Cost-benefit analysis of copper recovery in remediation projects: A case study from Sweden

Science of the Total Environment

Volumn 605-606, Issue , 2017, Pages 300-314

  Volchko, Yevheniya ^a   Norrman, Jenny ^a   Rosén, Lars ^a   Karlfeldt Fedje, Karin ^a,b  

^a CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^b Recovery and Management   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Contaminated sites; Cost benefit analysis; Metal recovery; Metal recycling; Optimization; Remediation; Uncertainty analysis

Indexed keywords

CONTAMINATION; COPPER; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS; EXCAVATION; LAND RECLAMATION; LEACHING; METAL ANALYSIS; METAL REFINING; METALLURGY; METALS; OPTIMIZATION; POLLUTION; PROFITABILITY; RECOVERY; REFINING; REMEDIATION; SLUDGE DISPOSAL; SOIL POLLUTION; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WASTE DISPOSAL;

CONTAMINATED SITES; ECONOMIC POTENTIALS; INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES; LONG-TERM INVESTMENT; METAL RECYCLING; PROCESSING EQUIPMENT; RECOVERY TECHNOLOGY; REMEDIATION PROJECTS;

METAL RECOVERY;

COPPER; METAL;

CONTAMINATED LAND; COPPER; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; OPTIMIZATION; PROFITABILITY; RECYCLING; SOIL POLLUTION; SOIL REMEDIATION; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WASTE TECHNOLOGY;

ARTICLE; ASH; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEVICES; ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION; INDUSTRIAL WASTE; INVESTMENT; LANDFILL; LEACHING; METAL RECOVERY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SLUDGE; SOIL POLLUTION; SWEDEN; CONTAMINATION; HUMAN; SOIL; UNCERTAINTY;

SWEDEN;

