Table 7 - uploaded by Paul Bardos
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Key factors in decision making for land remediation include: the driving forces for a remediation project, risk management, sustainable development, stakeholder satisfaction, cost effectiveness, and technical feasibility/suitability. These principles have been applied to an illustrative case study, a response to petroleum hydrocarbon contamination...
Context in source publication
Similar publications
Flood, as a serious worldwide environment problem, can lead to detrimental economic losses and fatalities. Effective flood control is desired to mitigate the adverse impacts of flooding and the associated flood risk through development of cost-effective and efficient flood management decisions and policies. A bi-level fuzzy two-stage stochastic pro...
Citations
... Thus, selecting the method of remediation for a contaminated area is not a straightforward process (Brusseau, 2019). The main factors that need to be considered when selecting a remediation alternative are as follows: (i) drivers and goals of the remediation project, (ii) risk management, (iii) technical feasibility, (iv) stakeholders' satisfaction, (v) costs and benefits, and (vi) sustainable development (Bardos et al., 2002). ...
Currently, environmental pollution, which could be attributed to both direct and indirect sources, is one of the top-ranked issues worldwide. It is the uncontrolled and less manageable use of natural resources by human beings to contaminate various parts of the natural ecosystem including soil, air, and water, which may create a hostile environment. To create clean and sustainable working conditions, environmental remediation and restoration using various advanced physico-chemical techniques have now become a global focus. Of the various classes of environmental pollution, water pollution has been taken as the most serious disaster that causes a significant number of deaths around the globe. The contamination of water is mainly contributed to by the advancement in urbanization, mining, improvement and development of industrialization, and growth of the world population. In the previous decades, immense physico-chemical wastewater remediation protocols have been extensively explored. However, those remediation techniques of polluted water have several drawbacks and limitations. Recently, the elaboration of efficient and operative nanomaterials synthesized via green methods has been considered the most advanced alternative for wastewater nanoremediation techniques. Various classes of green alternative capping and reducing agents such as different parts of green plants, bacteria (Gram-positive and -negative species), fungi, algae, and even viruses are highly employed during the synthesis of numerous nanomaterials such as metal oxide nanoparticles (M-MONPs), decorated and doped nanoparticles (D-NPs), and nanocomposites (NCs). In this book chapter, the synthesis of various grades of nanomaterials, including M-MONPs, D-NPs, and NCs in the area of green synthesis via green methods are extensively addressed. The synthesized green nanomaterials would then be characterized using dynamic light scattering, Fourier transform infrared, scanning electron microscopy-energy-dispersive spectroscopy, transmission electron microscopy-high resolution transmission electron microscopy with selected area electron diffraction, thermogravimetric analysis/differential thermal analysis, X-ray diffraction, and ultraviolet visible diffuse reflectance spectroscopytechniques to obtain their physico-chemical properties. The applications of those green nanomaterials as cost effective and recyclable alternative catalysts and high surface area adsorbents for wastewater remediation are extensively described. Controlling factors and parameters interfering during the remediation of polluted water using green nanomaterials are also well addressed.KeywordsEnvironmental remediationNanomaterialsGreen synthesisWastewater treatment
... Further, the property of negative charge helps in attracting the metals and organic in the internal surface of biochar from the polluted soil, and due to this potential risk of their uptake by organisms can be reduced greatly. Biochar can efficiently help in breaking the source and receptor pathways by adsorbing contaminants on the surface that act as pollutants for soil Bardos et al. 2002). Sustainable soil remediation techniques for contaminated soil are generally focused on maintaining or enhancing the quality of soil, which can occur by carbon sequestration, reducing soil erosion, and providing suitable environmental conditions for increasing soil biodiversity. ...
Increased industrial growth in the world serves a significant role in the water contamination with heavy metals. Heavy metals such as arsenic, copper, lead, chromium, mercury, nickel, and cadmium impart several health hazards to humans, plants, and animals. Moreover their accumulation potential disturbs the food chain. Freshwater demand is higher in the world which may lead to a severe water crisis in the upcoming years. Hence feasible water treatment technologies must be identified and its efficiency must be concentrated. Heavy metals bear the risk of biodegradation and transformation. Hence adsorption is found to be an attractive method nowadays for sequestration of such metals. It is an economically feasible and eco-friendly method. Biochar is advantageous over other adsorbents such as activated carbon, graphene, silica, etc. It is the product of a thermochemical process which possesses better adsorption capacity. It reduces the production time and in addition provides fuel. Different pyrolysis conditions influence the quantity and yield of char. The degree of biochar adsorption is mainly focused on the type of biomass used, metal species concentrated, functional groups, and surface area of the biochar. Regeneration of biomass is also an important phenomenon to be considered as the adsorbed biochar may cause secondary pollution if not disposed in a proper manner. In order to improve the surface properties, physical structure, and regeneration capacity of biochar, various modification technologies have been adopted. It will also pave way for the effective utilization of waste biomaterials in wastewater treatment. The modification may be carried out before pyrolysis or after pyrolysis. It is categorized under physical, chemical, magnetic, and mineral impregnation methods. This review focuses on the mechanism and improvements of the treated biochar in comparison to the pristine biochar for heavy metal sequestration.
