Comparison of PFAS soil remediation alternatives at a civilian airport using cost-benefit analysis

• DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163664
• Publication Date: 2023-04-22T23:55:06Z
• Authors: P. Drenning; Y. Volchko; L. Ahrens; L. Rosén; T. Söderqvist; J. Norrman
• Keywords: Hotspot (geology); Externality

Contamination of soil and water systems by per- polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) due to uncontrolled use aqueous film-forming foams (AFFFs) at firefighting training sites civilian military airports is a universal issue can lead significant human health environmental impacts. Remediation these often complex but necessary alleviate the PFAS burden minimise risks exposure eliminating hotspot/source from which spreads. This study presents probabilistic cost-benefit analysis (CBA) for evaluating remediation alternatives, includes monetisation both direct costs benefits as well externalities. The method applied case compare five alternatives managing contaminated Stockholm Arlanda Airport in Sweden. social profitability, or net present value (NPV), each alternative was calculated comparison two reference – 'total excavation' site (Alt 0) 'do nothing'. Sensitivity analyses model scenarios were tested account uncertainties, including small large spreading simulating different values magnitude annual avoided cost inaction (i.e., aggregate benefit) remediation. In total excavation, four studied resulted positive mean NPV. Excavation stabilization/solidification hotspot on-site combined with stabilization using activated carbon rest 2) had highest NPV scenarios, i.e., Alt 2 most socially profitable alternative. Simulations enabled estimation breakeven point becomes (NPV > compared lowest point: 7.5 5.75 millions SEK/year spreading, respectively.