Literature DB >> 16554118

Integrating long-term stewardship goals into the remediation process: natural resource damages and the Department of Energy.

Joanna Burger1, Michael Gochfeld, Charles W Powers.   

Abstract

The United States and other developed countries are faced with restoring and managing degraded ecosystems. Evaluations of the degradation of ecological resources can be used for determining ecological risk, making remediation or restoration decisions, aiding stakeholders with future land use decisions, and assessing natural resource damages. Department of Energy (DOE) lands provide a useful case study for examining degradation of ecological resources in light of past or present land uses and natural resource damage assessment (NRDA). We suggest that past site history should be incorporated into the cleanup and restoration phase to reduce the ultimate NRDA costs, and hasten resource recovery. The lands that DOE purchased over 50 years ago ranged from relatively undisturbed to heavily impacted farmland, and the impact that occurred from DOE occupation varies from regeneration of natural ecosystems (benefits) to increased exposure to several stressors (negative effects). During the time of the DOE releases, other changes occurred on the lands, including recovery from the disturbance effects of farming, grazing, and residential occupation, and the cessation of human disturbance. Thus, the injury to natural resources that occurred as a result of chemical and radiological releases occurred on top of recovery of already degraded systems. Both spatial (size and dispersion of patch types) and temporal (past/present/future land use and ecological condition) components are critical aspects of resource evaluation, restoration, and NRDA. For many DOE sites, integrating natural resource restoration with remediation to reduce or eliminate the need for NRDA could be a win-win situation for both responsible parties and natural resource trustees by eliminating costly NRDAs by both sides, and by restoring natural resources to a level that satisfies the trustees, while being cost-effective for the responsible parties. It requires integration of remediation, restoration, and end-state planning to a greater degree than is currently done at most DOE sites.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16554118     DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.12.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Environ Manage        ISSN: 0301-4797            Impact factor:   6.789


  6 in total

1.  Risk valuation of ecological resources at contaminated deactivation and decommissioning facilities: methodology and a case study at the Department of Energy's Hanford site.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Gochfeld; Christian Jeitner
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  Information needs for siting new, and evaluating current, nuclear facilities: ecology, fate and transport, and human health.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; James Clarke; Michael Gochfeld
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2010-02-06       Impact factor: 2.513

3.  Regulatory requirements and tools for environmental assessment of hazardous wastes: understanding tribal and stakeholder concerns using Department of Energy sites.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Charles Powers; Michael Gochfeld
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2010-08-16       Impact factor: 6.789

4.  Public perceptions of natural resource damages and the resources that require restoration.

Authors:  Joanna Burger
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health A       Date:  2010

5.  Environmental management: integrating ecological evaluation, remediation, restoration, natural resource damage assessment and long-term stewardship on contaminated lands.

Authors:  Joanna Burger
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2008-08-06       Impact factor: 7.963

6.  Collaboration versus communication: The Department of Energy's Amchitka Island and the Aleut Community.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Gochfeld; Karen Pletnikoff
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 6.498

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.