1 / 17

Green Remediation Taking the Easy Wins ! September 2008 SAFESPUR Forum

Green Remediation Taking the Easy Wins ! September 2008 SAFESPUR Forum Colmore Plaza, Colmore Circus, Queensway, Birmingham B4 6AT Dr Alexander Lee WSP Environmental Ltd.

latona
Download Presentation

Green Remediation Taking the Easy Wins ! September 2008 SAFESPUR Forum

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GreenRemediation Taking the Easy Wins! September 2008 SAFESPUR Forum Colmore Plaza, Colmore Circus, Queensway, Birmingham B4 6AT Dr Alexander Lee WSP Environmental Ltd

  2. “ contaminated groundwater will remain in-situ (with or without engineered control or containment) and contaminated soil will be excavated and sent for disposal at the time of facility decommissioning and/ or at Final Site Clearance, which could be many decades in the future. We are challenged to determine whether this represents the most appropriate option, balancing technical feasibility, resource, and the impact on people and the environment, including consideration of the waste hierarchy” NDA Briefing Paper NSG57/2008

  3. Non time critical issue resolution is often the focus Moneterised as Direct Use Value (e.g. land value enhancement) Option value (e.g. enhanced land utilisation options) Absence of consideration to Indirect use Value (e.g. pristine water quality to rivers) Non Use value (altruistic and bequest values) The Reality and the danger! Limited consideration is given to sustainability- green remediation else wider value to society Reduces to Problem Translocation

  4. Finding the hidden value in: Challenging the need for intervention? Measuring else quantifying the hidden value in a given technology selection to a client Challenging the perception that more sustainable/green means more cost The Challenge

  5. Quantifying the hidden value of technology selection • No widely adopted or generally accepted standards nor approach exists to the delivery of remediation in the sector of ground remediation • Numerous initiatives (SURF, Eurodemo, rescue europe,ROSA and REC) Environmental + Social + Financial = Sustainable

  6. Quantifying the hidden value of technology selection • No widely adopted or generally accepted standards nor approach exists to the delivery of remediation in the sector of ground remediation • Numerous initiatives (SURF, Eurodemo, rescue europe,ROSA and REC) 3Environmental + 1Social + 6Financial = Sustainable

  7. Sustainability or Green Remediation! “Green Remediation: The practice of considering all environmental effects of remedy implementation and incorporating options to maximise net environmental benefit of clean up” US EPA

  8. The Utopia of Green Remediation Delivery

  9. Walk before we run Quantifying altruistic and bequest as hidden value delivery/cost of the remediation lifecycle is PROBLEMATIC/STAGNATION To seek delivery will require complex and often subjective modelling This remains the goal • DANGER of being unworkable Quantify the known's First Focus on the show stoppers while building social models etc

  10. The new focus in technology selection Giant Microbes

  11. Signature Lipid Biomarkers DNA Quantitative Quant/Qual • Community Level 16s • Targeted • Functional • Quinones • Phospholipid Fatty Acids A New Paradigm in Site Management • Molecular Biological Tools (MBTs) • DNA probes to ID key organisms (qPCR, insitu hybridization) • Lipid analysis (PFLA) for specific and general community features • biomarkers • Specialized Chemical Analysis • Stable Isotope Probing (plume dynamics, natural attenuation) • Field based measurements – better, faster, cheaper

  12. The value of carbon £/tCO2 Social Cost of Carbon £26.50 - £70 UK Shadow Price. £26.50 EU Emissions Trading Scheme. £17.76 Kyoto Clean Development Mechanism. £13.30 The Carbon Model 1 tonne CO2 = 0.21 acres pine forest 100PAX to Birmingham circa 4-6 acres from transport alone

  13. An Illustration Project Summary Emissions (tonnes CO2e)

  14. Thermal £53-140K BIO £17-44k Disposal £27-71K An Illustration Less Carbon Efficient

  15. Nuclear industry needs to focus on wider benefits to society from a given intervention Non intervention needs to be scientifically justified as a benefit to wider society Non intervention needs to be robustly proven Green technologies are available and can be audited Tools to support green remediation decisions are emerging to assist in informed judgement but more emphasis needed on communicating wider societal benefits Walk before we can run – Take the easy wins BUT AN EYE ON THE LONGER TERM GOAL Summary Conclusions

  16. Finally, thank you for listening Dr Alexander Lee 0131 344 2300 alexander.lee@wspgrpoup.com

More Related