This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
The scale of land‐contamination problems, and of the responses to them, makes achieving sustainability in contaminated land remediation an important objective. The Sustainable Remediation Forum in the UK (SuRF‐UK) was established in 2007 to support more sustainable remediation practices in the UK. The prevailing international consensus is that risk assessment is the most rational approach for determining remediation needs and urgency. Sustainability in this context is related to the effective delivery of whatever risk management is necessary to protect human health or the wider environment. SuRF‐UK suggests that decisions made at the project planning stage, and also in the choice of remediation approach used to reach particular objectives decided upon, are both opportunities for sustainability gain. In 2011, SuRF‐UK issued a set of wide‐ranging indicators to support sustainability assessments made during project planning and remediation option appraisal. This advice was reviewed over 2018–2020 and new guidance on process and indicators has been released. Within this guidance, SuRF‐UK has provided a checklist of possible sustainability indicators/criteria that can be used to benchmark the scope of sustainability assessment for remediation projects. These indicators are divided into 15 overarching (“headline”) categories, divided in a balanced way across the three elements of sustainability: Environmental (emissions to air, soil and ground conditions, groundwater and surface water, ecology, and natural resources and waste); social (human health and safety, ethics and equity, neighborhoods and locality, communities and community involvement, and uncertainty and evidence); and economic (direct economic costs and benefits, indirect economic costs and benefits, employment and employment capital, induced economic costs and benefits, and project lifespan and flexibility). The majority of this study explains these categories and their various considerations in more depth and provides the supporting rationale that led to their inclusion in the revised SuRF‐UK guidance.
R. Paul Bardos; Hayley F. Thomas; Jonathan W. N. Smith; Nicola D. Harries; Frank Evans; Richard Boyle; Trevor Howard; Richard Lewis; Alan O. Thomas; Vivien L. Dent; Angela Haslam. Sustainability assessment framework and indicators developed by SuRF‐UK for land remediation option appraisal. Remediation Journal 2020, 31, 5 -27.
AMA StyleR. Paul Bardos, Hayley F. Thomas, Jonathan W. N. Smith, Nicola D. Harries, Frank Evans, Richard Boyle, Trevor Howard, Richard Lewis, Alan O. Thomas, Vivien L. Dent, Angela Haslam. Sustainability assessment framework and indicators developed by SuRF‐UK for land remediation option appraisal. Remediation Journal. 2020; 31 (1):5-27.
Chicago/Turabian StyleR. Paul Bardos; Hayley F. Thomas; Jonathan W. N. Smith; Nicola D. Harries; Frank Evans; Richard Boyle; Trevor Howard; Richard Lewis; Alan O. Thomas; Vivien L. Dent; Angela Haslam. 2020. "Sustainability assessment framework and indicators developed by SuRF‐UK for land remediation option appraisal." Remediation Journal 31, no. 1: 5-27.
Brownfield regeneration to soft reuse such as recreation and amenity has become increasingly common due to the demand for the potential environmental, social and economic benefits that it can deliver. This has led in turn to an increased demand for improved tools to support decision-making for this style of regeneration: tools which are simple to use, based on robust scientific principles and preferably which can ultimately link to quantitative or semi-quantitative cost-benefit analyses. This work presents an approach to assessing and comparing different scenarios for brownfield regeneration to soft reuse and other end-points. A “sustainability linkages” approach, based on sustainability assessment criteria produced by the UK Sustainable Remediation Forum (SuRF-UK), is developed and used in a refined qualitative sustainability assessment, and applied to develop a conceptual site model of sustainability, for a specific case study site (Port Sunlight River Park, U.K., a public leisure park established and maintained on a capped and managed former landfill site). Ranking, on an ex post basis, highlighted the clear sustainability advantages that the establishment of the Port Sunlight River Park has compared with a hypothetical non-development scenario. The conceptual site model provides a clearer basis for understanding cause and effect for benefits and disbenefits and a rationale for grouping individual effects based on their ease of valuation, providing a road map for cost-benefit assessments by (1) being able to match specific linkages to the most appropriate means of valuation, and (2) transparently connecting the sustainability assessment and cost benefit assessment processes.
