TERRA ETAQUA

International Association of Dredging Companies

Maritime Solutions for a Changing World

Number 123 | June 2011

FIXED LINK AT FEHMARNBELTuniting Europe’s transportation network

WHO REGULATES REMEDIATION?global survey on contaminated sediment

FIRST EXAMINE THE SEABEDwhy early sampling and testing matter

Editor

Marsha R. Cohen

Editorial Advisory Committee

Hubert Fiers, Chair

Bert Groothuizen

Neil Haworth

René Kolman

Heleen Schellinck

Martijn Schuttevâer

Roberto Vidal Martin

IADC Board of Directors

Jac. G. van Oord, President

Y. Kakimoto, Vice President

C. van Meerbeeck, Treasurer

Th. Baartmans

P. Catteau

N. Haworth

G. Vandewalle

IADC Secretariat

René Kolman, Secretary General

Alexanderveld 84

2585 DB The Hague

Mailing adress:

P.O. Box 80521

2508 GM The Hague

The Netherlands

T +31 (0)70 352 3334

F +31 (0)70 351 2654

E info@iadc-dredging.com

I www.iadc-dredging.com

I www.terra-et-aqua.com

Please address enquiries to the editor.

Articles in Terra et Aqua do not necessarily

reflect the opinion of the IADC Board or

of individual members.

CovER

In the foreground a small elevated platform for geotechnical sampling through a shallow rock seabed and in the background

a landing craft for soils sampling in excess of 5 m water depth. Conducting a detailed geotechnical site investigation is crucial

to the execution of a successful project, therefore, dredging contractors and consultants need to be involved early on so as to

avoid expensive “surprises” once work starts (see page 24).

TERRA ETAQUA

Guidelines for Authors

Terra et Aqua is a quarterly publication of the International Association of Dredging Companies,

emphasising “maritime solutions for a changing world”. It covers the fields of civil, hydraulic

and mechanical engineering including the technical, economic and environmental aspects

of dredging. Developments in the state of the art of the industry and other topics from the

industry with actual news value will be highlighted.

• As Terra et Aqua is an English language journal, articles must be submitted in English.

• Contributions will be considered primarily from authors who represent the various disciplines

of the dredging industry or professions, which are associated with dredging.

• Students and young professionals are encouraged to submit articles based on their research.

• Articles should be approximately 10-12 A4s. Photographs, graphics and illustrations are

encouraged. Original photographs should be submitted, as these provide the best quality.

Digital photographs should be of the highest resolution.

• Articles should be original and should not have appeared in other magazines or publications.

An exception is made for the proceedings of conferences which have a limited reading public.

• In the case of articles that have previously appeared in conference proceedings, permission

to reprint in Terra et Aqua will be requested.

• Authors are requested to provide in the “Introduction” an insight into the drivers (the Why)

behind the dredging project.

• By submitting an article, authors grant IADC permission to publish said article in both the

printed and digital version of Terra et Aqua without limitations and remunerations.

• All articles will be reviewed by the Editorial Advisory Committee (EAC). Publication of an

article is subject to approval by the EAC and no article will be published without approval

of the EAC.

MEMbERShip liST iADC 2011Through their regional branches or through representatives, members of IADC operate directly at all locations worldwide

AfricAVan Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors, Luanda, Angola Boskalis International Egypt, Cairo, EgyptDredging and Reclamation Jan De Nul Ltd., Lagos, NigeriaDredging International Services Nigeria Ltd, Ikoyi Lagos, NigeriaNigerian Westminster Dredging and Marine Ltd., Lagos, NigeriaVan Oord Nigeria Ltd, Victoria Island, Nigeria

AsiABeijing Boskalis Dredging Technology Co. Ltd., Beijing, P.R. ChinaVan Oord (Shanghai) Dredging Co. Ltd, Shanghai, P.R. ChinaVan Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors bv Hong Kong Branch, P.R. ChinaBoskalis Dredging India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai, IndiaInternational Seaport Dredging Private Ltd., New Delhi, IndiaJan De Nul Dredging India Pvt. Ltd., IndiaVan Oord India Pte Ltd, Mumbai, IndiaP.T. Boskalis International Indonesia, Jakarta, IndonesiaPT Penkonindo LLC, Jakarta, IndonesiaPenta-Ocean Construction Co. Ltd., Tokyo, JapanToa Corporation, Tokyo, JapanHyundai Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., Seoul, KoreaVan Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors bv Korea Branch, Busan, Republic of KoreaVan Oord (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, Selangor, MalaysiaVan Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors bv Philippines Branch, Manilla, PhilippinesBoskalis International Pte Ltd., SingaporeDredging International Asia Pacific (Pte) Ltd., SingaporeJan De Nul Singapore Pte. Ltd., SingaporeVan Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors bv Singapore Branch, SingaporeZinkcon Marine Singapore Pte. Ltd., SingaporeVan Oord Thai Ltd, Bangkok, Thailand

AusTrAliA + NEW ZEAlANDBoskalis Australia Pty, Ltd., Sydney, AustraliaDredeco Pty. Ltd., Brisbane, QLD, AustraliaJan De Nul Australia LtdVan Oord Australia Pty Ltd., Brisbane, QLD, AustraliaWA Shell Sands Pty Ltd, Perth, AustraliaNZ Dredging & General Works Ltd, Maunganui, New Zealand

EuropEBaggerwerken Decloedt & Zoon NV, Oostende, BelgiumDEME Building Materials NV (DBM), Zwijndrecht, BelgiumDredging International N.V., Zwijndrecht, BelgiumJan De Nul n.v., Hofstade/Aalst, BelgiumBoskalis Westminster Dredging & Contracting Ltd., CyprusBoskalis Westminster Middle East Ltd., Limassol, CyprusVan Oord Middle East Ltd, Nicosia, CyprusRohde Nielsen, Copenhagen, DenmarkTerramare Eesti OU, Tallinn, EstoniaTerramare Oy, Helsinki, FinlandAtlantique Dragage Sarl, St. Germain en Laye, FranceSociété de Dragage International ‘SDI’ SA, Lambersart, FranceSodraco International S.A.S., Lille, France Sodranord SARL, Le Blanc-Mesnil Cédex, FranceBrewaba Wasserbaugesellschaft Bremen mbH, Bremen, GermanyHeinrich Hirdes G.m.b.H., Hamburg, GermanyNordsee Nassbagger-und Tiefbau GmbH, Bremen, GermanyVan Oord Gibraltar Ltd, GibraltarIrish Dredging Company, Cork, IrelandVan Oord Ireland Ltd, Dublin, IrelandBoskalis Italia, Rome, Italy

Dravo SA, Italia, Amelia (TR), ItalySocieta Italiana Dragaggi SpA ‘SIDRA’, Rome, ItalyBaltic Marine Contractors SIA, Riga, LatviaDredging and Maritime Management s.a., Steinfort, LuxembourgDredging International (Luxembourg) SA, Luxembourg, LuxembourgTOA (LUX) S.A., Luxembourg, LuxembourgAannemingsbedrijf L. Paans & Zonen, Gorinchem, NetherlandsBaggermaatschappij Boskalis B.V., Papendrecht, NetherlandsBoskalis B.V., Rotterdam, NetherlandsBoskalis International B.V., Papendrecht, NetherlandsBoskalis Offshore bv, Papendrecht, NetherlandsDredging and Contracting Rotterdam b.v., Bergen op Zoom, NetherlandsMijnster zand- en grinthandel bv, Gorinchem, NetherlandsTideway B.V., Breda, NetherlandsVan Oord ACZ Marine Contractors bv, Rotterdam, NetherlandsVan Oord Nederland bv, Gorinchem, NetherlandsVan Oord nv, Rotterdam, NetherlandsVan Oord Offshore bv, Gorinchem, NetherlandsDragapor Dragagens de Portugal S.A., Alcochete, PortugalDravo SA, Lisbon, PortugalBallast Ham Dredging, St. Petersburg, RussiaDravo SA, Madrid, SpainFlota Proyectos Singulares S.A., Madrid, SpainSociedade Española de Dragados S.A., Madrid, SpainBoskalis Sweden AB, Gothenburg, SwedenDredging International (UK) Ltd., Weybridge, UKJan De Nul (UK) Ltd., Ascot, UKRock Fall Company Ltd, Aberdeen, UKVan Oord UK Ltd., Newbury, UKWestminster Dredging Co. Ltd., Fareham, UK

MiDDlE EAsTBoskalis Westminster Middle East Ltd., Manama, BahrainBoskalis Westminster (Oman) LLC, Muscat, OmanBoskalis Westminster Middle East, Doha, QatarMiddle East Dredging Company (MEDCO), Doha, QatarBoskalis Westminster Al Rushaid Co. Ltd., Al Khobar, Saudi ArabiaBoskalis Westminster M.E. Ltd., Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.Gulf Cobla (Limited Liability Company), Dubai, U.A.E.Jan De Nul Dredging Ltd. (Dubai Branch), Dubai, U.A.E.National Marine Dredging Company, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.Van Oord Gulf FZE, Dubai, U.A.E.

ThE AMEricAsBoskalis International bv Sucural Argentina, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaCompañía Sud Americana de Dragados S.A, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaJan De Nul do Brasil Dragagem LtdaVan Oord ACZ Marine Contractors bv Argentina Branch, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaVan Oord Dragagens do Brasil Ltda, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilVan Oord Curaçao nv, Willemstad, CuraçaoDragamex SA de CV, Coatzacoalcos, MexicoDredging International Mexico SA de CV, Veracruz, MexicoMexicana de Dragados S.A. de C.V., Mexico City, MexicoCoastal and Inland Marine Services Inc., Bethania, PanamaDredging International de Panama SA, Panama Westminster Dredging Overseas, TrinidadStuyvesant Dredging Company, Louisiana, U.S.A.Boskalis International Uruguay S.A., Montevideo, UruguayDravensa C.A., Caracas, VenezuelaDredging International NV - Sucursal Venezuela, Caracas, Venezuela

Terra et Aqua is published quarterly by the IADC, The International Association

of Dredging Companies. The journal is available on request to individuals or

organisations with a professional interest in dredging and maritime infrastructure

projects including the development of ports and waterways, coastal protection,

land reclamation, offshore works, environmental remediation and habitat restoration.

The name Terra et Aqua is a registered trademark.

for a free subscription register at www.terra-et-aqua.com

© 2011 IADC, The Netherlands

All rights reserved. Electronic storage, reprinting or

abstracting of the contents is allowed for non-commercial

purposes with permission of the publisher.

ISSN 0376-6411

Typesetting and printing by Opmeer Drukkerij bv,

The Hague, The Netherlands.

Contents 1

EDITORIAL 2

THE FEHMARNBELT TUNNEL: 3REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVESPETER LUNDHUS AND CHRISTIAN WICHMANN MATTHEISSEN

After almost 2 years of extensive study of conceptual designs, the plans for

the “missing” transportation link across the Fehmarnbelt from Denmark to

Germany are ready to proceed. The present-day ferry takes 45 minutes plus

waiting time. The link will take 7 to 10 minutes.

REMEDIATION OF CONTAMINTED SEDIMENT: A WORLDWIDE 14STATUS SURVEY OF REGULATION AND TECHNOLOGYPHILIP A. SPADARO

Remediation projects are becoming more frequent: Here’s a snapshot of

the current state of the industry, including which countries at present have

a regulatory framework and/or technical framework in place (and which

do not), and what technologies are actively being used.

THE IMPORTANCE OF BED MATERIAL CHARACTERISATION IN PLANNING 24DREDGING PROJECTSMICHAEL P. COSTARAS, R.N. BRAY, RICHARD P. LEWIS AND MARK W.E. LEE

Insufficient, inaccurate and irrelevant data about bed material can lead to

unwanted surprises, whereas early advice from contractors and specialist

consultants and adequate testing and sampling early on can offer cost-savings

down the road.

BOOKS/PERIODICALS REVIEWED 31A new book from IOC/UNESCO Understanding Sea-Level Rise and Variabilitytackles this difficult subject; and a new Facts About Dredging Around Coral Reefs is available.

SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/EVENTS 34“Forum on Early Contractor Involvement” is coming up in late June. CEDA Dredging

Days, CHIDA’s conference, PIANC COPEDEC and more follow.

contents

eDItoRIALAmongst the multiple activities of the umbrella organisations that represent the worldwide

dredging community – such as International Association of Dredging Companies (IADC),

the World Dredging Association (WODA) comprising CEDA, WEDA and EADA – are several

publications, including Terra et Aqua, and myriad congresses and conferences that take place

throughout any given year around the world, on a diversity of subjects that impact dredging

and maritime construction projects.

Attending these conferences, and perusing through their proceedings, often known as “grey

literature”, is one significant source of Terra articles which turn grey into black ink – or

downloadable files. Adjoining this are presentations of awards from IADC to young authors at

selected conferences – coming up soon at the 2011 WEDA and CEDA meetings – to encourage

young people to continue working in and doing research for the dredging industry.

Such research is the lifeline of any modern industry and encouraging the flow of innovative,

forward-looking technical, environmental and managerial information has become a focus of

IADC over the years.

But attending conferences is only half the story. In a

cooperative effort, CEDA and IADC, have often joined forces

to launch their own events. This year a new conference

entitled, “Forum on Early Contractor Involvement”, ECI for

short, has gone from the drawing board to reality. Schedule to

take place June 23-24 at the Hilton London Docklands (for

registration information see page 35), this forum represents

the recognition by a diverse group of professionals that the

sooner contractors become involved with a project, the better

it is for everyone – the project owner, the public and other

stakeholders. The theme, “Partnering Creates Possibilities”,

says it clearly – but when is ECI an appropriate solution?

And how do we implement it?

By inviting a broad range of speakers representing clients, consultants, lawyers and engineers,

the organisers have created an unusual formula. These presenters will lay the groundwork for

interactive, facilitated workshops which will follow: Audience participation is a must. In this way,

all attendees – financiers, insurers, engineers, government agents, contractors, consultants and

project owners will get a chance to share their experiences and tackle the questions about the

shared risks and responsibilities implicit in ECI. The overriding question is: How can ECI help

create a future where one can advance “maritime solutions for a changing world”, as our

Terra motto states, in the best, most cost-effective way.

In this issue of Terra et Aqua you will find articles that connect to this theme: one on the

proposed Fehmarnbelt link which will connect Denmark and Germany, where environmental,

technical and other studies are still being prepared; a global status survey of the contaminated

sediment policies, so crucial to the execution of dredging works; and one in which the necessity

for the characterisation of bed materials early on in a project is emphasised. As reflected in

these articles, “early contractor involvement” is more than a conference theme. It is a path to

successfully executing mega projects where complexities and environmental considerations

continue to challenge our best and brightest minds.

Koos van OordPresident, IADC

Koos van OordIADC, President

2 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

Register now

FORUM on

23 - 24 June 2011Hilton London Docklands, UK

• project owners• financiers • contractors • insurers• construction lawyers • regulators • government agencies and NGOs • advisors to decision makers in maritime infrastructure construction

An interactive forum and networking event.

“A paradigm shift is taking place in procurement. And we need to educate the client and contractors”.

Dean Kashiwagi

Organised by:

Partnering Creates Possibilities

Organised by: Supported by:

Early Contractor Involvement

www.dcm-conference.org

FOR WHOM:

WHAT:

WHEN and WHERE:

ABSTRACT

The Fehmarnbelt Link between Denmark and

Germany, for which in September 2008 a

bilateral government treaty was signed, is the

last of the three links uniting transportation

networks in Northern Europe. The three links

(the Great Belt and the Øresund Link being

the other two) are impressive mega structures

(bridges/ tunnels) spanning international

waterways. They concentrate traffic flows

and create strong transport corridors and

are the basis of new regional development

regimes.

In early 2011, following almost two years of

extensive work on different conceptual

designs for the fixed link it was decided that

an immersed tunnel should form the basis for

the continuous planning of the project,

including the environmental impact studies.

Completion of the link is scheduled for 2020.

INTRODUCTION

In the 1980s The European Round Table of

Industrialists identified 14 missing links in the

transportation network of the continent.

Three of them were found around the Danish

island of Zealand (see Figures 1a and 1b).

One link was within Denmark; the other two

were between nations. One link connects

heavy economic centres, one joins more thinly

populated regions and the last one links

peripheral areas. Two of them (the Great Belt

Link – linking the Danish islands of Zealand

and Funen and the Øresund Link between

Denmark and Sweden) have been constructed

and are fully operational. The third – the

Fehmarnbelt Link between Denmark and

Germany – was decided in 2008 on a bilateral

government level. The three links are

impressive mega structures (bridges/ tunnels)

spanning international waterways.

