several criteria resulting from field observation. Using this suitability index 15 different sites were visited and based on the numerical evaluation provided by MCDA most suitable sites were determined.     

Resilience: A New Consideration for Environmental Remediation in an Era of Climate Change

There has been a growing movement within the environmental industry to develop more sustainable approaches in environmental remediation. These have generally included carbon footprint analysis, life cycle assessment, and best management practices to reduce the overall net environmental, social, and economic impacts of investigation and remediation activities. One of the foundational reasons net environmental impacts are currently evaluated is to identify and, subsequently, reduce contributions to climate change, primarily greenhouse gas emissions. While this trend toward sustainability and reduction in impact to the global environment is both important and admirable, the approach to remediation design and long‐term planning now needs to evolve further to better incorporate climate resilience into sustainable remediation design and implementation: designing remediation solutions that account for the projected impacts of climate change, as well as have the capacity to adapt to changing conditions. As a global population, we are now beyond the point of being able to prevent climate change and instead need to plan for adapting to it. In remediation, the effects of climate change create both risks and opportunities which should be considered during remedial design and long‐term planning. Responsible parties may see the push for—and management of—these considerations through their internal corporate risk management. The authors of this paper propose a simple framework for climate adaptation and resilience evaluations and plan development for remediation projects. ©2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Developing Effective Decision Support for the Application of “Gentle” Remediation Options: The GREENLAND Project

Gentle remediation options (GRO) are risk management strategies/technologies that result in a net gain (or at least no gross reduction) in soil function as well as risk management. They encompass a number of technologies, including the use of plant (phyto‐), fungi (myco‐), and/or bacteria‐based methods, with or without chemical soil additives or amendments, for reducing contaminant transfer to local receptors by in situ stabilization, or extraction, transformation, or degradation of contaminants. Despite offering strong benefits in terms of risk management, deployment costs, and sustainability for a range of site problems, the application of GRO as practical on‐site remedial solutions is still in its relative infancy, particularly for metal(loid)‐contaminated sites. A key barrier to wider adoption of GRO relates to general uncertainties and lack of stakeholder confidence in (and indeed knowledge of) the feasibility or reliability of GRO as practical risk management solutions. The GREENLAND project has therefore developed a simple and transparent decision support framework for promoting the appropriate use of gentle remediation options and encouraging participation of stakeholders, supplemented by a set of specific design aids for use when GRO appear to be a viable option. The framework is presented as a three phased model or Decision Support Tool (DST), in the form of a Microsoft Excel‐based workbook, designed to inform decision‐making and options appraisal during the selection of remedial approaches for contaminated sites. The DST acts as a simple decision support and stakeholder engagement tool for the application of GRO, providing a context for GRO application (particularly where soft end‐use of remediated land is envisaged), quick reference tables (including an economic cost calculator), and supporting information and technical guidance drawing on practical examples of effective GRO application at trace metal(loid) contaminated sites across Europe. This article introduces the decision support framework. ©2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The challenge of remediation technology development

A huge commercial environmental industry, currently estimated at some $130 billion in size in the United States alone, has sprung up to manage and remediate environmental problems. Hundreds of innovative remediation technologies are being developed under EPA's SITE program, which has provided R&D funding for more than 100 new treatment technologies. Despite the obvious demand, numerous regulatory, marketing, technical, and financial barriers have impeded progress in the field of remediation technology development. Developers of remediation technologies are faced with a significant challenge to overcome these barriers and successfully bring a technology to market. This article examines the barriers to technology development and offers strategic planning alternatives for long-term economic success and commercial viability of remediation technologies.