Special Issue "Green and Sustainable Remediation of Contaminated Site"

A special issue of Sustainability (ISSN 2071-1050). This special issue belongs to the section "Environmental Sustainability and Applications".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 March 2019).

Special Issue Editor

Prof. Dr. Zeng-Yei Hseu
Website
Guest Editor

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Contaminated sites are designed to treat contaminants in soil or groundwater to decrease risks to human health and/or the environment, but the remediation processes also have the potential to cause environmental, economic, and social impacts. Traditional remediation practices, such as excavation, washing, and landfilling, are often less feasible on a large scale because they are environmentally disruptive, cost-prohibitive, and pose health risks to local residents and site workers. These concerns have prompted the emergence of cost-effective and less-disruptive alternatives for site remediation. Hence, green and sustainable remediation (GSR) of contaminated sites should comply with the standards for the protection of human health associated with environment, social, and economic considerations. To obtain the best management practices (BMPs) of site remediation, these considerations of GSR were proposed to meet requirements, such as reducing the environmental footprint and adverse effects of remediation processes, making policy decision for social justice by community involvement, and evaluating the cost, benefit, and economic effects of the alternative. Soil and groundwater remediation is, not only removing target contaminants, but also we need more consideration before making decisions using the approach of GSR.

The scope of the proposed Special Issue of Sustainability is to highlight the recent framework progress of GSR, as well as the technical alternatives for BMPs. The purpose of the Special Issue is not only to wrap-up the state-of-the-art of GSR for soils or groundwater contaminated by heavy metal and/or organic pollutants, but also to honestly consider the present bottlenecks of our scientific knowledge and the limiting steps of practical applications, as well as to propose innovative solutions to overcome them and contribute to the implementation of such promising GSRs.

Since you and your team are involved in the development of these approaches and in the understanding of the conceptual and technical development of GSR, you should contribute to the Special Issue and submit a manuscript describing your most recent results or a review on some exciting aspects of this promising topic.

Prof. Dr. Zeng-Yei Hseu
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sustainability is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1800 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • soil remediation
  • groundwater remediation
  • best management practice
  • environmental quality
  • human health
  • environmental footprint
  • Site contamination
  • social justice

