Newsroom

CORVALLIS, Ore. - An ordinary group of citizens in southern Idaho, with no expertise in hazardous waste or environmental technologies, were able to reach a surprising level of agreement on the use of bioremediation when they studied the issues at length in a "consensus workshop" approach developed by scientists at Oregon State University.

When the process began, this group of 10 Idaho residents knew very little about this complex and sophisticated cleanup technology, which uses bacteria to break down or change contaminants. By the time the process was complete, the same group had prepared a 35-page report outlining their understanding of the technology, its relative merits compared to other approaches, their concerns, recommendations and consensus about its use.

"This is one of the first uses of a consensus workshop to involve the public in decisions about hazardous waste cleanup," said Denise Lach, a co-director of OSU's Center for Water and Environmental Sustainability. "As a public involvement technique, it appears to be an effective outreach strategy and may be used further by the Department of Energy in the future."

Bioremediation is a cleanup technique being used at the Idaho National Environmental and Engineering Laboratory, which is just one of a number of DOE sites where bioremediation cleanup techniques may be useful, the researchers said.

A grant from the DOE supported this approach to studying public perceptions of the use of bioremediation. Nuclear research and operation activities at DOE sites have left behind contaminants that result in risks to human health and the environment, and the agency is looking at many different ways to clean up and restore its contaminated sites.

"A key question is how to involve citizens in decisions about a cleanup technology like bioremediation," Lach said. "In the consensus workshop, a citizen panel decides what questions are important to ask in learning about a particular technology. The panel meets over a period to time to learn about the technology from professionals they have identified and, in the end, to reach consensus about its use."

The group was recruited through ads in four Southern Idaho newspapers, and they were diverse in age, gender, occupations, education, and other factors. About all they had in common, by design, is that they knew little or nothing about bioremediation.

Pretty soon, however, the local citizens were identifying the types of experts they wanted to interview, learning the complexities of the science involved and discussing options in great detail. Concerns were discussed on everything from the mutation of bacteria to long-term clogging of aquifers, changing politics and alternative technologies.

Their report also spoke highly of the process.

"This kind of process works," the report said. "Instead of DOE doing public relations, often perceived as deceptive by the public, the panel has become engaged in the process of learning about remediation at DOE sites in a factual way. Instead of DOE telling people what they think the public should know, they should use the consensus workshop as a way of providing information and soliciting input."

To be most effective, the group suggested this approach to consensus building should bring in a wide range of experts, keep the panel size down to encourage direct involvement, have impartial facilitators, and be used frequently.

"It is no secret that government agencies continue to struggle with involving the public in meaningful ways in decisions that affect the lives of citizens," Lach said. "We believe that the consensus workshop approach holds great promise for doing just that, and we think it can be applied to all types of environmental and natural resource questions."

The Idaho residents who made up the panel came from Boise to Idaho Falls, Mackay and Twin Falls. Their consensus report can be found at http://www.cwest.orst.edu/nabir/index.htm.