Xiaonuo Li; Paul Bardos; Andrew B. Cundy; Marie K. Harder; Kieron J. Doick; Jenny Norrman; Sarah Williams; Weiping Chen. Using a conceptual site model for assessing the sustainability of brownfield regeneration for a soft reuse: A case study of Port Sunlight River Park (U.K.). Science of The Total Environment 2018, 652, 810 -821.
AMA StyleXiaonuo Li, Paul Bardos, Andrew B. Cundy, Marie K. Harder, Kieron J. Doick, Jenny Norrman, Sarah Williams, Weiping Chen. Using a conceptual site model for assessing the sustainability of brownfield regeneration for a soft reuse: A case study of Port Sunlight River Park (U.K.). Science of The Total Environment. 2018; 652 ():810-821.
Chicago/Turabian StyleXiaonuo Li; Paul Bardos; Andrew B. Cundy; Marie K. Harder; Kieron J. Doick; Jenny Norrman; Sarah Williams; Weiping Chen. 2018. "Using a conceptual site model for assessing the sustainability of brownfield regeneration for a soft reuse: A case study of Port Sunlight River Park (U.K.)." Science of The Total Environment 652, no. : 810-821.
NanoRem (Taking Nanotechnological Remediation Processes from Lab Scale to End User Applications for the Restoration of a Clean Environment) was a research project, funded through the European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme, which focuses on facilitating practical, safe, economic, and exploitable nanotechnology for in situ remediation of polluted soil and groundwater, which closed in January 2017. This article describes the status of the nanoremediation implementation and future opportunities for deployment based on risk‐benefit appraisal and benchmarking undertaken in the NanoRem Project. As of November 2016, NanoRem identified 100 deployments of nanoremediation in the field. While the majority of these are pilot‐scale deployments, there are a number of large scale deployments over the last five to 10 years. Most applications have been for plume control (i.e., pathway management in groundwater), but a number of source control measures appear to have taken place. Nanoremediation has been most frequently applied to problems of chlorinated solvents and metals (such as chromium VI). The perception of risk‐benefit balance for nanoremediation has shifted as the NanoRem Project has proceeded. Niche benefits are now more strongly recognized, and some (if not most) of the concerns, for example, relating to environmental risks of nanoremediation deployment, prevalent when the project was proposed and initiated, have been addressed. Indeed, these now appear overstated. However, it appears to remain the case that in some jurisdictions the use of nanoparticles remains less attractive owing to regulatory concerns and/or a lack of awareness, meaning that regulators may demand additional verification measures compared to technologies with which they have a greater level of comfort.
Paul Bardos; Corinne Merly; Petr Kvapil; Hans-Peter Koschitzky. Status of nanoremediation and its potential for future deployment: Risk-benefit and benchmarking appraisals. Remediation Journal 2018, 28, 43 -56.
AMA StylePaul Bardos, Corinne Merly, Petr Kvapil, Hans-Peter Koschitzky. Status of nanoremediation and its potential for future deployment: Risk-benefit and benchmarking appraisals. Remediation Journal. 2018; 28 (3):43-56.
Chicago/Turabian StylePaul Bardos; Corinne Merly; Petr Kvapil; Hans-Peter Koschitzky. 2018. "Status of nanoremediation and its potential for future deployment: Risk-benefit and benchmarking appraisals." Remediation Journal 28, no. 3: 43-56.
