Expressions of Intent for International Polar Year 2007-2008 Activities

Expression of Interest Details

PROPOSAL INFORMATION

CANADA #86: Remediation of Organic Contaminants in Polar Soils  (ROCPS)

Outline
The idealized image of the Arctic and Antarctic as pristine wilderness is, unfortunately, mistaken. Significant contamination of polar soils has resulted from industrial and military activities in the circumpolar Arctic and localized activities in the Antarctic. In the Arctic, local communities, and in the Antarctic, research stations, continue to contribute to environmental contamination. In the polar regions flora and fauna live “on the edge” and are particularly vulnerable to the detrimental effects of the contaminants. Remediation methodologies used in temperate climates are generally not applicable to polar regions without significant modifications. However, although the circumstances and sometimes the contaminants differ in the Arctic and Antarctic, remediation strategies that can be applied at the poles are often analogous. This overlap provides an opportunity to accelerate bi-polar remediation activities by using the expertise developed at one pole to clean up contamination at the other. Currently, one of the most relevant areas of contaminant research in both regions relates to our understanding of the science and engineering associated with hydrocarbon contaminant remediation. Petroleum products are important contaminants in the Antarctic and are widespread in the Canadian Arctic. This project will adapt and apply two proven strategies – chemical/physical and biological remediation - to petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in Antarctic soils and to hydrocarbon and PCB contamination in Arctic soils. Canada, with its large Arctic landmass, has acquired world-class expertise in remediation of organic contamination in cold soils, and this proposal’s collaborators are well-placed to contribute their knowledge to the fledgling remediation trials in the Antarctic. The unique challenges of Antarctic remediation have focused the Australian and New Zealand contributors on different aspects of the same remediation strategies. Informal international cooperation between some of the project members already exists but this project would support direct collaboration. Combining resources and knowledge will facilitate remediation at both poles. Further, knowledge acquired at logistically challenging Antarctic sites will be effective for remote Arctic remediation. The proposal comprises two projects organized along disciplinary lines but linked in their overall goals of contaminant removal. The first project, bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons by indigenous microbes, will be demonstrated using designed landfarms and biopiles, and supported by microbiological and molecular biological analyses of the processes occurring in situ. Bioremediation treatments (landfarms and/or biopiles) have been used successfully in the Arctic by the Environmental Sciences Group [ESG] at Royal Military College, the Analytical Services Unit at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, and by the National Research Council of Canada (Biotechnology Research Institute), Montreal but their efficacy has not yet been demonstrated in the Antarctic. Supporting bioreactors and other laboratory studies focus on the optimisation of the processes for particular site conditions. Fuel-contaminated soils at Australian Antarctic bases are candidates for the initial Antarctic trials of this remediation technology in parallel with contaminated locations on Ellesmere Island in Arctic Canada. Outcomes will include quantitative data on contaminant removal and qualitative data documenting the microbial community response to remediation at cellular and molecular levels. The microbial data will be acquired in part by “fingerprinting” the total soil microbial community during remediation and in part using novel DNA microarrays (“gene chips”) designed to detect specific biodegradation genes. The trials will establish field methodologies that can successfully and consistently be employed in harsh, remote environments, and will enable prediction of bioremediation success at other cold sites. The second remediation strategy uses permeable reactive barriers installed in contaminated soils to trap soil contaminants. A successful prototype is being monitored in the Arctic for mitigation of PCB contamination. An additional trial barrier designed for hydrocarbon contamination is also currently being evaluated on site. This technology will be extended to fuel-contaminated Australian Antarctic bases and identified PCB- and hydrocarbon-contaminated Canadian Arctic sites. The performance of various barrier materials under site-specific conditions will be rigorously tested in laboratory simulations and supported by quantification of fundamental parameters such as partition coefficients, permeability and kinetic constants. These studies will provide quantitative data essential to selection of remediation strategies in contaminated polar soils. The group’s existing international collaborations will ensure exchange, dissemination and implementation of the results to facilitate future polar remediation activities. The project’s emphasis on graduate student research ensures the training of future polar scientists.

What significant advance(s) in relation to the IPY themes and targets can be anticipated from this project?
Theme 1: addressed on a localized scale by measuring hydrocarbon and PCB contamination at specific Arctic and Antarctic sites to provide baseline data for future remediation assessment and treatment. Theme 2: addressed by implementing and monitoring contaminant removal during field trials. The research will detect changing contaminant levels and provide data about the potential for natural attenuation of polar spills (i.e., remediation without human intervention) and for extrapolation to remediation initiatives beyond IPY. Cleanup of Arctic and Antarctic sites will likely be ongoing for decades and results from this project will allow more accurate projections of realistic remediation goals. Theme 4: major goal, as prototype remediation strategies are implemented and evaluated under polar conditions. This project is unique in providing data on organic contaminant remediation and the fundamental parameters which affect the processes (bioremediation and movement of contaminants) at both poles for comparison of outcomes.