... Equally, residents may be less willing to trust stakeholders with a likely vested interest, for example, developers (Eiser et al., 2009) 4.3.5 | SOC5: Uncertainty and evidence Different remedial options may have different levels of uncertainty and evidence regarding their feasibility and performance. Additional concerns might relate to regulatory acceptability, ease of verification, and the expertise of the technology provider (R. P. Bardos et al., 2002). Considerations within this category include: ...
The scale of land-contamination problems, and of the responses to them, makes achieving sustainability in contaminated land remediation an important objective. The Sustainable Remediation Forum in the UK (SuRF-UK) was established in 2007 to support more sustainable remediation practices in the UK. The prevailing international consensus is that risk assessment is the most rational approach for determining remediation needs and urgency. Sustainability in this context is related to the effective delivery of whatever risk management is necessary to protect human health or the wider environment. SuRF-UK suggests that decisions made at the project planning stage, and also in the choice of remediation approach used to reach particular objectives decided upon, are both opportunities for sustainability gain. In 2011, SuRF-UK issued a set of wide-ranging indicators to support sustainability assessments made during project planning and remediation option appraisal. This advice was reviewed over 2018-2020 and new guidance on process and indicators has been released. Within this guidance, SuRF-UK has provided a checklist of possible sustainability indicators/criteria that can be used to benchmark the scope of sustainability assessment for remediation projects. These indicators are divided into 15 overarching ("headline") categories, divided in a balanced way across the three elements of sustainability: Environmental (emissions to air, soil and ground conditions , groundwater and surface water, ecology, and natural resources and waste); social (human health and safety, ethics and equity, neighborhoods and locality, communities and community involvement, and uncertainty and evidence); and economic (direct economic costs and benefits, indirect economic costs and benefits, employment and employment capital, induced economic costs and benefits, and project lifespan and flexibility). The majority of this study explains these categories and their various considerations in more depth and provides the supporting rationale that led to their inclusion in the revised SuRF-UK guidance.
... Further, the property of negative charge helps in attracting the metals and organic in the internal surface of biochar from the polluted soil, and due to this potential risk of their uptake by organisms can be reduced greatly. Biochar can efficiently help in breaking the source and receptor pathways by adsorbing contaminants on the surface that act as pollutants for soil (Gomez-Eyles et al. 2013; Bardos et al. 2002). ...
Biochar refers to black solid carbonaceous material produced majorly by the process of pyrolysis or sometimes produced by application of chemicals under oxygen-limited environmental conditions. The term biochar is specifically associated with a substrate that is used as soil ameliorant, and the surge in research interests toward biochar is due to its varied applications. One of the critical reasons to promote biochar as an excellent long-term soil conditioner is its stability. The characteristic properties of biochar when added to the soil are an increase in pH, nutrient retention capacity leading to elevated soil quality in agriculture, crop biomass, the fertility of the soil, cation exchange capacity, and carbon sequestration so its application in bioremediation of contaminated soils would be a substantial way to initiate many green processes in the environment. With large surface areas, accelerated sorption of organic and inorganic substances is possible, which helps reducing contaminant mobility during amendments of polluted soil. Biochar is quite promising for the removal of heavy metals, persistent organic matter, improvement of soil quality, and stabilization of soil for revegetation. This chapter summarizes biochar preparation methods and parameters, the role of biochar in bioremediation, different approaches used for soil restoration with potential drawbacks, and further scope of research with biochar in soil amendments.
... Projects for Decision Support System are used to assess the risk or to provide the facility for remediation option selection for contaminated soil, contaminated land and some of them also applicable for groundwater contamination. [16] It is unlikely that any single person will have the knowledge to perform all the analysis required in supporting the overall decisions pertaining to the management of land contamination. It is also apparent that there are many specialist underpinning decisions (e.g. ...
... The objective of contaminated land remediation projects is to reduce the risk of harm that contaminants could cause to organisms. This is achieved by breaking or reducing source-pathway-receptor linkages (Bardos et al., 2002) (Fig. 1). A source is the physical location of a contaminant itself, or the location from which it is being emitted. ...