Sustainability considerations have become widely recognised in contaminated land management and are now accepted as an important component of remediation planning and implementation around the world. The Sustainable Remediation Forum for the UK (SuRF-UK) published guidance on sustainability criteria for consideration in drawing up (or framing) assessments, organised across 15 “headline” categories, five for the environment element of sustainability, five for the social, and five for the economic. This paper describes how the SuRF-UK indicator guidance was developed, and the rationale behind its structure and approach. It describes its use in remediation option appraisal in the UK, and reviews the international papers that have applied or reviewed it. It then reviews the lessons learned from its initial use and the opinions and findings of international commentators, and concludes with recommendations on how the indicator categories might be further refined in the future. The key findings of this review are that the SuRF-UK framework and indicator guidance is well adopted into practice in the UK. It is widely recognised as the most appropriate mechanism to support sustainability-based decision making in contaminated land decision making. It has influenced the development of other national and international guidance and standards on sustainable remediation. However, there is room for some fine tuning of approach based on the lessons learned during its application.
R. Bardos; Hayley Thomas; Jonathan Smith; Nicola Harries; Frank Evans; Richard Boyle; Trevor Howard; Richard Lewis; Alan Thomas; Angela Haslam. The Development and Use of Sustainability Criteria in SuRF-UK’s Sustainable Remediation Framework. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1781 .
AMA StyleR. Bardos, Hayley Thomas, Jonathan Smith, Nicola Harries, Frank Evans, Richard Boyle, Trevor Howard, Richard Lewis, Alan Thomas, Angela Haslam. The Development and Use of Sustainability Criteria in SuRF-UK’s Sustainable Remediation Framework. Sustainability. 2018; 10 (6):1781.
Chicago/Turabian StyleR. Bardos; Hayley Thomas; Jonathan Smith; Nicola Harries; Frank Evans; Richard Boyle; Trevor Howard; Richard Lewis; Alan Thomas; Angela Haslam. 2018. "The Development and Use of Sustainability Criteria in SuRF-UK’s Sustainable Remediation Framework." Sustainability 10, no. 6: 1781.
A deliberate expert-based scenario approach is applied to better understand the likely determinants of the evolution of the market for nanoparticles use in remediation in Europe until 2025. An initial set of factors had been obtained from a literature review and was complemented by a workshop and key-informant interviews. In further expert engaging formats - focus groups, workshops, conferences, surveys - this initial set of factors was condensed and engaged experts scored the factors regarding their importance for being likely to influence the market development. An interaction matrix was obtained identifying the factors being most active in shaping the market development in Europe by 2025, namely "Science-Policy-Interface" and "Validated information on nanoparticle application potential". Based on these, potential scenarios were determined and development of factors discussed. Conclusions are offered on achievable interventions to enhance nanoremediation deployment.
Stephan Bartke; Nina Hagemann; Nicola Harries; Jennifer Hauck; Paul Bardos. Market potential of nanoremediation in Europe – Market drivers and interventions identified in a deliberative scenario approach. Science of The Total Environment 2018, 619-620, 1040 -1048.
AMA StyleStephan Bartke, Nina Hagemann, Nicola Harries, Jennifer Hauck, Paul Bardos. Market potential of nanoremediation in Europe – Market drivers and interventions identified in a deliberative scenario approach. Science of The Total Environment. 2018; 619-620 ():1040-1048.
Chicago/Turabian StyleStephan Bartke; Nina Hagemann; Nicola Harries; Jennifer Hauck; Paul Bardos. 2018. "Market potential of nanoremediation in Europe – Market drivers and interventions identified in a deliberative scenario approach." Science of The Total Environment 619-620, no. : 1040-1048.