EID: 85021401109     PISSN: 00489697     EISSN: 18791026     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.128     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Adedigba, A., Assessment of Metal Recycling in Remediation Projects: Application and Evaluation of a Cost-benefit Analysis Method. (Master's Thesis No 2015:135), 2015, Chalmers Reproservice, Gothenburg.
2. Alvarez-Guerra, M., Viguri, J.R., Voulvoulis, N., A multicriteria-based methodology for site prioritisation in sediment management. Environ. Int. 35:6 (2009), 920–930.
3. Andersson, D., Lundström, J., Enhanced Soil Washing – A Study on Treatment of Copper Polluted Soil and Bark. (Master's thesis 2015:45), 2015, Chalmers Reproservice, Gothenburg.
4. Baek, J., Choi, Y., Park, H., Uncertainty representation method for open pit optimization results due to variation in mineral prices. Fortschr. Mineral., 2016, 10.3390/min6010017.
5. Beames, A., Broekx, S., Lookman, R., Touchant, K., Seuntjens, P., Sustainability appraisal tools for soil and groundwater remediations: how is the choice of remediation alternative influenced by different sets of sustainability indicators and tool structures?. Sci. Total Environ. 470-471 (2014), 954–966.
6. Bedford, T., Cooke, R., Probabalistic Risk Analysis: Foundations and Methods. 2001, Cambridge University Press, New-York, USA.
7. Berggren Kleja, D., Ohlsson, Y., State of the Knowledge and the Potential for Metal Recycling from Contaminated Masses, Publication No 4. 2013, Swedish Geotechnical Institute, Linköping (In Swedish: Kunskapsläge och förutsättningar för återvinning av metaller i förorenade massor).
8. Bridge, D., Contested terrain: mining and the environment. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 29 (2004), 205–259, 10.1146/annurev.energy.28.011503.163434.
9. Brinkhoff, P., Multi-criteria analysis for assessing sustainability of remedial actions - applications in contaminated land development. A Literature Review. Report No 2011:14, 2011, Chalmers Reproservice, Gothenburg.
10. Brinkhoff, P., Norin, M., Norrman, J., Rosén, L., Ek, K., Economic project risk assessment in remediation projects prior to construction – methodology development and case study application. Remediation 25:2 (2015), 117–138.
11. Brown, L., Plan B 2.0: rescuing a planet under stress and a civilization in trouble. Earth Policy Institute, 2006, W.W. Norton & Co., New York 0-393-32831-7.
12. CABERNET, Sustainable brownfield regeneration: CABERNET network report. Land Quality Management Group, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK 0-9547474-5-3. Available at: http://www.cabernet.org.uk/resourcefs/427.pdf, 2006 (Accessed: September 2015).
13. Dudka, S., Adriano, D.C., Environmental impacts of metal ore mining and processing: a review. J. Environ. Qual. 26:3 (1997), 590–602.
14. Ecorys, Competitiveness of the EU non-ferrous metals industries: FWC sector competitiveness studies. The Final Report for European Commission, 2011, ECORYS Nederland BV, Rotterdam.
15. Elander, Remediation of ex. Impregnation Facility at Långö, Köpmannebro, the Municipality of Mellerud: Preliminary Study of Possibilities for Copper Recycling From Contaminated Masses, 2014, Elander Miljöteknik AB, Sweden (In Swedish: Efterbehandling av f.d. impregneringsplats på Långö, Köpmannebro i Melleruds kommun: Förstudie avseende möjligheterna att återvinna koppar från förorenade massor).
16. EU, Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on Waste and Repealing Certain Directives. OJ L312/3. 2008.
17. Harbottle, M.J., Al-Tabbaa, A., Evans, C.W., Sustainability of land remediation. Part 1: overall analysis. Geotech. Eng. 161 (2008), 75–92.
18. Holm, G., Bendz, D., Larsson, L., Leppänen, M., Mácsik, J., Pehrson, P., Rogbeck, Y., Svedberg, B., Stabilization and solidification of contaminated soils and sediments - applicability to Swedish conditions. Report No 5696, 2007, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm (In Swedish: Stabilisering och solidifiering av förorenad jord och muddermassor - Lämplighet och potential för svenska förhållanden).
19. HOMBRE, Decision Support Framework for the Successful Regeneration of Brownfields. 2013, Deltares, The Netherlands (Available at: http://www.zerobrownfields.eu/HombreTrainingGallery/HomePage/HOMBRE_D3.1_final_DecisionSupportFramework.pdf. (Accessed: September 2015)).
20. Johansson, N., Krook, J., Eklund, M., Institutional conditions for Swedish metal production: a comparison of subsidies to metal mining and metal recycling. Res. Policy 41 (2014), 72–82.
