Qualitative indicator analysis of a sustainable remediation

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect ScienceDirect Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000 Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000 ScienceDirect ScienceDirect

Availableonline onlineatatwww.sciencedirect.com www.sciencedirect.com Available www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Energy (2018) 000–000 588–593 EnergyProcedia Procedia147 00 (2017) www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

International Scientific Conference “Environmental and Climate Technologies”, CONECT 2018 International Scientific Conference “Environmental and Climate Technologies”, CONECT 2018

Qualitative indicator analysis ofonaDistrict sustainable remediation The 15thindicator Internationalanalysis Symposium Heating and Cooling Qualitative of a sustainable remediation Inese Tilla*, Dagnija Blumberga

Assessing the feasibility usingBlumberga the heat demand-outdoor Inese Tilla*,ofDagnija Institute of Energy Systems and Environment, Riga Technical University, Azenes 12/1, Riga, LV-1048, Latvia temperature function a long-term district Institute of Energy Systems andfor Environment, Riga Technical University, Azenes heat 12/1, Riga,demand LV-1048, Latviaforecast a,b,c

a

a

b

c

c

*, A. Pina , P. Ferrão , J. Fournier ., B. Lacarrière , O. Le Corre Abstract I. Andrić Abstract a IN+ Center for Innovation, Technology and Policy Research - Instituto Superior Técnico, Av. Rovisco Pais 1, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal With the rapid population bgrowth world faces major environmental challenges associated with drinking water limitations, Veolia Recherche & Innovation, 291 Avenue Dreyfous Daniel, 78520 Limay, France depletion resources, waste management and hazardous removal. In Kastler, several national andwater European Union cnatural With the of rapid population growth world faces major environmental challenges with drinking limitations, Département Systèmes Énergétiques et Environnement - IMTpollution Atlantique, 4 rue associated Alfred 44300 Nantes, France policy strategic planning documents of polluted sites and hazardous waste management are set and as important to depletion of natural resources, wasteremediation management and hazardous pollution removal. In several national Europeantasks Union reduce environmental burden and toremediation improve public healthsites through cleaner water, and soil. As projects policy strategic planning documents of polluted and hazardous wasteair management areremediation set as important tasksare to usually environmental complex and multidisciplinary due to public close interactions between social, andAs environmental dimensions, reduce burden and to improve health through cleaner water,economical air and soil. remediation projects are understanding of and the performance of thedue system and interactions its different between variablessocial, is required to realize successful anddimensions, sustainable usually complex multidisciplinary to close economical anda environmental Abstract remediation project. understanding of the performance of the system and its different variables is required to realize a successful and sustainable The aim of the study is to analyze existing situation in in Latvia, acquire knowledge remediation in other countries remediation project. District heating networks are commonly addressed the literature as one of about the most effectiveframework solutions for decreasing the and based findings a methodological decision making toolrequire for a sustainable implementation The aim ofon the study is build to analyze existing situation inThese Latvia, acquire knowledge about remediation remediation framework in through other countries greenhouse gas emissions from the building sector. systems high investments whichproject are returned thefrom heat cradle to grave planning to conditions remediation aftercare stage) a demand benefit in forthe social, economical and and based build aclimate methodological decision making tool that for a demonstrates sustainable remediation project implementation from sales. Dueon tofindings the(from changed and building renovation policies, heat future could decrease, environmental and cause impacts. aftercare stage) that demonstrates a benefit for social, economical and cradle to grave (from planning toless remediation prolonging thedimensions investment return period. The that are paper determined in are identification of indicators to remediation project practice in environmental dimensions and iscause lessthis impacts. Theobjectives main scope of this to assess thepaper feasibility of using the heat demand – according outdoor temperature function for heat demand Latvia, categorization indicators qualitative quantitativewas analysis of The qualitative by of using The objectives that areof in this paper areand identification ofindicators indicators to remediation project practice in forecast. The district ofdetermined Alvalade, into located in Lisbon (Portugal), used asand aaccording case study. district indicators is consisted 665 Multiple criteria decision making analysis -period Technique forquantitative order preference by similarity to (low, the ideal solution (TOPSIS). Latvia, categorization indicators into qualitative and analysis ofmedium, qualitative indicators by district using buildings that vary inofboth construction andand typology. Threeindicators weather scenarios high) and three Multiple criteria decision making analysis - Technique for order deep). preference by similarity to the obtained ideal solution renovation scenarios were developed (shallow, intermediate, To estimate the error, heat (TOPSIS). demand values were ©compared 2018 Thewith Authors. by Elsevier resultsPublished from a dynamic heatLtd. demand model, previously developed and validated by the authors. © 2018 2018an The Authors. Published by Ltd. ) This open accessthat article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ © The Authors. Published by Elsevier Elsevier Ltd. The isresults showed when only weather change is considered, the margin of error could be acceptable for some applications This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Selection and peer-review responsibility of all the scientific committee of the However, International Scientific Conference ) This iserror an open access article under the CCthan BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the in annual demand was lower 20% for weather scenarios considered). after introducing renovation Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Scientific Conference ‘Environmental ‘Environmental and Climate Technologies’, CONECT 2018. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Scientific Conference scenarios, the error value increased up to 59.5% (depending on the weather and renovation scenarios combination considered). and Climate Technologies’, CONECT 2018. ‘Environmental and Climate Technologies’, CONECT The value of slope coefficient increased on average 2018. within the range of 3.8% up to 8% per decade, that corresponds to the Keywords: remediation decrease sustainability; in the number of heating hours of 22-139h during the heating season (depending on the combination of weather and Keywords: sustainability; remediation On the other hand, function intercept increased for 7.8-12.7% per decade (depending on the renovation scenarios considered). coupled scenarios). The values suggested could be used to modify the function parameters for the scenarios considered, and improve the accuracy of heat demand estimations. © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and * Corresponding author. Cooling.