Sustainable remediation is the elimination and/or control of unacceptable risks in a safe and timely manner while optimizing the environmental, social, and economic value of the work. Forthcoming International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Standard on Sustainable Remediation will allow countries without the capacity to develop their own guidance to benefit from work done over the past decade by various groups around the world. The ISO standard has progressed through the committee draft (ISO/CD 18504) and draft international standard (ISO/DIS 18504) stages. The risk-based approach to managing the legacy of historically contaminated soil and groundwater has been incorporated into policy, legislation, and practice around the world. It helps determine the need for remediation and the end point of such remediation. Remediation begins with an options appraisal that short lists strategies that could deliver the required reduction in risk. A remediation strategy comprises one or more remediation technologies that will deliver the safe and timely elimination and/or control of unacceptable risks. The ISO standard will help assessors identify the most sustainable among the shortlisted, valid alternative remediation strategies. Practitioners presenting case studies claiming to constitute sustainable remediation should now report how they have aligned their work with the new standard. Indicators are used to compare alternative remediation strategies. The simplest metric that allows a characteristic to act as an indicator should be chosen. Weightings indicators can become a contested exercise and should only be undertaken where there is a clear desire for it by stakeholders and a clear need for it in identifying a preferred strategy. The simplest means of ranking alternative remediation strategies should be adopted.
C. Paul Nathanail; Laurent M. M. Bakker; Paul Bardos; Yasuhide Furukawa; Alessandro Nardella; Garry Smith; Jonathan W. N. Smith; Gabriele Goetsche. Towards an international standard: The ISO/DIS 18504 standard on sustainable remediation. Remediation Journal 2017, 28, 9 -15.
AMA StyleC. Paul Nathanail, Laurent M. M. Bakker, Paul Bardos, Yasuhide Furukawa, Alessandro Nardella, Garry Smith, Jonathan W. N. Smith, Gabriele Goetsche. Towards an international standard: The ISO/DIS 18504 standard on sustainable remediation. Remediation Journal. 2017; 28 (1):9-15.
Chicago/Turabian StyleC. Paul Nathanail; Laurent M. M. Bakker; Paul Bardos; Yasuhide Furukawa; Alessandro Nardella; Garry Smith; Jonathan W. N. Smith; Gabriele Goetsche. 2017. "Towards an international standard: The ISO/DIS 18504 standard on sustainable remediation." Remediation Journal 28, no. 1: 9-15.
Soft re-use of brownfields describes intended temporary or final re-uses of brownfield sites which are not based on built constructions or infrastructure (‘hard’ re-use). Examples of soft re-uses include the creation of public green space. These are essentially uses where the soil is not sealed. Often the case for soft re-use of brownfields has not been easy to demonstrate in strictly financial terms. The purpose of this paper is to describe a value based approach to identify and optimise services provided by the restoration of brownfields to soft re-uses, on a permanent or interim basis. A ‘Brownfield Opportunity Matrix’ is suggested as means of identifying and discussing soft restoration opportunities. The use of ‘sustainability linkages’ is suggested as a means of understanding the sustainability of the services under consideration and providing a structure for the overall valuation of restoration work, for example as part of design or option appraisal processes, or to support the solicitation of interest in a project.
R. Paul Bardos; Sarah Jones; Ian Stephenson; Pierre Menger; Victor Beumer; Francesca Neonato; Linda Maring; Uwe Ferber; Thomas Track; Katja Wendler. Optimising value from the soft re-use of brownfield sites. Science of The Total Environment 2016, 563-564, 769 -782.
AMA StyleR. Paul Bardos, Sarah Jones, Ian Stephenson, Pierre Menger, Victor Beumer, Francesca Neonato, Linda Maring, Uwe Ferber, Thomas Track, Katja Wendler. Optimising value from the soft re-use of brownfield sites. Science of The Total Environment. 2016; 563-564 ():769-782.
Chicago/Turabian StyleR. Paul Bardos; Sarah Jones; Ian Stephenson; Pierre Menger; Victor Beumer; Francesca Neonato; Linda Maring; Uwe Ferber; Thomas Track; Katja Wendler. 2016. "Optimising value from the soft re-use of brownfield sites." Science of The Total Environment 563-564, no. : 769-782.
This paper presents a holistic approach to sustainable urban brownfield redevelopment where specific focus is put on the integration of a multitude of subsurface qualities in the early phases of the urban redevelopment process, i.e. in the initiative and plan phases. Achieving sustainability in brownfield redevelopment projects may be constrained by a failure of engagement between two key expert constituencies: urban planners/designers and subsurface engineers, leading to missed opportunities and unintended outcomes in the plan realisation phase. A more integrated approach delivers greater benefits. Three case studies in the Netherlands, Belgium and Sweden were used to test different sustainability assessment instruments in terms of the possibility for knowledge exchange between the subsurface and the surface sectors and in terms of cooperative learning among experts and stakeholders. Based on the lessons learned from the case studies, a generic decision process framework is suggested that supports holistic decision making. The suggested framework focuses on stakeholder involvement, communication, knowledge exchange and learning and provides an inventory of instruments that can support these processes.
Jenny Norrman; Yevheniya Volchko; Fransje Hooimeijer; Linda Maring; Jaan-Henrik Kain; Paul Bardos; Steven Broekx; Alistair Beames; Lars Rosén. Integration of the subsurface and the surface sectors for a more holistic approach for sustainable redevelopment of urban brownfields. Science of The Total Environment 2016, 563-564, 879 -889.
AMA StyleJenny Norrman, Yevheniya Volchko, Fransje Hooimeijer, Linda Maring, Jaan-Henrik Kain, Paul Bardos, Steven Broekx, Alistair Beames, Lars Rosén. Integration of the subsurface and the surface sectors for a more holistic approach for sustainable redevelopment of urban brownfields. Science of The Total Environment. 2016; 563-564 ():879-889.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJenny Norrman; Yevheniya Volchko; Fransje Hooimeijer; Linda Maring; Jaan-Henrik Kain; Paul Bardos; Steven Broekx; Alistair Beames; Lars Rosén. 2016. "Integration of the subsurface and the surface sectors for a more holistic approach for sustainable redevelopment of urban brownfields." Science of The Total Environment 563-564, no. : 879-889.
The scale of land-contamination problems, and of the responses to them, makes achieving sustainability in contaminated land remediation an important objective. The Sustainable Remediation Forum in the UK (SuRF-UK) was established in 2007 to support more sustainable remediation practice in the UK. The current international interest in ‘sustainable remediation’ has achieved a fairly rapid consensus on concepts, descriptions and definitions for sustainable remediation, which are now being incorporated into an ISO standard. However the sustainability assessment methods being used remain diverse with a range of (mainly) semi-quantitative and quantitative approaches and tools developed, or in development. Sustainability assessment is site specific and subjective. It depends on the inclusion of a wide range of considerations across different stakeholder perspectives. Taking a tiered approach to sustainability assessment offers important advantages, starting from a qualitative assessment and moving through to semi-quantitative and quantitative assessments on an ‘as required’ basis only. It is also clear that there are a number of ‘easy wins’ that could improve performance against sustainability criteria right across the site management process. SuRF-UK has provided a checklist of ‘sustainable management practices’ that describes some of these. This paper provides the rationale for, and an outline of, and recently published SuRF-UK guidance on preparing for and framing sustainability assessments; carrying out qualitative sustainability assessment; and simple good management practices to improve sustainability across contaminated land management activities.
R. Paul Bardos; Brian D. Bone; Richard Boyle; Frank Evans; Nicola D. Harries; Trevor Howard; Jonathan W.N. Smith. The rationale for simple approaches for sustainability assessment and management in contaminated land practice. Science of The Total Environment 2016, 563-564, 755 -768.
AMA StyleR. Paul Bardos, Brian D. Bone, Richard Boyle, Frank Evans, Nicola D. Harries, Trevor Howard, Jonathan W.N. Smith. The rationale for simple approaches for sustainability assessment and management in contaminated land practice. Science of The Total Environment. 2016; 563-564 ():755-768.
