Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Cost-benefit analysis as a part of sustainability assessment of remediation alternatives for contaminated land
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)In: Journal of Environmental Management, ISSN 0301-4797, E-ISSN 1095-8630, Vol. 157, p. 267-278Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

There is an increasing demand amongst decision-makers and stakeholders for identifying sustainable remediation alternatives at contaminated sites, taking into account that remediation typically results in both positive and negative consequences. Multi-criteria analysis (MCA) is increasingly used for sustainability appraisal, and the Excel-based MCA tool Sustainable Choice Of REmediation (SCORE) has been developed to provide a relevant and transparent assessment of the sustainability of remediation alternatives relative to a reference alternative, considering key criteria in the economic, environmental and social sustainability domains, and taking uncertainty into explicit account through simulation. The focus of this paper is the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) as a part of SCORE for assessing the economic sustainability of remediation alternatives. An economic model is used for deriving a cost-benefit rule, which in turn motivates cost and benefit items in a CBA of remediation alternatives. The empirical part of the paper is a CBA application on remediation alternatives for the Hexion site, a former chemical industry area close to the city of G€oteborg in SW Sweden. The impact of uncertainties in and correlations across benefit and cost items on CBA results is illustrated. For the Hexion site, the traditional excavation-anddisposal remediation alternative had the lowest expected net present value, which illustrates the importance of also considering other alternatives before deciding upon how a remediation should be carried out.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. Vol. 157, p. 267-278
Keywords [en]
Soil, Ground water, Remediation, Pollution, Control, Environment, Sustainability, Economics, Costs, MCA, Statistical analysis, Case history, Gothenburg, Sweden, Bibliography, English
National Category
Geotechnical Engineering Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:swedgeo:diva-780DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.04.024OAI: oai:DiVA.org:swedgeo-780DiVA, id: diva2:1339447
Available from: 2019-07-29 Created: 2019-07-29 Last updated: 2019-07-29

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text
By organisation
Swedish Geotechnical Institute
In the same journal
Journal of Environmental Management
Geotechnical EngineeringEarth and Related Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 2 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf