Local Gain, Global Loss: The Environmental Cost of Action

Abstract

Lower toxicity and less pollution is the goal of all soil remediation. We are willing to spend money and time to achieve this. And our action of treating the soil causes new pollution in its turn.

The gain is local (cleaner soil), and the environmental cost is most often global or regional (global warming, particle and other air emissions, biodiversity, etc.). Balancing cost and gain is complicated by these different scales. Besides, everyone does not realise that the environmental costs are there. But if we are aware of the existence of such costs, there is also the possibility of minimizing them by choosing low-impact treatment options and low-impact materials. An example is the use of cement instead of steel for funnel walls (Bayer and Finkel 2006).

This chapter aims to show ways to improve the environmental impact of soil remediation. We will discuss the merits of various treatment techniques from this perspective, and point to areas where the environmental performance may be improved. Two simple evaluation models are applied to a petrol filling station as an example of environmental cost assessment. We conclude with aspects to consider which will help readers to improve their own soil treatment actions. The environmental cost is often calculated using various life cycle assessment methods (LCA). Many of our conclusions are based on LCA and LCA-related reasoning. The LCA method and problems encountered while applying the LCA method to contaminated soil are discussed in detail by Suer et al. (2004), and will not be addressed here.