Chicago/Turabian StyleR. Paul Bardos; Brian D. Bone; Richard Boyle; Frank Evans; Nicola D. Harries; Trevor Howard; Jonathan W.N. Smith. 2016. "The rationale for simple approaches for sustainability assessment and management in contaminated land practice." Science of The Total Environment 563-564, no. : 755-768.
There are a number of specific opportunities for UK and China to work together on contaminated land management issues as China lacks comprehensive and systematic planning for sustainable risk based land management, encompassing both contaminated soil and groundwater and recycling and reuse of soil. It also lacks comprehensive risk assessment systems, structures to support risk management decision making, processes for verification of remediation outcome, systems for record keeping and preservation and integration of contamination issues into land use planning, along with procedures for ensuring effective health and safety considerations during remediation projects, and effective evaluation of costs versus benefits and overall sustainability. A consequence of the absence of these overarching frameworks has been that remediation takes place on an ad hoc basis. At a specific site management level, China lacks capabilities in site investigation and consequent risk assessment systems, in particular related to conceptual modelling and risk evaluation. There is also a lack of shared experience of practical deployment of remediation technologies in China, analogous to the situation before the establishment of the independent, non-profit organisation CL:AIRE (Contaminated Land: Applications In Real Environments) in 1999 in the UK. Many local technology developments are at lab-scale or pilot-scale stage without being widely put into use. Therefore, a shared endeavour is needed to promote the development of technically and scientifically sound land management as well as soil and human health protection to improve the sustainability of the rapid urbanisation in China.
Frédéric Coulon; Kevin Christopher Jones; Hong Li; Qing Hu; Jingyang Gao; Fasheng Li; Mengfang Chen; Yong-Guan Zhu; Rongxia Liu; Ming Liu; Kate Canning; Nicola Harries; Paul Bardos; C Paul Nathanail; Rob Sweeney; David Middleton; Maggie Charnley; Jeremy Randall; Martin Richell; Trevor Howard; Ian Martin; Simon Spooner; Jason Weeks; Mark Cave; Fang Yu; Fang Zhang; Ying Jiang; Phil Longhurst; George Prpich; Richard Bewley; Jonathan Abra; Simon Pollard. China's soil and groundwater management challenges: Lessons from the UK's experience and opportunities for China. Environment International 2016, 91, 196 -200.
AMA StyleFrédéric Coulon, Kevin Christopher Jones, Hong Li, Qing Hu, Jingyang Gao, Fasheng Li, Mengfang Chen, Yong-Guan Zhu, Rongxia Liu, Ming Liu, Kate Canning, Nicola Harries, Paul Bardos, C Paul Nathanail, Rob Sweeney, David Middleton, Maggie Charnley, Jeremy Randall, Martin Richell, Trevor Howard, Ian Martin, Simon Spooner, Jason Weeks, Mark Cave, Fang Yu, Fang Zhang, Ying Jiang, Phil Longhurst, George Prpich, Richard Bewley, Jonathan Abra, Simon Pollard. China's soil and groundwater management challenges: Lessons from the UK's experience and opportunities for China. Environment International. 2016; 91 ():196-200.
Chicago/Turabian StyleFrédéric Coulon; Kevin Christopher Jones; Hong Li; Qing Hu; Jingyang Gao; Fasheng Li; Mengfang Chen; Yong-Guan Zhu; Rongxia Liu; Ming Liu; Kate Canning; Nicola Harries; Paul Bardos; C Paul Nathanail; Rob Sweeney; David Middleton; Maggie Charnley; Jeremy Randall; Martin Richell; Trevor Howard; Ian Martin; Simon Spooner; Jason Weeks; Mark Cave; Fang Yu; Fang Zhang; Ying Jiang; Phil Longhurst; George Prpich; Richard Bewley; Jonathan Abra; Simon Pollard. 2016. "China's soil and groundwater management challenges: Lessons from the UK's experience and opportunities for China." Environment International 91, no. : 196-200.