E-mail address:author. [email protected] * Corresponding E-mail address: [email protected] Keywords: Heat demand; Forecast; Climate change 1876-6102 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) 1876-6102 © 2018 Thearticle Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection under responsibility of the scientific of the International Scientific Conference ‘Environmental and Climate This is an and openpeer-review access article under the CC BY-NC-ND licensecommittee (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Technologies’, CONECT 2018. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Scientific Conference ‘Environmental and Climate 1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Technologies’, CONECT 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 1876-6102  2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and Cooling. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Scientific Conference ‘Environmental and Climate Technologies’, CONECT 2018. 10.1016/j.egypro.2018.07.075

2

Inese Tilla et al. / Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 588–593 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

589

1. Introduction Pollution caused by more intensive production and industrial operations, as well as historical pollution poses a risk to human health and environment. According to World Health Organization it is estimated that annually 12.6 million people pass away due to air, water and soil pollution, chemical exposures, climate change caused natural disasters etc. [1]. In several national and European Union policy strategic planning documents remediation of polluted sites and hazardous waste management are set as important tasks to reduce environmental burden and to improve public health through cleaner water, air and soil [2, 3]. Remediation of a polluted site is a treatment to remove hazardous substances and waste in order to minimize threats to environment and human health, however it is a very complex and resource-intensive process that cause its own impacts to social, economical and environmental dimensions, e.g. energy consumption, emissions, high cost, traffic disruption etc. [4]. Sustainable remediation is based on assessment of the most important remediation factors and process indicators and management of the potential risks to human and environmental health by identifying social, economical and environmental benefits and impacts of remediation alternatives and searching the overall benefit by means of decision making process [3, 5]. Despite the latest appearance of more and more modern and sufficient remediation methods and technologies, there are still difficulties in implementation of remediation projects in Latvia and other countries due to different pollution characteristics in each site, lack of methodology and flaws in decision making process [6, 7]. The aim of the study is to analyze existing situation in Latvia, acquire knowledge about remediation framework in other countries and based on findings build a methodological decision making tool for a sustainable remediation project implementation from cradle to grave (from planning to remediation aftercare stage) that demonstrates a benefit for social, economical and environmental dimensions and cause less impacts. The objectives that are determined in this paper are as follows:  Identification of indicators according to remediation project practice in Latvia;  Categorization of indicators into qualitative and quantitative indicators;  Analysis of qualitative indicators by using Multiple criteria decision making analysis – Technique for order preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS). In this study system boundaries are defined and include following remediation stages – initial planning and project application, implementation (remediation works and utilization of waste), after-remediation monitoring – and excluding the process of remediation equipment production and the process of extracting neutralization materials and additives. 2. Methodology 2.1. Identification and categorization In the beginning of this study identification of indicators that influence remediation process was made according to literature and remediation project practice in Latvia [8, 9]. Indicators were categorized into qualitative and quantitative indicators (Table 1).

