Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
analysis predicted that only a small percentage (generally less than 5%) of
the immature striped bass would be entrained or entrapped as part of their
operation and this small percentage was included in the 90% that would not
survive anyway. Thus the conclusion was that there was no reduction in the
breeding population, the population was sustainable, and there would be lit-
tle or no adverse impact on the Hudson River estuary striped bass breeding
success. The academic and regulatory community initially agreed with this
analysis because it was based on a wealth of high-quality data and state-of-
the-art ecological population modeling. It even included adequate allowance
for uncertainty and conservative probability analysis.
However, a coalition of Hudson River environmental advocacy groups
pointed out a flaw in the analysis. Only the existing conditions were considered
and there was no evaluation of the impact of each power plant based on future
conditions when other power generating facilities were in operation. When the
striped bass models were rerun using a diminished number of immature
bass resulting from the future operation of other facilities, an impact on
overall populations was detected. After this impact analysis comparing the
proposed action with the no action was completed, the power generating
community agreed to a reevaluation, and the result was a negotiated agree-
ment among the power generation community, the environmental advocacy
groups, and the regulators as to the total amount of water, and associated
immature striped bass that could be withdrawn, and then this total number
was proportioned among the proposed projects (this could also have been
resolved with a comprehensive cumulative impact analysis, see Section 5.5).
It was then incumbent on the environmental analysis of each individual
facility to demonstrate that their facility design, operation, and mitigation
would not result in immature striped bass mortality greater than their allot-
ment based on future conditions.
4.5.2
Development of Alternatives
In any situation after the problem has been defined, identification of alter-
native solutions is the first step in problem solving. This is certainly true
of environmental analysis and a primary, and usually the first alternative
identification approach is to make use of the environmental analysis and
project teams' technical expertise to identify tried and true methods to sat-
isfying the purpose and need. This is frequently accomplished in advance
or during the earliest stages of environmental analysis in the form of a tech-
nical feasibility study for a project or similar analysis for plans or policies.
Once the members of the team with technical or policy expertise have iden-
tified the classic and innovative project-specific alternative solutions to the
purpose and need, the environmental practitioners can begin identifying the
environmental resources potentially affected.
The next chronological step in alternative identification is through scop-
ing. As discussed in Section 4.3, both social and technical scoping can be
Search WWH ::
Custom Search