liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • 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
Environmental Impacts of Contaminated Site Remediation: a Comparision of two Life Cycle Assessments
Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies.
2003 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Magister)Student thesisAlternative title
Miljöpåverkan vid sanering av förorenade områden : en jämförelse mellan två livscykelanalyser (Swedish)
Abstract [en]

The decision process of which technique to choose for remediation of contaminated sites has traditionally focused on the clean up level, the time required and the economical resources. The environmental costs of the remediation are seldom taken into consideration. With a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) it is possible to receive an overall picture of the environmental impacts caused by a remediation technique. In this thesis a comparison of two LCA methods has been made. The methods are named REC and Uva and are used in the Netherlands and Germany. Two remediation techniques, the adsorption technique and the bioremediation technique, were compared and data from a discontinued petrol station were used. The output from the REC method indicated that the adsorption technique causes more environmental costs then the bioremediation technique. The main reason is because the adsorption technique consumes more groundwater and energy. The UvA method presented a different result. According to this method the bioremediation technique causes more environmental costs. This is because the bioremediation technique consumes more energy and causes more emissions. The main reasons of the difference between the REC and the UvA methods are that they use diverse ways to calculate the consumption of energy, have different system boundaries and consider different impact categories. A conclusion of the present study is that a decision process of which remediation technique to use at a contaminated site could be dependent on which method is used as a decision support tool.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Institutionen för tematisk utbildning och forskning , 2003. , 32 p.
Keyword [en]
Interdisciplinary studies, Contaminated site, remediation, life cycle assessment, bioremediation, adsorption, environmental impact, decision support tool
Keyword [sv]
TVÄRVETENSKAP
National Category
Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-1931ISRN: LIU-ITUF/MV-D--03/02--SEOAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-1931DiVA: diva2:19258
Uppsok
samhälle/juridik
Available from: 2003-08-19 Created: 2003-08-19

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(576 kB)1821 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 576 kBChecksum MD5
99828952191524ff1d7cbf6b266332dd807ca2ad6dfccc2e696c68fe52ab4f8f64507dd1
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Department of Thematic Studies
Social Sciences Interdisciplinary

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 1821 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 541 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • 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