Contamination of soil with trace elements, such as Cu, is an important risk management issue. A pot experiment was conducted to determine the effects of three biochars and compost on plant growth and the immobilisation of Cu in a contaminated soil from a site formerly used for wood preservation. To assess Cu mobility, amended soils were analysed using leaching tests pre- and post-incubation, and post-growth. Amended and unamended soils were planted with sunflower, and the resulting plant material was assessed for yield and Cu concentration. All amendments significantly reduced leachable Cu compared to the unamended soil, however, the greatest reductions in leachable Cu were associated with the higher biochar application rate. The greatest improvements in plant yields were obtained with the higher application rate of biochar in combination with compost. The results suggest joint biochar and compost amendment reduces Cu mobility and can support biomass production on Cu-contaminated soils.
Sarah Jones; R. Paul Bardos; Petra S. Kidd; Michel Mench; Frans de Leij; Tony Hutchings; Andrew Cundy; Chris Joyce; Gerhard Soja; Wolfgang Friesl-Hanl; Rolf Herzig; Pierre Menger. Biochar and compost amendments enhance copper immobilisation and support plant growth in contaminated soils. Journal of Environmental Management 2016, 171, 101 -112.
AMA StyleSarah Jones, R. Paul Bardos, Petra S. Kidd, Michel Mench, Frans de Leij, Tony Hutchings, Andrew Cundy, Chris Joyce, Gerhard Soja, Wolfgang Friesl-Hanl, Rolf Herzig, Pierre Menger. Biochar and compost amendments enhance copper immobilisation and support plant growth in contaminated soils. Journal of Environmental Management. 2016; 171 ():101-112.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSarah Jones; R. Paul Bardos; Petra S. Kidd; Michel Mench; Frans de Leij; Tony Hutchings; Andrew Cundy; Chris Joyce; Gerhard Soja; Wolfgang Friesl-Hanl; Rolf Herzig; Pierre Menger. 2016. "Biochar and compost amendments enhance copper immobilisation and support plant growth in contaminated soils." Journal of Environmental Management 171, no. : 101-112.
Nanoscale zero-valent iron (nZVI) is the most commonly used nanoremediation material. While there has been a reasonable level of application of nZVI technologies for in situ remediation in the United States, its utilization across Europe has been much more limited. There has been significant uncertainty about the balance between deployment risks and benefits for nanoparticles (NPs), which has affected the regulatory position in several countries. Some member states of the European Union (EU) take a strong precautionary view of the risks from the deployment of NPs into the subsurface, preventing the adoption of the technology. This article provides a risk–benefit assessment for nZVI based on published information and describes the steps that will be taken by a major European research project (NanoRem), as part of its work to provide a basis for better informed decision making in European environmental restoration markets. A key part of this process is dialogue between practitioners and researchers. NanoRem therefore has an active process of communication with different stakeholder networks (regulators, service providers, and site owners). NanoRem hopes to stimulate a consensus on appropriate use of nanoremediation and thereby stimulate effective technology transfer to the European remediation market. ©2015 The Authors
Paul Bardos; Brian Bone; Miroslav Černík; Daniel W. Elliott; Sarah Jones; Corinne Merly. Nanoremediation and International Environmental Restoration Markets. Remediation Journal 2015, 25, 83 -94.
AMA StylePaul Bardos, Brian Bone, Miroslav Černík, Daniel W. Elliott, Sarah Jones, Corinne Merly. Nanoremediation and International Environmental Restoration Markets. Remediation Journal. 2015; 25 (2):83-94.
Chicago/Turabian StylePaul Bardos; Brian Bone; Miroslav Černík; Daniel W. Elliott; Sarah Jones; Corinne Merly. 2015. "Nanoremediation and International Environmental Restoration Markets." Remediation Journal 25, no. 2: 83-94.
