Remediation: Techniques and Cost - Urban Watersheds: Geology, Contamination, and Sustainable Development - page 411

weighted toward pollution prevention and permitting, and they have been effective at
significantly reducing the amount of contaminants entering the air and surface waters of
the United States.
An expanding variety of technologies now exist for remediating soil, water, sediments,
and air. The most important factor, however, for ensuring a successful remediation effort
is the proper characterization of the site. Investigators must identify all sources of con-
tamination, produce accurate estimates of contaminant mass, and follow sound sampling
procedures. Technology alone cannot rescue a poor game plan.
Sites where groundwater is contaminated are six times more expensive to remedi-
ate than those where soil alone is affected. Analysis of a large sample of contaminated
sites revealed there are very high costs associated with remediating sites where the
contaminant of concern was chromium VI and DNAPL VOCs. A synergistic effect is
realized when these contaminants are released in a geologically vulnerable area. The
remedial cost patterns at sites of environmental contamination also demonstrate the
importance and predictive power of using Contaminant Risk Factors (CRFs) to assist
in future sustainable development and redevelopment of urban areas across the United
States.
Pollution prevention techniques implemented on a watershed-wide and site-specific
basis are a logical first step toward sustainable development. Consideration of the geology
and contaminant-specific physical chemistry can help determine what chemicals should
be used, where they should be used, and how they should be used. In the next chapter, we
present guidelines for achieving sustainable urban watersheds by building on the scien-
tific foundation of geology and contaminant management.
References
American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) 1995. Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action .
ASTM Publication E1739-95. West Philadelphia, PA.
Cauwenberghe, L.V. 1997. Electrokinetics . Ground-Water Remediation Technologies Analysis Center.
Pittsburgh. PA.
City of Springfield, Missouri. 2010. Northwest Wastewater Treatment Plant. http://www.spring-
fieldmo.gov/sanitary/nw_treatment.html (accessed November 27, 2010).
Eifert, W. 2010a. Engineered Natural Systems: A Technology Overview with Case Studies , p. 15. New York:
Roux Associates.
Eifert, W.H. 2010b. Simple, Reliable and Cost-Effective Solutions for Water Management and Treatment: A
Technology Overview with Case Studies . New York: Roux Associates.
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable. 2010. Soil vapor extraction. http://www.frtr.gov/
matrix2/section1/list-of-fig.html (accessed June 24, 2010).
Murray, K.S. and D.C. Clark. 1993. Treatment cell concept for the bioremediation of hydrocarbon con-
taminated soils. In Principles and Practices for Diesel Contaminated Soils , Vol. II, ed. P.T. Kostecki,
E.J. Calabrese, and C. Barkan, pp. 83-95. Amherst, MA: Association for the Environmental
Health of Soils.
Murray, K. S., J.B. McNeal, and S.B. McNeal. 1997. Air treatment galleries and soil venting: a solution
to soil and groundwater contamination at remote sites. Environmental Protection 8:24-28.
Murray, K.S., A. Farkas, J. Heiden et al. 1997. Surface water quality analysis. Rouge River, southeast
Michigan. Michigan Academician 29:159-171.
Murray, K.S., D.T. Rogers, and M.M. Kaufman. 2004. Heavy metals in an urban watershed in south-
eastern Michigan. Journal of Environmental Quality 33:163-172.