Compiled by: Marjan Euser (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Subscription Service: SedNet Secretariat (email@example.com)
Disclaimer: SedNet is not responsible for faults due to incorrectness of info in this newsletter
Previous issues: www.sednet.org
The issue of Sediment Management is rising on the European agenda. Sediment topics will be an element of River Basin Management Plans to be published in 2009 under the Water Framework Directive. Sediment Management is one element of a European Working Group on Estuarie Management, organised by DG Environment of the EU Commission. Sediments are explicitly mentioned in new EU legislation, like the Directive on Environmental Quality Standards in the field of water policy, the Marine Strategy Directive, and the Waste Directive.
In Europe the largest amounts of sediments have to be dredged in the North Sea region, where the natural sediment regime in the sea leads to high sedimentation in ports, harbours and waterways. Additionally, sediments gain in importance due to sea level rise and loss of fine grained sediments in the Wadden Sea.
On this background SedNet organises its 6th International 2-day Conference on Sediment Management in Hamburg. Here still ongoing river restoration challenges coincide with dredging needs and sediments play a central role. The region is a good example to discuss cross-cutting science-policy issues.
At the beginning of the conference a report will be given from the SedNet Round Table Discussion on “Implementation of sediment management issues into the first RBM Plans”.
On day 3, after the conference, a Special Session under the title “Managing the Elbe Estuary” will cover local challenges and solutions.
Special Session on 9 October 2009:
Managing the Elbe Estuary
In the Port of Hamburg regular dredging is necessary to maintain safe water depths for navigation. In the 1980’s when contamination of Elbe sediments was on a high level a comprehensive dredged material management concept was developed. Central element is land treatment and disposal of dredged contaminated Elbe sediments.
Nowadays challenges have changed. The port is situated at the upper end of the Elbe estuary, about 100 km away from the North Sea. Nature conservation objectives to preserve and enhance the precious estuary ecology are sought to be combined with needs of navigation and water depth maintenance. Today the larger part of dredged sediments is relocated in the aquatic system. Special nature conservation measures can also lead to reduction of sedimentation and thus of dredging needs.
In a Special Session “Managing the Elbe Estuary” this concept will be explained in 4 plenary presentations. After that a site visit will show the land treatment and disposal facilities. Participants will see the world’s largest operating dredged material treatment facility METHA. Here 1 million cubic meters of sediments are separated into sand and silt, the silt is dewatered. After this it is safely stored in a special confined disposal site or is beneficially used. Also the Francop disposal site will be part of the visit.
The detailed conference program is available from www.sednet.org.
Early this year SedNet gave an official response to the Draft Technical Guidance for Deriving Environmental Quality Standards under the Water Framework Directive, published in December 2008. In an earlier phase, the SedNet Steering Group sent recommendations to EU working groups giving advice to the European Commission on how to derive sediment-EQS for organic pollutants. These recommendations are also based on the discussion in the session on sediment quality standards in the SedNet Conference held in Oslo, May 27th-29th 2008.
|The response by SedNet sent to the European Commission (January 26th, 2009) contained the following main points:|
|1.||SedNet acknowledges the tremendous work put into the Draft Technical Guidance for Deriving EQS under the Water Framework Directive and basically supports the recommendations given therein.|
|2.||In the international community of ‘sediment’ scientists, users, and managers an intensive discussion about the possible role of Sediment Quality Standards (SQS) took place during the last ten years. The results from this discussion were, inter alia, published in literature of SETAC (2005)1 and SedNet (Barcelo et al. 20062; Heise et al. 20063). A special session of the 5th International SedNet Conference (Oslo, Norway, 27th-29th May 2008) was devoted to the issue of SQS. SedNet recognises that most of the conclusions drawn from this fruitful scientific process are considered in the existing draft.|
|3.||SedNet would particularly like to affirm that:
● With the recent state of knowledge SQS cannot simply be used for any compliance checking. However, when discussing management goals it is of the same importance to state that river basin managers should thoroughly take into account requirements towards sediment quality. SQS should be set adequately to these management goals and should be used to trigger risk assessment studies when exceeded. In that respect, for example, the secondary poisoning through the food chain caused by contaminated sediments should be given attention.