Their lengths are around 20 km (12 miles)

each. They concentrate traffic flows and

create strong transport corridors. They are the

basis of new regional development regimes.

“Ferries connect systems, fixed links unite

systems”. The concept of missing links has

been adapted by the European Union in

different large-scale strategies.

Above: The present situation showing the ferry with

vehicles coming from Puttgarden (Germany)

disembarking at Rødby (Denmark). The fixed

Fehmarnbelt link will not only take over the transport

services now carried out by the ferries between Rødby

and Puttgarden. It will forge new relations between the

communities on both sides of the link.

tHe FeHMARnBeLt tUnneL: ReGIonAL DeVeLoPMent PeRsPectIVes

PeteR LUnDHUs AnD cHRIstIAn WIcHMAnn MAttHIessen

Following these new strategies, the Trans-

European Transport Network was adopted

and implemented nationally in different ways.

Some countries have been focussing on high-

speed railway infrastructures, others have

improved airports and seaways, and in

Denmark the three fixed links totalling a

€13 billion investment have been given high

priority in the national transport action plans.

The revision of the guidelines and the new

EU initiatives regarding “Green Corridors”

intends to substantially affect funding

programmes of the TEN-T towards fostering

sustainable cross-border transport

infrastructure linking up to policies of

regional development, innovation and growth.

The third fixed link, the Fehmarnbelt Link

forms a giant step in the creation of a new

North-European corridor.

The first stage of the Northern European

integration project was completed with the

opening in 1997/1998 of the fixed link across

Denmark’s Storebælt (Great Belt) (Figure 2).

This represented a giant leap into the future

in terms of logistics and physical interaction

between East and West Denmark. Although

networks across Storebælt already existed,

the new link largely increased the potential

for co- operation between the various parts

of Denmark.

The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel : Regional Development Perspectives 3

4 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

The second stage, the Øresund Fixed Link was

ready in 2000 (Figure 3). Despite the fact that

the Øresund Region’s major cities appeared

to provide good pre-bridge opportunities for

integration, only some fairly weak networks

had been established between Scania in

Sweden and Zealand in Denmark. The opening

of the Øresund Bridge/tunnel, therefore,

substantially improved potential networking

across the strait and, following a somewhat

sluggish start, due to lack of updated

administrative rules, such links ever since have

been steadily growing in a learning process.

With the decision by Germany and Denmark

to enter the third stage and build a fixed

Fehmarnbelt link, the two nations not only

embarked on a large-scale project to improve

the infrastructure of Northern Europe and

reduce travel times, but also to stimulate

economic, cultural and social development in

the areas, regions and countries around the

link. With the fixed Fehmarnbelt link, one of

the world’s mega projects in terms of logistics

will be completed. “The missing Scandinavian

link” will no longer be “missing”.

The fixed Fehmarnbelt link will result in

considerably changes. Although differences

between the German and Scandinavian

languages and the fact that the near areas are

sparsely populated will constitute barriers to

the area’s development. Nevertheless, the

potential gains are significant. And one thing

is certain: As new infrastructure projects of

this size have always resulted in major

changes, the link will create growth and

development.

The fixed Fehmarnbelt link will not only take

over the transport services previously carried

out by the ferries between Rødby and

Puttgarden. No less important is the fact that

new relations between the communities on

both sides of the link will be forged –

between southern Zealand, Lolland and

Falster in Denmark and eastern Holstein in

Germany as well as, further afield, between

Copenhagen/the Øresund city and Hamburg.

As a result, new trading opportunities, new

forms of tourism, new jobs and new housing

opportunities will arise. In turn, this will open

up new regional development perspectives

for the entire Fehmarnbelt region. Already a

range of contacts and partnerships are being

formed between Denmark, Germany and

Sweden for the purpose of exploiting the

opportunities created by the fixed

Fehmarnbelt link.

The treaty on the construction of a fixed

Fehmarnbelt link was signed by the Danish

and German governments on 3 September

2008. The decision engendered strong focus

on the development perspectives following

the fixed link’s completion in 2020.

PLAnnInG tHe FeHMARnBeLt tUnneL: stAte oF tHe ARtIn early 2011, following almost two year’s

extensive work on different conceptual

designs for the fixed link it was decided that

an immersed tunnel should form the basis for

the continuous planning of the project

including the environmental impact studies.

However, alternative technical solutions – for

example a cable-stayed bridge – are still being

considered and benchmarked. The decision on

S W E D E N

SCANIA

Malmö

ZEALAND

LOLLAND-FALSTER

Copenhagen

SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN

MECKLENBURG-VORPOMMERN

FUNEN

JUTLAND

Hamburg

Kiel

Lübeck

Rostock

D E N M A R K

P O L A N D

G E R M A N Y

0 25 50 75 100 Km

D E N M A R K

P O L A N D

G E R M A N Y

S W E D E N

SCANIA

SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN

MECKLENBURG-VORPOMMERN

ZEALAND

LOLLAND-FALSTER

FUNEN

JUTLANDCopenhagen

Hamburg

Malmö

Kiel

Lübeck

Rostock

Great B

elt

F ehmarnbelt

Øre

sund

0 25 50 75 100 Km

Figure 1a. Pre-fixed links:

Southern Scandinavia plus

parts of Northern Europe.

Distance between the

Zealand archipelago and

the rest of the region as

time: 1 hour equals 80 km.

The three ovals indicate the

location of the ferry lines

and the “Missing

Scandinavian Links” as

stated in the late 1980s.

Western oval (left): The

Great Belt. Eastern oval

(right): Øresund. Southern

oval: Fehmarnbelt. Larger

oval at Øresund indicates

several ferry cross

Figure 1b. Post-fixed links:

Southern Scandinavia plus

parts of Northern Europe.

Solid line: Existing

connections and roads.

Broken line: Fehmarnbelt

link to be constructed.

Distance in kilometres.

which solution is finally to be built will be

made pursuant to a specially enacted

construction act in Denmark and subject to

approval by the German authorities. The final

approval is expected in 2013.

The recommendation of the immersed tunnel

is based on a preliminary, comprehensive

assessment of, not least, environmental and

safety issues including navigational safety but

also technical, traffic, time and financial issues.

The state-of-the-art tunnel under the

Fehmarnbelt is set to be one of the safest in

the world (Figure 4) . With a length of about

18 km it will also be the world’s longest

combined road-rail tunnel to date. The tunnel

will be five times the length of the Øresund

tunnel (approx. 4 km) between Copenhagen

and Malmö and three times the length of the

Trans-Bay Tube Bart Tunnel in San Francisco,

which is currently the world’s longest immersed

tunnel. The total length of the Fehmarnbelt

tunnel will be about 18 km from tunnel mouth

to tunnel mouth. At a speed of 110 km per

hour, this will offer motorists a journey time of

approximately 10 minutes through the tunnel.

For train passengers, the journey will take seven

minutes from coast to coast.

Technical challengesAn immersed tunnel will present considerable

technical challenges during the construction

phase, as a result of the intensive shipping

traffic in the Fehmarnbelt. However, unlike a

bridge, an immersed tunnel will not entail as

many technical operations which push the

limits of what has been done before.

Essentially, the procedure will be the same as

it was for construction of the Øresund Fixed

Link’s immersed tunnel under the Drogden

Channel, only many more times over and at

greater depth, i.e., up to 30-40 metres in the

Fehmarnbelt compared to approximately

25 metres in the Øresund.

A cable-stayed bridge across the Fehmarnbelt,

with two free spans of 724 m each, would be

the largest spans ever constructed for

combined road and rail traffic. Compounded

by the high shipping traffic in the area, this

would pose significant risks in the construction

phase in terms of cost overruns, delays and

industrial accidents. One of the key parameters

for the choice of technical solution is the

environmental impact of the projects. Both a

cable-stayed bridge and an immersed tunnel

would impact the marine environment in the

Fehmarnbelt. The preliminary conclusion is that

a bridge would have slightly more significant

permanent environmental impacts than an

immersed tunnel. A number of the

environmental impacts of a fixed link would be

on Natura 2000 sites. In such instances, EU

legislation prescribes that the least intrusive

alternative must be selected.

In the interests of navigation safety, a tunnel

clearly poses fewer risks than a bridge.

The Fehmarnbelt is a heavily trafficked stretch

of water with 47,000 vessel transits per

annum (2006), including many tank vessels.

In the coming years, shipping traffic in the

Fehmarnbelt is expected to increase

substantially to approximately 90,000 vessel

transits in 2030. However, risk analyses for a

bridge show that, from a vessel perspective,

navigation safety would be improved in

relation to a situation with no bridge and

continued ferry crossings. This would require

a cable-stayed bridge with two navigational

spans of at least 724 m each, and the

implementation of permanent, radar-based

vessel monitoring in the form of a Vessel

Traffic Service (VTS) system covering a range

from the south end of the Great Belt to the

Cadet Channel.

Financial factorsIn financial terms, there is at the outset very

little difference between the two projects.

The construction estimate (2008 price level)

for an immersed tunnel is € 5.1 billion and

for a cable-stayed bridge, € 5.2 billion.

Assessment of the overall cost of each of the

two projects must also take into account the

construction time and the cost of operation

and maintenance. The construction time for

the tunnel is estimated at 6.5 years, and for

the bridge, 6 years. The cost of operation

and maintenance is slightly higher for a tunnel

than for a bridge.

All told, the payback time for the two projects

would be essentially the same: approximately

30 years for the coast-to-coast project.

This means that, from an overall financial

perspective, there is no difference between

bridge and tunnel.

PETER LUNDHUS

received his MSc in Civil Engineering,

Technical University of Denmark and Public

Negotiation, Harvard. He worked

internationally for Christiani & Nielsen

covering all aspects of design, bidding and

construction of civil engineering works, e.g.,

tunnels, bridges and harbour works in

Europe, Asia and Africa from 1973-1988.

He then joined the Great Belt Link A/S in

Denmark (1988-1992), in 1990 becoming

Project Director for the 8-km-long bored

twin railway tunnel, a significant part of the

18-km-long, combined tunnel and bridge

toll-funded link for road and rail between

the eastern and western parts of Denmark.

From 1992-2000 he was Technical Director

in Øresundsbrokonsortiet, a joint Danish-

Swedish company tasked with the

construction of the 16-km-long toll-funded

tunnel and bridge link crossing the Øresund

between Denmark and Sweden.

Since 2001 he is Technical Director for

Femern A/S, a state owned company which

is tasked with the planning of a fixed link

between Denmark and Germany across the

Fehmarnbelt.

CHRISTIAN WICHMANN

MATTHIESSEN

earned his MSc, PhD and Dr. Scient at

the University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

He has been Professor, Urban Geography

since 1988. He was head of the

Department 1986-1990 and 1996-1999

and President of the. National Committee

for Geography 1998 and on the

International Union of Geography, Urban

Geography Commission Board of Directors

in 2000 and President 2008-2012. He has

been on the Board of Directors of the Royal

Danish Society of Geography, the European

Institute of Comparative Urban Research,

the Center for Regional and Tourism

Research, and part of the Danish

Government’s Commission on

Infrastructure 2006-2008. His research has

covered a wide range of fields such as

Urban System Structure and Function,

Urban Growth, Large City (Re)-vitalization,

Implications of Infrastructural Investments,

Metropolitan Competition, Regional

Development, Tourism and Triple Helix –

co-operation between universities,

corporate world, regional government.

The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel : Regional Development Perspectives 5

6 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

ConstructionThe immersed tunnel solution comprises 89

tunnel elements in total, made of waterproof

concrete (Figures 5 and 6). The elements each

weighing around 75,000 tonnes will be

manufactured on land in covered factories

and then transported by tugs to the alignment

and sunk into the dredged trench and

connected to the preceding element.

The immersed tunnel will thus lie in a channel

dredged in the seabed and will be protected

by a layer of stones 1.2 m thick as protection

against sinking ships or ships’ anchors.

A new concept for special elements has been

introduced when developing the conceptual

design for the tunnel. As all mechanical and

electrical equipment requiring space and

maintenance will be gathered in these special

elements. This means that the standard

elements can be made technically simpler and

homogenous and, therefore, better suited for

batch production.

Femern A/S is working on the assumption that

a large proportion of the tunnel components

would be produced locally owing to their

great weight. On account of the risks entailed

by sea transportation of such large

components, Femern A/S has previously

concluded that production of concrete

components should ideally be sited within

120 km from the alignment in order to always

have a sufficient handle on the weather

outlook. A more distant siting may also be

considered but will increase the risks picture.

It is expected that the contracts with the

contracting firms who will be undertaking the

construction project will be signed in 2014.

Safety in the tunnelThorough safety analyses have been

conducted and the proposed tunnel more

than meets all relevant safety standards

– including the EU’s tunnel safety directive –

because of the end-to-end emergency lane,

amongst other features. The requirements for

road tunnels have increased a great deal over

the last decade. The design of the

forthcoming Fehmarnbelt tunnel takes all the

new requirements into account.

For motorists, the immersed tunnel will be at

least as safe as a standard motorway.

All traffic will run in separate one-direction

tunnel tubes so there is no oncoming traffic.

To minimise the risk of accidents, a

computerised traffic control system will be

installed and there will be a 24-hour manned

control centre. Moreover, traffic information

will be available on FM radio and signage for

motorists and varied architectural lighting will

be installed in the tunnel so drivers can

maintain concentration for the full 10 minute

journey.

As is the case with flying, studies show that

some few users may feel discomfort when

entering and driving in tunnels. For a very few

users, the discomfort is so intense that it will

make them choose an alternative route.

Correspondingly, a similar number of users

Figure 2. The Great Belt Bridge connecting the Danish islands of Funen and Zealand represented a giant leap into the

future in terms of logistics and physical interaction between eastern and western Denmark.

Figure 3. The Øresund Bridge between Denmark and Sweden. The opening of this bridge/tunnel link has substantially

improved networking across the strait.

LandscapingThe tunnel will be almost invisible in the

landscape, with the exception of the portal

buildings and landfills. The tunnel will not

impact the marine environment once it has

been built. The preliminary environmental

investigations show that an immersed tunnel

has the least permanent environmental effects

and thus also requires fewer measures to

minimise environmental impacts.

The proposal is for the tunnel to be

constructed almost in a straight line from

coast-to-coast. On the German side, motorists

will drive over a small hill and then down-

wards into a green valley before arriving at

the mouth of the tunnel (Figure 8). After

a gradual transition to artificial lighting, they

will continue into a tunnel with light-coloured

walls and architectural decoration.

The approach on the Danish side of Lolland

will be characterised by a designed landscape

and will be marked by a portal containing the

control and monitoring centre. In this way,

the portal building on the Danish side is

envisaged as a landmark for travellers en

route to Germany (Figure 9).

tHe GeoGRAPHY oF tHe FeHMARnBeLt ReGIonThe Fehmarnbelt region comprises the Zealand

archipelago, Bornholm, Schleswig -Holstein,

Hamburg and Scania. Parts of Mecklenburg-

Vorpommern and, when discussing major

cities, Rostock are at relevant occasions

included in the Fehmarnbelt region. The region

comprises 9.3 million people with 1.2 million

in the Swedish part, 2.5 million in the Danish

part and 5.6 million in the German part.

In 1997-1998 the Zealand archipelago was

joined to mainland Europe by the opening

of the Great Belt tunnel and bridge whilst

the fixed link between Zealand and the

Scandinavian peninsula, the Øresund Bridge,

was commissioned in 2000. The two mega

bridges/tunnels have significantly changed the

geographical reality for Southern Scandinavia.

Looking at the diagram in Figure 10, what is

striking are the traffic jumps following the

opening of the fixed links. The traffic jump

was significant after the opening of Great Belt

Bridge and developments subsequently

entailed a new, lasting, growth regime.

The reason was that a series of networks

were already in place and were waiting to

be employed in new and more value creating

ways. Family ties were national, companies

had Denmark as their market and the public

sector, institutions and organisations were

organised on a nationwide basis. What was

needed was simply to change the logistics

and localisation patterns.

There was also a traffic jump following the

opening of the Øresund Bridge, but this took

longer because there were no existing, well-

The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel : Regional Development Perspectives 7

experience anxiety driving across long or high

bridges. When driving in tunnels the anxiety

can be relieved with creative and strong

lighting, decoration, clear information with

frequent signage and a welcoming and

reassuringly safe design for the tunnel portals

(Figure 7).