Published Papers (4 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

Open AccessArticle
Chemical or Natural? Including LCA in Social CBA to Compare Remediation Alternatives for a Dry-Cleaning Facility
Sustainability 2019, 11(7), 1975; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11071975 - 03 Apr 2019
Cited by 1
Abstract
The choice between remediation alternatives for contaminated sites is complicated by different elements, e.g., the occurrence of multiple contaminants, the extent of the contamination, or the urban location, complicate the choice between remediation alternatives. This paper addresses this challenging choice by analyzing a [...] Read more.
The choice between remediation alternatives for contaminated sites is complicated by different elements, e.g., the occurrence of multiple contaminants, the extent of the contamination, or the urban location, complicate the choice between remediation alternatives. This paper addresses this challenging choice by analyzing a case study of an extensive soil and groundwater contamination by a dry-cleaning company. For remediating this site, two alternatives were proposed. The first remediation alternative combines several techniques with in-situ chemical oxidization being the most important one. Due to the potential negative impact of this alternative on local residents a second remediation alternative was drawn up, in which the focus lies on the use of stimulated biological degradation. A Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) was performed on both alternatives and showed that the second alternative had a lower environmental impact. The inclusion of monetized LCA results in the calculation of a social Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) provided a more extensive view of the secondary environmental costs and benefits of the remediation alternatives. The results of the social CBA allow to conclude that both alternatives are not socially desirable, the chemical alternative however is socially less disadvantageous than the more natural remediation alternative. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Green and Sustainable Remediation of Contaminated Site)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Characterization of Di-n-Butyl Phthalate Phytoremediation by Garden Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. longifolia) through Kinetics and Proteome Analysis
Sustainability 2019, 11(6), 1625; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061625 - 18 Mar 2019
Cited by 2
Abstract
Di-n-dutyl phthalate (DBP), an endocrine disruptor, is one of the most widely used phthalate esters (PAEs) in the world. It can be accumulated in seafood or agricultural products and represents a substantial risk to human health via the food chain. Thus, [...] Read more.
Di-n-dutyl phthalate (DBP), an endocrine disruptor, is one of the most widely used phthalate esters (PAEs) in the world. It can be accumulated in seafood or agricultural products and represents a substantial risk to human health via the food chain. Thus, finding a plant which can remediate DBP but have no effects on growth is the main topic of the development of DBP phytoremediation. This study used garden lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. longifolia), which has a significant DBP absorption capability, as a test plant to measure phytoremediation kinetics and proteome changes after being exposed to DBP. The results show that DBP accumulated in different parts of the garden lettuce but the physiological status and morphology showed no significant changes following DBP phytoremediation. The optimal condition for the DBP phytoremediation of garden lettuce is one critical micelle concentration (CMC) of non-ionic surfactant Tween 80 and the half-life (t1/2, days), which calculated by first-order kinetics, was 2.686 days for 5 mg L−1 of DBP. This result indicated that the addition of 1 CMC of Tween 80 could enhance the efficiency of DBP phytoremediation. In addition, the results of biotoxicity showed that the median effective concentration (EC50) of DBP for Chlorella vulgaris is 4.9 mg L−1. In this case, the overall toxicity markedly decreased following phytoremediation. In the end, the result of proteome analysis showed six protein spots, revealing significant alterations. According to the information of these proteomes, DBP potentially causes osmotic and oxidative stress in garden lettuce. In addition, since DBP had no significant effects on the morphology and physiological status of garden lettuce, garden lettuce can be recommended for use in the plant anti-DBP toxicity test, and also as the candidate plant for DBP phytoremediation. We hope these findings could provide valuable information for DBP-contaminated water treatment in ecological engineering applications or constructed wetlands. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Green and Sustainable Remediation of Contaminated Site)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Effect of Growing Groundcover Plants in a Vineyard on Dissipation of Two Neonicotinoid Insecticides
Sustainability 2019, 11(3), 798; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030798 - 03 Feb 2019
Abstract
This study investigated the difference in neonicotinoids dissipation in a grape vineyard by planting different groundcovers plants, including a control bare field (CF), Arachis pintoi Krap. and Greg. (peanut field (PF)) and Clinopodium brownei (Sw.) Kuntze (mint field (MF)). After one day of [...] Read more.
This study investigated the difference in neonicotinoids dissipation in a grape vineyard by planting different groundcovers plants, including a control bare field (CF), Arachis pintoi Krap. and Greg. (peanut field (PF)) and Clinopodium brownei (Sw.) Kuntze (mint field (MF)). After one day of pesticide spraying, the highest dinotefuran residue concentration was in 0- to 15-cm soil in the CF (0.161 mg/kg), but 30- to 45-cm and 15- to 30-cm soil in the MF and PF, respectively (0.307 and 0.033 mg/kg). Also, after four days, the highest imidacloprid residue concentration was in 0- to 15-cm soil in the CF. Imidacloprid was not retained in the 30- to 45-cm soils in the PF, but in the MF, a 0.015- and 0.011-mg/kg residue was detected in 30- to 45-cm soil in the second and third soil samplings, indicating a different distribution with different groundcover plants. The dinotefuran absorption ability was greater with A. pintoi than C. brownei, and the imidacloprid absorption ability was greater with C. brownei. Our results suggest that groundcover plants affect the dissipation of neonicotinoids differently, while A. pintoi has a high metabolic rate toward the two neonicotinoids and can increase the soil organic matter content, which is a preferable choice for a groundcover. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Green and Sustainable Remediation of Contaminated Site)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Review

Jump to: Research

Open AccessReview
Iron Sulfide Minerals as Potential Active Capping Materials for Mercury-Contaminated Sediment Remediation: A Minireview
Sustainability 2019, 11(6), 1747; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061747 - 22 Mar 2019
Cited by 5
Abstract
Several innovative approaches have been proposed in recent years to remediate contaminated sediment to reduce human health and environmental risk. One of the challenges of sediment remediation stems from its unfeasible high cost, especially when ex situ strategies are selected. Therefore, in situ [...] Read more.
Several innovative approaches have been proposed in recent years to remediate contaminated sediment to reduce human health and environmental risk. One of the challenges of sediment remediation stems from its unfeasible high cost, especially when ex situ strategies are selected. Therefore, in situ methods such as active capping have been emerging as possible options for solving sediment problems. Active capping methods have been extensively tested in field-scale sediment remediation for organic pollutants (e.g., PCBs, PAHs, DDT) contamination with good sequestration efficiency; however, these methods have not been widely tested for control of heavy metal pollutants, such as mercury (Hg). In this review, the potentials of using iron sulfide minerals to sequestrate Hg were discussed. Iron sulfide minerals are common in the natural environment and have shown good effectiveness in sequestrating Hg by adsorption or precipitation. Iron sulfides can also be synthesized in a laboratory and modified to enhance their sequestration ability for Hg. Some of the potential advantages of iron sulfides are pointed out here. Additional tests to understand the possibility of applying iron sulfides as active caps to remediate complicated environment systems should be conducted. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Green and Sustainable Remediation of Contaminated Site)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop