Literature DB >> 32065319

A paradigm for protecting ecological resources following remediation as a function of future land use designations: a case study for the Department of Energy's Hanford Site.

Joanna Burger1,2,3, Michael Gochfeld4,5,6, David S Kosson5,7, Kevin G Brown5,7, Jennifer Salisbury5, Christian Jeitner8,4,5.   

Abstract

Since the late 1980s, there has been a US federal mandate to clean up contaminated sites remaining from the Second World War, the Cold War, and abandoned industries. One determinant of cleanup standards for remediation is future land use-how will the land be used and by whom? Land use decisions may be consensus documents developed by site owners, state and federal agencies, and local stakeholders. Often there are competing views and/or claims on how remediated sites should be used, including as open or green space. Large sites are likely to have more ecological heterogeneity within similar land use designations because of differences in climate, geology, topography, and history of human use. This paper uses the Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site as a case study to examine how and whether future land use designations will protect species, species diversity, heterogeneity, and ecosystems once remediation is complete. The objective of this paper is to describe "future land use designations" on a large, complex site (DOE's Hanford Site) and to examine the following: (1) how future land use designations were made and have changed over time, (2) how land use designations included the value of ecological resources, (3) how risk evaluations of ecological resources from remediation were made, and (4) how future land use may affect the health and well-being of ecological resources on site in the post-remediation period. The paper provides a paradigm for integrating ecological protection into future land use designations such that rare and sensitive resources are protected throughout the process. The paradigm includes the following: (1) developing future land use designations, (2) defining resource levels (values), (3) relating resource levels to land use designations and management, (4) defining risk evaluations, (5) determining the likelihood that valuable resources will occur on each land use type after remediation, and (6) evaluating the potential risk to those resources that results from activities allowed under future land use designations. The paper discusses the importance of each step, the implications for protection of ecological resources, and the importance of land use designations in the assessment of risk to ecological resources from both continued monitoring and maintenance by DOE (or other land owners) and the activities permitted by the established future land use designations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Assessment; Ecological resources; Future land use designations; Habitat mosaics; Land use; Post-remediation; Resource evaluations; Risk

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32065319     DOI: 10.1007/s10661-020-8084-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Monit Assess        ISSN: 0167-6369            Impact factor:   2.513


  21 in total

1.  World population growth and the role of annual energy use per capita.

Authors:  J Sheffield
Journal:  Technol Forecast Soc Change       Date:  1998-09

2.  Long-term biological monitoring of an impaired stream: synthesis and environmental management implications.

Authors:  Mark J Peterson; Rebecca A Efroymson; S Marshall Adams
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2011-04-08       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  A Methodology to Evaluate Ecological Resources and Risk Using Two Case Studies at the Department of Energy's Hanford Site.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Gochfeld; Amoret Bunn; Janelle Downs; Christian Jeitner; Taryn Pittfield; Jennifer Salisbury; David Kosson
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2016-11-30       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  Waste to energy--key element for sustainable waste management.

Authors:  Paul H Brunner; Helmut Rechberger
Journal:  Waste Manag       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 7.145

5.  Functional remediation components: A conceptual method of evaluating the effects of remediation on risks to ecological receptors.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Gochfeld; Amoret Bunn; Janelle Downs; Christian Jeitner; Taryn Pittfield; Jennifer Salisbury
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health A       Date:  2016-08-30

6.  Early decision framework for integrating sustainable risk management for complex remediation sites: Drivers, barriers, and performance metrics.

Authors:  Melissa A Harclerode; Tamzen W Macbeth; Michael E Miller; Christopher J Gurr; Teri S Myers
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 6.789

7.  An expert panel process to evaluate habitat restoration actions in the Columbia River estuary.

Authors:  Kirk L Krueger; Daniel L Bottom; W Gregory Hood; Gary E Johnson; Kim K Jones; Ronald M Thom
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2016-12-19       Impact factor: 6.789

8.  Ecotoxicological study of arsenic and lead contaminated soils in former orchards at the Hanford Site, USA.

Authors:  Damon Delistraty; Jerry Yokel
Journal:  Environ Toxicol       Date:  2011-09-16       Impact factor: 4.119

9.  An approach for balancing health and ecological risks at hazardous waste sites.

Authors:  G W Suter; B W Cornaby; C T Hadden; R N Hull; M Stack; F A Zafran
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 4.000

10.  Inclusion of social indicators in decision support tools for the selection of sustainable site remediation options.

Authors:  Valérie Cappuyns
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 6.789

View more
  1 in total

1.  Combining ecological, eco-cultural, and environmental justice parameters to create Eco-EJ indicators to monitor cultural and environmental justices for diverse communities around contaminated sites.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Gochfeld; David S Kosson; Kevin G Brown; Jennifer Salisbury; Michael Greenberg; Christian Jeitner
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2022-02-12       Impact factor: 3.307

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.