● Tiered approaches are the best way to deal with the intrinsic uncertainties of setting and applying SQS. Thus, SedNet welcomes the tiered assessment framework for sediments suggested in the guideline. At the same time SedNet would like to emphasize the need for a flexible implementation of the framework, for example, using multiple lines of evidence which are related to the central management objectives in a certain river basin and to further develop it according to improved knowledge.
● Monitoring designs in the river basins should be adequate to the objectives of the tiered approach and the selected lines of evidence.
|4.||SedNet would like to have more emphasize in the following areas:
● So far, in the Technical Guidance the need for sediment and/or biota quality standards is mainly motivated by the undetectable low concentrations of lipophilic pollutants in the water phase and analytical complications (e.g. section 1.2, line 242 ff). However, the reasons linked to the role of sediments in aquatic systems should be weighted adequately. So, the relevance of the exposure of chemicals through the food chain is not only important for secondary poisoning in terrestrial organisms, but also for aquatic invertebrates and fish. EQS based on waterborne exposures are not protective in all cases because their exclusive use could neglect other exposure pathways, e.g. the ingestion of contaminated sediments.
● Management at river basin scale is one of the main ideas of the WFD which should be followed also with regard to SQS. They should be linked to the functions and the functioning of a river basin and to the management objectives followed therein. Most probably, differences between river basins will result in basin-specific use of SQS. Furthermore, the objectives in a river basin will be much more complex than just to protect the benthic community. The proper use of SQS should account for this.
|5.||The general statements in the SedNet reponse to the Draft Technical Guidance for Deriving EQS under the Water Framework Directive is listed above. In addition, a number of detailed remarks and recommendations have been submitted directly from members of the SedNet community.|
|1 SETAC (2005): Use of Sediment Quality Guidelines and Related Tools for the Assessment of Contaminated Sediments: Proceedings from the Pellston Workshop on Use of Sediment Quality Guidelines and Related Tools for the Assessment of Contaminated Sediments, 18-22 August 2002, Fairmont, Montana, USA. Editor Richard J. Wenning (ISBN 1880611716, 9781880611715).
2 Barceló (2006): Sustainable management of sediment resources. Vol. 1. Sediment quality and impact assessment of pollutants. Ed.s: D. Barceló and M Petrovic. Elsevier B.V., Amsterdam and Oxford, 2007. (ISBN-13: 978-0-444-51962-7)
3 Heise (2006): Sustainable management of sediment resources. Vol. 3. Sediment risk management and communication. Ed.: S. Heise. Elsevier B.V., Amsterdam and Oxford, 2007. (ISBN-13: 978-0-444-51965-8)
If you missed the eNews special on SedNet’s observations on sediment management in River Basin Management Plans, you can find a copy here.
Prof. Alexandra Katsiri of the National Technical University of Athens volunteered to be the nucleus for a local organising team for a SedNet conference in 2010 in Greece.
This will cover again all sediment related issues, from science over management to policy. Its special focus should be on the Mediterranean region. A subject like the management of tailing dam sediments and spills from mining activities can be dealt with, which is of special importance for Greece. There management of dredged material is another “hot issue”.
With the SedNet link to UNESCO-ISI also world-wide issues may be addressed.
More information will become available in October 2009. For the time being the SedNet Steering Group is seeking for more interested individuals and institutions in the Mediterranean countries who would like to support this event.