3

Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000 Inese Tilla et al. / Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 588–593

590

Table 1. Qualitative and quantitative indicators. Qualitative Shortcomings in legislation Land use after remediation `Polluters pay` principle Ownership of land and infrastructure Geological conditions Available information of the site Characteristics of pollution (composition) Risks Quantitative The impact of pollution on human health (disease rate) Cost benefit analysis (cost of the project) The impact of pollution on environment (rate of loss of biodiversity) Pollution migration rate Available financial resources Characteristics of pollution (concentration) Time limit Pollution self degradation rate Choice of remediation technology (employment, noise and vibration, availability, cost etc.) Duration of monitoring Meteorological conditions

2.2. Qualitative indicator analysis This paper presents an analysis of qualitative indicators by using Multiple criteria decision making analysis, named – Technique for order preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS). By this analysis indicators are ranked by severity of impact (5 – highest to 1 – lowest) to social, economical and environmental criteria. To estimate relative importance of each criteria experts from the State Environmental Service of Latvia were assigned with the task of weighting. TOPSIS matrix is shown in Table 2. Table 2. TOPSIS matrix. Weight

Shortcomings in legislation

4

Social

5

Land use after remediation 4

3

Available information of the site 3

2

Economical

5

4

3

3

4

4

3

4

4

Environmental

5

4

1

2

2

4

3

5

`Polluters pay` principle 4

Ownership of land and infrastructure 3

Geological conditions

Characteristic s of pollution (composition) 3

Risks

For evaluation of selected indicators it was assumed that the criteria include following sub-criteria [10, 11]:  Social – human health, education, employment, cultural values, transportation organization;  Economical – investments, remediation project and after remediation cost;  Environmental – air, soil and water quality, biodiversity, climate change, resources depletion.

4

4

Inese Tilla et al. / Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 588–593 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

591

Decision matrix normalization was made by using following equations [12, 13]:

xij

nij 

m

x

2 ij

i 1

nij 

(1)

xij

(2)

max xij i

where decision maker’s ratings; xij i 1, 2, …m; j 1, 2, …n. Construction of weighted normalized decision matrix was made by using following equation [12, 13]:

vij  nij  w j

(3)

where wj is the weight of each criterion, ∑���� �� � �.

Positive ideal and negative ideal solutions are identified by using following equations [12, 13]:









 



A  v1 , v2 ,..., vn  max vij j  I , min vij j  J









 

i



i



A  v1 , v2 ,..., vn  min vij j  I , max vij j  J i

i



(4) (5)

To determine separation from ideal solution and negative solution following equations are used [12, 13]: 1/ p

 n d    vij  v j  j 1



   

 n d    vij  v j  j 1



   



 i



 i

p

p

(6)

1/ p

(7)

where p ≥ 1. To determine relative closeness to ideal solution following equation is used [12, 13]: Ri 

d i d i  d i

(8)

Inese Tilla et al. / Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 588–593 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

592

5

3. Results The results calculated by using Multiple criteria decision making analysis - Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to The Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) reveal influence of qualitative indicators to social, economical and environmental dimensions and thus highlighting focus areas for an implementation of a sustainable remediation project. Results are represented in Fig. 1. 1,00

1,00

0,90

0,79

0,80 0,70

0,68

0,66

0,60 0,50

0,40

0,40 0,30 0,20

0,19

0,21

0,23

0,10 0,00

shortcomings land use after `polluters pay` ownership of in legislation remediation principle land and infrastructure

geological conditions

available characteristics information of of pollution the site (composition)

risks

Fig. 1. Qualitative indicators ranked by relative closeness to ideal solution.

The calculation results distinctly show that shortcomings in legislation are crucial over environmental, social and economical qualities and have influence on every stage of remediation process - planning, remediation works and after remediation. The calculated coefficient for indicator “shortcomings in legislation” is 1. National policy and development plans are documents where national environmental problems, basic principles and directions for action to achieve policy goals are determined and prioritized [14]. Legislation acts and regulations set out rules and procedures for actions to be taken in order to ensure environmental quality and human health. In case this guidance is not provided in case of implementation of remediation projects it is impossible to achieve successful results and sustainability, thus causing negative impacts to people and environment as well as economy. Another important factor for every project is risk assessment and management. The calculated coefficient for risks in this analysis is 0.79. Risk assessment combines predictions of what could be possible failures, consequential consequences and likelihood to happen. Risks that might have an influence on the implementation of remediation projects must be evaluated already in the preliminary planning stage, as it may have an influence to other indicators and result environmental challenges (different volume and characteristics of the pollution, inappropriate technology choice etc.), as well as economical challenges (higher project cost) and social challenges (emissions during remediation, traffic flows etc.). Risk management includes implementation of necessary activities to eliminate or minimize risks and impacts to its lowest and continuous monitoring of its results [15]. Modeling results reveal that indicators “land use after remediation” (calculated coefficient – 0.68) and “available information of the site” (calculated coefficient – 0.66) are almost on the same importance level as both indicators have relevance to the remediation initial planning process. As practice shows in other countries, e.g. Germany, in the initial planning phase remediation aim is set and the extent to which remediation works must be done is evaluated according to intentions of how remediation territory (land) will be used after remediation works. It is certain that remediation of territory which is located in populated area and is planned to be use for social activities demands

