Choosing remediation and waste management options at hazardous and radioactive waste sites

Remediation

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 39-58

  Greenberg, Michael ^a,b   Burger, Joanna ^c   Powers, Charles ^d,e,f   Leschine, Thomas ^g,h,i   Lowrie, Karen ^a,b,e   Friedlander, Barry ^e,f   Faustman, Elaine ^g,j   Griffith, William ^g   Kosson, David ^k,l  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Rutgers University   (United States)

^c RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d Institute for Responsible Management   (United States)

^e Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute   (United States)

^f University of Medicine and Dentistry   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^h Applied Physics Laboratory   (United States)

ⁱ NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL   (United States)

^j NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (United States)

^k VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^l International Renewable Energy Agency   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2442575382     PISSN: 10515658     EISSN: 15206831     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/rem.10053     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Bebbington, W., (1972). History of DuPont at the Savannah River Plant. Wilmington, DE: E. I. DuPont De Nemours and Company.
2. Boiko, P., Morrill, R., Flynn, J., Faustman, E., Van Belle, G., & Omenn, G., (1996). Who holds the stakes? A case study of stakeholder identification at two nuclear weapons production sites. Risk Analysis, 16, 237–249.
3. Burger, J., Rosh, D. Jr., Wartenberg, D., & Gochfeld, M., (1999). Future land use and concerns about the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory: Perceptions and concerns of urban dwellers, Environmental Management, 24, 541–551.
4. Canter, L. & Hill, L., (1979). Handbook of variables for environmental impact assessment. Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Science.
5. Etzioni, A., (1968). The active society. New York: Free Press.
6. Gerber, M., (1992). Home front: The Cold War legacy of the Hanford Nuclear Site. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
7. Greenberg, M., (2000). Balancing apples and oranges: Factors to consider in Brownfield's remediation, 115-123 in National Association of County and City Health Officials, Community Revitalization and Public Health: Issues, Roles, and Relationships for Local Public Health Agencies, Washington, D. C.: NACCHO and ATSDR.
8. Greenberg, M., Frisch, M., Solitare, L., & Lowrie, K., (2000). Downsizing US Department of Energy facilities: Evaluating alternatives for the region surrounding the Savannah River nuclear weapons site region, Evaluation and Program Planning, 23, 255–265.
9. Hobbs, B. & Meier, P., (2000). Energy decisions and the environment: A guide to the use of multicriteria methods. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Press.
10. Inhaber, H., (1976). Environmental indices. New York: John Wiley Interscience.
11. Kuhberger, A. and Huber, O., (1998). European decision making with missing information: A verbal protocol study. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 10, 269–290.
12. Lave, L. & Dowlatabadi, H., (1962-1972, 1993). Climate-change policy, Environmental Science & Technology, 27.
13. Leopold, L., Clarke, F., Hanshaw, B. & Balsley, J., (1971). A procedure for evaluating environmental impact, Washington DC, US Department of the Interior.
14. Lowrance, W., (1976). Of acceptable risk. Los Altos, CA: Kaufmann.
15. Mitchell, R., Payne, B. & Dunlap, R., (1989). Stigma and radioactive waste: Theory, assessment, and some empirical findings from Hanford, Washington. Worcester, MA: CENTED Report no. 78.
16. National Research Council (NRC). (1994). Ranking hazardous waste sites for remedial action. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
17. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). The Hanford tanks: environmental impacts and policy choices. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
18. National Research Council (NRC). (2000a). Alternatives for high-level waste salt processing at the Savannah River sites. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
19. National Research Council (NRC). (2000b). Integrated design of alternative technologies for bulk-only chemical agent disposal facilities, Washington DC: National Academy Press.
20. Parkin, J., (1992). A philosophy for multiattribute evaluation in environmental-impact assessments. Geoforum, 23, 467–475.
21. Piller, C., (1991). The fail-safe society, community defiance and the end of the American technological optimism. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
22. Reynolds, J., (1999, July). High level waste salt disposition alternatives, historical overview. Briefing to Citizens Advisory Board, Aiken, SC.
23. Roberson, J., (2001a, November). Environmental management priorities, memorandum.
24. Roberson, J., (2001b, December). Office of Environmental Management Science and Technology Program, memorandum.
25. Rowland, M., (1978). Environmental impact assessment. Memphis, TN: Regional Economic Development Center, Memphis State University.
26. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichenstein, S., (1979). Rating the risks. Environment, 21, 14–20.
27. Top-to-Bottom Review Team. (2002, February). A review of the Environmental Management Program, United States Department of Energy.
28. U. S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management. (1995). Closing the circle on the splitting of the atom. DOE/EM-0266.
29. U. S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management. (1996). The 1996 baseline environmental management report. DOE/EM-0290.
30. U. S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management. (1998a, June). Accelerating cleanup: Paths to Closure. DOE/EM-0362.
31. U. S. Department of Energy, Spent Nuclear Fuel Management (1998b, December). Draft Environmental Impact Statement. DOE/EIS-02709D.
32. Weart, S., (1992). Fears, fantasies and fallout. New Scientist, 136, 34–37.