With the dramatic decrease in hazardous

emissions from cars and trucks in the last ten

years, the “piston effect” – longitudinal

ventilation – of the vehicle traffic will be

sufficient to comply with the requirements

for air quality in the tunnel during normal

operation. In the event of irregular operation,

a fire or discharge of toxic fumes, the

ventilation system will ensure that motorists

can get safely out of the tunnel and that

rescue and emergency teams can work safely.

In addition, a sprinkler system will be installed

in the tunnel, which will limit the extent of

any fire and smoke.

There will be a central gallery between the

road tunnel tubes to which the motorists can

go in the event of an accident. Approximately

every 100 metres there will be cross-

connections between the tunnels, which

means that there will be no more than around

50 metres to the nearest emergency exit.

The over-pressure ventilation in the central

gallery will ensure that there is fresh air and

no smoke in the gallery in the event

of a fire.

Figure 4. The approach ramp and portal structure on the Danish side of a Fehmarnbelt tunnel with the control and monitoring facilities seen from the north towards the south.

8 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

localisation factors for infrastructure, transport

and logistics. Compared to the domestic

regional traffic, traffic across Fehmarnbelt is

weak and cross-border infrastructure consists

of ferry services. Although there are also

ferries across Øresund, the Øresund Bridge

constitutes the significant link between

Zealand and Scania.

Basically, there are three different perspectives

for regional development. The first comprises

the interaction between the major heavy

centres, i.e. between Copenhagen–Malmö-

Lund (the Øresund City) on the one side and

especially Hamburg, but also Kiel, Lübeck and

Rostock on the other. Within this perspective,

short term, this will probably be less dramatic

than it was following the two other mega

projects (the Great Belt and Øresund links)

because there are no well established

networks across the Fehmarnbelt or heavy

centres near the future fixed link. By contrast,

predictions suggest that the project will create

a new lasting growth regime based on its

considerable value creating potential,

particularly brought about by the establish-

ment of new networks and because a new

border regional framework calls for action.

ReGIonAL AnALYsIs PeRsPectIVesIn the Fehmarnbelt region, the national sea

borders act both as system separators and as

developed networks to build upon. Rather,

developments following the Øresund Bridge

can be described as something entirely new

with a learning process in which all

localisation decisions were taken in light of

the fixed link as a reality, where logistics

acquired new development opportunities and

where new economies of scale were added to

the agenda with their starting point in an

overall Danish/Swedish metropolitan region.

The question now is how the transport picture

at Fehmarnbelt will change post fixed link.

There is no doubt that changes will occur and

that the fixed Fehmarnbelt link will result in a

traffic jump and new growth potential. In the

Figure 5. The Fehmarnbelt tunnel will be constructed from 79 standard elements each 217 m long and 10 shorter special elements to be located every 1.8 km.

Figure 6. The special elements will ensure that ongoing operations and maintenance can be carried out without disrupting traffic. Beneath the road lanes and the rail track, there

will be access to all technical rooms. Personnel, therefore, do not have to cross the traffic.

The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel : Regional Development Perspectives 9

have a substantial and statistically significant

positive impact on house prices. These

estimates do not take other future dynamic

changes into account, such as new property

developments or new commuting trends. An

8 per cent increase in the price of the average

house on the German side corresponds to an

absolute increase in 2009 prices of €16,000.

The estimates for the Danish side are some-

what more uncertain, but can be expected to

fall within the same range. Using data from

housing markets in other areas with high-

speed train links shows an overall increase in

residential property values of €1.6 billion on

the German side of the Fehmarnbelt.

The total increase for the local housing

markets on the Danish side would amount

to at least €1.4 billion. The total minimum

increase – assuming high-speed rail service

links – thus amounts to €3 billion in 2009

prices (providing the economic structure in

Denmark and Germany remains unchanged).

One can assume, therefore, that the improved

infrastructure in the areas near the fixed

Fehmarnbelt link will result in relocations from

Greater Copenhagen to the Danish areas near

the link and similarly, relocations from

Hamburg to the North German areas near

the link.

Differences in property prices will not, to the

same extent as has been seen around Øresund,

promote border commuting although the new

increasingly set to become the backbone

of Europe’s mass transport system. These

opportunities are too good to miss.

Those areas (Lolland-Falster, the Northeastern

part of Schleswig- Holstein), which border the

future fixed link, can expect job losses when

the link opens and the ferry services cease

operating. This is unavoidable, but it could

mean that these areas mobilise and demand

new localisation of government assets.

This was, for instance, the case with West

Zealand’s success in connection with the

construction of the Great Belt Bridge where

the Danish government came under pressure

to move the Copenhagen naval station to

Korsør and did so. However, there are also

gains to be had. The property market will

respond to more efficient transport

connections and to the fact that access to

major cities in the neighbouring country will

be much faster and more convenient.

The areas that border the fixed link will

become “real” border regions with

neighbours in another country within daily

reach and commuting areas to the centres

expanded.

Property price increaseAs part of the project of reference

(Matthiessen, ed. 2011), the impact of

accessibility on house prices is estimated.

These estimates confirm that a fixed link will

there are almost exclusively potential gains.

The second perspective comprises those parts

of the region that are close to the

Fehmarnbelt. Here it is not only about

potential winners, but also realising that once

the fixed link is completed, jobs linked to the

ferries and crossings will disappear and that at

the same time construction work will cease.

The third perspective encompasses the other

ferry towns, which will experience new tough

competition (compare Figures 11 and 12).

The major cities will experience new growth

potential. First and foremost, this will apply to

the Øresund City and Hamburg and secondly

to Kiel, Lübeck and Rostock which, however,

will see some negative development potential

in that ferry services in these towns will be

exposed to strong competition. The major

cities will also see a strengthening of their

crossing point function, which will make them

more attractive as localisation targets for a

wide range of activities. They themselves will

be occupied by strengthening the interaction

within areas that create new value by

exploiting both the complementary

opportunities and supplementing each other’s

activities. They will be better positioned within

the international metropolitan competition.

Moreover, the construction of the fixed

Fehmarnbelt link will provide great

opportunities for linking the Øresund City

and the heavy Scandinavian centres to the

network of high-speed trains that are

Figure 7. Three colored zones

and illustrations on the walls

of the road tunnel will help to

give motorists a varied journey

during their 10 minute drive

through the Fehmarnbelt

tunnel.

10 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

and prosperity and future prospects. Without

these cities, the region would not have an

international format.

These two cities, however, are not alone as

high level centres. Berlin, Frankfurt and

Stockholm also play significant roles in the

region, Berlin as Germany’s capital and a so

far failed bid to establish itself in the elite of

world cities. Frankfurt and Stockholm are in

a class to which Berlin aspires. Frankfurt has

a dominating role within Europe’s financial

world, which in other major nations is often

located in the capital. In addition, the city is

one of the world’s large intercontinental

airport centres. Stockholm occupies a

significant role in terms of large international

business groups as well as being Sweden’s

capital, but is nevertheless more isolated in

respect of global integration than the other

heavy centres.

Interaction is always an expression of added

value. As a result, it makes sense to examine

new opportunities and what these analyses

can be used for. The view is that if stronger

links, first between Copenhagen and

Hamburg and second with Stockholm and

Berlin could be created, a new North

European axis could result, i.e., a network of

mutually strongly linked cities with uniform

partnership relations with the rest of the

world. Such an axis could claim a position at

a higher level within the continent’s urban

hierarchy and thus contribute to development,

growth and wealth.

motorways and railroads (inclusive high speed

train lines), whilst the Øresund city plays the

same role for Scandinavia (excluding high

speed train lines).

International air transport indicates the

potential accessibility for the flow of people

and the handling of high value cargo.

Copenhagen is an important centre with flight

connections to cities on four continents and

a strong European network whilst Hamburg

is served by relatively few international flights

and has a modest European network.

On non-material accessibility the Internet

backbone network Copenhagen performs well

and Hamburg is also a central hub, but not as

important as Copenhagen.

The Fehmarnbelt link and the Øresund Bridge

will bring Schleswig-Holstein and Hamburg

closer to the Øresund regional market. Perhaps

even more important, they will create a direct

portal for the entire Scandinavian market of

almost 20 million inhabitants (Sweden,

Denmark and Norway). The same scenario is

presented by Scania and Zealand, which will

have a great improvement in accessibility to

the German market of 80 million inhabitants.

Urban systemThe Fehmarnbelt Region’s urban system is

structured with a number of large heavy

centres within and outside the region as

important nodes (co-ordinating network

centres). The Øresund City and Hamburg are

crucial for the region’s function, activity level,

role as a hinterland for Copenhagen and

Hamburg, Lübeck and Kiel will create new

opportunities for what is today regarded as

peripheral areas in Lolland-Falster and in the

North East Schleswig- Holstein. Similarly, the

tourist market and the market for border

localisation will react to the new found

accessibility. This also means significantly

more realistic efforts within the European

Union’s range of border regional policies.

Logistic changeCopenhagen Airport is the leading air traffic

centre for Denmark and large parts of

Northern Europe – and since the opening of

the Øresund Bridge, Southern Sweden is part

of the local hinterland. Traffic across the

Øresund Bridge reflects the increasing

integration of Greater Copenhagen–Malmö-

Lund. Due to the short and frequent ferry

services between Helsingborg and Elsinore,

this border area is also displaying some signs

of integration. The Fehmarnbelt currently

shows no evidence of developing cross-border

systems except within some retail areas driven

by price differences.

The network position of the two major

conurbations within the Fehmarnbelt region –

Copenhagen and Hamburg is of high quality.

Hamburg is the second harbour of the

European continent with a global network of

lines, whilst the harbours of the Øresund

region plays more modest roles with feeder

traffic as their mission. When it comes to land

traffic Hamburg is the North German hub for

Figure 8. On the German side

the proposal is to make the

approach area as green as

possible and thus integrate it

into the existing landscape as

much as possible.

The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel : Regional Development Perspectives 11

come from the Lübeck area in Schleswig-

Holstein. In the Danish and Swedish parts of

the region, Copenhagen and adjoining areas

attract most of the commuting from the

surrounding areas, i.e., 66,500 commuters.

74 per cent of regional commuters into the

metropolitan area of Copenhagen come from

Region Zealand with 26 per cent from Scania.

The many commuters from Scania to

Copenhagen are largely a result of the

increased integration between Denmark and

Sweden that followed in the wake of the

opening of the Øresund Bridge in 2000.

The urban system within and close to the

Fehmarnbelt region includes a number of

other centres. There are other large cities of

which some with larger or smaller justification

claim metropolitan status. Three large German

cities are found on a somewhat lower level in

the urban hierarchy than the Øresund City,

Hamburg and Berlin. They consist of the

special ised centres Braunschweig–Wolfsburg,

Hannover and Bremen and are overshadowed

by Hamburg but nevertheless play strong

independent roles as industrial centres,

meeting places and gateway cities.

The region’s urban system is also structured

by a number of other major cities that play

the role as regional centres with a strong

concentration of hinterland-oriented public

service activities. Most of these cities have a

university, some have gateway function and

all have considerable industrial niches. As part

of the picture, there are a series of medium-

sized cities in the Fehmarnbelt region whose

roles are mainly local although a few like

some of the major centres also function as a

supplement to, and interact with, the larger

gateway cities.

Commuting and labour marketCommuting statistics reveal that the region’s

workforce is mobile. This is especially the case

in the major cities which attract commuters

from the surrounding areas. Approximately

105,600 individuals commute to Hamburg

and its vicinity from areas in Northern

Germany. By far the majority, 40 per cent,

The German and Danish labour markets,

particularly in the Fehmarnbelt Region, are

largely distinct from each other – as is

common with many other border regions in

Europe. Cross-border commuting between the

two countries is characterised by significant

differences in the flows between north-south

and south-north directions. This is owing to

the current market situation where the Danish

side offers a greater incentive for cross-border

employ ment. In total, estimates are that some

11,600 individuals work in Denmark and live

in Germany whilst 1,600 individuals work in

Figure 9. The tunnel entrance

on the Danish side of

Fehmarnbelt includes a control

and monitoring centre in the

portal building.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

'09'08'07'06'05'04'03'02'01'00'99'98'97'96'95'94'93'92'91'90

Vehicles (millions)

Fehmarnbelt Greatbelt Oresund

Figure 10. Traffic development across the three Straits that separate the Zealand archipelago from the rest of the

world. The figures in the diagram show traffic across the whole section, millions of vehicles per year. With regard to

the Great Belt (Storebælt) this includes smaller ferry crossings north and south of the Great Belt Bridge. The Øresund

statistics comprise the northern ferry traffic Elsinore – Helsingborg as well as south of the Bridge. The statistics for

Fehmarnbelt traffic include those from Rodbyhavn and Gedser to Northern Germany

12 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

Germany and live in Denmark (2008).

Compared to the German-Danish land border,

the Fehmarnbelt connection has roughly six

times fewer commuters in both directions.

Barriers to mobility in cross-border regions are

created by geographical distance and other

impediments to travel between two countries:

Administrative barriers, different la bour

market conditions, qualification barriers and

other barriers in the daily lives of the

populations of these regions. Furthermore,

information about the conditions on the other

side is often fragmented. Strategies and

initiatives aimed at reducing border barriers

are based upon two principles: (a) problem

solving, such as harmonisation of regulations

through bilateral agreements, and (b)

information and consultancy. Strategic success

also depends on the learning process of the

labour force and of the consultants.

The benefits of a cross-border region with

significant labour mobility between the two

sides stem from the fact that commuters

themselves contribute to reducing border

barriers and promote social cohesion across

the whole of the region. Moreover, such a

new cross-border region profits from the

economic benefits of a large and diverse

labour market.

The expectation is that a strong development

of information and consulting infrastructure

and fur ther progress in removing the border

barriers will take place simultaneously with

the con struction of the fixed link. An increase

of the number of commuters can be expected

as a result of interaction of these impulses.

Figure 13 summarises the mostly, weekly

commuter flow across the Fehmarnbelt as

envis aged in the various scenarios.

Clusters in the economyScania, Zealand, Bornholm, Schleswig-

Holstein, Hamburg and Mecklenburg-

Vorpommern each have their own industrial

profiles, focusing on specific clusters and their

development. Whilst these regions differ, they

also operate clusters of similar structure and

focus. The ob ject with the cluster analysis in

this report is to identify clusters for potential

co-operation. The immediate strategy is based

on the fact that life sciences and health are

important business sectors in most parts of

the Fehmarnbelt Region.

This research focus of many universities is

reflected in the cluster policy of the respective

organisations. Also, the business sectors of

food and information technology (including

the media) are widely represented in the

Fehmarnbelt region where they have

important roles in the regional economies and

are the target of cluster development efforts.

A fourth area with potential for regional

partnerships is logistics focusing on shipping.

A fifth is wind energy/green technology and

a sixth is tour ism (including business tourism).

There are other strong sectors although these

only cover parts of the region. Maritime

industries play an important role in all

North German regions, nanotechnology in

Schleswig-Holstein and Scania, the financial

sector (with business-to-business services) is

important in Copenhagen and Hamburg as,

indeed, are the cultural sector and airport-

related activities. Aviation is strong in

Hamburg, but we have been unable to

discover information from other parts of the

Fehmarnbelt region although we would like

to do so in view of the central role of the

industry.

Although important for the regional

economies, tourism is an area in which

the regions see each other as competitors.

Hamburg and Copenhagen compete for

metropolitan tour ism, including business

tourism (meetings, incentives, conferences,

events). The two metropolises also compete

for cultural tourists and families looking for a

city product. The many fine beaches around

the Fehmarnbelt region are also attractive

destinations, especially for families and for

water sport enthusiasts.

Although competition is strong, opportunities

for partnerships should be explored and joint

cluster development should be placed on the

agenda.

We also believe that the potential for

co-operation between Copenhagen and

Hamburg should be explored in terms of

finance and related services as well as for the

cultural sector. The cultural sector effort could

Centre Centre

Centre-centre interaction

Periphery Periphery

Border

Centre Centre

Centre-centre interaction

Real border region

Border

Figure 11. Simple model of

activities and interaction –

current situation in the

Fehmarnbelt region.

Figure 12. Simple model of

activities and interaction –

future scenario in the

Fehmarnbelt region.

The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel : Regional Development Perspectives 13

be linked to the media industry. Airport

related activities should also be explored with

a view to co-operation.

