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 other effects of which some are positive and some are negative. ▫ Often high costs and sometimes Project risks significant environmental footprints. ▫ At the same time, remediation may Benefits lead to positive social effects, e.g. improved recreation and local job opportunities. – Increased interest and use of sustainability assessments.
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
Project work packages WP2: ¡Indicators ¡on ¡ remedia5on ¡ efficiency WP1: ¡Project ¡management SCORE ¡-‑ ¡Sustainability ¡assessment ¡in ¡Case ¡studies WP7: ¡Dissemina5on ¡ ¡ WP5: ¡Impact ¡on ¡ WP3: ¡ WP4: ¡Impact ¡on ¡ remedia5on ¡ Incorpora5on ¡in ¡ Learning ¡process remedial ¡design efficiency the ¡remedia5on ¡ process WP6: ¡Evalua5on ¡of ¡ stakeholder ¡learning ¡process
Case studies – ongoing remediation projects Site ¡name ¡and ¡ Ac-vity ¡ Contaminants ¡ loca-on ¡ Järpen, Sulfite Pulp Mill ¡ Pyrite ash, heavy metals Jämtland in soil ¡ (SGU) ¡ Södervägs brädgård, Lumber yard, wood PAH, aliphates, aromates preservation ¡ Vall, Gotland in soil, sediments and (SGU) ¡ groundwater in limestone aquifer ¡ Wood preservation ¡ Dioxin ¡ Köja, Kramfors, Ångermanland (SGU) ¡ BT Kemi, Teckomatorp Pesticide Organics (phenoxy acids, (Svalövs kommun) ¡ manufacturing ¡ chlorophenols, chlorocreosols, , dioxins, dinoseb, antimony) in soil and groundwater ¡ Cement manufacturer ¡ Limhamns läge, PAH and heavy metals in Limhamns, Skåne soil (filling material) and (NCC) ¡ groundwater ¡
SCORE – Sustainable Choice Of REmediation 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 – 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? • We want support for decisions that lead to Social ¡ sustainable solutions. sustainability Solutions • Assessment of sustainability typically involves a wide Economic Environmental sustainability variety of information of sustainability different character. • MCDA is a decision analysis method for integrating ” Development that ensures that the use of objective measurements with resources and the environment today does not value judgments restrict their use by future generations.” (Belton & Stewart, 2002) Brundtland Commission (1987)
SCORE – Sustainable Choice Of REmediation Stakeholder values Remediation and Reference The Framework Goals, criteria, and Alternatives preferences Aquire new SCORE Selection of Criteria information Update Environmental Social Economic Sustainability Sustainability Sustainability Document and assure quality Uncertainty Weighting of Criteria analysis Report and communicate Total Sustainability Review, Assessment approve and audit Decision Support Decision Managerial Review and Judgment
Domains and Criteria (Indicators) Effects on … Equity Soil Health & Safety Physical impacts on Flora & fauna Cultural heritage Groundwater Local Surface Water Environmental Quality and Amenity Sediments Local Air participation Non-renewable Local acceptance natural resources Economic Non-recyclable Profitability waste 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
Thanks for your attention! lars.rosen@chalmers.se
Recommend
More recommend
