Gorte notes that, "the pressure to find cheaper and more effective technologies for assessment and cleanup of brownfields will continue to build"⁴². Without a baseline to compare to, these results at least show some promise for field-portable tools. Behind the results, however, lies the stifling atmosphere of multiple agency policies, multiple permitting processes, and inconsistent acceptance of verification and certification data. Despite the powerful driver of waterfront property's resale value, no amount of cost/benefit work for the property owner will sway regulators resistant to integrating field tools—particularly on-site analysis tools—into their programs.

Potentially, lessons learned from developing and applying field tools to soils could be used to prevent similar mistakes and obstacles with the field screening and field analysis tools in development for sediments. With a few exceptions among the most financially supported and most advanced state environmental agencies, however, this seems unlikely. Most field tools, aside from PIDs and soil gas samplers, remain in the middle or stuck at the start of their quest for acceptance. Field screening and analysis tools for sediments face an additional collective action problem among their prospective waterfront clients. Enhanced cooperation among waterfront regulators and property owners has proven its ability to expedite sediment assessment and cleanup, and therefore provides an emerging opportunity for technology transfer.

[ Back to Chapter 3 | Forward to Other References and Recommended Reading ]

⁴²Gorte, p. 2.

Page last modified: