Assessing ecological risk on a regional scale

Society needs a quantitative and systematic way to estimate and compare the impacts of environmental problems that affect large geographic areas. This paper presents an approach for regional risk assessment that combines regional assessment methods and landscape ecology theory with an existing framework for ecological risk assessment. Risk assessment evaluates the effects of an environmental change on a valued natural resource and interprets the significance of those effects in light of the uncertainties identified in each component of the assessment process. Unique and important issues for regional risk assessment are emphasized; these include the definition of the disturbance scenario, the assessment boundary definition, and the spatial heterogeneity of the landscape. Although the research described in this article has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through Interagency Agreement Number DW89932112-01-2 to the U.S. Department of Energy, it has not been subjected to EPA review and therefore does not necessarily reflect the views of EPA and no official endorsement should be inferred.     

Treatment of risk in environmental impact assessment

Risk assessment and environmental impact assessment have developed as separate traditions. While environmental impact assessment is a broad field that includes all activities that attempt to analyze and evaluate the effects of human and related actions on the environment, risk assessment has been concerned with the relatively well-defined regulatory problems and employs formal quantitative analysis of the probability of specific undesired events, such as cancer. Risk analytic approaches, particularly the explicit treatment of uncertainty, can significantly contribute to environmental assessments. This article discusses the type and sources of uncertainty in environmental assessments, techniques for their quantification, and ways to use uncertainty estimates to calculate probabilities of effects or probabilities of exceeding environmental standards and to determine the need for mitigation or additional research.This article was presented at the International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis, Task Force Meeting on Risk and Policy Analysis under Conditions of Uncertainty, Laxenburg, Austria, November 1985.     

Impingement losses of white perch at Hudson River power plants: Magnitude and biological significance

We performed a quantitative assessment of the impact of impingement at power plants on the Hudson River white perch population We estimated that impingement reduces the abundance of each white perch year class by at least 10% and probably by 15–20% or more after 2–3 years of vulnerability to power plants We attempted to detect effects of impingement on average year-class abundance of white perch from a time series of abundance indices derived from impingement data We found, however, that neither impingement collection rates observed at Hudson River power plants nor beach seine data provide a reliable index of year-class strength in white perch. Even if a reliable index were developed, natural fluctuations in year-class strength are great enough that a short-term monitoring program would be inadequate for detecting even a large reduction in average year-class strength. We performed a multipopulation analysis using simple food chain and food web models The results suggest that any long-term decline in white perch abundance caused by impingement should be accompanied by an increase in the abundance of one or more competing fish species and by an increase in the biomass of adult white perch relative to young-of-the-year.We conclude that 1) at present, assessments of population-level impact of impingement should focus on short-term effects, 2) research is needed to develop a reliable index of year-class strength for use in long-term monitoring programs, 3) identification and quantification of natural environmental factors influencing year-class strength are needed to improve our ability to predict and detect changes in abundance, and 4) it would be useful in designing monitoring programs to focus on detecting patterns of change among populations and age groups rather than solely on declines in abundance of individual populationsResearch sponsored by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission under Interagency Agreement No. 40-550-75 with the US Department of Energy under Contract W-7405-eng-26 with Union Carbide Corporation. Publication No. 2030, Environmental Sciences Division, ORNL.     

Quantifying natural resource injuries and ecological service reductions: challenges and opportunities

The natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) are complex and have been difficult to implement. The complexity and difficulty in implementation arise both from the assessment procedures specified in agency NRDA guidance and from the limited ability of ecologists to quantify impacts of hazardous substances on natural resources. This paper explores the scientific aspects of NRDA implementation, and discusses conceptual and methodological relationships between NRDA and the much broader field of ecological risk assessment (ERA). We discuss three critical components of the NRDA assessment approach: measuring natural resource injuries and reductions in resource services; evaluating causality; and establishing baseline conditions. We identify (1) specific approaches drawn from ERA practice that could improve each of these components, and (2) research needs and institutional changes that may improve the ability of the NRDA process to achieve its stated objectives. We recommend the acceleration of the ongoing dialogue among NRDA practitioners from the Trustee and PRP communities as a first step toward resolving the procedural and technical deficiencies of the NRDA process.