|
Syllabus
and Speaker Schedule for 598H |
|
|
Tuesday,
April 1
Topic: Nuclear waste management
Max
S. Power
Nuclear Waste Program Specialist
Washington
Department of Ecology
Top
|
Title: “Uncertainties
in Nuclear and Hazardous Waste Cleanup”
Presentation
Suggested Reading/Web Sites:
U.S.
Department of Energy’s Long Term Stewardship Study
http://lts.apps.em.doe.gov/center/stewstudycontent.html
National Research Council Report on long-term management of legacy waste
sites (summary recommended)
http://www.nap.edu/books/0309071860/html/
Power,
Max S. 2002. “Substantial Margin of Safety”: A New Approach
to High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposition. Prepared for the Waste Management
Symposium 2002 Conference, February 24-28, 2002, Tucson, Arizona (pdf)
Additional resources that may be of interest
based on April 1 class discussion:
(see comment about this file)
Covello,
V. and P. Sandman. "Risk
Communication: Evolution and Revolution", in Wolburst A. (ed). Solutions
to an Environment in Peril, Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University
Press (2001): 164-178.
Note: The Covello and Sandman file is
a .tif file. If you have trouble opening the file, download the file first
using "Save Target As" and then open in an imaging program (Windows 2000
users will want to use the Microsoft Imaging Program, which is found
in the Start-Programs-Acceccessories menu).
National
Environmental Policy Institute. December 1999. Rolling Stewardship:
Beyond Institutional Controls,
Preparing Future Generations for Long-Term
Environmental Cleanups. 51 pp. (pdf)
Describes “rolling stewardship” as focusing on the links
needed between generations to carry long-term stewardship forward. Rolling
stewardship requires a framework for stewardship decisions that can be
tailored over time, and empowers each generation with greater information
on stewardship tools and practices. The rationale behind this approach
is that there are too many imponderables, in terms of planning for conditions
many decades in the future, to make decisions today that will be effective
many generations from now. Rolling stewardship allows greater flexibility,
yet ensures there is an infrastructure in place to empower the next generation
of decision-makers. This approach disarms the critic who harps on the
infeasibility of perpetual guarantees. Instead, it focuses attention
away from the imponderable future and onto practical issues that we can
carry out today with some assurance of success. The test is, “Will
the solution remain viable for a generation?” rather than, will
it be viable for the next millennium and beyond.
Joint
Institute for Energy & Environment. May 2000. Reducing the Nuclear
Legacy Burden: DOE Environmental Management Strategy and Implementation.
Author: Milton Russell. 60pp. JIEE-00-01. (pdf)
The author argues that DOE’s goal as agent for the public should
be to minimize the joint risk and cost burden on this and future generations.
He advocates switching from a physical (“cleanup”) transformation
mindset to one of minimizing the legacy burden. The legacy burden includes
the value of both the direct harmful effects borne and of the resources absorbed
and other harms incurred in reducing such effects. This paper provides a
strategy that emphasizes implementation of necessary trade offs while achieving
equity within this and succeeding generations.
Yucca
Mountain Project (official website)
Hanford Site (official
website)
Disposition
of High-Level Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel: The Continuing Societal and Technical
Challenges (2001) - recent National Research Council report on high
level waste
|
Tuesday, April 15
Topic: Forest and fire management
** Note: Class ends at 1:20 pm on this day only
Prof. Dave
Peterson
Research Forester
USDA Forest Service
Pacific Northwest
Research Station,
Fire and Environmental Research Applications Team
and
Professor, Forest Ecology
UW College of Forest Resources
Top
|
Title: “Fire,
fuel and forest management on public lands -- will the smoke get
in our eyes?”
Presentation
Synopsis:
Fuel accumulations in Western forests during the past 50+ years pose
a hazard for larger and more severe fires and pose a risk for local communities
and resource values. Public debate about managing fuels focuses on appropriate
policy and management strategies for reducing fuels and reducing risk.
Because the scientific basis for decision making is lacking, the success
of proposed solutions to the "fuel problem" is uncertain, especially
in the face of litigation and regulatory constraints.
