Abstract

  
  Two remediation alternatives have emerged as cost-effective approaches to the management of dredged sediments: sub-aqueous confined aquatic disposal (CAD) and beneficial upland application, including artificial wetlands and/or construction fill applications. Developing an optimal strategy depends upon a multidimensional analysis of economic, environmental, ecological, thermodynamic and socio-political concerns. The primary objective of this ongoing research is to establish a decision support tool that enables researchers, state regulators, and coastal zone managers to conduct a comparative evaluation of consequences and/or risks associated with the various disposal/reuse options available. Of critical importance to this task is developing metrics related to each dimension that are easy to communicate and interpret, transparent in formulation and scientifically reliable (or reproducible). This poster presents a framework for quantitative assessment of technological alternatives by multiple methods: total cost assessment, chemical pollution potential and wetland plant habitat suitability. Total cost depends largely upon characterization of geotechnical/structural properties of the dredged sediments and stabilizing admixture requirements, as well as environmental and ecological risk parameters. Pollution potential highly depends upon the expected mobility, persistence and concentration of relevant pollutants. Wetland plant suitability depends upon supported plant mass, pollutant phytoextraction and properties of soil column leachate. Experiments relating to each metric are described. The resulting assessments will provide coastal zone managers or waste program regulators a broad-based tool for comparing dredged material management alternatives that can be communicated to broad constituencies and employed as a guide or basis for decision-making.