|The SETAC Sediment Advisory Group (SEDAG) met on November 18, 2008 at the Tampa Convention Center in Tampa, FL during the North America SETAC meeting. Chris Ingersoll (U.S. Geological Survey) led the meeting on behalf of Susanne Heise (Hamburg University of Applied Sciences). Brief descriptions of the eight new SEDAG work groups were presented to participants. The work groups and their corresponding work group chairs include:|
|•||Behaviour, Fate and Bioavailability of Particle Bound Contaminants in Changing Aquatic Environments, chaired by Susanne Heise,Susanne.firstname.lastname@example.org|
|•||Ecosystem-Based Sustainable Sediment Management, chaired by Sabine E. Apitz, email@example.com|
|•||Guidance on PAHs in Aquatic Environments, chaired by Judy L. Crane,firstname.lastname@example.org|
|•||Harmonization of Methods for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, chaired by Chris Ingersoll, email@example.com|
|•||Response of Sediment-Contaminant Systems to Disturbances and Climate Change, chaired by Philip N. Owens, firstname.lastname@example.org|
|•||Reviewing Sediment Targets Used for Water Policy, chaired by Adrian Collins, email@example.com|
|•||Sediment Quality in Tropical Countries, chaired by Gerardo Gold-Bouchot, firstname.lastname@example.org|
|•||Watershed Level Assessment of Contaminant Fate and Transport in Sediments to Build Conceptual Site Models, chaired by AmyMarie Accardi-Dey, aaccardi-dey@PIRNIE.COM|
The work groups are not limited to SETAC members. Every person interested in sediments and in the specific topics can join. The work groups are just starting to initiate activities and post information on the SETAC Communities web page at communities.setac.net (from here, log in to reach the SEDAG Communities web page). For example, the work group on Guidance on PAHs in Aquatic Environments held its first meeting on November 19, 2008 at the Tampa Convention Center, and the minutes of this meeting are available on the SEDAG Communities web page. Information on how to access and use the SETAC Communities Portal is available at: http://www.setac.org/node/156. Please contact the work group chairs directly to join a work group. For general information about SEDAG, contact Susanne Heise at Susanne.email@example.com.
See also: http://eusoils
Lessons learned in RiskBridge on sediment risk governance
The final conference of the EC FP6 Coordination Action (CA) project RiskBridge (www.riskbridge.eu) was held in Brussels on 26-27 March 2009. The objective of RiskBridge is to build robust, integrative inter-disciplinary governance models for emerging and existing risks. This is done by comparing and exchanging of experiences in six different ‘risk fields’: biotechnology/stem cell research, radioactive waste, nanotechnology, climate change, electromagnetic fields and sediments.
The members of the ‘sediment risk field’ (Ramon Batalla, Jos Brils, Matjaz Mikos, Henk Senhorst, Adriaan Slob, Jaap van der Vlies and Rick Wenning) characterized sediment risk governance as “the culmination of consideration of the many options that stakeholders and institutions, both public and private, together apply to the management of sediment”.
|Based on 5 sediment management case studies prepared by the ‘sediment risk field members’, the following conclusions regarding the lessons learned in risk governance from sediment management were identified:|
|•||Sediment is an important environmental requirement, as well as a critical requirement of society;|
|•||Perceptions of risk associated with sediment are difficult to merge and resolve among stakeholders, suggesting that raising awareness through education is needed;|
|•||Pure “technocratic” risk governance approaches do not work in sediment management, and hence, there is considerable room for improvement of sediment risk governance approaches;|
|•||Improvements in risk governance may be achieved by improving the understanding of the role of sediment in river systems and the human built environment, as well as the means by which society interferes with these functions.|
It is evident that a certain level of uncertainty will always remain in the context of sediment management. Society may accept this uncertainty with the understanding that a flexible, adaptive approach to management actions will be adopted as new information becomes known. This may be one of the most important policy changes to consider for managing sediments in Europe.
Based on the exchange of experiences reported by other participants in RiskBridge working in the 5 risk fields in addition to sediments, it is evident that a thorough analysis and shared perception by stakeholders of what constitutes a “problem” is necessary for addressing actual or perceived risks associated with technologies and events. Further, stakeholders need to have a common understanding of the “sense of urgency” when they develop and implement responses to risk. These two conditions (problem definition and problem response) are absolute prerequisites for any process of change in response to risk governance by whatever methodology available in science and policy. To frame this conclusion differently: it is evident from the RiskBridge program — and particularly the sediment risk field — that the quality of the answer or response to risk depends on the quality of the question or reaction to the condition of risk. Thus, society, policy makers, and decision makers need to take the time for thorough problem framing and for gradual building of risk governance models that are inclusive. “Inclusive” means competent, knowledge based, cost effective, fair, and consultative by involving all stakeholders and by integrating their concerns and perceptions.
Inspired by the projehtp and its outcome, the ‘sediment risk field members’ prepared a series of papers that will be submitted shortly (as one series) to the peer reviewed SETAC journal “Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management” (IEAM, see: www.setac.org).
The Gesellschaft Deutscher Chemiker (GDCh) is the largest chemical society in continental Europe with members from academe, industry and other areas. The society was founded in 1949 but builds on a long tradition that began in 1867 when its first predecessor organization, the Deutsche Chemische Gesellschaft was founded in Berlin. The work of the society is structured by divisions and working groups, among them the Waterchemical Society. Under the umbrella of the Waterchemical Society in 2002 a working group on “Sediments and Water quality” was established. The recent meeting of this group was held in February 2009 in Berlin. There the group continued to discuss processes affecting the sediment quality in rivers.
Sediment dynamics within a typical groyne field of the River Elbe
River sediments store large quantities of hazardous contaminants, because in the past, large quantities of pollutants were discharged by e.g. sewage and mining waters into the rivers. Many contaminants, such as heavy metals and organic micropollutants, are adsorbed to fine-grained sediments. Particle bound contaminants were deposited and accumulated over years in regions of low flow velocities – such as groyne fields. In recent years, the immission of pollutants has been reduced drastically. As a consequence, the older contaminated sediments are covered by less polluted younger deposits. Investigations on sediments in groyne fields of the River Elbe showed a significant increase of pollutant concentration with depth.
The amount of deposited sediments within groyne fields is subject to a large variability, depending on discharge conditions and suspended matter concentrations in the past. In periods with normal discharge, mainly deposition of suspended matter occurs, whereas extreme flood events may remobilize the sediments and transport them downstream to the Estuary/Sea. The Middle Elbe has around 3000 groyne fields constructed particular to the river banks to maintain a desired navigation channel. It is expected, that each groyne field store a large amount of highly polluted sediments. Therefore, the groyne fields in the River Elbe can be regarded as temporal sinks and sources of pollutants. The floods in 2002 and 2006 have illustrated this drastically.
In order to quantify the sedimentation/erosion dynamics within a typical groyne field of the River Elbe, the University of Stuttgart monitored in cooperation with the ELANA Company the sediment volume within a groyne field near Magdeburg over the last 4 years. The first measurement in December 2005 delivered a sediment volume of 650 m³. After the big flood event in spring 2006, the bed morphology was surveyed again with a volume of 590 m³. The decrease of 60 m³ maybe attributed to the erosive discharge conditions during the flood event. In April 2007 and July 2008 an increase of the sediment volume was observed (total volume: 598 m³ resp. 610 m³), which indicates that deposition processes dominated after the flood in spring 2006. An analysis of the gauged discharge data supports this assumption, because after April 2006 no erosive flood was recorded.
The investigation illustrates the importance of groyne fields for the sediment transport in rivers. Therefore the quantification of polluted groyne field sediments potentially available for erosion is essential for assessing the environmental impact on the water body and the soil of the floodplains.
Dipl.-Geoecol. Th. Jancke, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Hydraulic Engineering; firstname.lastname@example.org
Biogeochemistry of a minerotrophic fen during a water table fluctuation
Peatlands cover only a small surface area, yet they store about 24 % of the world’s soil carbon stocks and have thus acted as a significant carbon sink since the last deglaciation. As mineralization in peatlands depends to a large extend on hydrological conditions and temperature, climate change scenarios of increasing temperatures and altered precipitation patterns in temperate regions can be expected to affect this carbon sink function. On the other hand, peatlands contribute also to the natural global methane emissions, with methane being produced in the permanently waterlogged soil. Therefore, the consequences of climate change for biogeochemistry of peatlands is of great interest.