In the past decade, management of historically contaminated land has largely been based on prevention of unacceptable risks to human health and the environment, to ensure a site is “fit for use.” More recently, interest has been shown in including sustainability as a decision‐making criterion. Sustainability concerns include the environmental, social, and economic consequences of risk management activities themselves, and also the opportunities for wider benefit beyond achievement of risk‐reduction goals alone. In the United Kingdom, this interest has led to the formation of a multistakeholder initiative, the UK Sustainable Remediation Forum (SuRF‐UK). This article presents a framework for assessing “sustainable remediation”; describes how it links with the relevant regulatory guidance; reviews the factors considered in sustainability; and looks at the appraisal tools that have been applied to evaluate the wider benefits and impacts of land remediation. The article also describes how the framework relates to recent international developments, including emerging European Union legislation and policy. A large part of this debate has taken place in the “grey” literature, which we review. It is proposed that a practical approach to integrating sustainability within risk‐based contaminated land management offers the possibility of a substantial step forward for the remediation industry, and a new opportunity for international consensus.
Paul Bardos; Brian Bone; Richard Boyle; Dave Ellis; Frank Evans; Nicola D. Harries; Jonathan W. N. Smith. Applying sustainable development principles to contaminated land management using the SuRF-UK framework. Remediation Journal 2011, 21, 77 -100.
AMA StylePaul Bardos, Brian Bone, Richard Boyle, Dave Ellis, Frank Evans, Nicola D. Harries, Jonathan W. N. Smith. Applying sustainable development principles to contaminated land management using the SuRF-UK framework. Remediation Journal. 2011; 21 (2):77-100.
Chicago/Turabian StylePaul Bardos; Brian Bone; Richard Boyle; Dave Ellis; Frank Evans; Nicola D. Harries; Jonathan W. N. Smith. 2011. "Applying sustainable development principles to contaminated land management using the SuRF-UK framework." Remediation Journal 21, no. 2: 77-100.
Sustainable remediation has come to exist as a popular term used to describe contaminated site management that is demonstrably sustainable, i.e. where some form of sustainability appraisal has been used in decision making to identify the “most sustainable” approach for any particular management intervention required. The “most sustainable” approach is one that, in the view of the stakeholders involved in making or considering management decisions, has the optimal balance of effects and benefits across the three elements of sustainability: environment, economy and society. This chapter describes how the Brundtland Report concept of sustainable development can be linked with contaminated site remediation practice, both how sustainability can be assessed and used as a tool in decision making; and also how sustainability thinking is creating new contaminated site remediation approaches, for example, marrying concepts of Risk Management and renewable energy production. The chapter discusses the individual “indicators” or metrics that contribute to an understanding of sustainability, the tools available for combining these into a sustainability appraisal, and the types of boundary conditions that need to be considered in setting the scope of sustainability appraisal. The chapter also discusses the linkage of “sustainability” with “Risk Management”, the importance of engaging stakeholders in sustainability appraisal, and an emerging set of international initiatives in the field. Finally it presents a series of sustainable remediation case studies (technologies and decision making tools) and a view of the possible future for “sustainable remediation”.
R. Paul Bardos; Laurent M. M. Bakker; Hans L. A. Slenders; C. Paul Nathanail. Sustainability and Remediation. Dealing with Contaminated Sites 2010, 889 -948.
AMA StyleR. Paul Bardos, Laurent M. M. Bakker, Hans L. A. Slenders, C. Paul Nathanail. Sustainability and Remediation. Dealing with Contaminated Sites. 2010; ():889-948.
Chicago/Turabian StyleR. Paul Bardos; Laurent M. M. Bakker; Hans L. A. Slenders; C. Paul Nathanail. 2010. "Sustainability and Remediation." Dealing with Contaminated Sites , no. : 889-948.
Paul Bardos. Nanoremediation and International Environmental Restoration Markets. 2021, 1 .
AMA StylePaul Bardos. Nanoremediation and International Environmental Restoration Markets. . 2021; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StylePaul Bardos. 2021. "Nanoremediation and International Environmental Restoration Markets." , no. : 1.