Using multiple indices to evaluate scenarios for the remediation of contaminated land: the Porto Marghera (Venice, Italy) contaminated site
- 574 Downloads
Background, aim, and scope
The management of contaminated sites requires the investigation of different involved aspects (from socioeconomic to risk and technological issues) and the presentation of useful and condensed information to decision makers. For this purpose, indices are more and more recognized as effective and valuable tools. This paper presents specific indices created within the DEcision Support sYstem for REhabilitation of contaminated sites (DESYRE).
Materials and methods
DESYRE is a software which aids decision making for the rehabilitation of a large contaminated site (i.e., megasite) by the creation and comparison of different rehabilitation alternatives. The software is composed of six modules, each dealing with a specific aspect of the remediation process, ending with the decision module. In this module, scenarios (i.e., suitable solutions for the rehabilitation of the contaminated site including selected land use, socioeconomic benefits, remediation costs, time span, environmental impacts, technology set/s, and residual risk) are created and evaluated by means of suitable indices. Nine indices cover the socioeconomic, risk, technological, cost, time, and environmental impact aspects. Mathematical algorithms are used to calculate these indices by taking into account data collected during the analytical steps of the DESYRE system and elaborated through the support of the spatial analysis, which is embedded in the system.
The case study of Porto Marghera, Venice, Italy is presented in order to document the effectiveness of developed indices in evaluating management solutions and presenting options to decision makers. For the purpose of this study, three different scenarios for the remediation of a part of the site of Porto Marghera (approximately 530 ha) are developed and compared. The three scenarios consider the industrial land use and deal with the contamination in soil caused by inorganic and organic compounds. The scenarios mainly differ for the number of the included remediation technologies and for the spatial distribution of the technologies on the considered area.
Indices results allow the user to more easily evaluate the advantages and limits of each scenario in order to select the most appropriate one. For instance, the risk indices allow the user to identify scenarios with good performance in reducing the extension of risk areas and the risk magnitude. Equally, the technological indices support the achievement of efficient remedial solutions characterized by a limited number of technologies, applied to extended areas and with high performance. The environmental impact index allows users to estimate the wider effects on the environment of the selected solutions, while the socioeconomic index is the result of social and economic investigations of the regional and local conditions, which ends with the identification of the best land use (e.g., the industrial one for the Porto Marghera area).
The proposed nine DESYRE indices provide more complete information to investigate suitable management solutions. DESYRE indices facilitate the definition of a consensus among stakeholders and the achievement of a widely shared solution for contaminated site management, even at larger sites, such as Porto Marghera.
Recommendations and perspectives
Further improvements to the system may be adopted, e.g., the possibility to aggregate results of the different assessments into one synthetic index per scenario or the inclusion of a Group Decision Making procedure.
KeywordsContaminated site Decision support systems Environmental impact Indices Integrated assessment Mega site Remediation technologies Risk management Scenario evaluation Socioeconomic
The DESYRE project was funded by the Italian Ministry of University and Scientific Research and developed by the Venice Research Consortium with the support of the University Ca’ Foscari of Venice and Thetis S.p.A. The authors are grateful to the wide group of scientists involved in the development of specific modules and functions; in particular, special thanks go to Antonio Marcomini (scientific supervision); Claudio Carlon (project management and coordination); Silvio Giove and Stefano Silvoni (multicriteria analysis); Manuela Samiolo and Gian Antonio Petruzzelli (technology selection); Nadia Nadal and Lisa Pizzol (risk assessment); Ilaria Bazzanella, Stefano Foramiti, and Luca Dentone (GIS application); and Stefano Soriani, Ilda Mannino, Gisella Facchinetti, and Antonio Mastroleo (socioeconomic and fuzzy analysis).
- ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (1998) Standard provisional guide for risk-based corrective action. ASTM, Philadephia, p 100Google Scholar
- Bardos RP, Mariotti C, Marot F, Sullivan T (2001) Framework for decision support used in contaminated land management in Europe and North America. Land Contam Reclam 9(1):149–163Google Scholar
- EEA (European Environment Agency) (1999) Environmental indicators: typology and overview, EEA Technical report 25. EEA, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
- Facchinetti G, Mastroleo G, Mannino I, Soriani S (2003) A fuzzy expert system for the socio-economic analysis of contaminated sites. In: Pejas J, Piegat A (eds) Enhanced methods in computer security, biometric and artificial intelligence system. Springer, New York, pp 255–265Google Scholar
- FRTR (Federal Remediation Technology Roundtable) (2002) Remediation technologies screening matrix and reference guide, 4th ed. www.frtr.gov/matrix2/ visited on March 2006
- Gray PCR, Wiedemann PM (1997) Risk and sustainability: mutual lessons from approaches to the use of indicators, 2nd edn. Arbeiten zur Risiko-Kommunikation, JuelichGoogle Scholar
- Hammond A, Adriansee A, Rodenburg E, Bryant D, Woodward R (1995) Environmental Indicators: a systematic approach to measuring and reporting on environmental policy performance in the context of sustainable development. World Resource Institute, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
- Isaaks EH, Srivastava RM (1989) An introduction to applied geostatistics. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Lootsma FA (2000) Multi-criteria decision analysis via ratio and difference. Kluwer, NorwellGoogle Scholar
- Malczewski J (1999) GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Wiley, New York, p 388Google Scholar
- Marcomini A, Suter GW II, Critto A (eds) (2009) Decision support systems for risk-based management of contaminated sites. Springer, New York, p 436Google Scholar
- Nijboer MN (1998) REC: a decision support system for comparing soil remediation options based on risk reduction, environmental merit and costs. Contaminated soil. Thomas Telford, Oxford, pp 1173–1174Google Scholar
- OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation, Development) (2002) Aggregated environmental indices. Review of aggregation methodologies in use. OECD, Paris, p 43 Report of the Working Group on Environmental Information and Outlooks, WGEIOGoogle Scholar
- Regione Veneto, Comune di Venezia (2004) Master plan per la bonifica dei siti inquinati. p 185 (in Italian; http://www.ambiente.venezia.it/suolo/doc/MasterPlan-parte%201.pdf)Google Scholar
- Segnestam L (2002) Indicators of environment and sustainable development. Theories and practical experience. The World Bank Environment, Washington, D.C., pp 3–26Google Scholar
- USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) (1989) Risk assessment guidance for superfund Vol 1, Human health evaluation manual. USEPA, Washington DC: EPA/540/1-89/002Google Scholar
- Vik EA, Bardos P, Brogan J, Edwards D, Gondi F, Henrysson T, Jensen BK, Jorge C, Mariotti C, Nathanail P, Papassiopi N (2001) Towards a framework for selecting remediation technologies for contaminated sites. Land Contam Reclam 9(1):119–127Google Scholar