Community response to a sustainable restoration plan for a superfund site

  • Virinder Sidhu
  • Dibyendu Sarkar
  • Rupali Datta
  • Barry Solomon
Research Article
  • 25 Downloads

Abstract

Large-scale copper (Cu) mining activities in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula produced millions of metric tons of mining wastes also known as stamp sands. The stamp sands containing high concentrations of Cu were disposed of into several lakes connected to the Lake Superior. Eventually, as aquatic organisms in these lakes started to exhibit toxicity symptoms, the stamp sands were dredged and discarded on the lake shores. Consequently, these areas turned into degraded, marginal lands and were collectively classified as a Torch Lake Superfund site by the US EPA. Due to the lack of vegetative cover, the Cu-rich stamp sands eroded into the lakes, affecting the aquatic life. To alleviate this issue, a sustainable restoration plan (SRP) was developed and tested in a greenhouse environment prior to field implementation. Cold-tolerant oilseed crops, camelina (Camelina sativa) and field pennycress (Thlaspi arvense), were grown on compost-fertilized stamp sands, which reduced soil erosion by acting as a vegetative cap. Oilseed plants produced normal yield, demonstrating their potential utilization as biofuel feedstock. Prior to implementing the SRP in field-scale in the Torch Lake Superfund site, a public opinion survey of the local community was conducted to understand the views of residents. Door-to-door survey was performed in July–August 2015, which yielded a response rate of 68.1%. Results showed that residents were generally concerned with stamp sand erosion into the Torch Lake and were overwhelmingly supportive of the SRP, which would not only provide environmental benefits but could boost the local economy via biofuel production. To gauge the general environmental awareness of the respondents, the survey included questions on climate change. Most of the respondents acknowledged that climate change is real and anthropogenically mediated. Having college education and a relatively high annual household income showed a positive and significant correlation with climate change awareness.

Keywords

Stamp sand Torch Lake Camelina Field pennycress Biofuel Sustainable restoration plan 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr. Yong Wang from the Montclair State University for his help in designing the survey questionnaire and approval for the study. VS acknowledges the doctoral assistantship he received from Montclair State University.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants

A letter of agreement seeking permission for the door-to-door survey from the Torch Lake Township was obtained (SI-2). The survey was approved by the IRB (Institutional Review Board) office of Montclair State University (IRB Protocol no. 001526) (SI-3). All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

11356_2018_1885_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (1.9 mb)
ESM 1 (PDF 1916 kb)