The world of researchThe Fehmarnbelt region comprises five

scientific centres. The Øresund City belongs

amongst the group of Europe’s scientific

metropolises; Hamburg and Kiel are research

cities at a slightly lower level whilst Rostock

and Lübeck belong to the group of regional

research centres. The five research centres

have different profiles, but also share some

common features.

The Øresund City’s position of strength is

primarily based on health research,

geosciences and the natural environment.

In Hamburg, focus is on health together with

traditional natural science. Kiel’s strength is

centred on geo-disciplines and on marine

sci ence. Rostock also focuses on marine

science whilst Lübeck has a specialisation

profile, which exclusively focuses on health.

An analysis has been made of the

opportunities for partnerships by isolating

those disciplines with potential for developing

new links and which can partly supplement

partly complement each other. Obvious

opportunities for strengthening the interaction

between the centres in order to achieve gains

have also been pointed out.

On the basis of positions of strength, north

as well as south of the Fehmarnbelt, a

number of marine disciplines (oceanography,

marine biology, limnology) health-science

fields (anaesthesiology, endocrinology and

metabolism, immunology, research into

infectious diseases, rheumatology,

haematology) the geoscience areas (soil

science, meteorology and atmospheric

science, multidisciplinary geosciences) and two

traditional natural science disciplines (physics:

particles and fields; mathematical biology)

would be able to supplement each other at

a high level.

It is clear that a series of initiatives is currently

under way to strengthen research within

material science and nanotechnology.

No fewer than four new scientific avant-garde

facili ties in the form of gigantic research

laboratories are under establishment. Two of

these are located in Hamburg, European XFEL

(an experimental facility which generates

extremely fast x-ray flashes) and PETRA

(synchrotron x-ray facility) and two in the

Øresund City, the European Spallation Source

(European experimental facility based on the

world’s strongest neutron source) and MAX IV

(synchrotron radiation facility).

Accounting for investments running billions

of Euros, these projects will also establish new

contacts and new partnership relations with

the business community. The perspectives for

research into material technology and life

science research are significant and are

monitored with great interest by those

commercial sectors that have the potential

to participate in, and exploit, the planned

research activities.

Number of commuters in both directions

Low fare Current fare

Axis IntegrationHigh IntegrationModerate IntegrationNo IntegrationStatus Quo0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

Figure 13. Commuting across the Fehmarnbelt 2020 – alternative scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

Femern A/S is owned by Sund & Bælt

Holding a 100 per cent state-owned Danish

company and has been appointed by the

Danish Minister of Transport to conduct

preparation, investigations and plan for a

coast-to-coast link across the Fehmarnbelt.

A Fehmarnbelt Fixed Link realises the vision

of a fixed, close and direct connection

between Scandinavia and continental

Europe. By uniting the populations in areas

such as science, business and culture, it will

promote the continuous integration of

Europe.

The fixed link will considerably reduce the

travel time between Scandinavia and

continental Europe: Whilst the current ferry

transit takes 45 minutes (plus waiting time),

train passengers will require only 7 minutes,

car drivers no more than 10. The duration

of a train journey between Hamburg and

Copenhagen will be cut short from about

4.5 to 3 hours.

The fixed link closes a gap between the

Scandinavian and European rail networks

and is supported by the European Union as

part of one of the top priority rail corridors

for Europe. In the future, freight trains will

be able to avoid the 160 km longer detour

via the Great Belt. This will create a strong

transport corridor between the Øresund

region in Denmark/Sweden and Hamburg

in Germany, allowing a new greater and

more competitive region – the Fehmarnbelt

region – to emerge.

Together with a multi-national team of

researchers Christian Wichmann

Matthiessen in February 2011 finished a

scientific study of the regional effects of

the fixed link.

REFERENCES

Matthiessen, C. W. and Worm, M. (Eds.) (2011).

The Fehmarnbelt Fixed Link: Regional Development

Perspectives. 440 pages. University Press of Southern

Denmark. Available in print and as an e-book) from

www.universitypress.dk

ABSTRACT

The remediation of contaminated sediment

is becoming more common throughout the

world. Ongoing remediation projects can

be found in Israel, Brazil, Australia, and

numerous European countries, as well as

at many sites throughout North America.

Given this situation, now seems to be an

appropriate time to reflect on the current

status of this field and the variety of

approaches currently in use around the world.

In particular, the following should be

considered:

• What countries currently have a regulatory

framework in place?

• What countries currently have a technical

framework in place?

• What technologies are in active use?

Through this status survey, we can develop a

“snapshot” of the current state of the industry

and evaluate the need for and value of

additional development of approaches and

technologies.

An early version of this article appeared in the

WODCON XIX Proceedings, Beijing, China and

has been updated for publication here.

INTRODUCTION

The regulatory and social mandate to address

contaminated sediment is growing. As

members of the community of professionals

on the inside of the world of sediment

management, we observe this growth from a

unique perspective. As recently as the 1980s,

environmental issues such as contaminated

sediment management were not a welcome

addition to the agenda in the view of many

dredgers, port operators and others on the

waterfront.

This resistance seems almost inconceivable

today, when this issue has become such a

critical element of our inward conversation

(amongst those working within the dredging

community) and our outward conversation

(with the public and the regulating

community).

Now it is 2011. The issue of contaminated

sediment management has gained a permanent

place in our thinking about the waterfront.

Above: Remediation of the Pine Street (Burlington,

Vermont USA) site was accomplished using a reactive

core mat to prevent seepage of coal tar. Such

remediation projects of contaminated sediment are

becoming more common throughout the world.

Technologies including capping, monitored

natural recovery, and dredging have advanced

and continue to develop. At the same time,

contaminated sediment management has

differentiated itself from the mainstream

industry of dredging.

While we (the scientists and engineers

dedicated to the management of contaminated

sediments) have worked diligently to

understand the potential environmental

consequences of dredging as well as the other

technologies, have also struggled to show the

important benefits to society of capital and

maintenance dredging and how the positive

attributes of dredging, such as benefits to

commerce and coastal defense, can and do

balance the risks.

And while this debate has continued, related

concerns surrounding the occurrence and

extent of ecological and human health risks

of contaminated sediment have continued to

grow. These concerns were barely recognised

three decades ago (with a few notable

exceptions). Now, we face ever-increasing

attention and mounting expenditures in the

private and public sectors to address them.

It is not the objective of this work to debate

the points made by others about the technical

ReMeDIAtIon oF contAMInAteD seDIMent: A WoRLDWIDe stAtUs sURVeY oF ReGULAtIon AnD tecHnoLoGY

PHILIP A. sPADARo

14 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

Remediation of Contaminated Sediment : A Worldwide Status Survey of Regulation and Technology 15

been with us since the late 1980s. However,

the primary triggering event for concern or

cleanup can often come from the

redevelopment of waterfront infrastructure,

capital or maintenance dredging programmes,

or concerns about the contamination of

fisheries resources.

As a result, each year sees a new regulation

relating to contaminated sediment being

published by a national, regional, provincial,

state, or local government.

As we enter the second decade of the

21st century, the concern about contaminated

sediment is growing. Large- and small-scale

studies are in progress in numerous countries.

Cleanup projects, particularly large and

complex ones, are becoming more common.

But how common? In what countries?

According to what rules? Using what

technologies?

or regulatory merits of sediment remediation.

Nor is it the objective to further the discussion

of the environmental consequences of capital

or maintenance dredging or the regulation of

dredging itself. Rather, it is the objective here

to observe the situation and document the

current conditions.

GRoWtH oF tHIs FIeLDFrightening stories of sediment contamination

have been with us for about half a century.

The relationship between sediment

contamination and human disease was

recognised as early as 1956 (Ministry of the

Environment – Japan 2002), when mercury

poisoning from the ingestion of contaminated

fish and shellfish was identified as the source

of Minamata disease.

In the late 1970s, despite dramatic

improvements in water quality, significant

problems in benthic and epibenthic ecology

began to surface. The research of Varanasi

and others (Varanasi et al. 1985; Malins et al. 1985) clearly established the link between

sediment contamination and lesions and other

abnormalities in fish.

A series of dredging crises unfolded in the

United States over the years starting in 1985

at Four Mile Rock in Seattle, Washington

(Urabek and Phillips 1992), progressing to

New York in the mid-1990s (Spadaro 1997),

and continuing to this day in the ports of

Cleveland and Toledo, Ohio (Great Lakes

Maritime Task Force 2007).

In the United States, an entire industry related

to the cleanup of contaminated sediment at

Superfund sites has developed and is thriving.

The regulatory mandate to address

contaminated sediment as a distinct

environmental medium worthy of cleanup has

Legend = Countries with formal

sediment management framework, regulations, or project examples

= Countries with some sediment management framework, regulations, or project examples

= Countries with no discernable sediment management framework, regulations, or project examples

Figure 1. Global map identifying regulatory and technical findings.

16 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

Table I. Country Listing and Internet Search Results

Country Search

Result

Country Search

Result

Country Search

Result

Country Search

Result

United States of America 239000 Venezuela 9840 Oman 5180 Sierra Leone 3550

Canada 133000 Nigeria 9700 Syria 5180 Somalia 3550

United Kingdom 106000 Kenya 9540 Serbia 5120 Gabon 3520

Germany 85400 Monaco 9390 Mali 5100 Yemen 3520

China (PRC) 76900 Bulgaria 8930 Papua New Guinea 5080 Liberia 3450

Japan 74800 Iceland 8510 Malta 5050 Moldova 3370

Australia 70700 Iraq 8260 United Arab Emirates 5050 Rwanda 3360

Netherlands 67900 Niger 8210 Uruguay 5030 Cape Verde 3310

Mexico 65400 Ukraine 8020 Mozambique 4870 Burkina Faso 3270

France 65000 Slovakia 7970 Namibia 4870 Suriname 3270

India 44500 Panama 7770 Bahamas 4840 Saint Kitts and Nevis 3250

Italy 44300 Costa Rica 7560 Bosnia and Herzegovina 4840 Democratic Republic of the Congo 3200

Spain 42800 Jamaica 7160 Cameroon 4800 Seychelles 3190

Sweden 42400 Saudi Arabia 7000 Marshall Islands 4780 Liechtenstein 3110

New Zealand 35700 Morocco 6950 Zambia 4750 Tonga 3110

Russia 34100 Tanzania 6880 Madagascar 4740 Micronesia 3100

Switzerland 33800 Croatia 6850 Latvia 4670 San Marino 3050

Brazil 31700 Kuwait 6840 Nicaragua 4650 Bhutan 3030

Belgium 27200 Slovenia 6810 Central African Republic 4560 Antigua and Barbuda 2990

Norway 26800 Cuba 6790 Fiji 4560 Brunei 2980

Denmark 26600 Ghana 6700 El Salvador 4530 The Gambia 2970

Poland 25200 Sri Lanka 6690 Burma (Myanmar) 4460 Mauritania 2940

Turkey 23100 Nepal 6560 Congo (RoC) 4380 Equatorial Guinea 2870

Ireland 21500 Bolivia 6410 Honduras 4380 Swaziland 2830

Greece 19200 Ecuador 6380 Albania 4370 Maldives 2790

Chile 19000 Sudan 6270 Armenia 4350 Kyrgyzstan 2750

Finland 18400 Estonia 6250 Botswana 4320 Palau 2720

South Africa 18300 Ethiopia 6130 Angola 4300 Kosovo 2700

Austria 18100 Lebanon 5940 Dominican Republic 4260 Tajikistan 2660

Portugal 18100 Haiti 5860 Guyana 4190 Côte d’Ivoire 2630

Taiwan 18100 Uganda 5850 Malawi 4120 Turkmenistan 2630

Argentina 17400 Chad 5840 Libya 4100 Burundi 2620

Thailand 17000 Luxembourg 5790 Belarus 4070 Eritrea 2570

Israel 16600 Mongolia 5770 Azerbaijan 4040 Vatican City 2540

Vietnam 15100 Tunisia 5660 Grenada 4040 Dominica 2520

Indonesia 14700 Cyprus 5650 Uzbekistan 4040 Lesotho 2510

Malaysia 14000 Cambodia 5640 Belize 4000 Vanuatu 2430

Singapore 13500 Trinidad and Tobago 5600 Paraguay 3990 East Timor 2360

Egypt 13200 Kazakhstan 5590 Barbados 3980 São Tomé and Príncipe 2160

Bangladesh 12000 Zimbabwe 5560 Mauritius 3950 Djibouti 2100

Czech Republic 11900 Guatemala 5550 Macedonia 3890 Comoros 1990

Hungary 11800 Afghanistan 5540 Palestine 3820 Guinea-Bissau 1930

Philippines 11800 Senegal 5490 Bahrain 3780 Kiribati 1890

Romania 11000 Lithuania 5440 Montenegro 3780 Tuvalu 1810

Peru 10900 Samoa 5360 Solomon Islands 3730 Nauru 1630

Colombia 10300 Algeria 5230 Benin 3710 Andorra 1490

Pakistan 9870 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 5220 Qatar 3680

Iran 9850 Laos 5190 Saint Lucia 3670

were made for size of country, length of

coastline, or degree of industrialisation.

The searches were conducted only in English.

Testing the results with a comparable

nonsense search phrase suggests that results

of 10,000 or less generally indicate little or

no sediment management activity within a

country. Results of 6,000 or less appear to

be “noise” in the search results.

Quality standards related to dredgingAs of March 2010, about 35 countries appear

to have some type of regulatory framework

relating to contaminated sediment

management, primarily in the form of

environmental quality standards related to

dredging. Many of these frameworks are

relatively new, appearing to have been

promulgated within the past decade.

And only a few of them appear to be more

than guidance; strict requirements for cleanup

are not prevalent. About the same number of

countries (largely, but not exclusively, the

same countries) appear to have some type of

technical framework available to evaluate risks

from sediment contamination.

The technologies employed tend significantly

toward removal (dredging) and off-site

disposal. A small minority of countries appear

to be intentionally employing techniques other

than dredging, such as capping or monitored

natural recovery (Figure 2).

oBseRVAtIons Although we have made significant progress

over the past 30 years, the challenges seem

daunting. We are still struggling to find the

best way to apply a scientifically sound, risk-

based approach to the screening and cleanup

of contaminated sediment sites. A diversity of

approaches exists and these are often used

and sometimes combined in less than

scientific ways.

In many cases, guidance on concentrations

intended for screening of sites is applied as

clean up criteria resulting in overly

conservative approaches. We are engaged in a

debate over the relative merits of the

watershed approach to contaminated

sediment management (Apitz et al. 2006)

and an approach more focussed on cleanup

of sediment contamination hot-spots.

The former approach articulates the value of

management of sediments within an entire

watershed in mind while the latter approach

seeks to address sediment contamination on

a smaller scale, typically in proximity to legacy

sources of industrial pollution. Thus far, we

have not found a highly effective and

reasonably priced “silver bullet” technology for

sediment treatment (Van der Laan et al. 2007).

New contaminants, such as personal care

products and pharmaceuticals, are presenting

themselves faster than we have been able to

address the classic contaminants of mercury,

polychlorinated biphenyls, and pesticides.

And the more experts press for source control

to prevent the recontamination of sediment

after cleanup, the more the realisation dawns

that the runoff from our agricultural and

urban settings, as much as from any industry,

is also responsible for sediment

contamination.

PHILIP A. SPADARO

is a leading international expert in

sediment cleanup and waterfront

redevelopment and a Senior Vice President

in the Waterfront and Sediment Group

of ARCADIS. He has degrees in chemistry

and geophysical sciences and more than

26 years of experience applying his

expertise and management skills to

projects where sediment quality is a

prominent issue. As the senior scientist in

the Waterfront and Sediment Group, he

advises ARCADIS’s clients and coordinates

sediment management and remediation

projects worldwide.

APPRoAcHSearch criteria were developed for generating

an informal Internet “snapshot” of the state

of contaminated sediment issues around the

world in 2010. For each of 196 countries

(the 192 member states of the United Nations

plus Kosovo, Palestine, Taiwan, and Vatican

City), a phrase in the format of “country +

contaminated sediments” was searched, and

the number of results was recorded. Results

for this type of search are of course qualitative

and time-dependent.

The searches were conducted over a few days

in March 2010 so the results would be

contemporaneous and internally consistent.

The tabulated results are presented in Table I.

Using the results from these initial searches,

key documents were identified and reviewed

to address the larger regulatory and technical

questions. The results of this review are

presented in Table II and depicted graphically

on Figure 1. The figure and tables are color

coded to indicate countries with both

regulatory and technical frameworks (green),

countries with one or the other (red),

and countries with neither (gray).