Research into the use of biochar for the remediation of contaminated soils has expanded rapidly over the past 5 yr. We review recent developments in the field and present the findings emanating from small-scale batch sorption experiments, through soil incubations and bioassays, to large-scale field experiments. We discuss the evidence that these experiments have contributed toward a mechanistic understanding of how biochar is capable of remediating soils contaminated with both organic and inorganic contaminants. The effects of biochar pyrolysis temperature, biochar source material, soil type, and contaminant type on the performance of biochars for remediation are identified. The risks associated with applying biochar to uncontaminated agricultural soils are discussed. Knowledge gaps and questions are identified which, if addressed, will considerably advance the application of biochar as a soil remediation tool in the future.
... However, while monetization is often preferred by economists and the method might be handy particularly when studying the cost-efficiency of remediation alternatives, it is not necessarily feasible in the case of decisionmaking involving multiple and originally incompatible criteria. In fact, Bardos et al. (2002) state that the possibility of not being forced to monetize all factors involved can be considered the merit of MCDA methods in the CLM context. The infeasibility of monetization is also manifested in the fact that some aspects, which could be important to an individual stakeholder, will be lost. ...
The decisions on risk management (RM) of contaminated sites in Finland have typically been driven by practical factors such as time and money. However, RM is a multifaceted task that generally involves several additional determinants, e.g. performance and environmental effects of remediation methods, psychological and social factors. Therefore, we adopted a multi-criteria decision analysis approach and developed a decision support tool (DST) that is viable in decision-making in such a complex situation. The basic components of the DST are based on the Dutch REC system. However, our DST is more case-specific and allows the consideration of the type, magnitude and scale of contamination, land use, environmental conditions and socio-cultural aspects (e.g. loss of cultural heritage, image aspects). The construction of the DST was started by structuring the decision problem using a value tree. Based on this work we adopted the Multi-Attribute Value Theory (MAVT) for data aggregation. The final DST was demonstrated by two model sites for which the RM alternatives and site-specific data were created on the basis of factual remediation projects and by interviewing experts. The demonstration of the DST was carried out in a workshop where representatives of different stakeholders were requested to rank and weight the decision criteria involved. To get information on the consistency of the ranking of the RM alternatives, we used different weighting techniques (ratio estimation and pair-wise weighting) and alternative ways to treat individual respondents' weights in calculating the preference scores for each RM alternative. These dissimilar approaches resulted in some differences in the preference order of the RM alternatives. The demonstration showed that attention has to be paid to the proper description of the site, the principles of the procedure and the decision criteria. Nevertheless, the procedure proved to enable efficient communication between different stakeholders and the identification of the preferred RM option.
... Cox and Crout, 2003;Marcomini et al., 2009). At the same time, not being forced to monetize all factors is actually considered a major advantage and strength of MCDA methods (Bardos et al., 2002). ...
Yhteenveto: Riskinarviointimenetelmien ja monikriteerianalyysin soveltaminen pilaantuneiden maa-alueiden riskinhallinnassa Suomessa FINNISH ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE, FINLAND Helsinki 2010 The publication is available in the internet: www.enviroment.fi/publications ISBN 978-952-11-3800-3 (pbk.) ISBN 978-952-11-3801-0 (PDF)
... Generally, decisions should be reached in a clear, concise and transparent manner to reduce bias in contaminated land development. The decision process should also be balanced and systematic, and founded on the principles of precision and inclusive decision making (Bardos et al., 2002). Tools designed to support this decision process (Decision Support Tools or DSTs) can mainly be represented in two forms; written guidance (e.g.; Defra and the Environment Agency's CLR11, Environment Agency, 2004) and/or software-based guidance systems (of which there are several). ...
A range of tools have been proposed to support decision making in contaminated land remediation. From a European perspective it is clear, however, that there are considerable national differences in the decision support process, and more generally in the extent to which this process supports the selection of less invasive, alternative remediation options such as phytoremediation, in situ immobilisation etc. (referred to here as “gentle” remediation technologies). In this paper we present results from the recently completed European Union ERANET SNOWMAN project SUMATECS (Sustainable Management of Trace Element Contaminated Sites), and critically review available decision support tools in terms of their fitness for purpose for the application of gentle remediation technologies. Stakeholder feedback indicates a lack of knowledge amongst stakeholders of currently available decision support tools. We propose that decision support which focuses on gentle remediation is more strongly incorporated into existing, well-established (national) decision support tools / decision-frameworks, to promote more widespread use and uptake.
... The selection of a remedial action is generally based on specific criteria, such as elimination of the risk to human health and the ecosystem, technical feasibility and suitability, cost, effectiveness in the short and in the long term, etc. (USEPA, 1996(USEPA, , 1997Bardos et al, 1999Bardos et al, & 2002Janikowski et al, 2000;Postle et al;Vegter, 2001;CLARINET, 2002). Table 3 presents some of the soil remediation technologies and indicative costs provided by CLARINET (2002) and compiled by the authors. ...