Within the framework of the DFG Research Group FOR 562, a minerotrophic fen located in North-Eastern Bavaria (elevation approx. 750 m, mean annual precip. 1020 mm) was subjected to an intensified drought and rewetting cycle to simulate a dry summer with a heavy precipitation event. To understand the impact of such events on peatlands, we traced below ground redox sensitive species, CO2 and CH4 concentrations. We hypothesized that a drying and rewetting cycle would renew alternative electron acceptors for anaerobic respiration in the soil after being rewetted. Furthermore, methanogenesis would be temporarily suppressed due to preferential reduction of alternative electron acceptors, such as nitrate, ferric iron and sulfate. Additionally, aerobic mineralization during drought could enhance peat decomposition.
Inducing a drought phase by means of lowering the water table via drainage and using a temporary roof construction successfully aerated the peat soil and alternative electron acceptors for anaerobic respiration were provided through re-oxidation of ferrous iron and sulfides. Due to the dense nature of the fen peat, lowering the water table had, however, hardly any effect on total soil respiration. Nevertheless, a water table fluctuation of about 50 cm sufficed to provide electron accepting capacity to support anaerobic respiration for about 100 days. One may thus derive from this study that more pronounced water table fluctuations due to climate change may effectively fuel anaerobic respiratory activity in peat through provision of alternative electron acceptors. Methanogenesis was also temporarily suppressed during drought, an effect that lingered on for a time scale of 1-3 months after rewetting of the peat and thus re-onset of anaerobic conditions. Locally, however, methanogenesis became a viable process in distinct micro-niches before complete reduction of alternative electron acceptors on the soil horizon scale. The observation of fastest recovery of methane production in the uppermost soil underlines the importance of labile carbon compounds provided by the vegetation. In this uppermost part of the profile – probably also relevant for emission – the microbial community was apparently well adapted to redox fluctuations.
Using analysis of hydrogen concentrations, mass balancing on the horizon scale and isotope analysis of CO2 and CH4 we concluded that distinct redox processes under these fluctuating conditions proceeded in distinct micro-niches. Fluctuating redox conditions thus created and renewed redox boundaries fuelling anaerobic respiration by provision redox gradients to be exploited by microbial metabolism. It may be concluded that systems affected by redox fluctuations, i.e. through aeration or provision of oxygen rich waters, can support a wide range of microbial respiratory pathways apparently proceeding in parallel, but separated on a very small aggregate scale. This may be expected to cause a high efficiency of decomposition processes, causing probably further degradation of fens. On the other hand, in river sediments characterized by distinct redox micro-habitats, such a zonation may be favorable for effective removal of contaminants.
SedNet is one of the signatories of the Venice Platform Declaration. The subscribing parties, representatives of maritime, marine and coastal networks, respond to the invitation of the European Commission to engage in a cooperation process, which will support European Maritime Policies in several ways: by assisting in the definition of policy priorities related to coastal and maritime matters; by cooperating on issues of common concern; by taking greater benefit of the widespread available knowledge and experience in Europe; by making a more efficient use of mutual resources and investments.
In particular, the Platform intends to organize a Stakeholder Forum to voice at the European level the shared objectives and concerns of the network organizations and seeks to achieve a permanent and constructive dialogue with the different authorities and more specifically the European institutions.
The next steps of the initiative will be explored and discussed at the workshop “An all embracing stakeholder platform for a holistic maritime policy”, that will be held at the Maritime Day on 19 May in Rome (http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/maritimeday/index_en.html).
Water Framework Directive
PIANC has set up a web page about the Water Framework Directive with plenty of useful information: http://www.pianc.org/euwfd.asp
Launch of PIANC’s ‘Working with Nature’ position paper
Since their October 2007 meeting in Japan, PIANC’s EnviCom has been working to prepare a new PIANC position paper entitled Working with Nature. The paper has evolved through an iterative process involving not only EnviCom members but also PIANC’s partner associations on EnviCom, particularly CEDA and IADC.