FInDInGsInternet search results vary from a high of

239,000 (United States of America) to a low

of 1,490 (Andorra). The results make intuitive

sense, with countries having well-known

sediment management programmes producing

more Internet search results. No allowances

Remediation of Contaminated Sediment : A Worldwide Status Survey of Regulation and Technology 17

Figure 2. Remedial design at the Thea Foss Waterway,

Tacoma Washington, USA included evaluations of

source control measures and potential disposal sites,

natural recovery analysis, cap, dredging and confined

disposal facility designs, a hydrographic survey and

habitat mitigation plans.

18 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

United States of America

Yes Yes d, c, nr, ss, sp, it, et, b 239000 Linkov 2006

Canada Yes Yes d, c, nr, ss, sp, it, et 133000 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment 1999, 2001, Sydney Tar Ponds Agency 2010, British Columbia Laws, 2003

United Kingdom Yes d, c 106000 Brewer 1997

Germany Yes Yes d, c, ss, l, sp, it, et, b 85400 Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety 1998, Löser 2001

China (PRC) Unknown Yes d 76900 Liu 1999, Chen 2007

Japan Yes Yes d, c, ss, sp, it, et 74800 Ministry of the Environment - Japan 1994, Hosokawa 1993

Australia Yes Yes d 70700 Department of Environment and Conservation, 2003, Guerin 2001, Rae 2006, New South Wales Consolidated Acts, 1997

Netherlands Yes Yes d, c, nr, ss, l, sp, it, et, b 67900 Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment 1998, 2009

Mexico Unknown Yes Unknown 65400 Gomez-Alvarez, 2007

France Yes Yes d, c 65000 Poirier 2007

India Unknown Yes Unknown 44500 Jumbe 2009

Italy Yes Yes d, c, l 44300 Carere 2008, DiTermini, 2008

Spain Yes Yes d 42800 Garg 2009

Sweden Yes Yes d, c, it, et, b 42400 Hultsfreds 2010, Projekt Turingen 2003

New Zealand Yes Unknown Unknown 35700 Ministry of the Environment – New Zealand 2009, 2010

Russia Unknown Yes d, c 34100 Koukina 2003, Dauvalter, 2006

Switzerland Yes Yes d 33800 Wildi 2004

Brazil Yes Yes d 31700 Amorim 2007

Belgium Yes Yes d, c, nr, ss, l, sp, it, et, b 27200 Vervaeke 2003, Goethals, 2001

Norway Yes Yes d, c, ss 26800 Norwegian Council on Contaminated Sediments 2006, Barton 2008, Ministry of the Environment – Norway, 2004

Denmark Yes Yes d, c, ss 26600 Sear 1996

Poland Yes Yes Unknown 25200 Aleksander-Kwaterczak 2008, Kuperberg 2001

Turkey 23100

Ireland Yes Yes Unknown 21500 Environmental Protection Agency – Ireland 2008, Brogan 2002, Jarvis 2006

Greece Yes Unknown Unknown 19200

Chile Unknown Yes Unknown 19000 Godoy-Fáundez 2008

Finland Yes Yes d, c, ss, sp 18400 Ministry of the Environment – Finland 2008, Londesborough 2005, Dauvalter 2006

South Africa 18300

Austria Yes Yes Unknown 18100 Liska 2008

Portugal Yes Unknown d 18100

Taiwan 18100

Argentina Unknown Yes d 17400 Andrade 2002, Ronco 2008

Thailand Yes Yes d 17000 Panichayapichet 2006

Israel Unknown Unknown d 16600

Vietnam 15100

Indonesia 14700

Malaysia Unknown Yes Unknown 14000 Praveena 2007

Singapore 13500

Egypt 13200

Bangladesh 12000

Czech Republic Yes Unknown Unknown 11900

Hungary Yes Unknown Unknown 11800

Philippines 11800

Romania Yes Unknown Unknown 11000

Peru 10900

Country Regulatory Framework

Scientific Framework

Technologies Employed1

Search Result

References

Table II. Summary of Characteristics by Country (for abbreviations see page 21)

Remediation of Contaminated Sediment : A Worldwide Status Survey of Regulation and Technology 19

Colombia 10300

Pakistan 9870

Iran 9850

Venezuela 9840

Nigeria 9700

Kenya 9540

Monaco 9390

Bulgaria 8930

Iceland Yes Unknown Unknown 8510

Iraq 8260

Niger 8210

Ukraine 8020

Slovakia Yes Yes Unknown 7970 Apitz 2006

Panama 7770

Costa Rica 7560

Jamaica Unknown Yes Unknown 7160 Knight, 2004

Saudi Arabia 7000

Morocco 6950

Tanzania 6880

Croatia 6850

Kuwait 6840

Slovenia Yes Unknown Unknown 6810

Cuba 6790

Ghana 6700

Sri Lanka 6690

Nepal 6560

Bolivia 6410

Ecuador 6380

Sudan 6270

Estonia Yes Unknown Unknown 6250

Ethiopia 6130

Lebanon 5940

Haiti 5860

Uganda 5850

Chad 5840

Luxembourg Yes Unknown Unknown 5790 Toth, 2007

Mongolia 5770

Tunisia 5660

Cyprus Yes Unknown Unknown 5650

Cambodia 5640

Trinidad and Tobago 5600

Kazakhstan 5590

Zimbabwe 5560

Guatemala 5550

Afghanistan 5540

Senegal 5490

Lithuania 5440

Samoa 5360

Algeria 5230

Country Regulatory

Framework

Scientific

Framework

Technologies

Employed1

Search

Result

References

Continuation Table II.

20 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

5220

Laos 5190

Oman 5180

Syria 5180

Serbia 5120

Mali 5100

Papua New Guinea 5080

Malta Yes Unknown Unknown 5050

United Arab Emirates Unknown Yes Unknown 5050 El-Sammak 2001

Uruguay 5030

Mozambique 4870

Namibia 4870

Bahamas 4840

Bosnia and Herzegovina 4840

Cameroon 4800

Marshall Islands 4780

Zambia 4750

Madagascar 4740

Latvia Yes Unknown Unknown 4670

Nicaragua 4650

Central African Republic 4560

Fiji 4560

El Salvador 4530

Burma (Myanmar) 4460

Congo (RoC) 4380

Honduras 4380

Albania Unknown Yes Unknown 4370 Celo 2004

Armenia 4350

Botswana 4320

Angola Unknown Yes Unknown 4300 Africa Report, 2008

Dominican Republic 4260

Guyana 4190

Malawi 4120

Libya 4100

Belarus 4070

Azerbaijan 4040

Grenada 4040

Uzbekistan 4040

Belize 4000

Paraguay 3990

Barbados 3980

Mauritius 3950

Macedonia 3890

Palestine 3820

Bahrain 3780

Montenegro 3780

Solomon Islands 3730

Benin 3710

Country Regulatory

Framework

Scientific

Framework

Technologies

Employed1

Search

Result

References

Continuation Table II.

Remediation of Contaminated Sediment : A Worldwide Status Survey of Regulation and Technology 21

Qatar 3680

Saint Lucia 3670

Sierra Leone 3550

Somalia 3550

Gabon 3520

Yemen 3520

Liberia 3450

Moldova 3370

Rwanda 3360

Cape Verde 3310

Burkina Faso 3270

Suriname 3270

Saint Kitts and Nevis 3250

Democratic Republic of the Congo

3200

Seychelles Yes Unknown Unknown 3190 National Assembly 1994

Liechtenstein 3110

Tonga 3110

Micronesia 3100

San Marino 3050

Bhutan 3030

Antigua and Barbuda 2990

Brunei 2980

The Gambia 2970

Mauritania 2940

Equatorial Guinea 2870

Swaziland 2830

Maldives 2790

Kyrgyzstan 2750

Palau 2720

Kosovo 2700

Tajikistan 2660

Côte d’Ivoire 2630

Turkmenistan 2630

Burundi 2620

Eritrea 2570

Vatican City 2540

Dominica 2520

Lesotho 2510

Vanuatu 2430

East Timor 2360

São Tomé and Príncipe 2160

Djibouti 2100

Comoros 1990

Guinea-Bissau 1930

Kiribati 1890

Tuvalu 1810

Nauru 1630

Andorra 1490

Country Regulatory

Framework

Scientific

Framework

Technologies

Employed1

Search

Result

References

Continuation Table II.

1Abbreviation Definitions

b Bioremediation

et Ex-Situ Remediation

it In-Situ Remediation

d Dredging

c Capping

nr Natural Resources

ss Stabilization/Solidification

l Lagooning

sp Sediment Processing

22 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

REFERENCES

The Africa Report (2008). “Country Profile: ANGOLA.”

Africa in 2009. Groupe Jeune Afrique, Paris, France.

Aleksander-Kwaterczak, U., and Helios-Rybicka, E.

(2008). “Contaminated sediments as a potential source

of Zn, Pb, and Cd for a river system in the historical

metalliferous ore mining and smelting industry area of

South Poland.” Journal of Soils and Sediments, 9 (1).

Springer Berlin (13-22).

Amorim, E.P., Fávaro, D.I.T., Berbel, G.B.B., and Braga,

E.S. (2007). “Metal and Trace Element Assessment of

Estuary Sediments from Santos, Brazil, by Neutron

Activation and Atomic Absorption Techniques.” (Paper

prepared for the 2007 International Nuclear Atlantic

Conference, Santos, Brazil).

Andrade, M.L., Reyzabal, M.L., Marcet, P., Montero,

M.J. (2002) “Industrial Impact on Marsh Soils at the

Bahia Blanca Ria, Argentina.” Journal of Environmental

Quality 31. Madison, Wisconsin, USA (532-538).

Apitz, S.E., Brils, J., Marcomini, A., Critto, A., Agostini,

P., Micheletti, C., Pippa, R., Scanferla, P., Zuin, S.,

Lánczos, T., Dercová, K., Kočan, A., Petrík, J., Hucko, P.,

and Kusnir, P. (2006). “Approaches and Frameworks

for Managing Contaminated Sediments – A European

Perspective.” NATO Science Series, 73: Assessment

and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments. Springer

Netherlands (5-82).

Barton, D.N. (2008). “Valuing the benefits of

remediating contaminated marine sediments – a case

study from the Grenlandsfjord, Norway.” (Presentation

prepared for the 2008 International SedNet Conference,

Oslo, Norway).

Brewer, P.A., and Taylor, M.P. (1997). “The spatial

distribution of heavy metal contaminated sediment

across terraced floodplains,” CATENA, 30 (2-3).

Elsevier (229-249).

British Columbia Laws (2003). “Environmental

Management Act.” Available online at: http://www.

bclaws.ca/Recon/document/freeside/--%20E%20--/

Environmental%20Management%20Act%20%20

SBC%202003%20%20c.%2053/00_Act/03053_00.

htm. Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.

Brogan, J., Crowe, M., and Carty, G. (2002). “Setting

Environmental Quality Objectives for Soil- Developing

a Soil Protection Strategy for Ireland.” Environmental

Protection Agency, Johnstown Castle Estate, County

Wexford, Ireland.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment

(2001). “Canadian sediment quality guidelines for the

protection of aquatic life.” Canadian Environmental

Quality Guidelines, Canadian Council of Ministers of

the Environment, Winnipeg, Canada.

Carere, M., Depropris, L., Funari, E., Musmeci, L., and

Onorati, F. (2008). “Assessment and management of

contaminated sediments in Italian marine coastal

waters.” Annali dell’Istituto Superiore di Sanita, 44 (3).

Rome, Italy (239-243).

Çelo, V., Babi, D., Baraj, B., and Çullaj, A. (2004). “An

Assessment of Heavy Metal Pollution in the Sediments

Along the Albanian Coast.” Water, Air, & Soil Pollution,

11 (1-4). Springer Netherlands (235-250).

Chen, Y., Yang, H., Zhang, Z., Qin, M., Jin, F., and Lü, J.

(2007). “Application of Equilibrium Partitioning Approach

to the Derivation of Sediment Quality Guidelines for

Metals in Dianchi Lake.” Pedosphere, 17 (3).

Soil Science Society of China (284-294).

Dauvalter, V., and Sandimirov, S. (2006). “Pollution of

the Sediments of the Paz River basin.” Institute of the

North Industrial Ecology Problems, Apatity, Russia.

Department of Environment and Conservation. (2003).

“Contaminated Site Act.” Information available online

at: http://portal.environment.wa.gov.au/pls/portal/docs/

PAGE/DOE_ADMIN/ BROCHURE_REPOSITORY/

CSBROCHURE_WEB.PDF. Western Australia.

Di Termini, I., Panatto, D., and Rovatti. M. (2008).

“Ecological risk assessment of contaminated sediments

in a harbour site.” Department of Chemical Engineering

and Process, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.

El-Sammak, A. (2001). “Heavy Metal Pollution in Bottom

Sediment, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.” Bulletin of

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 67 (2).

Springer New York (295-302).

Environmental Protection Agency - Ireland. (2008). “Soil”,

2008 State of the Environment Report. Johnstown Castle

Estate, County Wexford, Ireland (172-185).

Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conserva-

tion and Nuclear Safety. (1998). “Federal Soil Protection

Act of 17 March 1998 (Federal Law Gazette I p. 502).”

Germany.

Garg, A., Antón-Martín, R., García-Luque, E., Riba, I.,

and DelValls, T.A. (2009). “Distributions of butyltins (TBT,

DBT, MBT) in sediments of Gulf of Cádiz (Spain and its

bioaccumulation in the clam Ruditapes philippinarum.”

Ecotoxicology 18 (8). Springer Netherlands (1029-1035).

Godoy-Faúndez, A., Antizar-Ladislao, B., Reyes-Bozo, L.,

Camaño, A., and Sáez-Navarrete, C. (2008).

“Bioremediation of contaminated mixtures of desert

mining soil and sawdust with fuel oil by aerated

in-vessel composting in the Atacama Region (Chile).”

Journal of Hazardous Materials, 151 (2-3). Elsevier BV,

Netherlands (649-657).

Goethals, P., and De Pauw, N. (2001). “Development

of a concept for integrated ecological river assessment

in Flanders, Belgium.” Laboratory of Environmental

Toxicology & Aquatic Ecology, Department of Applied

Ecology & Environmental Biology, Ghent University,

Belgium.

Gómez-Álvarez, A., Valenzuela-García, J.L., Aguayo-

Salinas, S., Meza-Figueroa, D., Ramírez-Hernández, J.,

and Ochoa-Oretega, G. (2007). “Chemical partitioning

of sediment contamination by heavy metals in the

San Pedro River, Sonora, Mexico.” Chemical Speciation

and Bioavailability, 19 (1). Science Reviews 2000 Ltd.

(25-35).

Great Lakes Maritime Task Force (2007). “Great Lakes

Dredging Crisis.” Available online at: http://www.glmtf.

org/dredging_crisis.html.

Guerin, T.F. (2001). “Commercial Activities in

Remediation of Soil and Sediments and Trends in the

Asia Pacific Region.” Journal of Soils and Sediments,

1 (1). Springer Berlin, (50-57).

Hosokawa, Y. (1993). “Remediation work for mercury

contaminated bay-experiences of Minamata Bay project,

Japan.” Water Science and Technology, 28 (3).

IWA (339-348)

Hultsfreds Kommun. “Remediation of PCB-Contaminated

Sediments in Lake Järnsjön.” Available online at: http://

www.hultsfred.se/templates/Page____2346.aspx.

Accessed March 2010.

Jarvis, A.P., and Kelly, M. (2007). “Recommendations

for ecological and sediment quality monitoring in the

Rivers Drish and Rossetown downstream of the Lisheen

Mine, Co Tipperary, Ireland.” Institute for Research

on the Environment & Sustainability, Newcastle

University, UK.

CONCLUSIONS

It is safe to conclude that the current

snapshot presented here will change, perhaps

dramatically, over time. While this single set

of results does not allow identification of a

trend, it seems reasonable to speculate that

the number of countries with regulatory

frameworks for management of contaminated

sediment will continue to expand as concerns

about the risks of contaminated sediment and

debate about the best approaches to

remediation continue to mount.

Remediation of Contaminated Sediment : A Worldwide Status Survey of Regulation and Technology 23

Jumbe, A.S., and Nandini, N. (2009). “Heavy metals

analysis and sediment quality values in Urban lakes.”

