Grantee Research Project Results
2003 Progress Report: Passive Treatment of Metal-rich Waters through Enhanced Wetland Technologies: A Field Scale Pilot Project
EPA Grant Number: R829423E02Title: Passive Treatment of Metal-rich Waters through Enhanced Wetland Technologies: A Field Scale Pilot Project
Investigators: Focht, Will , Regens, James L. , Nairn, Robert W. , Settle, Chad , Anex, Rob
Current Investigators: Nairn, Robert W.
Institution: Oklahoma State University , University of Tulsa , University of Oklahoma
Current Institution: University of Oklahoma
EPA Project Officer: Chung, Serena
Project Period: July 15, 2002 through July 14, 2004
Project Period Covered by this Report: July 15, 2002 through July 14, 2003
Project Amount: $160,000
RFA: EPSCoR (Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research) (2001) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: EPSCoR (The Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research)
Objective:
The objective of this research project is to develop and demonstrate an enhanced life cycle assessment (ELCA) methodology that combines LCA inventory and impact analyses, human health risk assessment, and dynamic cost-benefit analysis within a stakeholder-based analytic-deliberative process. The ELCA framework will be demonstrated through application to the treatment of metal-rich waters through enhanced wetland technologies at a site near the Tar Creek Superfund in northeast Oklahoma.
Progress Summary:
Year 1 of the project involved gathering data and defining the systems to be studied. Dr. Anex worked with Dr. Nairn to develop a clear definition of the pollution treatment technology of passive treatment systems applicable at a site near north Miami, OK. Dr. Anex and his team gathered data describing the construction, placement, operation, and retirement of the treatment wetlands. Dr. Anex and his team developed a set of influence diagrams depicting the relationships among the treatment wetland technology life cycle impacts (physical, biological, and economic) and their causes and effects. This expert-based mental model will be used by Dr. Anex in performing risk assessment studies and by Dr. Focht in assessing stakeholders' knowledge of remediation technology life cycle impacts. Dr. Focht's team conducted interviews of stakeholders in the region to ascertain their general concerns about the wetland treatment of mine wastes. Five perspectives on the risks posed by mine wastes were revealed using Q methodology.
Future Activities:
We will complete the explanation of the influence diagram to include a qualitative description of the health risks that would be posed by the engineered wetlands technology and the assessment of the reduction of relative risks that would result from its treatment of contaminated water. Dr. Anex moved to Iowa State University in August 2003, and was replaced by Dr. Regens. His team will conduct a baseline health risk assessment to be followed with a residual health risk assessment that will estimate the risks that will be posed if the engineered wetland technology was implemented, including risks posed by the construction and operation of the technology. Dr. Settle's team will complete his dynamic economic valuation of wetlands and benefit categories for use in benefit transfer as an option to determine the value of the engineered wetland technology. Dr. Nairn's team will complete his technical assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the engineered wetlands technology in treating contaminated mine waters. Dr. Focht's team will conduct a second round of interviews to assess stakeholders’ knowledge of the engineered wetlands technology, and to explore their concerns about its deployment.
The research team will request a no-cost extension for 1 year to complete the research project activities. A number of reasons motivate the request for an extension. First, the Principal Investigator left the project (the second to do so in the first 15 months of the grant). Second, the leader of the Strategic Improvement Plan portion of the grant also left at the beginning of Year 2 of the project. Third, the research project did not begin until 4 months had elapsed because the award letter had not been delivered to the research team. Fourth, the Tar Creek site has been the subject of several lawsuits and the attention of legislators, which has delayed the ability of the research team
Journal Articles on this Report : 1 Displayed | Download in RIS Format
Other project views: | All 1 publications | 1 publications in selected types | All 1 journal articles |
---|
Type | Citation | ||
---|---|---|---|
|
Anex RP, Focht W. Stakeholder involvement in life-cycle assessment and comparative risk assessment. Risk Analysis 2002;22(5):859-875. |
R829423E02 (2003) |
not available |
Supplemental Keywords:
exposure, risk assessment, water, chemical transport, passive treatment, modeling, bioremediation, economic analysis, stakeholder participation, benefit transfer, engineered wetlands, water, ecological effects, metals, restoration, remediation, life cycle analysis, environmental chemistry, biology, ecology, hydrology, geology, analytical, mining, Oklahoma, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, EPA Region 6, Tar Creek., RFA, Scientific Discipline, Geographic Area, Water, Water & Watershed, Environmental Chemistry, State, Ecology and Ecosystems, Watersheds, biogeochemical study, wetland restoration, constructed wetlands, water quality, Oklahoma (OK), construction and design of wetlands, groundwater, metals, mining impacted watershedProgress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.