Can sustainability assessments lead to improved remediation - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Can sustainability assessments lead to improved remediation efficiency?

SustRem 2016, Montréal, Canada

Lars Rosén, Jenny Norrman, Robert Anderson, Yevheniya Volchko

Department of Civil and Enviromental Engineering Chalmers University of Technology lars.rosen@chalmers.se

Contents

– Remediation in Sweden – The SAFIRE project – The SCORE method – Preliminary results – Remarks and conclusions

Remediation in Sweden

• 80 000 potentially

contaminated sites

• One of the largest

expenditure at the Swedish Ministry of Environment

• 1300 sites with substantial

risk to humans and/or ecosystems

• Remediation a part of almost

all construction and urban development projects

Concerns

Swedish EPA is concerned about the slow progress of remediation and that the national environmental objective A Non-Toxic Environment may not be reached. Remediations are too expensive and has a low level of technological innovation, with the vast majority of remediations being performed by excavation and disposal off-site.

Remediation – a complex process

– Main purpose of remediation ▫ to reduce negative impacts on

humans and the environment.

– However, remediation also results in

• ther effects of which some are positive

and some are negative.

▫ Often high costs and sometimes

significant environmental footprints.

▫ At the same time, remediation may

lead to positive social effects, e.g. improved recreation and local job

• pportunities.

– Increased interest and use of

sustainability assessments.

Project risks Benefits

SAFIRE - Sustainability Assessment For Improved Remediation Efficiency

– Overall purpose:

To evaluate how sustainability assessments can improve the efficiency of site remediation in Sweden.

– Project period: 2015-2017 – Funder: Swedish research council Formas and case-study

projects (total 10 million SEK = 2 million CAD)

– Collaboration: ▫ Researchers ▫ Problem-owners ▫ Service providers ▫ Authorities

Learning ¡process WP2: ¡Indicators ¡on ¡ remedia5on ¡ efficiency ¡ WP3: ¡ Incorpora5on ¡in ¡ the ¡remedia5on ¡ process WP4: ¡Impact ¡on ¡ remedial ¡design WP5: ¡Impact ¡on ¡ remedia5on ¡ efficiency WP7: ¡Dissemina5on ¡ WP6: ¡Evalua5on ¡of ¡ stakeholder ¡learning ¡process WP1: ¡Project ¡management SCORE ¡-­‑ ¡Sustainability ¡assessment ¡in ¡Case ¡studies

Project work packages

Case studies – ongoing remediation projects

Site ¡name ¡and ¡ loca-on ¡ Ac-vity ¡ Contaminants ¡

Järpen, Jämtland (SGU) ¡ Sulfite Pulp Mill ¡ Pyrite ash, heavy metals in soil ¡ Södervägs brädgård, Vall, Gotland (SGU) ¡ Lumber yard, wood preservation ¡ PAH, aliphates, aromates in soil, sediments and groundwater in limestone aquifer ¡ Köja, Kramfors, Ångermanland (SGU) ¡ Wood preservation ¡ Dioxin ¡ BT Kemi, Teckomatorp (Svalövs kommun) ¡ Pesticide manufacturing ¡ Organics (phenoxy acids, chlorophenols, chlorocreosols, , dioxins, dinoseb, antimony) in soil and groundwater ¡ Limhamns läge, Limhamns, Skåne (NCC) ¡ Cement manufacturer ¡ PAH and heavy metals in soil (filling material) and groundwater ¡

Science of the Total Environment, 511 (2015): p 621-638 “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler” (A. Einstein, 1933) SCORE – Sustainable Choice Of REmediation

SCORE – Sustainable Choice Of REmediation

– A method

▫ Multi-criteria decision analysis

(MCDA)

– A computer tool ▫ SCORE MCDA assessment ▫ Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) ▫ Project risk assessment (PRA) ▫ Soil Function assessment (SF Box) ▫ Uncertainty analysis (Monte Carlo)

Why MCDA for sustainability assessment?

” Development that ensures that the use of resources and the environment today does not restrict their use by future generations.”

Brundtland Commission (1987)

• We want support for

decisions that lead to sustainable solutions.

• Assessment of sustainability

typically involves a wide variety of information of different character.

• MCDA is a decision analysis

method for integrating

• bjective measurements with

value judgments (Belton & Stewart, 2002)

Social ¡ sustainability Economic sustainability Environmental sustainability Solutions

SCORE – Sustainable Choice Of REmediation The Framework

Remediation and Reference Alternatives Selection of Criteria Environmental Sustainability Social Sustainability Economic Sustainability Total Sustainability Assessment Managerial Review and Judgment

Aquire new information Update Document and assure quality Report and communicate Review, approve and audit

Decision Support

Uncertainty analysis SCORE

Weighting of Criteria Decision Stakeholder values Goals, criteria, and preferences

Domains and Criteria (Indicators)

Economic Profitability Soil Physical impacts

• n Flora & fauna

Groundwater Surface Water Sediments Air Non-renewable natural resources Non-recyclable waste Health & Safety Cultural heritage Local participation Local acceptance Local Environmental Quality and Amenity Equity

Effects on…

Literature – focus groups – interviews Criteria list developed to avoid double-counting!

Important aspects of SCORE

Environmental, economic and social effects

• On specific receptors on-site and off-site
• Due to reduction of source contamination and performing the remedial action

Example of results, Järpen

• Alternative 1 = ”Traditional alternative” – full excavation of soil
• Alternative 2 = Most sustainable alternative – less excavation and

more removal of sediments

Example of results, Järpen

Main differences going from ”traditional” to most sustainable:

• Change from overall negative environmental effects to overall positive

environmental effects

• Economic profitability increased by 104 MSEK (20 million CAD)
• Slightly lower positive social effects
• From negative to positive total sustainability index

Example of results, Hexion

• Alternative 1 = ”Traditional” alternative – full excavation and disposal
• Alternative 2 = Most sustainable alternative – excavation, local treatment

and reuse of soil

Example of results, Hexion

Main differences going from ”traditional” to most sustainable:

• Change from overall negative environmental effects to overall positive

environmental effects

• Slightly higher positive social effects
• Economic profitability increased by 15 MSEK (3 million CAD) to positive NPV
• From negative to positive total sustainability index

Remarks and conclusions

– The project addresses the issue identified in annual surveys by

the Swedish Geotechnical Institute (SGI) as being the most important in achieving more efficient site remediations in Sweden.

– The interaction of the SAFIRE project with on-going remediation

projects provides a unique opportunity for transfer of knowledge between academia and practitioners.

– The project includes main organizations in the remediation sector,

such as the Geological Survey, SGI, land-developers and contractors.

– Provides a basis for future updates of Swedish guidance reports

and handbooks concerning site remediation.

– Can sustainability assessment lead to improved remediation

efficiency?

▫ Preliminary results show that it can lead to improved

environmental and social outcomes while increasing economic profitability

lars.rosen@chalmers.se

Thanks for your attention!