What international collaboration is involved in this project?
Dr. Ian Snape, “Human Impacts Research”, Australian Antarctic Division [AAD] Dr. Martin Riddle, “Human Impacts Research” Programme Leader, AAD Dr. Jackie Aislabie, “Environmental protection of soils of the Ross Sea region” Programme Leader, Landcare Research, New Zealand

FIELD ACTIVITY DETAILS

Geographical location(s) for the proposed field activities:
The sites below are the initial selections; others may be added as appropriate. Old Casey Station, Australian Antarctic Scott Base, Ross Island, Antarctica Marble Point, Ross Sea Region, Antarctica Resolution Island, Nunavut, Canada Ellesmere Island, Nunavut, Canada

Approximate timeframe(s) for proposed field activities:
Arctic: 06/07 – 10/07      06/08 – 10/08      
Antarctic: 11/06 – 02/07      11/07 – 02/08      

Significant facilities will be required for this project:
All sites: Transport of personnel to field sites (fixed wing aircraft), transport of samples to laboratories; housing for personnel at existing field stations. These can be shared with other projects. Australian Antarctic sites: access to wet labs for on-site analysis Ross Sea Region sites: access to wet lab; Marble Point – helicopter time Arctic sites: Resolution Island - helicopter time

Will the project leave a legacy of infrastructure?
No. This project will utilize existing infrastructure and does not require construction or modification of existing infrastructure.

How is it envisaged that the required logistic support will be secured?

Existing collaborations and informal research agreements with AAD and Antarctica New Zealand should secure the Antarctic logistics. Some of the Arctic logistics can be obtained using existing support but additional funding will be required. Own national polar operator Arctic: Polar Continental Shelf Project [PCSP] Another national polar operator Antarctic: AAD, Antarctica New Zealand National agency Arctic: PCSP, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada [INAC] Military support Arctic: Department of National Defence [DND]

Has the project been "endorsed" at a national or international level?
This pre-proposal has been reviewed and is being submitted by the Canadian Steering Committee (CSC). Ongoing discussions will integrate this pre-proposal into a larger network of related national and international initiatives. The CSC has initially sorted this pre-proposal into: Antarctic

PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND STRUCTURE

Is the project a short-term expansion (over the IPY 2007-2008 timeframe) of an existing plan, programme or initiative or is it a new autonomous proposal?
yes

This proposal arose from earlier initiatives (Polar Connections Workshop, Sept. 2003 and the Canadian Antarctic Research Program [CARP]) that identified potential federal government sources of funding. The named collaborations within Canada and internationally have been identified and some are already in place. This project would also fall under the recently released Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research [SCAR] Research Programme ‘Evolution and Biodiversity in the Antarctic’ [EBA], providing an opportunity for synergy between agencies. We are aware of other Canadian groups who should be submitting IPY pre-proposals on ecotoxicology and contaminant distribution in polar environments; these projects would complement our proposed activities and could generate synergy regarding logistics and sample site information.

How will the project be organised and managed?
Management structure has not been defined for the project yet but we anticipate that there will be a management committee representing the partners. Cooperative management already exists between CARP and AAD through SCAR. Organization and management will be addressed with feedback from CSC-IPY, especially if additional collaborators are identified in the pre-proposal stage.

What are the initial plans of the project for addressing the education, outreach and communication issues outlined in the Framework document?
The project is heavily weighted to training of graduate students and post-doctoral fellows, providing for education of the next generation of polar scientists. A graduate student from the AAD has already worked for one summer in the Canadian Arctic with the Queen’s University researchers. This type of exchange will be implemented to facilitate communication and broaden the education of students. Community consultation in the local communities regarding remediation is an important aspect of the cleanup in the Canadian Arctic and will be continued with this project. We also could work with groups that promote knowledge about the polar regions, especially those stressing bi-polar linkages, e.g. Students on Ice and the Sedna IV team. Additionally the usual presentation of research at conferences and publication in peer-reviewed journals will be pursued.

What are the initial plans of the project to address data management issues (as outlined in the Framework document?
The project will not generate massive amounts of data like climate or oceanographic research, and therefore we do not anticipate problems with data management which can be dealt with in-house. We assume that IPY will have mechanisms for data sharing, like SCAR’s Joint Committee on Antarctic Data Management.

How is it proposed to fund the project?
For a 3-year project spanning the official IPY period (2007-2008) plus preliminary work-up and post-field work data interpretation. (PDF, post-doctoral fellow; GS, graduate student) Landfarming and biopiles: 0.5 PDF, 5 GS Barriers: 0.5 PDF, 2 GS Total stipends: 1 PDF @ $35K x 3 yr = $105,000 7 GS @ $20K x 3 yr = $420,000 Materials: $190,000 Travel to NZ and Aus, 2 field seasons = $120,000 Travel to Arctic, 2 field seasons = $80,000 Cost for logistical support in the Arctic and Antarctic may be available from other funding sources. Total funds required for a 3-year programme (Sept 06 – Aug 09) = Cdn $915,000 Potential sources of funds Extant Canadian agencies: NCP, INAC, DND, CARP, Northern Contaminants Program [NCP] New funds from IPY

Is there additional information you wish to provide?
Because of the size of the budget and the polar focus of this project, it cannot proceed using existing funding sources and requires infusion of new funding from IPY to begin. Once initiated, it may be possible to sustain subsequent research in part from established agencies (e.g., NSERC).

PROPOSER DETAILS

Dr  John Poland
Analytical Services Unit
School of Environmental Studies, Queen’s University
K7L 3N6
Canada

Tel: 613-533-6000 ext 77866
Mobile: no
Fax: 613-533-2897
Email:

Other project members and their affiliation