Results 1 - 10 of 2624
Results 1 - 10 of 2624. Search took: 0.032 seconds
|Sort by: date | relevance|
[en] This paper presents a brief history of the development of cumulative effects, the current requirements in North America and elsewhere in the world, challenges at the project level, thoughts on how emerging concepts of strategic environmental assessment and regional assessment may offer means to improve the examination of cumulative effects and offers suggestions for current and future needs in cumulative effects assessment.
[en] In early 2011, BHP Billiton published the supplement to the 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for its proposed expansion of the Olympic Dam operation. The overall EIS process provides opportunity for public and government feedback on draft EIS and the supplement addresses the issues raised in formal submissions by the public and the government on the content of the draft EIS. The two documents together form the EIS for the proposed expansion and consist of some 10,000 pages of information, comment and conclusions. Of over 4,000 submissions received on the draft EIS, there were 372 unique submissions with the rest being form letters. Submissions were received on all aspects of the proposed expansion and this paper focuses on those related to radiation. Overall, there were minimal positive radiation related comments and comments were either; seeking more information or clarity on key areas of interest, voicing ideological concerns or reiterating common misconceptions or errors of fact. The public comments provide an insight into the radiation related issues that are causing concern in sections of the community, providing an opportunity to target either awareness or education programs:He aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the key issues raised and describe how they were addressed in the supplement to the EIS.
[en] Research focusing on the practices surrounding screening in Impact Assessment (IA) is limited. Yet, it has been found that development proposals sometimes are adjusted through an informal dialog with IA practitioners prior to or during screening. Such practice is often referred to as ‘grey IA’ in Denmark. This article explores the prevalence, influence and applied rationale of grey IA. Through a questionnaire, data was collected from 121 IA practitioners working within the fields of environmental impact assessment and strategic environmental assessment. It was found that grey IA is a common practice, which influences the outcomes of formal screening procedures through consideration of impacts on neighbours and spatial zones of protection. Grey IA is to some extent motivated by the opportunity to save the resources required for full-scale IA, but an additional ‘green’ rationale also exists. Grey IA may influence the effectiveness of IA systems, but further research is needed before any conclusions can be made. - Highlights: • Screening procedures may function as an informal, ‘grey’ assessment. • Grey assessment is common and influences formal screening outcomes. • Grey assessment is motivated by an opportunity to cut IA costs. • Yet, an environmental, ‘green’ rationale for grey assessment also exists.
[en] In November 1993 US DOE decided to phase out operations at the Mound Plant in Miamisburg, Ohio, with the goal of releasing the site for commercial use. The broad concept is to transform the plant into an advanced manufacturing center with the main focus on commercializing products and other technology. DOE proposes to lease portions of the Mound Plant to commercial enterprises. This Environmental Impact statement has a finding of no significant impact in reference to such action
[en] Highlights: • A tool for rapid assessment of EIA performance is presented. • The tool focusses on EIA systems in low and middle income countries. • This tool aims to enhance the capacities of the main EIA organizations. • Mechanisms are identified to maintain and further develop the enhanced capacities.
[en] This article highlights the advantages of biofuels including the low sulphur content, the small amount of nitrogen dioxide and dust released on combustion, the reduced health risk, the renewability of biofuels, the possible collection of trace metals from the soil by biofuels, and no long term impact on the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The disadvantages of the more expensive biofuel are also noted. (UK)
[en] This Decree, made in implementation of Decree-Law No. 186/90 on environmental protection, provides that prior to any licence being granted to any project, including nuclear installations, the licensing authority must be provided with an environmental impact study of the planned installation. This study must include a description of the project, its site, its operational characteristics, physical, geological, hydrological, ecological, demographic data, as well as information on the quality of the environment
[fr]Ce Decret, pris en application du Decret-Loi no 186/90 relatif a la protection de l'environnement, prevoit que, prealablement a l'octroi d'une autorisation a tout projet, y compris une installation nucleaire, l'autorite competente en la matiere doit recevoir une etude d'impact sur l'environnement de l'installation projetee. Cette etude doit comprendre une description du projet et du site envisage, des donnees relatives a l'exploitation, ainsi que des caracteristiques physiques, geologiques, hydrologiques, ecologiques de l'environnement et sa qualite
[en] Highlights: • Manipulation is an illegitimate attempt to alter EIA for spurious interests. • Any stakeholder may try to manipulate EIA in self-benefit. • While bias is unavoidable in EIA and should be managed, manipulation is unacceptable. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process where several stakeholders take part, each with different interests, making bias unavoidable and a major cause of concern, but there is a big difference between inherent stakeholders' bias and manipulation, an illegitimate attempt to alter decisions for spurious interests. Although manipulation has usually been attributed to developers, any stakeholder may try to use it for self-benefit. In this paper we analyse manipulation possibilities, and how they can be used by stakeholders. While bias is unavoidable and should be reduced, understood and managed in EIA, manipulation is unacceptable and must be excluded.