Working with Nature calls for an important shift in thinking in our approach to navigation development projects to help deliver mutually beneficial, ‘win-win’ solutions. It promotes a proactive, integrated approach which:
● focuses on achieving the project objectives in an ecosystem context rather than assessing the consequences of a predefined project design;
● focuses on identifying win-win solutions rather than simply minimising ecological harm.
Working with Nature thus considers the project objectives firstly from the perspective of the natural system rather than from the perspective of technical design. However, Working with Nature does not mean that we no longer achieve our development objectives: rather it ensures that these objectives are satisfied in a way which maximises opportunities and – importantly – reduces frustrations, delays and associated extra costs.
The paper discusses the extent to which the Working with Nature concept can already be put into practice, as well as some of the outstanding challenges. It also recognises that developing and delivering such win-win initiatives will take more innovation and imagination in some cases than in others. Notwithstanding such challenges, PIANC is convinced that the rewards of Working with Nature will extend far beyond the natural environment into social and economic aspects.
The full text of the Working with Nature paper can be read at
http://www.pianc.org/downloads/envicom/Working with Nature final position paper-e.pdf
EuroGeoSurveys is the Association of the Geological Surveys of Europe.
Objectives of EGS are, amongst others, to jointly address issues of common interest and to provide technical information to the EU and to national decision makers.
Recently a Geochemial Atlas of Europe has become available onwww.gtk.fi/publ/foregsatlas; it is also available on CD.
Other interesting activities: working Group Geochemistry, EU-SEASED database about marine sediments, detailed maps of hotspots (useful for those who are working on ecological quality standards).
More info at www.eurogeosurveys.org or download a presentation about EGS via www.sednet.org
In 2005, the European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC) initiated a long-term research network to promote the development of common risk assessment tools for contaminated land in Europe. Under HERACLES (Human and Ecological Risk Assessment for Contaminated Land in European Member States) researchers investigated the methods, used by Member States, to determine possible dangers from contaminated soils, to human health and the environment.
Research focused on three areas, or pillars, of risk assessment:
• Relative Risk Assessment – methods used to identify contaminated sites at a regional level
• Screening Risk Assessment – methods for setting screening or threshold values of contaminants in soil
• Site-specific Risk Assessment –site level assessment of contamination risks to human health and the environment
The study found that only three countries, Germany, Finland and The Netherlands, had approved guidelines on assessing ecological risks of contaminated land. However, many Member States have or are developing ecologically based threshold soil concentrations, although these have yet to be fully integrated into soil quality standards.
Wide variations in the procedures for ecological risk assessments were found across European countries. The researchers attributed these differences primarily to political and scientific factors, with regulatory, social, cultural and geographical influences also contributing to non-standardised approaches. Political decisions influence the importance given to assessing ecological risks: for example, which species are considered to be at risk from contaminated soils in a particular area.
However, possibilities exist for harmonising the scientific and technical elements of risk assessments, creating standard tools for soil risk assessment across the EU.
One major difficulty is determining ecological damage at individual sites. Other studies have shown that a TRIAD concept, based on combining evidence from risk assessments of soil contamination in three areas: chemical, toxicological and ecological, could be implemented as part of the harmonisation process. The researchers suggest development of the TRIAD approach could play an important role in standardising site-specific risk assessment tools.
See also: http://eusoils.jrc.it/ESDB_Archive/eusoils_docs/other/EUR22805.pdf (A JRC Scientific and Technical Report)
Source: Swartjes, F.A., Carlon, C., de Wit, N.H.S.M. (2008). The possibilities for the EU-wide use of similar ecological risk-based soil contamination assessment tools. Science of the Total Environment. 406: 523-529.
When discussing the issue of contamination of the aquatic environment, water pollution is still the major aspect that has been regulated and extensively studied, but poor attention has been devoted to sediments. Sediments have been described as the sink or storage place and a source for contaminants entering river systems through various pathways. But bottom sediments have various functions in the environment, such as providing habitat for many aquatic organisms, and are an important component of aquatic ecosystems.