6

Inese Tilla et al. / Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 588–593 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

593

higher remediation requirements in comparison to a territory, which is located in rural area and is planned to be used for afforestation. In the planning phase description of a polluted site, assumptions of pollution composition, characteristics, volume and migration rate, and thus the choice of remediation methods and technology and success of the project implemented accordingly is dependent on available information of the site and prior research results (if available). This must be estimated in correspondence to risks. Less critical indicators that received coefficients 0.23, 0.21 and 0.19 are accordingly “geological conditions”, “ownership of land and infrastructure” and “’polluters pay’ principle”, which are more influential for some of criteria, but less influential for overall system. In implementation of a sustainable remediation it is expected to take into account all indicators especially those with a heavy influence over the processes. 4. Conclusions The effectiveness and sustainability of a remediation project is affected by different qualitative and quantitative indicators. Key indicators according to analysis made by using Multiple criteria decision making analysis Technique for order preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS) are – shortcomings in legislation, risks, land use after remediation and available information of the site. These indicators should be given additional attention when implementing a sustainable remediation project. Legislation has a crucial influence on social, economical and environmental qualities. National policy requires frequent reviews as the environmental situation is constantly changing. Policy guidance must be improved to support and lead effective and sustainable remediation projects. Risk evaluation and management as well as estimation of land use after remediation and available information of the site also require attention in a sustainable remediation planning process. Further studies of quantitative indicator analysis are needed to carry out a sustainability appraisal in terms of social, economical and environmental balance. References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]

Pruss-Ustun A, Corvalan C, Bos R, Neira M, Wolf J. Preventing disease through healthy environments. A global assessment of the burden of disease from environmental risks. World Health Organization 2016. CL:AIRE, NICOLE. A Review of the Legal and Regulatory Basis for Sustainable Remediation in the European Union and the United Kingdom. Sustainable Remediation Forum, United Kingdom, 2015. CLARINET. Sustainable Management of Contaminated Land: An Overview. A report from the Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmental Technologies. Austria, 2002 Environment Protection Authority. EPA Guidelines for Environmental management of on-site remediation. Adelaide: EPA; 2006. Chai LH, Lha D. A new approach of deriving indicators and comprehensive measure for ecological environmental quality assessment. Ecological indicators 2018; 85:716–28. Polyak YM, Bakina LG, Chugunova MV, Mayachkina NV, Gerasimov AO, Bure VM. Effect of remediation strategies on biological activity of oil-contaminated soil - A field study. International Bioderioration and Biodegradation 2018;126:57–68. Kim K-E, Jung JE, Lee Y, Lee DS. Ranking surface soil pollution potential of chemicals from accidental release by using two indicators calculated with a multimedia model (SoilPCA). Ecological Indicators 2018;85:664–73. Beames A, Broekx S, Lookman R, Touchant K, Seuntjens P. Sustainability appraisal tools for soil and groundwater remediation: How is the choice of remediation alternative influenced by different sets of sustainability indicators and tool structures? Science of Total Environment 2014;470-1: 954–66. Smith J. A Framework for Assessing the Sustainability of Soil and Groundwater Remediation. United Kingdom: CL:AIRE; 2010. Laurila-Pant M, Lehikoinen A, Uusitalo L, Venesjarvi R. How to value biodiversity in environmental management? Ecological Indicators 2015;55:1–11. Braganca L, Mateus R, Koukkari H. Building Sustainability Assessment. Sustainability 2010;2:2010–23. Roszkowska E. Multi-Criteria Decision Making Models By Applying The Topsis Method To Crisp And Interval Data. MCDM, 2011. Li P, Qian H, Wu J, Chen J. Sensitivity analysis of TOPSIS method in water quality assessment: I. Sensitivity to the parameter weights. Environ Monit Assess 2013;185(3):2453–61. The Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development of Latvia. Environmental Policy Guidelines for 2014 – 2020. Gormley A, Pollard S, Rocks S. Guidelines for Environmental Risk Assessment