• Energy Research

Gentle remediation options (GRO), i.e. in situ stabilisation, (aided) phytoextraction and (aided) phytostabilisation, were implemented at ten European sites contaminated with trace elements (TE) from various anthropogenic sources: mining, atmospheric fallout, landfill leachates, wood preservatives, dredged-sediments, and dumped wastes. To assess the performance of the GRO options, topsoil was collected from each field trial, potted, and cultivated with lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) for 48days. Shoot dry weight (DW) yield, photosynthesis efficiency and major element and TE concentrations in the soil pore water and lettuce shoots were measured. GRO implementation had a limited effect on TE concentrations in the soil pore water, although use of multivariate Co-inertia Analysis revealed a clear amelioration effect in phytomanaged soils. Phytomanagement increased shoot DW yield at all industrial and mine sites, whereas in agricultural soils improvements were produced in one out of five sites. Photosynthesis efficiency was less sensitive than changes in shoot biomass and did not discriminate changes in soil conditions. Based on lettuce shoot DW yield, compost amendment followed by phytoextraction yielded better results than phytostabilisation; moreover shoot ionome data proved that, depending on initial soil conditions, recurrent compost application may be required to maintain crop production with common shoot nutrient concentrations.

Gentle remediation options (GRO), i.e. in situ stabilisation, (aided) phytoextraction and (aided) phytostabilisation, were implemented at ten European sites contaminated with trace elements (TE) from various anthropogenic sources: mining, atmospheric fallout, landfill leachates, wood preservatives, dredged-sediments, and dumped wastes. To assess the performance of the GRO options, topsoil was collected from each field trial, potted, and cultivated with lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) for 48days. Shoot dry weight (DW) yield, photosynthesis efficiency and major element and TE concentrations in the soil pore water and lettuce shoots were measured. GRO implementation had a limited effect on TE concentrations in the soil pore water, although use of multivariate Co-inertia Analysis revealed a clear amelioration effect in phytomanaged soils. Phytomanagement increased shoot DW yield at all industrial and mine sites, whereas in agricultural soils improvements were produced in one out of five sites. Photosynthesis efficiency was less sensitive than changes in shoot biomass and did not discriminate changes in soil conditions. Based on lettuce shoot DW yield, compost amendment followed by phytoextraction yielded better results than phytostabilisation; moreover shoot ionome data proved that, depending on initial soil conditions, recurrent compost application may be required to maintain crop production with common shoot nutrient concentrations.

The use of science-based tools for impact assessment has increasingly gained focus in addressing the complexity of interactions between environment, society, and economy. For integrated assessment of policies affecting land use, an analytical framework was developed. The aim of our work was to apply the analytical framework for specific scenario cases and in combination with quantitative and qualitative application methods. The analytical framework was tested for two cases involving the ex ante impact assessment of: (1) a European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) financial reform scenario employing a modeling approach and combined with a comprehensive indicator analysis and valuation; and (2) a regional bioenergy policy scenario, employing a fully participatory approach. The results showed that European land use in general is less sensitive to changes in the Common Agricultural Policy, but in the context of regions there can be significant impacts on the functions of land use. In general, the implementation of the analytical framework for impact assessment proved to be doable with both methods, i.e., with the quantitative modeling and with the qualitative participatory approach. A key advantage of using the system of linked quantitative models is that it makes possible the simultaneous consideration of all relevant sectors of the economy without abstaining from a great level of detail for sectors of particular interest. Other advantages lie in the incontestable character of the results. Based on neutral, existing data with a fixed set of settings and regions, an absolute comparability and reproducibility throughout Europe can be maintained. Analyzing the pros and cons of both approaches showed that they could be used complementarily rather than be seen as competing alternatives.

The use of science-based tools for impact assessment has increasingly gained focus in addressing the complexity of interactions between environment, society, and economy. For integrated assessment of policies affecting land use, an analytical framework was developed. The aim of our work was to apply the analytical framework for specific scenario cases and in combination with quantitative and qualitative application methods. The analytical framework was tested for two cases involving the ex ante impact assessment of: (1) a European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) financial reform scenario employing a modeling approach and combined with a comprehensive indicator analysis and valuation; and (2) a regional bioenergy policy scenario, employing a fully participatory approach. The results showed that European land use in general is less sensitive to changes in the Common Agricultural Policy, but in the context of regions there can be significant impacts on the functions of land use. In general, the implementation of the analytical framework for impact assessment proved to be doable with both methods, i.e., with the quantitative modeling and with the qualitative participatory approach. A key advantage of using the system of linked quantitative models is that it makes possible the simultaneous consideration of all relevant sectors of the economy without abstaining from a great level of detail for sectors of particular interest. Other advantages lie in the incontestable character of the results. Based on neutral, existing data with a fixed set of settings and regions, an absolute comparability and reproducibility throughout Europe can be maintained. Analyzing the pros and cons of both approaches showed that they could be used complementarily rather than be seen as competing alternatives.

Cross-cutting environmental, social and economic changes may have harsh impacts on sensitive regions. To address sustainability issues by governmental policy measures properly, the geographical delineation of sensitive regions is essential. With reference to the European impact assessment guidelines from 2005, sensitive regions were identified by using environmental, social and economic data and by applying cluster analysis, United Nation Environmental Policy priorities and expert knowledge. On a regionalised ‘Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics’ (NUTS) level and for pre-defined sensitive region types (post-industrial zones, mountains, coasts and islands) 31 % of the European area was identified as sensitive. However, the delineation mainly referred to social and economic issues since the regional data bases on environmental indicators are limited and do not allow the separation of medium-term vital classes of sensitive regions. Overall, the sensitive regions showed indicator values differing from the EU- 25 average. peer-reviewed