21. Kalyanmoy, D., Multi-objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms. 2001, Wiley, Chichester.
22. Karlfeldt Fedje, K., Strömvall, A.-M., Evaluation of solid residues quality after enhanced Cu leaching of polluted soils. Sci. Total Environ. 563-564 (2015), 676–682.
23. Karlfeldt Fedje, K., Yillin, L., Strömvall, A.-M., Remediation of metal polluted hotspot areas through enhanced soil washing - evaluation of leaching methods. J. Environ. Manag. 128 (2013), 489–496.
24. Karlfeldt Fedje, K., Modin, O., Strömvall, A.-M., Copper recovery from polluted soils using acidic washing and bioelectrochemical systems. Metals 5 (2015), 1328–1348.
25. Kemakta, Complementary Main Study for Contaminated Land at Former Log Impregnation at Långö, Köpmannebro, the Municipality of Mellerud. 2012, Kemakta Konsult AB, Stockholm (In Swedish: Kompletterande huvudstudie för förorenad mark vid f.d. stolpimpregnering på Långö, Köpmannebro, Mellerud kommun).
26. Law, J., Law, J., (eds.) A Dictionary of Finance and Banking, Fifth ed., 2014, Oxford University Press (Print ISBN-13: 9780199664931).
27. Linkov, I., Moberg, E., Multi-criteria decision analysis. Environmental Applications and Case Studies, 2011, CRC Press.
28. LME, London metal exchange. Available at www.lme.com, 2016 (Accessed: October 2016).
29. MEA, Millennium ecosystem assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis, 2005, Island Press, Washington.
30. Norrman, J., Volchko, Y., Hooimeijer, F., Maring, L., Kain, J.-H., Bardos, P., Broekx, S., Beames, A., Rosén, L., Integration of the subsurface and the surface sectors for a more holistic approach for sustainable redevelopment of urban brownfields. Sci. Total Environ., 2016, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.097.
31. Panagos, P., Van Liedekerke, M., Yigini, Y., Montanarella, L., Contaminated sites in Europe: review of the current situation based on data collected through a European network. J. Environ. Public Health, 2013, 10.1155/2013/158764.
32. RESCUE, Best practice guidance for sustainable brownfield regeneration. A Division of Land Quality Management Ltd. 0-9547474-0-2, 2005, Land Quality Press (Available at: http://www.hartvanzuid.nl/downloads/REVIT_booklet.pdf/ (Accessed: September 2015)).
33. REVIT, Working towards more effective and sustainable brownfield revitalization policies. Ensuring Sustainability in Brownfield Revitalization INTEREG III B Community Initiative, 2007 (Available at: http://areale.ch/brache/images/links_infothek_PDF/20-REVIT_Sustainability.pdf (Accessed: August 2015)).
34. Rosén, L., Back, P.-E., Soutukorva, Å., Söderqvist, T., Brodd, P., Grahn, L., Cost-benefit Analysis (CBA) as a Tool for Prioritization of Remedial Actions – Method Development and Examples. Report No 5836. 2008, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm (In Swedish: Kostnadsnyttoanalys som verktyg för prioritering av efterbehandlingsinsatser – metodutveckling och exempel på tillämpning).
35. Rosén, L., Söderqvist, T., Back, P.-E., Soutukorva, Å., Brodd, P., Grahn, L., Multi-criteria Analysis (MCA) for Sustainable Remediation at Contaminated Sites – Method Development and Examples. Report No 5891. 2009, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm (In Swedish: Multikriterieanalys för hållbar efterbehandling – Metodutveckling och exempel på tillämpning).
36. Rosén, L., Törneman, N., Kinell, G., Söderqvist, T., Forsman, I., Thureson, C., Evaluation of the Swedish National Program for Remediation of Contaminated Sites. Report No 6601. 2014, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm.
37. Rosén, L., Back, P.-E., Söderqvist, T., Norrman, J., Brinkhoff, P., Norberg, T., Volchko, Y., Norin, M., Bergknut, M., Döberl, G., SCORE: a novel multi-criteria decision analysis approach for assessing the sustainability of contaminated land remediation. Sci. Total Environ. 511 (2015), 621–638.
38. Rosén, L., Franzén, F., Norrman, J., Söderqvist, T., Volchko, Y., Risk Evaluation with the SCORE – Method for the Industrial Site Järpen, the Municipality of Åre. Report No 2016:17. 2016, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg (ISSN 1652-9162, (In Swedish: Riskvärdering med SCORE-metoden för Järpens industriområde i Åre kommun – Fallstudierapport)).
39. Santoleri, J., Reynolds, J., Louis, T., Introduction to Hazardous Waste Incineration. 2000, Wiley, New York.