American Journal of Environmental Sciences, 5 (6).

Science Publications (678-688).

Knight, C., Kaiser, J., Lalor, G.C., Robotham, H., and

Witter, J.V. (2004). “Heavy metals in surface water

and stream sediments in Jamaica.” Environmental

Geochemistry and Health, 19 (2). Springer Netherlands

(63-66).

Koukina, S., Korneeva, G., Ametistova, L., and Bek, T.

(2003). “A comparative biogeochemical study of

sediments from Kandalaksha Bay, White Sea, Russian

Arctic.” Polar Record, 39 (4). Cambridge University

Press (357-367).

Kuperberg, M., Kucharski, R., and Chamberlain, S.

(2001). “Phytoextraction Demonstration in Poland for

Lead Removal.” EPA Tech Trends Newsletter,

Septermber 2001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Linkov, I., Satterstrom, F.K., Kiker, G., Seager, T.P.,

Bridges, T., Gardner, K.H., Rogers, S.H., Belluck, D.A.,

and Meyer, A. (2006). “Multicriteria Decision Analysis:

A Comprehensive Decision Approach for Management

of Contaminated Sediments.” Risk Analysis, 26 (1).

Society for Risk Analysis, McLean, Virginia, USA (61-78).

Liska, I. (2008). “Management of Sediment Quality and

Quantity in the Danube River Basin.” (Presentation

prepared for the 2008 International SedNet Conference,

Oslo, Norway).

Liu, W., Wang, Z., Wen, X., and Tang, H. (1999).

“The application of preliminary sediment quality criteria

to metal contamination in the Le An River.” Environ-

mental Pollution 105 (3). Elsevier Science Ltd., (355-366)

Londesborough, S. (2005). “Proposal for Environmental

Water Quality Standards in Finland.” The Finnish

Environ ment, 749. Finnish Environmental Institute,

Helsinki, Finland.

Malins, D.C., Krahn, M.M., Myers, M.S., Rhodes, Brown,

D.W., Krone, C.A., McCain, B.B., and Chan, S. (1985).

“Toxic chemicals in sediments and biota from a

creosote-polluted harbor: relationships with hepatic

neoplasms and other hepatic lesions in English sole

(Parophyrys vetulus).” Carcinogenesis. Volume 6,

Number 10, pp 1463-1469, Oxford University Press.

Ministry for the Environment – New Zealand. (2010).

“Proposed National Environmental Standard for

Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil.”

Available online at: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/laws/

standards/contaminants-in-soil/. New Zealand.

Ministry for the Environment – New Zealand. (2009).

“Audit of the Remediation of the former Fruitgrowers

Chemical Company Site, Mapua.” Available online at:

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/hazardous/audit-

remediation-mapua/index.html. New Zealand.

Ministry of the Environment – Finland. (2008). “Soil

Protection Policies.” Available online at: http://www.

ymparisto.fi/default.asp?node=6045&lan=en. Finland.

Ministry of the Environment – Japan. (2002). “Minamata

Disease the History and Measures.” Available online at:

http://www.env.go.jp/en/chemi/hs/minamata2002/. Japan.

Ministry of the Environment – Japan. (1994). “Environ-

mental Quality Standards for Soil Pollution.” Available

online at: http://www.env.go.jp/en/water/soil/sp.html.

Japan.

Ministry of the Environment – Norway. (2004).

“Regulations relating to pollution control.” Available

online at: http://www.lovdata.no/cgi-wift/ldles?doc=/sf/

sf/sf-20040601-0931.html. Norway. June.

Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environ-

ment (2009). Soil Remediation Circular. The Hague,

The Netherlands.

Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environ-

ment (1998). “Soil Protection Act. Text of the Act as

at December 1998.” The Hague, The Netherlands.

National Assembly – Seychelles (1994). “The Environ-

mental Protection Act, 1994. Seychelles.

New South Wales Consolidated Acts (1997).

“Contaminated Land Management Act.” Available

online at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_

act/clma1997238/. Australia.

Norwegian Council on Contaminated Sediments

(2006). “Remediation of Contaminated Sediments –

Recommendations and viewpoints from the Norwegian

Council on Contaminated Sediments.” Norwegian

Council on Contaminated Sediments, Oslo, Norway.

Panichayapichet, P., Nitisoravut, S., and Wangkiat, A.

(2006). “Management of Pb-Contaminated Sediment

in Khli Ti Creek, Thailand.” Chinese Journal of

Geochemistry, 25 (supplement 1), Science Press,

Marrickville, New South Wales, Australia (119-120).

Poirier, L., Quiniou, F., Ruiz, N., Montagu, M.,

Amiard, J.C., and Pouchus, Y.F. (2007) “Toxicology

assessment of peptaibols and contaminated sediments

on Crassostrea gigas embryos.” Aquatic Toxicology,

83 (4). Elsevier (254-262).

Praveena, S.M., Radojevic, M., Abdullah, M.H., and

Aris, A.Z. (2007). “Application of Sedimenat Quality

Guidelines in the Assessment of Mangrove Surface

Sediment in Mengkabong Lagoon, Sabah, Malaysia.”

Global Journal of Environmental Research, 1 (3).

International Digital Organization for Scientific

Organization, Cairo, Egypt (96-102).

Projekt Turingen. (2003). “Lake Turingen Remediation

Project Summary.” Available online at: http://www.

turingen.se/default.asp?lang=eng.

Rae, I. (2006). “Chemicals in the environment.”

(Paper prepared for the 2006 Australian State of the

Environ ment Committee, Department of the Environ-

ment and Heritage, Canberra).

Ronco, A., Peluso, L., Jurado, M., Rossini, G.B., and

Salibian, A. (2008). “Screening of Sediment Pollution

in Tributaries from the Southwestern Coast of the

Río de la Plata Estuary.” Latin American Journal of

Sedimentology and Basin Analysis, 15 (1). Asociación

Argentina de Sedimentología.

Sear, D. and Carver, S. (1996). “The release and

dispersal of Pb and Zn contaminated sediments within

an Arctic braided river system.” Applied Geochemistry,

11 (1-2). Elsevier, (187-195).

Spadaro, P. (1997). “Protecting the Environment,

West coast port remediation ideas sent East.”

The Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce. April 21.

Sydney Tar Ponds Agency. “Sydney Tar Ponds

Remediation Project Summary.” Available online at:

http://www.tarpondscleanup.ca/index.php?sid=1.

Tóth, G., Stolbovoy, V., and Montanarella, L. (2007).

“Soil Quality and Sustainability Evaluation - An

integrated approach to support soil-related policies

of the European Union.” Office for Official Publications

of the European Communities, Luxembourg.

Urabeck, F.J. and Phillips, K.E. (1992). “Puget Sound

Dredged Disposal Analysis.” Corps of Engineers Seattle

District, Defense Technical Information Center, Seattle,

WA. April.

Van der Laan, A.K.J., van Steeg, H., de Vries, M., and

Hakstege, A.L. (2007). “Large-Scale Pilot for Treatment

and Use of Contaminated Dredged Material in the

Netherlands; Preliminary Results and Policy.” WODA

Global Proceedings 18th World Dredging Congress,

May 27-June 1, 2007.

Varanasi, U., Reichert, W.L., Stein, J.E., Brown, D.W.,

and Sanborn, H.R. (1985). “Bioavailability and Bio-

transformation of Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Benthic

Organisms Exposed to Sediment from an Urban Estuary.”

Environmental Science and Technology, 19, 836.

Vervaeke, P., Luyssaert, S., Mertens, J., Meers, E.,

Tack, F.M.G., and Lust, N. (2003). “Phytoremediation

prospects of willow stands on contaminated sediment:

a field trial.” Environmental Pollution, 126 (2). Elsevier

(275-282).

Wildi, W., Dominik, J., Loizeau, J., Thomas, R.L.,

Favarger, P., Haller, L., Perroud, A., and Peytremann, C.

(2004). “River, reservoir and lake sediment

contamination by heavy metals downstream from

urban areas of Switzerland.” Lakes & Reservoirs:

Research and Manage ment, 2004 (9). Blackwell

Publishing, Oxford, UK (75-87).

24 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

tHe IMPoRtAnce oF BeD MAteRIAL cHARActeRIsAtIon In PLAnnInG DReDGInG PRoJects

MIcHAeL P. costARAs, R.n. BRAY, RIcHARD P. LeWIs AnD MARK W.e. Lee

ABSTRACT

Practical experience of dredging projects has

demonstrated the importance of understanding

the nature and composition of seabed material

before dredging starts. The dredging industry

strongly encourages clients to undertake

detailed geotechnical investigations at an early

stage in project design to avoid any expensive

“surprises” once work starts. Despite this,

mainstream engineering consultants are not

taking specialist advice and proponents are not

being advised about what to do, nor does it

appear that dredging contractors and specialist

consultants are being consulted at an early

enough stage in project development.

Attempts to make very minor cost savings

early in a project by undertaking inadequate

sampling and testing of bed materials routinely

leads to serious project problems with

significant consequences in terms of project

schedule, project cost and company profit.

Consequently, the reputation of the dredging

industry suffers and the perception of

dredging being a claim-ridden activity persists.

This article focusses on when, how and why

projects suffer as a consequence of

inadequate sampling and testing of bed

materials. Having identified the problems

guidelines are set out to allow these to be

avoided in the future. This article is based on

a paper which appeared in the Proceedings of the WODCON XIX in Beijing, China in

September 2011 and has been published

here in a revised version with permission.

INTRODUCTION

When planning dredging projects, a key factor

is the ability to describe the site and define

the nature of the ground. This information,

together with physical, environmental,

operational, statutory and legal constraints

provide the tendering Contractor vital

information which, in conjunction with the

Specification, helps the Contractor understand

what work has to be done.

There is little doubt that the importance of

accurate and comprehensive geotechnical

information is necessary to facilitate the design

and execution of any construction project

(Figure 1). However, time and again it is found

that insufficient, inaccurate and irrelevant data

are used to inform dredging projects.

The purpose of this article is to address factors

that are of specific relevance to dredging

rather than maritime structures as a whole,

and which therefore have a significance that

may not be recognised when planning the

development of a maritime project. Model

results are used to help illustrate the points

made within the article.

24 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

Above: A geotechnical site investigation for a major

marine development with, nearshore, a small elevated

platform for geotechnical sampling through a shallow

rock seabed and, offshore, a landing craft for soils

sampling in excess of 5 m water depth. Characterising

bed material prior to dredging is essential.

Figure 1. Close-up of the elevated platform for

geotechnical sampling through a shallow rock seabed.

The Importance of Bed Material Characterisation in Planning Dredging Projects 25

Whilst many examples of bad practice (and

resultant delays, costs and legal action) exist,

discussion of specific projects is not considered

appropriate and is not undertaken here.

For any dredging project, the understanding

of the bed material, its variability, how it

behaves when it is dredged, transported,

placed or enters the water column is vital to

determining how best to dredge it and how

best to mitigate impacts both in the near and

far field.

WHAt Is WRonGDredging works are frequently a component

of a large maritime engineering development

scheme, such as a new harbour, barrage or

immersed tube crossing. Dredging is perceived

as being a simple operation, far less complex,

in terms of design, than berthing structures,

barrages, locking structures and immersed

tubes. In some ways the dredging design is simple and this traps the design engineer into

thinking that the dredging activity is less

important than other construction activities

in the project. This is not so; it is quite the

opposite in fact.

The value of the dredging work often equals

and may exceed the value of the other works

being carried out. A small change in the sub-

soils along a berthing line may cause there to

be increases in construction cost because of

the need to lengthen piles or carry out soil

replacement. A similar small change in the

sub-soil in the dredging area may have a

profound effect on dredging productivity and

cost the contractor 10% or 15% more – which may be the difference, for the dredging

contractor, in making a profit or loss on the

project. In some cases, where for instance

environmental sensitivities are heightened, the

costs or impact of the differences may be far

more fundamental – possibly bringing the

works to a halt until the problems have been

overcome.

Another factor that influences the amount of

preliminary sub-soil investigation carried out

for dredging works is that this type of work is

expensive and moderately difficult to execute

with the necessary quality, both on site and

during laboratory testing. Clients are thus

faced with significant expenditure upfront,

sometimes on a project that only has a slim

chance of getting past the planning stages.

They are naturally reticent about spending this

risk money. This makes it difficult for design

engineers to convince clients that they should

spend money upfront. One objective of this

article is to assist design engineers in

educating clients to understand the site

investigation needs for their work.

A third problem that is found is that the

design engineer is unaware of the factors that

influence the environmental effects of

dredging works. This is unsurprising. Dredging

itself is a sub-set of maritime civil engineering,

and the environmental effects of dredging are

a sub-set of dredging works. As a result,

specialist support is needed to understand the

site investigation requirements (Figure 2).

PLAnnInG A sIte InVestIGAtIon FoR DReDGInG WoRKsThe scope of the worksWhen site investigation works are going to be

expensive, such as in maritime sub-soil

investigation, a tiered approach to

investigation is recommended. This approach

has been described elsewhere (Bray 2008),

both in terms of the approach to the

investigation and the evaluation of the data

so collected. The intent is to reduce the

quantity of upfront expenditure in the initial

stages, so that only sufficient data are

collected to determine:

• determine whether the project is likely

to be technically and financially feasible;

• identify how more detailed investigations

can be tailored to suit both the project

envisaged and the ground conditions

found in the initial stage; and

• ensure that investigation methods, and

sample collecting and testing, are all

suitable in extent and relevant to the types

of dredgers to be used in the works.

Subsequently, further investigations can be

planned if it is determined that the project

is going forward. However, at this stage the

client is likely to be more favourably disposed

to carry out more extensive investigations,

because the project is moving forward and

the investigations are being moulded to the

type and nature of the project and the

construction methods likely to be needed.

For example, the initial investigations may

have shown that a seismic survey would

reduce considerably the cost of future

investigations, combined with only a limited

borehole campaign.

Figure 2. An acoustic instrument (Nortek AWAC, used for the measurement of currents and waves in the marine

environment, is one of many tools for gathering essential geotechnical information.

26 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

Focus of the investigationsWhen design engineers are considering the

information they require for a berthing

structure or reclamation area, the focus tends

to be on bearing strata and the compressibility

of any weak overlying soils. This is not so for

the dredging engineer or contractor, where

a number of other parameters are of vital

importance.

Firstly, the engineer/contractor needs to know

what type of dredger is best suited to the

materials on site and the method of excavating

and moving this material to its final destination.

Secondly, they need to evaluate how

productive the dredging equipment will be

and, finally, what the environmental effects of

the dredging works and construc tion methods

are likely to be. In addition, if the material is to

be used for some beneficial purpose, the

engineer will need to know whether its

characteristics have changed during the

dredging, transport and placing processes,

and, if so, what its final state is.

• Weak soils need to be collected with

minimum disturbance. Hence wash boring

is not particularly useful. Ideally, the

traditional shell and auger methods should

be used. Not only do they allow for

identification of every change of strata, but

samples taken during the boring, although

disturbed, are generally representative of

the material at the sampling depth;

• Vibrocoring is an alternative method for

obtaining information about weak material,

but it must be recognised that the depth of

investigation may be limited by the

maximum length of core recoverable

relative to the required dredge depth or

material that is too strong to be penetrated

(Figure 3);

• Weak soils need to be sampled and tested

frequently. It is almost always the case that

there are not enough samples or the testing

carried out has been limited. Engineers are

not just interested in a range of values.

They need to know how the strength and

size characteristics vary across the site

(Figure 4);

To carry out these evaluations, information

about both the strong and the weak materials

on the site is needed. Therefore the number

and locations of the boreholes, vibrocores or

other sampling methods used to investigate

and collect samples must be adjusted

accordingly. It is too prescriptive to suggest

a formula for determining the optimum

number of investigative points. These will be

determined by the overall geology of the site,

the sensitivity of the probable dredging

method and, to some extent the stage of the

development at that time.

A potential method for determining where

to focus marine site investigation resources is

given in the following section. Additional

information can also be gained by talking to

Dredging Contractors during the planning of

the site investigation works.

sAMPLInG AnD testInGSamplingThe following points are particularly relevant

when considering sampling:

Figure 3. A Vibrocorer in use during site investigation works.

Figure 4. Undertaking undisturbed soil sampling using a ship-mounted rotary drilling rig as part of

offshore site investigation works for a major marine development.

The Importance of Bed Material Characterisation in Planning Dredging Projects 27

• Detecting the variability of the materials on

the site is one of the most important

objectives of the site investigation;

• Correct logging of rock cores is vital.

