The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Brownfields to green fields: realising wider benefits from practical contaminant phytomanagement strategies

Brownfields to green fields: realising wider benefits from practical contaminant phytomanagement strategies
Brownfields to green fields: realising wider benefits from practical contaminant phytomanagement strategies
Gentle remediation options (GROs) are risk management strategies or technologies involving plant (phyto-), fungi (myco-), and/or bacteria-based methods that result in a net gain (or at least no gross reduction) in soil function as well as effective risk management. GRO strategies can be customised along contaminant linkages, and can generate a range of wider economic, environmental and societal benefits in contaminated land management (and in brownfields management more widely). The application of GROs as practical on-site remedial solutions is still limited however, particularly in Europe and at trace element (typically metal and metalloid) contaminated sites. This paper discusses challenges to the practical adoption of GROs in contaminated land management, and outlines the decision support tools and best practice guidance developed in the European Commission FP7-funded GREENLAND project aimed at overcoming these challenges. The GREENLAND guidance promotes a refocus from phytoremediation to wider GROs- or phyto-management based approaches which place realisation of wider benefits at the core of site design, and where gentle remediation technologies can be applied as part of integrated, mixed, site risk management solutions or as part of “holding strategies” for vacant sites. The combination of GROs with renewables, both in terms of biomass generation but also with green technologies such as wind and solar power, can provide a range of economic and other benefits and can potentially support the return of low-level contaminated sites to productive usage, while combining GROs with urban design and landscape architecture, and integrating GRO strategies with sustainable urban drainage systems and community gardens/parkland (particularly for health and leisure benefits), has large potential for triggering GRO application and in realising wider benefits in urban and suburban systems. Quantifying these wider benefits and value (above standard economic returns) will be important in leveraging funding for GRO application and soft site end-use more widely at vacant or underutilized sites.
Contaminated land, Brownfields, Gentle remediation options, Phytoremediation, Phytomanagement, Heavy metals, Decision support tools
0301-4797
67-77
Cundy, A.B.
994fdc96-2dce-40f4-b74b-dc638286eb08
Bardos, R.P.
38c1d5e8-5226-4fca-906f-0cd3a72063c3
Puschenreiter, M.
13db6136-81bb-43f0-a160-3d7655b74256
Mench, M.
2b192d5d-fbf9-4ea1-a566-9fd8eb6478ad
Bert, V.
103702d1-407e-4a93-bbb9-ae4f6673b4eb
Friesl-Hanl, W.
b494ebcc-723c-4a08-ac34-11027ce90a81
Müller, I.
44144908-9909-453d-9f81-416da16dae3f
Li, X.N.
33e10fbd-13b3-4414-aae4-2bb160976cfe
Weyens, N.
3c7ec831-0002-4028-8ee3-e74162b55177
Witters, N.
c29ac88b-df42-4f9f-bd49-abd620aaca60
Vangronsveld, J.
0ed51739-3d36-4cfe-b509-4b62dc012a2b
Cundy, A.B.
994fdc96-2dce-40f4-b74b-dc638286eb08
Bardos, R.P.
38c1d5e8-5226-4fca-906f-0cd3a72063c3
Puschenreiter, M.
13db6136-81bb-43f0-a160-3d7655b74256
Mench, M.
2b192d5d-fbf9-4ea1-a566-9fd8eb6478ad
Bert, V.
103702d1-407e-4a93-bbb9-ae4f6673b4eb
Friesl-Hanl, W.
b494ebcc-723c-4a08-ac34-11027ce90a81
Müller, I.
44144908-9909-453d-9f81-416da16dae3f
Li, X.N.
33e10fbd-13b3-4414-aae4-2bb160976cfe
Weyens, N.
3c7ec831-0002-4028-8ee3-e74162b55177
Witters, N.
c29ac88b-df42-4f9f-bd49-abd620aaca60
Vangronsveld, J.
0ed51739-3d36-4cfe-b509-4b62dc012a2b

Cundy, A.B., Bardos, R.P., Puschenreiter, M., Mench, M., Bert, V., Friesl-Hanl, W., Müller, I., Li, X.N., Weyens, N., Witters, N. and Vangronsveld, J. (2016) Brownfields to green fields: realising wider benefits from practical contaminant phytomanagement strategies. Journal of Environmental Management, 184 (1), 67-77. (doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.03.028).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Gentle remediation options (GROs) are risk management strategies or technologies involving plant (phyto-), fungi (myco-), and/or bacteria-based methods that result in a net gain (or at least no gross reduction) in soil function as well as effective risk management. GRO strategies can be customised along contaminant linkages, and can generate a range of wider economic, environmental and societal benefits in contaminated land management (and in brownfields management more widely). The application of GROs as practical on-site remedial solutions is still limited however, particularly in Europe and at trace element (typically metal and metalloid) contaminated sites. This paper discusses challenges to the practical adoption of GROs in contaminated land management, and outlines the decision support tools and best practice guidance developed in the European Commission FP7-funded GREENLAND project aimed at overcoming these challenges. The GREENLAND guidance promotes a refocus from phytoremediation to wider GROs- or phyto-management based approaches which place realisation of wider benefits at the core of site design, and where gentle remediation technologies can be applied as part of integrated, mixed, site risk management solutions or as part of “holding strategies” for vacant sites. The combination of GROs with renewables, both in terms of biomass generation but also with green technologies such as wind and solar power, can provide a range of economic and other benefits and can potentially support the return of low-level contaminated sites to productive usage, while combining GROs with urban design and landscape architecture, and integrating GRO strategies with sustainable urban drainage systems and community gardens/parkland (particularly for health and leisure benefits), has large potential for triggering GRO application and in realising wider benefits in urban and suburban systems. Quantifying these wider benefits and value (above standard economic returns) will be important in leveraging funding for GRO application and soft site end-use more widely at vacant or underutilized sites.

Text
JEMA Brownfields to Greenfields author's pre-print updated.pdf - Accepted Manuscript
Download (532kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 19 March 2016
Published date: 15 December 2016
Keywords: Contaminated land, Brownfields, Gentle remediation options, Phytoremediation, Phytomanagement, Heavy metals, Decision support tools
Organisations: Geochemistry

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 399210
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/399210
ISSN: 0301-4797
PURE UUID: fd77962b-fa80-48f7-b5b1-53eccf793168
ORCID for A.B. Cundy: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-4368-2569

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 08 Aug 2016 15:23
Last modified: 15 Aug 2019 05:22

Export record

Altmetrics

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×