This volume of the Handbook deals with various aspects of sediment contamination such as the fate and behaviour of persistent organic pollutants, the application of sediment toxicity identification evaluation (TIE) protocols, and the various ways to degrade toxic pollutants from sediments. Overall the book provides readers the fundamental knowledge needed to better understand the complex issue of contaminated sediments.
Handbook on Integrated Water Resources Management in Basins
The handbook, the first of this kind on this topic, is addressing, as a priority, basin managers, water professionals and representatives of public authorities – governments and local authorities – who have to make decisions related to water management and who must protect aquatic ecosystems, while trying to limit conflicts between the various users. The handbook also concerns non-governmental stakeholders (NGOs, professional organizations, users’ associations, etc.) concerned by water uses or environmental protection and which are involved in activities in basins.
The advices provided in this document can be applied in basins, whatever the situation (developed or developing countries, wet or arid climate, national or transboundary river basins) or the method used for water governance.
The English and French electronic versions of the Handbook can be downloaded free of charge from the INBO and GWP websites:
http://www.riob.org/gwp/handbook/GWP-INBOHandbookForIWRMinBasins.pdf – (1,290 MB).
• the Global Water Partnership (GWP), an international network which aims at water safety in the world. www.gwpforum.org and
• the International Network of Basin Organizations, www.inbo-news.org.
PIANC has recently published 2 new reports:
PIANC publication “Dredging management practices for the environment – A structured selection approach”, EnviCom report of WG 100 – 2009
The Working Group Envicom was set up as a forum for development of prudent guidance for selection of management practices designed to provide environmental protection in dredging projects. The report provides guidance for consideration and selection of management practices for environmental protection based on objective science and engineering-based factors and specifications. It describes in brief the full process of a dredging project from conception to the operational phase and indicates where and how in this process the essential decisions on the implementation of management practices should be taken. An additonal CD-ROM provides detailed descriptions of potential management practices and comprehensive information.
An article about the report can be found at
PIANC publication “Dredged material as resource”
EnviCom report of WG 104 – 2009
Contrary to conventional wisdom, most dredged material is clean, natural product and, far from being a waste, can be an important environmental and economic resource, as shown in two case studies: the rehabilitation of a brownfield at Fasiver, Belgium and the creation of a wetland in Wallasea, UK.
An article about the report can be found at
Multiple Stressors – Novel methods for integrated risk assessment, Aarhus, Denmark, 28-30 September 2009
Papers in the following areas are welcomed:
• integration of environmental and human risk assessment
• assessment of chemical mixtures and combinations of chemicals and natural stressors
• understanding complex exposure scenarios, and
• understanding the cognitive and knowledge-related, social and contextual aspects of integrated risk assessment.
Papers that focus on the development of advanced methods in areas such as tracking the fate of chemicals, the effects of chemical mixtures and combinations of natural stressors and chemicals, toxicokinetics, toxicogenomics, modelling, social science and data handling will be particularly welcome. This applies especially where such methods have potential for improving environment and human health by reducing the risk from chemical exposure.
Deadline for submitting abstracts: 1 June 2009.
More info at http://nomiracle.jrc.ec.europa.au
Incorporating Sustainable Approaches in Site Remediation
International Conference on 9-10 November 2009 in Copenhagen, Denmark
The objective of the GreenRemediation Conference is to improve the awareness of green remediation solutions among environmentalists and decision makers. Main topics are:
• Policy Drivers
• Decision Support Tools
• Sustainable Remediation Technologies
The conference is organized by Danish EPA, Information Centre on Contaminated Sites – DANISH REGIONS and The Capital Region of Denmark in collaboration with the consultancy companies NIRAS, GEO, COWI, Rambøll and DMR. The Scientific Committee is formed by representatives from US EPA, Austrian EPA and scientific capacities from the Nordic countries, Austria, France the UK and the US.
Deadline for abstracts is 8 June 2009. Conference programme will be available from June 30, 2009.
More information and abstract guidelines are available athttp://www.polytec.dk/GreenRemediation
27-30 May 2009: Global Change – Challenges for Soil Management. Venue: Tara Mountain, Serbia.
Organized by the World Association of Soil and Water Conservation, Belgrade University, World Association for Sedimentation and Erosion Research, European Society of Soil Conservation.
For more info please contact email@example.com or firstname.lastname@example.org
28-29 May 2009: Seminar on Synergies between River Restoration and River Management – Natura2000 and Ramsar sites, Lelystad, the Netherlands. Organised by the European Centre for River Restoration (ECRR). www.ecrr.org
24-25 June 2009: Final conference of SOCOPSE – Source Control of Priority Substances in Europe, Maastricht, the Netherlands. SOCOPSE aims at supporting the implementation process for the Water Framework Directive, by providing guidelines and decision support tools for the management of priority substances. www.socopse.eu
22-23 June 2009: A Short Course in Catchment Management; organised by the University of Sheffield, UK. More info at www.sheffield.ac.uk/csc/news
30 June – 3 July 2009: Fourth International Symposium on Contaminated Sediments: Sustainable Management and Remediation. Ireland.
30 July – 3 August 2009: International Advanced Training Workshop on Integrated River Basin Management, Beijing, China. Organised by IRTCES.
19-21 August 2009: The Water Framework Directive – Sharing experiences and meeting future challenges, Stockholm, Sweden. (In the framework of the World Water Week.)
19 August: Open seminar. 20-21 August: Meeting of River Basin District Authorities.
6-12 September 2009: Workshop on “Sediment problems and sediment management in Asian river basins”, Hyderabad, India.www.appliedhydrology.org/iahs/
14-16 September 2009: 3rd International Conference on Estuaries and Coasts, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan.http://donko.civil.tohoku.ac.jp/icec2009/index.html
20-23 September 2009: 27th meeting of the International Association of Sedimentologists, Alghero, Sardinia, Italy with a session on Marine Applied Geology and Sedimentology – The Factors Influencing Sedimentary Deposits in the Coastal Zone.
For more info you can contact the organizers: Sergio Cappucci (email@example.com) and Carl L. Amos (firstname.lastname@example.org) or visitwww.ias2009.com
21-24 September 2009: 2nd REP-LECOTOX workshop “Trends in Ecological Risk Assessment”, Novi Sad, Serbia.
23-25 September 2009: REMTECH; 3rd edition of the Remediation Technologies Exhibition in Ferrara, Italy. www.remtechexpo.com
28-30 September 2009: Multiple Stressors – Novel methods for integrated risk assessment, Aarhus, Denmark.Deadline for submitting abstracts: 1 June 2009. http://nomiracle.jrc.ec.europa.au
7-9 October 2009: 6th International SedNet Conference “The Role of Sediments in Coastal Management”, co-organised by Hamburg Port Authority. Hamburg, Germany. Program at www.sednet.org.
5-6 November 2009: Dredging tools for the future. CEDA Dredging Days 2009, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.http://www.cedaconferences.org/dredgingdays2009
9-10 November 2009: Green Remediation Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark. The call for abstracts is open until 8 June 2009.http://www.polytec.dk/GreenRemediation
26-28 April 2010: Integrated River Basin Management Conference; action programs and monitoring under the Water Framework Directive. Lille, France.
9–14 September 2010: A conference of the World Organisation of Dredging Associations, WODCON XIX, Beijing, China. Organised by EADA in association of its Chinese Chapter, CHIDA.
A Call for Papers will be issued early 2009. See furtherhttp://www.woda.org/
19-23 June 2011: 12th International Symposium on the Interactions between Sediments and Water, Dartington, Devon, England. Organised by the International Association for Sediment Water Science (IASWS)
http://www.IASWS.org and www.geog.plymouth.ac.uk/IASWS2011
Mrs. Marjan Euser
Deltares / TNO
P.O. Box 342
NL-7300 AH Apeldoorn