Skip to main content

Using Stakeholder Input to Develop a Comparative Risk Assessment for Wildlife from the Life Cycles of Six Electrical Generation Fuels

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Stakeholders and Scientists

Abstract

An assessment was conducted of the known and documented effects of electricity generation on vertebrate wildlife in the New York/New England (NY/NE) region. A Comparative Ecological Risk Assessment incorporating Life Cycle Assessment (CERALCA) was constructed to make objective comparisons among the six types of electricity generation important to the NY/NE region: coal, oil, natural gas, hydro, nuclear, and wind. Nonrenewable electricity generation sources, such as coal and oil, pose higher risks to wildlife than renewable electricity generation sources, such as hydro and wind. Based on the comparative amounts of SO2, NOx, CO2, and mercury emissions generated from coal, oil, natural gas, and hydro and the associated effects of acidic deposition, climate change, and mercury bioaccumulation, coal as an electricity generation source is by far the largest contributor to risks to wildlife found in the NY/NE region. The focus of this chapter is primarily on the role of stakeholders and how interactions between the authors and these stakeholders influenced and improved the final product. Thus, while the scientific aspects of the study have been much condensed to provide a full accounting of the stakeholder process, we hope that sufficient coverage of the technical aspects has been provided for the reader to fully appreciate the derivation of our conclusions. For those who would like additional information on the original study, we refer them to the March 2009 report available on line at http://www.nyserda.org/publications/Report%2009-02%20Wildlife%20report%20-%20web.pdf.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • AWEA (American Wind Energy Association) (2009) AWEA Calls New NYSERDA Wildlife Study a “Welcome Look at an Important Issue.” Press release 12 May 2009. Contacts: Julie Clendenin (202):384-3090 and Heather Caufield (212):255-8478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnhouse L, Fava J, Humphreys K et al. (1998) Life-Cycle Impact Assessment: The State-of-the-Art, 2nd Edition. Report of the SETAC Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) Impact Assessment Workgroup, SETAC LCA Advisory Group. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) and SETAC Foundation for Environmental Education, Pensacola.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodaly RA, Hecky RE, Fudge RJP (1984) Increases in Fish Mercury Levels in Lakes Flooded by the Churchill River Diversion, Northern Manitoba. Canadian J Fisheries & Aquatic Sci 41:682-691.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burger J (1997) Oil Spills. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartiedge J (2010) Renewable Electricity (Portfolio) Standards. BrighterEnergy.org. http://www.brighterenergy.org/3972/faq/faq-legislation/renewable-electricity-portfolio-standard. Accessed 20 Jul 2010

  • Fowler, T. 4 (June 2008) Research finds wind power poses least risk to wildlife. Available online: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl//5819709.html. Accessed 20 Jul 2010

  • Henderson RF, Datson GP, Duke CS et al. (2007) BOSC Workshop on USEPA Risk Assessment Principles and Practices. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 14(1):39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herlihy AT, Kaufmann PR, Mitch ME et al. (1990) Regional Estimates of Acid Mine Drainage Impact on Streams in the Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern United States. Water, Air & Soil Pollution 50(1-2):91-107

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Litto, R, Hayes RE, Liu B (2006) Capturing Fugitive Methane Emissions from Natural Gas Compressor Buildings. Abstract. Journal of Environmental Management 84(3):347-361

    Google Scholar 

  • Mac, MJ, Opler PA, Haeker CEP et al. (1998) Status and Trends of the Nation’s Biological Resources, Vols. 1 and 2. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston.

    Google Scholar 

  • NEI (Nuclear Energy Institute) (2007) Resources and Stats: Nuclear Statistics. Available online: http://www.nei.org/resourcesandstats. Accessed 20 Jul 2010

  • New York Times (2010) Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill. Available online: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/o/oil_spills/gulf_of_mexico_2010/index.html. Accessed 20 Jul 2010

  • NOAA OR&R (Office of Response and Restoration) (2010) Oil Spills in History. Available online: http://response.restoration.noaa.gov. Accessed 20 Jul 2010

  • NRC (National Research Council) (2007) Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects: Prepublication Copy. The National Academies Press, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • NYSERDA (New York State Energy Research and Development Authority) (2005) State Energy Planning. Available online: http://www.nyserda.org/Energy_Information/energy_state_plan.asp. Accessed 20 Jul 2010

  • Pacca, S (2007) Impacts from Decommissioning of Hydroelectric Dams: A Life Cycle Perspective. Climatic Change 84:281-294

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R (1993) A Matter of Risk. Chapter 5 In: Nuclear Renewal. Penguin Books. USA. Available online: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/chernobyl.html. Accessed 20 Jul 2010

  • SAIC (Scientific Applications International Corporation) (2006) Life Cycle Assessment: Principles and Practice. National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, USEPA, EPA/600/R-06/060. Cincinnati.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuels WB, Ladino A (1984) Calculations of Seabird Population Recovery from Potential Oil Spills in the Mid-Atlantic Region of the United States. Ecological Modelling 21:63-84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokstad E (2006) Environmental Restoration: Big Dams Ready for Teardown. Science 314(5799):584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) (1998) Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. USEPA Risk Assessment Forum, EPA/630-R095/002F. Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) (2000) Mountaintop Mining/Valley Fill Environmental Impact Statement: Preliminary Draft. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 3, EPA/903/R-00/014, October 2000. Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission) (2007) Fact Sheet on the Three Mile Island Accident. Available online: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/3mile-isle.html. Accessed 20 Jul 2010

  • WCD (World Commission on Dams) (2000) WCD Press Releases and News Announcements: 27 November 2000 – Does Hydropower Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions? Available online: http://www.dams.org/news_events/press357.html. Accessed 20 Jul 2010

  • Zillioux EJ, Porcella DB, Benoit JM (1993) Mercury Cycling and Effects in Freshwater Wetland Ecosystems. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 12:2245-2264

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are indebted to many for the ideas, guidance and plain hard work that brought this project to completion. Without the support and vision of the NYSERDA staff, there would have been no project; without the stakeholders mentioned throughout the chapter there would have been no purpose for the project. Our colleagues, Peter Colverson, Christine Denny, Karen Hill and Susan Marynowski of Pandion Systems, Inc., and William Warren-Hicks of EcoStat, Inc. deserve our lasting gratitude for their insight, direction, and attention to detail throughout the project. A special thanks also goes to the editors of the original report: Diane Welch of NYSERDA, Jayne Charles, Deian Moore, and Timothy Sullivan of E&S Environmental Chemistry, Inc., and Zywia Wojnar of Pace Energy and Climate Center, Pace Law School.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edward J. Zillioux .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zillioux, E.J., Newman, J.R., Lampman, G.G., Watson, M.R., Newman, C.M. (2011). Using Stakeholder Input to Develop a Comparative Risk Assessment for Wildlife from the Life Cycles of Six Electrical Generation Fuels. In: Burger, J. (eds) Stakeholders and Scientists. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8813-3_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics