RISK-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION - DECISION FRAMEWORK AND ROLE OF UNCERTAINTY

被引:32
作者
DAKINS, ME
TOLL, JE
SMALL, MJ
机构
[1] ENSERCH ENVIRONM CORP, RISK ASSESSMENT & RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS, BELLEVUE, WA 98004 USA
[2] CARNEGIE MELLON UNIV, DEPT CIVIL & ENVIRONM ENGN, PITTSBURGH, PA 15213 USA
[3] CARNEGIE MELLON UNIV, DEPT ENGN & PUBL POLICY, PITTSBURGH, PA 15213 USA
关键词
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; VALUE OF INFORMATION; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; RISK ANALYSIS; NEW BEDFORD HARBOR;
D O I
10.1002/etc.5620131206
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
A methodology for incorporating uncertainty in model predictions into a risk-based decision for environmental remediation is illustrated, considering polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) sediment contamination and uptake by winter flounder in New Bedford Harbor, Massachusetts. Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses are conducted for a model that predicts the sediment remediation volume required to meet a biota tissue concentration criterion. These evaluations help to identify the variables that most significantly contribute to uncertainty in the model prediction and allow for calculations of the expected value of including uncertainty (EVIU) and the expected value of perfect information (EVPI) for the remediation decision. The EVIU is the difference between the expected loss of a management decision based solely on a deterministic analysis and the expected loss of the optimal management decision that considers uncertainty. For the illustrative application to New Bedford Harbor, the expected loss avoided from performing an uncertainty analysis and using the resulting information to make the optimal management decision is approximately $20 million. The EVPI, the expected decrease in loss that can be achieved by having all uncertainty eliminated, is approximately $16 million.
引用
收藏
页码:1907 / 1915
页数:9
相关论文
共 32 条
[11]   EVALUATING THE BENEFITS OF UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION IN ENVIRONMENTAL-HEALTH RISK MANAGEMENT [J].
FINKEL, AM ;
EVANS, JS .
JAPCA-THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT, 1987, 37 (10) :1164-1171
[12]   A METHOD FOR PROPAGATING MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTIES THROUGH DISPERSION MODELS [J].
FREEMAN, DL ;
EGAMI, RT ;
ROBINSON, NF ;
WATSON, JG .
JOURNAL OF THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ASSOCIATION, 1986, 36 (03) :246-253
[13]   HYDROGEOLOGICAL DECISION-ANALYSIS .1. A FRAMEWORK [J].
FREEZE, RA ;
MASSMANN, J ;
SMITH, L ;
SPERLING, T ;
JAMES, B .
GROUND WATER, 1990, 28 (05) :738-766
[14]  
Hoar W.S., 1979, FISH PHYSL
[15]   PROBABILISTIC MODELS FOR PREDICTING STREAM QUALITY [J].
LOUCKS, DP ;
LYNN, WR .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 1966, 2 (03) :593-&
[16]  
Marin C. M., 1989, Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, V5, P1, DOI 10.1016/0169-7722(89)90002-8
[17]   A COMPARISON OF THREE METHODS FOR SELECTING VALUES OF INPUT VARIABLES IN THE ANALYSIS OF OUTPUT FROM A COMPUTER CODE [J].
MCKAY, MD ;
BECKMAN, RJ ;
CONOVER, WJ .
TECHNOMETRICS, 1979, 21 (02) :239-245
[18]   ANALYSIS OF PARAMETER ERROR IN A NON-LINEAR MODEL [J].
ONEILL, RV ;
GARDNER, RH ;
MANKIN, JB .
ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 1980, 8 (JAN) :297-311
[19]   BAYESIAN METHODS FOR MODEL UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS WITH APPLICATION TO FUTURE SEA-LEVEL RISE [J].
PATWARDHAN, A ;
SMALL, MJ .
RISK ANALYSIS, 1992, 12 (04) :513-523
[20]  
RAIFFA HOWARD, 1968, DECISION ANAL