The quality of the rock is as important as

its strength. Hence core recovery, RQD and

Fracture Index should be recorded on all

cores.

TestingTesting of samples needs to reflect the

sensitivity of the dredging method to changes

in soil or rock characteristics. For example, the

standard sieve sizes are not necessarily ideal for

testing loose granular materials, particularly

when hydraulic methods of excavation are

envisaged.

The shape of the PSD curve between 80 and

200 microns is very influential in determining

overflow losses from trailing suction hopper

dredgers (TSHD, see below) and the sizes

below 20 microns are also very important for

determining the fill characteristics of materials

and the permeability, which will affect

consolidation of fill.

Where soils or rocks are particularly weak,

it may be necessary to carry out specific tests

to assess degradation of dredged materials

during the dredging process or thereafter.

Testing of materials to determine the way in

which they break-up can be important for

two primary reasons:

1. there can be a very significant impact on

the losses from a dredging project and,

consequently, the likely environmental

impact (potentially affecting the viability

of the project); and

2. if the material is to be used for reclamation

then the design and construction of the

reclamation and the mechanical properties

of the fill will be very heavily influenced by

the character of the material which is

liberated by the dredging process.

Dredging has the potential to degrade bed

materials in different ways. These can be

summarised as follows:

a) Mechanical breakage where the plant

comes into contact with the bed (e.g., at

a cutter head or a backhoe bucket);

b) Impacts / contacts between clasts / particles

(e.g., in pumps and pipelines);

c) Material coming into contact with pipe and

pump surfaces; and

d) Flow of water around fragments / grains.

A number of established lab tests exist for

measuring the breakage / abrasion of rocks /

MICHAEL COSTARAS

is the Manager of the Dredging Group at

HR Wallingford. He has extensive

experience of estuary and marine

developments and port siltation and

specialises in the provision of dredging

impact assessments and dredging

contracts. He is a Board Member of the

International Board of the Central Dredging

Association (CEDA) and is a past Chairman

of the British Section Committee.

NICK BRAY

is a Consultant to HR Wallingford. He is

a dredging and reclamation specialist, with

a broad knowledge of maritime civil

engineering gained through his 44-year

involvement in the sector. With a

background in project management,

he has experience of both consulting

and contracting organisations. He was a

founder member of the British Section of

CEDA and has been a regular contributor

to the literature of dredging.

RICHARD LEWIS

is a Scientist within the Dredging Group

at HR Wallingford. He has a detailed

knowledge of coastal and estuarine

sediment dynamics and is experienced in

data manipulation and analysis, including

data quality control and the associated

limitations. He specialises in undertaking

dredger simulation modelling for projects

which require the development of dredging

strategies, the determination of likely

production rates and their associated costs.

MARK LEE

is a Principal Scientist in the Dredging

Group at HR Wallingford. He has a

background in marine monitoring and

surveying, and has over 13 years

experience during which time he has

specialised in coastal oceanographic

surveys and coastal and fluvial sediment

transport measurements. Mark has also

contributed to both vessel-based and

shore-based marine surveys. He has

worked extensively on projects in the

following sectors: dredging; construction;

energy; oil and gas and water.

Figure 5. Laboratory tumbling equipment is sometimes used to simulate the degrading of sediment during dredging.

28 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

granular material, these include:

• Los Angeles test

• Deval Test (aggregate attrition value)

• Micro-Deval test

• Aggregate Abrasion Value (AAV) test

• Polished Stone Value (PSV) test

• Slake Durability test

However, none of these tests has been

designed to assess the impact of dredging

processes on materials; instead they tend to

have origins in industries such as road

construction. As a consequence, none of the

tests represents well the physical conditions

that materials are subject to during dredging.

For example, both the Los Angeles test and

the Micro-Deval test both involve placing

samples in a rotating cylinder with steel balls,

while the Aggregate Abrasion Value test

involves pressing samples against the surface

of a steel disc while feeding with Leighton

Buzzard sand.

Previous studies of abrasion of both grains

and shelly material have shown that failure to

properly represent the physics that materials

are subject to can lead to unexpected /

incorrect results. Ngan-Tillard et al. (2009)

found that, using the French Micro-Deval test,

quartzitic sand suffered unexpectedly high

degradation as compared with carbonate sand

(the shape of the carbonate grains leading to

them being suspended away from the bottom

of the cylinder). The authors sought to

address this perceived anomaly by changing

the rotation speed and the character of the

steel balls used. Similarly, the use of tumbling

barrel experiments to simulate shell abrasion

in fluvial environments has been shown to

have serious shortcomings (Newell et al. 2007)

(Figure 5).

More representative, specifically designed,

tests are required to properly represent the

physical processes that materials are subject

to during dredging. In the absence of such

tests, existing laboratory methods should be

used with careful thought, thorough

procedures and caution.

exAMPLes oF sItUAtIons WHeRe sIte InVestIGAtIon ResULts ARe cRItIcALFor the examples presented in the following

section, costs have been developed using the

suite of HR Wallingford Dredging Research

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 10 100 1000 10000

Grain size (microns)

% P

assi

ng

PSD A

PSD B

Figure 6(a). Parallel shift in PSD.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 10 100 1000 10000

Grain size (microns)

% P

assi

ng

PSD C

PSD D

Figure 6(b). Rotational shift in PSD.

Table I. Cost uncertainty resulting from varied ground conditions

Item SandSoft Clay

Medium

Clay

Stiff Clay

WK Rock

MS Rock

VS Rock

Marine operations platformBase

Case+20% +10% same +10% +20% +30%

Berth Base

Case+20% +10% same +10% +20% +30%

TrestleBase

Case+20% +10% same +10% +20% +30%

BreakwaterBase

Case+50% +10% same same same same

Construction DockBase

Case+30% +10% same +5% +10% +20%

DredgingBase Case

+5% +10% +20% +100% +300% +500%

Shoreline protectionBase

Case+30% same same same same same

The Importance of Bed Material Characterisation in Planning Dredging Projects 29

Dredger Simulation Models. The HR

Wallingford Dredging Research Dredger

Simulation Models are a set of proprietary

models that take into account the physical

processes involved in the excavation and

transport of material for a variety of standard

dredge plant. Each model has the ability to

deal with operator controlled usage and

variable ground conditions to estimate

production. The costing modules use the soil

characteristics and production estimates

to develop wear rates and incorporate the

CIRIA Cost Standards for Dredging Equipment

(2009) to calculate the depreciation and

interest, maintenance and repair, insurances,

crew and fuel costs that all factor into the

cost of the plant and the unit rates produced.

Trailing suction hopper dredger (TSHD) operationsJust a small parallel shift in the particle size

distribution (PSD) of material being dredged

can have a marked effect on the cost and

execution of a dredging project. The example

is given whereby the initial site investigations

for a sand sourcing study are limited with only

a small number of samples taken to

characterise the area.

The results of PSD analysis identify an average

PSD akin to PSD A as shown in Figure 6(a).

The dredging contractor tenders for the work

and is successful on the basis of his price for

dredging PSD A. Throughout the execution of

the works the contractor discovers that the soils

being dredged are better described by PSD B in

Figure 6(a), a coarser PSD which produces a

higher quality fill. This puts the dredging

contractor in an advantageous position as he/

she will have to dredge less material in situ to

provide the same quantity of fill.

Assuming that PSD A and PSD B both have

the same characteristics (density, angularity

and mineralogical composition), this leads to

lower overall wear on the moving parts of the

dredger than had been budgeted for in the

tender price, but higher wear in the pipelines

ashore. Furthermore, the amount of material

lost through the overflow process will also be

reduced giving the contractor more freedom

to work unrestricted should there be any

environmental restrictions in place.

The differences in the required in situ

productivities to achieve the same fill output

are small (~ 5%) but in the context of a

€ 50M dredge contract this may amount to

a difference in excess of €2.5M, which in this

case would be an additional 50% profit to the

contractor.

This sensitivity is also present for a shift about

the D50

of the PSD as illustrated by PSD C and

PSD D in Figure 6(b), where the two average

soil PSDs have the same D50

, but a marginally

different amount of sorting. Thus, a similar cost

result is obtained if the degree of sorting of a

granular material is not assessed adequately.

Cutter suction dredger (CSD) operationsFor rock dredging projects, the impact of

poorly characterised materials has the

potential to have a far more significant impact

on the total cost and schedule of a dredging

project. Figure 5 shows rock strength

distributions obtained from two differently

targeted site investigations at the same site:

- The strength distribution obtained from

Investigation A is based around limited

geotechnical data in the dredge area and

comprehensive coverage around the piled

structures.

- The strength distribution obtained from

Investigation B is based upon a well-

targeted and comprehensive investigation

across all areas and clearly shows the

presence of stronger material that had been

missed by Investigation A.

Faulty testing equipment has also been known

to be another contributing factor towards

producing similar variations in testing results

as shown in Figure 7 (i.e., the rock strength is

biased downwards).

Investigation A

Investigation B

0 to 5

30 16

5 to 15

65 44

15 to 25

5 31

25 to 35

0 9

Distribution (%)

Unconfined

compressive strength (Mpa)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Unconfined compressive strength (MPa)

Nu

mb

er o

f re

sult

s

Investigation AInvestigation B

Figure 7. Two rock strength distributions from the same site.

30 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

Newell et al., (2007). “Bedload abrasion and the

in situ fragmentation of bivalve shells”.

Sedimentology, 54, 835-845.

Ngan-Tillard et al. (2009). “Index test for the

degradation potential of carbonate sands during

hydraulic transportation.” Engineering Geology,

108, 54-64.

If a comparison of costs is made, based upon

the results of Investigations A and B, the total

cost of dredging is 51% higher for the rock

strength distribution described by Investigation

B which would result in the filing of a

substantial claim against the client.

The effect of poor Site Investigation results in the context of the overall projectA typical Phase 1 LNG project (up to 8 MTPA)

may consist of two berths, one marine

operations platform and a 2.5 km trestle,

1300 m of breakwater in 10 m water depth

and 15M m3 of dredging. In total this may

amount to an investment of approximately

US$ 1 billion. The figures shown in Table I are

based on a cost analysis of several Phase 1

LNG projects around the world.

Table I illustrates the cost sensitivity of the

individual engineering components of a typical

Phase 1 LNG project to variations in ground

conditions relative to a base case condition.

Table I clearly demonstrates that the potential

variability in cost and the level of risk linked to

each individual engineering component is the

most significant for dredging. The examples

presented above show the importance of

undertaking adequate site investigations to

inform the tendering process and highlighted

the relevance for both client and contractor.

Based upon the figures presented in Table I,

and bearing in mind that the monetary value

of the dredging works could represent 50%

of the cost of the marine works, the current

definition of an “adequate” site investigation

for dredging should be revised. This article

suggests that the design engineer should

weight geotechnical investigations such that

the number of cores drilled is biased towards

characterising the areas to be dredged.

Involving the Contractor early on is one of

the ways of developing the right focus for

these investigations. Alternatively, a procedure

should be adopted that results in the engineer

allocating a sufficiently high enough number

of boreholes in the dredging area to permit a

reasonable estimate of the cost of dredging to

be made. This could be based on a system

that takes account of the rough estimates of

the values of the marine components of the

project (see Figure 8).

REFERENCES

Bray, R.N. (Editor) (2008). Environmental Aspects of

Dredging. CEDA-IADC-Taylor and Francis, Leiden,

The Netherlands.

Bray, R.N. (2009). A guide to cost standards for

dredging equipment 2009. CIRIA, London, UK.

Is Geology Complex?

Is Seismic Investigation Feasible?

Plan Site Investigation and Seismic Survey to Suit Overall Ground Conditions

Produce Rough Costing of Marine Components

Split Between Value of Jetty and Dredging

Propose Number of Boreholes to Suit Budget Available

YES

NO

YES

NO

Figure 8. Proposed system to define the number of boreholes to characterise dredged areas relative to other marine

components.

CONCLUSIONS

Bed material characterisation for dredging

projects is a significant factor in defining how

dredging works will be undertaken. It also

demands an understanding of the dredging

process and how this influences/impacts both

the marine environment and areas where

dredged material is placed – intentionally or

otherwise.

Comprehensive geotechnical information is

important for any construction project. How

this is collected, assessed and extrapolated is

vital to understanding the risk associated

with dredging works and ensuring the right

equipment is selected first time. This requires

an acceptance that the requirements of a

dredging site investigation are not the same

as those for a construction project. Further,

it demands a change in the mindset away

from the idea that any site investigation

should be developed proportionally to the

capital investment per unit area for the

project as a whole.

Recognising that the comprehensive all-

embracing site investigation is a utopian ideal,

this article highlights the key attributes of

soils that need to be determined and where

testing should be focussed. It explains the

significance of material characteristics in

the context of TSHD and CSD operations.

Following on from this, it highlights a

weighting or procedural approach to

focussing the marine site investigation

resources and encourages project owners

to consult dredging contractors and specialist

consultants at an early stage in project

development.

Books / Periodicals Reviewed 31

UnDeRstAnDInG seA-LeVeL RIse AnD VARIABILItYEditEd by John A. ChurCh, PhiliP l. WoodWorth, thorkild AAruP And W. StAnlEy WilSon428 pp. Wiley-Blackwell Publishers. Colour illustrations. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-4443-3452-7 (hardcover). ISBN: 978-1-4443-3452-4 (paperback).

In June 2006, the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP),

responding to the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change (IPCC), organised a workshop in Paris, France that brought

together the world’s specialists on the science of sea-level change.

The core motivation for the workshop was the ever-increasing

population growth along coastal zones, combined with the

assessment of IPCC that sea-level rise is also continuing. The aim of

the workshop was to identify “the major uncertainties associated with

sea-level rise and variability, as well as the research and observational

activities need for narrowing those uncertainties…”.

After examining all aspects of sea-level rise, the workshop determined

uncertainties in the knowledge of contributing factors and generated

a summary set of recommendations focussed on reducing those

uncertainties. Many of the recommendations made by the workshop

seek to guide ongoing research that should be enhanced, including a

10-Year Implementation Plan for the Global Earth Observation System

of Systems (GEOSS). Other recommendations encourage open data

sharing, data archaeology, and better use of data already in hand.

Finally new needs based on emerging science and technological

development were ascertained.

The book reflects the discussions and deliberations of some 163

scientists from 29 countries who attended the workshop and their

assessments of our current understanding of sea-level rise.

The expressed hope of the book is to help set priorities for future

research and to help governments, industry and society to formulate

sound policy to respond to greenhouse gas concentrations and sea-

level rise and their consequences.

The supporting organisations, in addition to WCRP, were the World

Meteorological Organization (WMO), the Intergovernmental

Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of UNESCO and the International

Council for Science (ICSU). In addition, a multitude of international

organisations and agencies have sponsored and participated in

making the workshop and the book a reliable and definitive

contribution to the literature on this sometimes controversial subject.

Approximately one hundred authors from a wide range of institutions,

research laboratories and universities have contributed to the text.

The basic point of departure of the book (and the reason for the

workshop) is that coastal zones have changed profoundly during

the 20th century with increasing populations, economies and

urbanisation. About 10% of the world’s population today live in

coastal zones below 10-metres elevation. Adding up the populations

of the 136 port cities around the world with more than 1 million

inhabitants comes to a total of 400 million people. About 10% of this

population are exposed to the possibility of a 1-in-100-year coastal

flood event. Clearly, given the attractiveness of living near water,

coastal development is not about to cease, and thus society is

becoming increasingly vulnerable to the effects of sea-level rise and

variability, as witnessed by the tsunami in Southeast Asia in 2004,

Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans in 2005 and the recent tsunami

in Japan where the consequences are yet to be overseen.

The underlying principle guiding the book is that “Improved

understanding of sea-level rise and variability is required to reduce

the uncertainties associated with sea-level rise projections, and hence

to contribute to more effective coastal planning, management and

adaptation in the presence of the many pressures on coastal regions”.

This theme of uncertainty is evident starting in Chapter 1,

the Introduction, which gives an overview of the coastal situation

globally – including many colour photographs depicting highly dense

coastal populations, erosion episodes and measurement techniques.

Chapter 2, Impacts and Response to Sea-Level Rise, and Chapter 3,

A First-Order Assessment of the Impact of Long-Term Trends in

Extreme Sea Levels on Offshore Structures and Coastal Refineries, give

insight into the vulnerabilities of coastal communities and the need for

adaptation and mitigation and improved understanding of sea-level

rise in order to reduce costs associated with sea-level rise.