References

  1. Adeola FO (2000) Endangered community, enduring people: toxic contaminated, health and adaptive responses in a local context. Environ Behav 32:209–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arcury TA, Christianson EH (1990) Environmental worldview in response to environmental problems: Kentucky 1984 and 1988 compared. Environ Behav 22:387–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balat M, Balat H (2010) Progress in biodiesel processing. Appl Energy 87:1815–1835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cusack C, Mihelcic J (1999) Sediment toxicity from copper in the Torch Lake (MI) Great Lakes area of concern. J Great Lakes Res 25(4):735–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Daneshvary N, Daneshvary R, Schwer RK (1998) Solid-waste recycling behavior and support for curbside textile recycling. Environ Behav 30:144–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM (2009) Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method, 4th edn. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  7. Fan J, Shonnard DR, Kalnes TN, Johnsen PB, Rao S (2013) A life cycle assessment of pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) derived jet fuel and diesel. Biomass Bioenergy 55:87–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gamba RJ, Oskamp S (1994) Factors influencing community residents’ participation in commingled curbside recycling programs. Environ Behav 26:587–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grantham A, Anderson AL, Kelley T (2009) Door to door survey and community participation to implement a new county mosquito control program in Wayne County, North Carolina, USA. Int J Environ Res Public Health 6:2150–2159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hine DW, Gifford R (1991) Fear appeals, individual differences, and environmental concern. J Environ Educ 23:36–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Howell SE, Laska SB (1992) The changing face of the environmental coalition: a research note. Environ Behav 24:134–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jones RE, Dunlop RE (1992) The social bases of environmental concern: have they changed over time? Rural Sociol 57:28–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Knothe G, Van Gerpen J, Krahl J (2005) The biodiesel handbook. AOCS Press, UrbanaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Krieger J, Rabkin J, Sharify D, Song L (2009) High point walking for health: creating built and social environments that support walking in a public housing community. Am J Public Health 99(S3):593–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Li X, Mupondwa E (2014) Life cycle assessment of camelina oil derived biodiesel and jet fuel in the Canadian Prairies. Sci Total Environ 481:17–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maslow AH (1970) Motivation and personality. Viking Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. McCormickRL, WilliamsA, IrelandJ, BrimhallM, HayesRR (2006) Effects of biodiesel blends on vehicle emissions. Fiscal Year 2006 Annual Operating Plan Milestone 10.4, NREL Milestone Report 540–40554Google Scholar
  18. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) (2007) Biennial remedial action plan update for the Torch Lake area of concern, Lansing, MIGoogle Scholar
  19. Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) (1987) MDNR remediation plan for Torch Lake AOC. Surface Water Quality Division, GLEAS. LansingGoogle Scholar
  20. Michigan Department of Public Health (MDPH) (1983) The MDPH, now the Michigan Department of Community Health (MDCH), issued a fish consumption advisory on sauger and walleye in for Torch Lake, Houghton County based on fish tumors of unknown originGoogle Scholar
  21. Mittelbach M, Remschmidt C (2004) Biodiesel—a comprehensive handbook. Martin Mittelbach, GrazGoogle Scholar
  22. Moser BR (2009) Biodiesel production, properties, and feedstocks. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 45:229–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Moser BR, Vaughn SF (2010) Evaluation of alkyl esters from Camelina sativa oil as biodiesel and as blend components in ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel. Bioresour Technol 101:646–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nord M, Lulo AE, Bridger JC (1988) The association of forest recreation with environmentalism. Environ Behav 30:235–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Osmond DL, Hardy DH (2004) Characterization of turf practices in five North Carolina communities. J Environ Qual 33(2):565–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Samdahl DM, Robertson R (1989) Social determinants of environmental concern: specification and test of the model. Environ Behav 21:57–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. SAS Institute Inc (2012) JMP® version 10. SAS Institute Inc., CaryGoogle Scholar
  28. SidhuV (2016) Establishing a vegetative cap for sustainable stabilization of copper contaminated soils in Torch Lake, Michigan. PhD Dissertation, Montclair State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  29. Sidhu V, Sarkar D, Datta R (2016) Effects of biosolids and compost amendment on chemistry of soils contaminated with copper from mining activities. Environ Monit Assess 188:176.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-016-5185-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Torch Lake Township (TLT) (2015) Health and safety concerns at Hubbell beach. http://www.torchlaketownship.com/News+and+Views/7234.aspx
  31. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1989) Torch Lake, remedial investigation/feasibility study, Houghton County, Michigan, volume 1A, final work plan, US EPA contract 68-W8-0093. Donohue & Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  32. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1986) Comprehensive environmental response, compensation, and liability act national priorities listGoogle Scholar
  33. United States Census Bureau (2012) U.S. Census Bureau, 2008-2012 American Community SurveyGoogle Scholar
  34. Van Liere KD, Dunlap RE (1980) The social bases of environmental concern: a review of hypotheses, explanations and empirical evidence. Public Opin Q 44:181–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. WestonSolutions, Inc. (Weston) (2007) Summary report for the Torch Lake area assessment: Torch Lake NPL site and surrounding areas Keweenaw Peninsula, Michigan. Prepared for US EPA. Document No.: 274-2A-ABDTGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil, Environmental and Ocean EngineeringStevens Institute of TechnologyHobokenUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biological SciencesMichigan Technological UniversityHoughtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Social SciencesMichigan Technological UniversityHoughtonUSA

Personalised recommendations