40. SGF, Carbon Footprint in Result of Remediation and Ground-bait. 2016, Swedish Geotechnical Society ((In Swedish: Carbon footprint från efterbehandling och andra markarbeten). Available at http://www.sgf.net/web/page.aspx?refid=2679 (Assessed: October, 2016)).
41. SGI, Contaminated Sites – Inventory of Obstacles for Efficient Remediation and Knowledge Needs. 2012 (Varia 629; Linköping, (In Swedish: Förorenade områden – Inventering av effektivitetshinder och kunskapsbehov)).
42. Smith, J.W.N., Kerrison, G., Benchmarking of decision-support tools used for tiered sustainable remediation appraisal. Water Air Soil Pollut. 224:12 (2013), 1706–1716.
43. Söderqvist, T., Brinkhoff, P., Tommy, Norberg T., Rosén, L., Back, P.-E., Norrman, J., Cost-benefit analysis as a part of sustainability assessment of remediation alternatives for contaminated land. J. Environ. Manag. 157 (2015), 267–278.
44. SoilTech, Tender From SoilTech to Malin Norin at NCC Teknik. 2009, SoilTech AB, Stockholm.
45. Sparrevik, M., Barton, D.N., Bates, M.E., Linkov, I., Use of stochastic multi-criteria decision analysis to support sustainable management of contaminated sites. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46 (2012), 1326–1334.
46. STA, Surface Water and Groundwater Protection. Publication No 2013:135. 2013, Swedish Transport Administration 978-91-7467-526-9 (In Swedish: Yt- och grundvattenskydd).
47. STA, Analysis Method and Socio-economic Values for the Transport Sector: ASEK 6.0. 2016, Swedish Transport Administration ((In Swedish: Analysmetod och samhällsekonomiska kalkylvärden för transportsektorn: ASEK 6.0.), Available at http://www.trafikverket.se/ASEK (Accessed: August, 2016)).
48. Statistics Sweden, Historical Overview of the Inflation Rates in Sweden. 2016, Statistics Sweden (Available at http://www.scb.se/sv_/Hitta-statistik/Statistik-efter-amne/Priser-och-konsumtion/Konsumentprisindex/Konsumentprisindex-KPI/33772/33779/Konsumentprisindex-KPI/33831/ (Assessed: October 2016)).
49. Strömberg, B., Svärd, S.-H., The Incineration Handbook: The Disposal and Incineration Technologies. 2012, Värmeforsk Serviceaktiebolag, Stockholm ((In Swedish: Bränslehandboken: Anläggnings- och Förbränningsteknik)).
50. SuRF-UK, A framework for assessing the sustainability of soil and groundwater remediation. Contaminated Land: Applications in Real Environments, 2010, CL:AIRE, London.
51. SuRF-UK, Annex 1: the SuRF-UK indicator set for sustainable remediation assessment. Contaminated Land: Applications in Real Environments, 2011, CL:AIRE, London.
52. Svefa, Swedish property market – focus on 24 cities. Sustainable Property Ownership and Sustainable Urban Development, 2016, Sib-Tryck Holding AB, Stockholm ((In Swedish: Svensk fastighetsmarknad - fokus 24 orter. Hållbart fastighetsägande och hållbar stadsutveckling)).
53. Sweco, Långön, Köpmannebro – Detailed Investigation of Bark Deposits, Detailed Risk Assessment and Suggested Remediation Alternatives. 2003, Sweco Viak, Vänersborg (In Swedish: Långön, Köpmannebro - Fördjupad undersökning av barkupplag med fördjupad riskbedömning och åtgärdsförslag).
54. Swedish EPA, Suggestion on the Goals for Remediation of Contaminated Sites. Report No NV-00336-13. 2013, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm ((In Swedish: Förslag till etappmål för efterbehandling av förorenade områden). Available at http://www.naturvardsverket.se/upload/miljoarbete-i-samhallet/miljoarbete-i-sverige/regeringsuppdrag/2013/etappmal2013forslag/etappmal2013forslag-ebh-skrivelse.pdf (Assessed: September 2016)).
55. Swedish EPA, The Majority of Contaminated Sites are Disclosed. 2017, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency ((In Swedish: De flesta förorenade områdena är kända.), Available at http://www.naturvardsverket.se/Sa-mar-miljon/Mark/Fororenade-omraden/ (Accessed: April, 2017)).
56. Trafa, Road traffic injuries 2015. Report no 2016:2. Traffic analysis, Official Statistics of Sweden, 2016 (Available at http://www.trafa.se/vagtrafik/vagtrafikskador/ (Assessed: September 2016)).
57. UN, The future we want. Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly. A/RES/66/288, 2012, United Nations, New York.
58. Volchko, Y., Norrman, J., Bergknut, M., Rosén, L., Söderqvist, T., Incorporating the soil function concept into sustainability appraisal of remediation alternatives. J. Environ. Manag. 129 (2013), 367–376.
59. WCED, Our common future. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987, United Nations, A/42/427.