Suggested Reading:
Pollet,
J. and P.N. Omi. 2002. Effect of thinning and prescribed burning on wildfire
severity in ponderosa pine forests. International Journal of Wildland
Fire 11:1-10
UW Libraries link:
http://www.publish.csiro.au/journals/ijwf/issue.cfm?J=WF&V=11&I=1 |
Tuesday,
April 29
Topic: Uncertainty in Federal Level Policy Making
Prof. David Harrison
Former Senior Policy
Advisor to
Washington State Senator Maria Cantwell
and
Senior Lecturer
Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs
Top
|
Title: "Uncertainty in Federal Level
Policy Making"
Synopsis/Suggested Reading:
Prof. Harrison distributed the following for
students at the seminar:
"Thinking Strategically about Adoption and Implementation", Chapter
13
in Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice by David L. Weimer and Aidan
R. Vining.
If you would like a copy of the chapter, please contact Lara
Whitely Binder. |
Tuesday,
May 13
Topic: Managing Fish and Water in Urban Water Supplies
George Schneider
Water Supply Manager
Seattle
Public Utilities
Bruce Bachen
Senior Fish Biologist
Seattle Public Utilities
Rand
Little
Senior Fish Biologist
Seattle Public Utilities
Top
|
Title: “Addressing
uncertainty in managing the water and instream resources of the Cedar
River: The need to balance certainty and flexibility.”
• George Schneider's presentation: "Uncertainty
and the Management of the Cedar River"
• Rand Little's presentation: "Cedar
River Instream Flow Management: Balancing Certainty and Flexibility"
• Bruce Bachen's presentation: "Decisions
in the Face of Uncertainty: Cedar River Sockeye Hatchery Proposed Adaptive
Management Plan"
Synopsis:
Sustainable management of human altered ecosystems is a significant
challenge. Our efforts to manage these complex systems are often hampered
by substantial uncertainty and a general tendency toward inaction. We
sometimes find ourselves implementing relatively rash actions supported
by insufficient
information. Or conversely, when faced with seemingly insurmountable
uncertainty, we tend to preserve the status quo and avoid decisive
actions. Neither
of these pathways is likely to lead to improved natural resource management
practices in human-altered ecosystems. Three of Seattle Public Utilities'
resource managers will provide examples of Seattle’s efforts to
find constructive pathways in managing natural resources in the Cedar
River
Basin. The areas of focus are managing around hydrologic uncertainty;
development of an instream flow regime that works for multiple species;
and creation
of a sockeye salmon supplementation program that employs adaptive management
to help integrate the program with the natural ecosystem.
Suggested Reading:
For more information on SPU and the Cedar
River watershed, please visit:
http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/util/cedarwatershed/
For more information on SPU's Cedar River Watershed Habitat Conservation
Plan, please visit:
http://www.cityofseattle.net/util/CedarRiverHCP/
For a summary of current water supply conditions in the Cedar and Tolt
River watersheds, please visit:
http://www.cityofseattle.net/util/watersupply/current.htm
Recommended Link (temporary):
The
following UW instream flow workshop was recommended by Rand Little. The
workshop is May 28 and May 29.
http://www.stewardandassociates.com/Instream/index.htm
|
Tuesday,
May 27
Topic: Uncertainty
in environmental policy settings
Matt Steuerwalt
Policy Analyst
Washington State Attorney General’s Office
Top
|
Title: "Navigating
with Insufficient Information"
Synopsis:
In many circumstances, policy makers and negotiators are forced
to make decisions under very short time horizons. When do we know enough
to know what to do? Presentation includes examples from the energy and
telecommunications markets.
Suggested Reading:
The following links will take you to the suggested readings, which will
be used for the basis of some conversations. They are all short and
are intended to
be read mostly as examples of types of risks, tolerances, and
strategies for managing uncertainty, and only secondarily for the specific
circumstances (although we can talk about those too in some cases).
On the durability of decisions, see:
http://www.safnet.org/archive/502_nwplan.cfm
On certainty
of delivery, financial risk and tools, flexibility v. certainty, see:
(please past this link into your browser; note the text wrapping)
http://www.wutc.wa.gov/webdocs.nsf/6f0baa33f074e151882566c20000604d/aca12433
b8dbd8b388256b820072cb0b!OpenDocument
On balancing competing technical recommendations and risks, see:
http://www.newsdata.com/enernet/fishletter/#7
On risk management & risk tolerance, see:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134556030_citylight16m.html
On risk mitigation, health and safety risks:
http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/kc/home/nreleases/NewsRelease.cfm?ReleaseNo=392
On trade-offs, and the distribution of risks, see:
http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~enviro/envr481/Guests/dietrich3.html
|
Please
remember that your summary essay is due by 12:00 pm on Friday, June
6. Please see "Seminar Requirements"
on the home page for more information. |
| Top • Home |