This requires improving observation and modelling of the oceans,

glaciers and ice caps and of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets.

Detecting early signs of any growing ice sheet contributions is critical

to decision-making about the required level of greenhouse gas

mitigation and adaptation planning. These chapters form the basis for

why the research presented in subsequent chapters is so necessary

and should be continued and in fact enhanced.

BooKs / PeRIoDIcALs ReVIeWeD

32 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

Chapter 4, Paleoenvironmental Records, Geophysical Modeling, and

Reconstruction of Sea-Level Trends and Variability on Centennial and

Longer Timescales, approaches the subject with the aim of reducing

some of the uncertainties that arise during research. The fact is that

global mean sea level has always changed. But putting it in a historical

context, research which looks at glacial cycles in the last million years

gives evidence for observing the phenomena today. According to

researchers, “sea level has oscillated by more than 100 metres as the

ice sheets, particularly those of northern Europe and North America,

waxed and waned”. Paleo data indicates rates of sea-level rise of

about 6 to 9 m per millenia with sea level reaching 6-9 m above

present day values and with polar temperatures about 3°C to 5°C

higher than today. Over the following 100,000 years sea levels fell

until about 20,000 years ago until about 7,000 years ago the ice

sheets collapsed. Thereafter sea level rose rapidly for many millennia,

with peak rates during the deglaciation potentially exceeding several

metres per century. From about 6000 to 2000 years ago, and up to

the 18th century, sea level rose more slowly. Predictions for the latter

part of the 21st century are for global temperatures similar to those

that occurred about 125,000 years ago.

Chapter 5, Modern Sea-Level Change Estimates, presents the more

precise observational techniques that have been developed recently

which have led to new conclusions about sea-level rise. For instance,

by examining coastal sediment cores and other paleo sea-level data,

the indication is that “the rate of sea level rise has increased since

1993, with a rate of over 3 mm/year, greater than any similar length

period during the 20th century”.

Whilst it is not always clear why sea level is rising, this chapter presents

a broad approach to the many different physical processes contributing

to sea level change, such as the melting of glaciers and ice caps and

upper ocean thermal expansion, as well as some contributions from

deep-ocean thermal expansion and the ice sheets. Sea level also

changes as a result of storage of water in dams and extraction of

water from aquifers. The chapter also examines the use of satellite

altimetry to measure changes in the ocean and ice sheet volume,

satellite gravity to measure changes in ocean and ice sheet mass.

Chapter 6, Ocean Temperature and Salinity Contributions to Global

and Regional Sea-Level Change, also addresses the uncertainties of

previous measurements and new methods such as Argo profiling

floats to measure changes in upper-ocean temperatures and thermal

expansion which since 2003 have led to improved understanding of

the sea-level. Of particular concern is the rapid dynamic thinning of

the margins of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets. But with

FActs ABoUtDReDGInG ARoUnD coRAL ReeFsINTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF DREDGING COMPANIESAn Information Update from the IADC. Number 1-2011. 4 pp. Available free of

charge online and in print.

Facts About Dredging Around Coral Reefs was published this spring as part of

the IADC series of concise, easy-to-read “management summaries” on specific

dredging and maritime construction subjects.

Since coral reefs are one of our most valuable marine assets and, one which

dredging projects often encounter, they often become a subject of concern.

Although coral reefs are robust and can withstand the forces of storms, climatic

change, sea level changes and predators, they are still vulnerable and sensitive

to their surroundings. Healthy coral reefs provide food, protect shorelines and

support the livelihoods of local communities such as fishing and tourism.

Unhealthy coral reefs can have a negative socio-economic impact.

Studying the interrelationship between dredging activities and coral reefs has

become crucial as the rapid development of our coastal infrastructure with

ports, waterways, land reclamation and beach nourishment increases.

These necessary economic developments can impact coral reefs and cause

disturbances in their ecosystem thus giving the impression that economic

growth is in conflict with environmental considerations. To ensure that this is

not the case, close examination of the coral reefs and potential impacts must

be conducted in a timely matter. Transparency and clarity must be achieved

through systematic evaluations to determine what can and should be done,

taking into consideration that not all impacts are permanent or detrimental,

and some risks can certainly be avoided by sound strategic planning.

Facts About Dredging Around Coral Reefs offers suggestions for the best

technical practices that can be used to prevent, minimise, mitigate or

compensate for impacts incurred when dredging is schedule to take place in

the vicinity of coral reefs. For instance, site investigations, an Environmental

Management Plan and continuous monitoring can reduce risks considerably.

Achieving a successful dredging project in a sensitive coral reef environment

demands that all parties think ahead and cooperate.

Other Facts About in the series are: Site

Investigations, Turbidity, Alliance Contracts,

Procurement, Environmental Impact

Assessments, Surveying, Soil Improvement,

Dredged Material as a Resource, Dredging

Management Practices for the Environment,

Deltas and Climate Change, Confined

Disposal Facilities, Environmental Monitoring

and Building with Nature.

All Facts About are downloadable in

PDF form at the IADC website:

www.iadc-dredging.com.

Printed copies can be ordered by contacting

the IADC Secretariat: info@iadc-dredging.com.

What are Coral Reefs?Coral Reefs are large, long-lived bio-geological structures

that include all associated plants and animals. They are

marine ridges or mounds formed from the deposition of

calcium carbonate by living organisms, predominantly

hard corals, but also by other organisms such as coralline

algae and shellfish. Specifically, coralline algae are marine algae, or seaweeds,

that deposit calcium carbonate, thus contributing to Coral

Reef formation. Corals are particular marine animals that are

characterised by polyps; they are predominantly colonial and

they secrete a calcium carbonate skeleton. Corals exist as a

variety of species, some of which have symbiotic relationships

with algae, making them dependent on sunlight as well as on

filter feeding to meet their energy requirements. They can

develop distinct growth forms including branching to

digitate (finger-like), foliose (plate-like), encrusting, massive

(boulder-shaped), and mushroom shapes. Different forms

and species have different characteristics which affect where

the corals are found, how they react differently to stress

which, for instance, affects how fast they grow. Although Coral Reefs are robust and have often

withstood the forces of storms, climatic change, sea level

change and predators, the living elements – coral, coralline

algae and shellfish that build these structures – are just a

very thin veneer of delicate tissue, highly sensitive to the

surrounding environment. Why are Coral Reefs important?Healthy Coral Reefs provide an array of services to human

communities, including food (especially protein),

protecting shorelines, supporting the livelihoods of local

communities, such as fishing and tourism and sustaining

cultural traditions. In contrast, unhealthy or degraded

Coral Reef systems can be linked to a decline in natural

resources upon which local people are dependent, an

increased vulnerability in the coastal area and loss of

cultural traditions. One estimate puts the economic value

of the world’s coral reefs at € 265 billion (US$ 350 billion)

per year. In contrast the cost of damages and cost for

restoration of Coral Reefs has been estimated to be in the

order of US$ 1,000 per m2.

Where are Coral Reefs found?Globally, Coral Reefs occur in two distinct marine

environments: Deep, cold water (3 to 14°C), and shallow,

warm water (21 to 30°C). So far, cold-water corals have

been identified in 41 countries at a prevailing water depth

greater than 39 m. Warm-water Coral Reefs form in the

shallow, clear seas of the tropics with an essential

combination of low nutrient waters and high levels of

available sunlight. Although warm-water Coral Reefs

cover just under 0.1% of the ocean floor, their location

often overlaps with preferred port locations. Why study the interaction of Coral

Reefs and Dredging?One third of the world’s population lives in coastal areas,

where rapid development has meant increased construction

of coastal infrastructure such as ports, waterways, coastal

defences, land reclamation and beach nourishment. This

has inevitably led to conflicting priorities between Coral

Reef conservation and economic growth. The concern is

that development of waterways, ports and harbours can

lead to the direct loss of Coral Reefs caused by the removal

or burial of reefs, as well as through stress to corals caused

by elevated turbidity and sedimentation during dredging

and actual operation of the ports. This concern raises

several questions: Are these negative effects to Coral Reefs

immediate or will they develop over a longer time frame?

Are they temporary or permanent? To answer these questions, the impact of dredging

projects on this sensitive and valuable resource must be

systematically evaluated, and careful consideration must be

given as to how to monitor these impacts and, ultimately,

how to avoid or mitigate them.Why is it difficult to dredge near Coral Reefs?Limestone and coral materials tend to break into extremely

fine particles when dredged. This creates milky white

“clouds” of suspended sediments and these “clouds” of fine

sediments can stay in suspension for a long time, spreading

over a large area and often causing increased sedimentation.

Because they result in significantly reduced light

Facts aboutDredging Around Coral ReefsAn Information Update from the IADC – Number 1 – 2011

55730_FactsAbout.indd 1

10-05-11 09:49

Books / Periodicals Reviewed 33

incomplete data and remaining discrepancies, it is difficult to complete

physically based quantitative estimates for the 21st century.

Chapter 7, Cryospheric Contributions to Sea-Level Rise and Variability,

explains some of the reasons for these uncertainties, such as the

inadequacies of sampling. It then offers recommendations for

improving measurement requirements through modelling of the

dynamics of ice flows. Continuing to examine the why of sea-level

rise, Chapter 8 addresses Terrestrial Water-Storage Contributions to

Sea-Level Rise and Variability. This covers the direct effect of human

activities such as dams, irrigation and mining ground water which

continue to raise many as yet unanswered questions.

Much of the progress made in recent research is dependent on

geodetic techniques and these are presented in Chapter 9, Geodetic

Observations and Global Reference Frame Contributions to Under-

standing Sea-Level Rise and Variability. Especially the development of

space-based observa tory tools like GPS, ICESat and GRACE are

discussed and the importance of the International Terrestrial Reference

Frame is emphasised. The importance of funding and continuing these

projects is continually brought forward. Uncertainties can only be

addressed by further examination.

In Chapter 10, the focus turns to Surface Mass Loading on a Dynamic

Earth: Complexity and Contamination in the Geodetic Analysis of

Global Sea-Level Trends. The key word is dynamic as the Earth is still

changing, and still responding to changes in the mass of the ice

sheets, glaciers and ice caps. These influence the regional distribution

of sea-level rise through corresponding changes in the Earth’s

gravitational field and the elastic movement of the Earth’s crust,

so that ice sheet contributions to future sea-level rise may have

disproportionate impact in some potentially vulnerable regions and

less impact in other regions. This too warrants further close study.

Trying to understand the impacts of rising seal level leads to some

historical comparisons as presented in Chapter 11, Past and Future

Changes in Extreme Sea Levels and Waves. Since it is generally agreed

that rising sea levels have been and will continue to be felt most

acutely through extreme events, examination of the intensity and

frequency of extreme events in the second half of the 20th century

is offered here, including several regional case studies.

As improving the understanding of the past and present events is

dependent on accurate measurements, Chapter 12 is dedicated to a

discussion of the Observing Systems Needed to Address Sea-Level Rise

and Variability. For instance, the importance of adhering to the Global

Climate Observing System (GCOS) is underscored.

And finally, Chapter 13 provides a Synthesis and Outlook for the

Future, trying to give an overview of the discussions in previous

chapters. Recognising that sea level is currently rising near the upper

bound of the IPCC projections and that sea levels will continue to rise

for centuries, appropriate attention is spent to sea level and society –

the need for climate change mitigation, that is, substantial emission

reductions to reverse ongoing thermal ocean expansion as well as the

need for adaptation in coastal regions. Such societal adaptation may

include planning and zoning of vulnerable coastal regions,

modification of coastal infrastructure and the construction of

protection for valuable coastal regions.

Clearly, forced adaptation, as a result of extreme events, is far more

costly in human and financial terms and deeply disruptive to society

than planned, long-term adaptation.

If there is one word that arises time and time again throughout the

book, and presumably the workshop, it is the word uncertainty.

As we are moving out of a period of relatively stable sea level into

a period of sea-level rise, according to the editors, “Science has an

important role to play in assisting societies to respond”. The need

to continue to improve our abilities to observe and model the global

oceans, glaciers and ice caps, to be able to detect early signs of

change, and to plan for policies to respond to this future is crucial

to protecting coastal zones and the populations living there.

This book is clearly a call-to-arms which encourages further research

aimed at understanding the various processes inherent to sea-level rise

in order to determine how much each of the processes contribute to

the global sea level rise numbers and what the appropriate responses

should be. Narrowing the uncertainties requires observations of many

processes through sustained observing systems in order for the

scientific community to improve its advice to society and reduce the

uncertainty associated with that advice. The book assesses the data

and the need to answer several significant questions: What are the

social and economic impacts of doing nothing about sea-level rise?

Should we be taking mitigating measures? How can we adapt to

sea-level rise?

In addition to the depth of the discussions represented in these

chapters, the reader benefits from an extensive Abbreviations and

Acronyms section, a full Index, and not in the least, the reference lists

that accompany each chapter, giving insight and access to a wealth

of source material on the subject of sea-level rise.

As the authors/editors indicate the book provides important

information for policymakers, research funders, scientists, students,

coastal managers and engineers.

The book is available from www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell.

IOC-UNESCO has also published, “Sea-level Rise and Variability - A summary for policy makers, which is available at http://unesdoc.

unesco.org/images/0018/001893/189369e.pdf (English); http://unesdoc.

unesco.org/images/0018/001893/189369f.pdf (French) and

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001893/189369s.pdf (Spanish).

MC

seMInARs / conFeRences / eVents

34 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

Unesco-IHe seminar on DredgingJunE 20-24, 2011dElFt, thE nEthErlAndS

This five-day course organised by the International Association of

Dredging Companies strives to provide an understanding of dredging

through lectures and workshops. Some of the subjects covered are:

the development of new ports and maintenance of existing ports;

project phasing (identification, investigation, feasibility studies, design,

construction, and maintenance); descriptions of types of dredging

equipment and boundary conditions for their use; state-of-the-art

dredging techniques as well as environmentally sound techniques;

pre-dredging and soil investigations, designing and estimating from

the contractor’s view; costing of projects and types of contracts such

as charter, unit rates, lump sum and risk-sharing agreements.

The cost of the seminar is € 2,250.- (including VAT). The fee includes

all tuition, seminar proceedings and workshops and a special

participant’s dinner during the week. Fees are exclusive of travel

costs and accommodation. IADC provides assistance with finding

accommodations.

For further information contact:IADC Secretariat

Tel: +31 70 352 3334

Fax: +31 70 351 2654

• Email: info@iadc-dredging.com

World ocean council national BusinessForum on Marine spatial PlanningJuly 13-14 2011hotEl MonACo, WAShinGton, dC

The World Ocean Council (WOC) will convene ocean industries to

foster and facilitate business involvement in the coastal and marine

spatial planning (CMSP) process underway in the U.S. The U.S. has

established a National Ocean Council (NOC) that will be implementing

CMSP through a series of 9 regional programmes. The NOC will be

holding a National Workshop for government agencies to develop the

government’s CMSP Strategic Action Plan in late June. A coordinated,

multi-sectoral process to ensure the ocean business community is well-

informed and constructively engaged in U.S. CMSP efforts is essential

to CMSP being able to support the sustainable use of marine space

and resources by responsible industry operators. The National Business

Forum on CMSP will address this and will:

- Create a clear understanding of CMSP in the ocean business community

- Define and examine the potential business impacts and benefits of

CMSP

- Ensure the business community is fully informed of the specific U.S.

CMSP process and plans

- Develop a WOC Action Plan for engaging CMSP and facilitating/

coordinating business involvement in CMSP as it develops in the U.S.

CMSP is defined by the Task Force as “a comprehensive, adaptive,

integrated, and transparent spatial planning process, based on sound

science, for analyzing current and anticipated uses of ocean, coastal,

and Great Lakes areas. CMSP identifies areas most suitable for various

types or classes of activities in order to reduce conflicts among uses,

reduce environmental impacts, facilitate compatible uses, and preserve

critical ecosystem services to meet economic, environmental, security,

and social objectives”. CMSP seeks to move sea use planning “away

from the current sector-by-sector, statute by statute approach”

according to the Task Force information.

The National Forum is being organised by the WOC in partnership

with Battelle Memorial Institute, which became a WOC Founding

Member in 2010. Marine spatial planning (MSP) is a priority for WOC

Members. A WOC Working Group on MSP has been formed to

explore the WOC role in catalysing cross-sectoral industry leadership

and collaboration on MSP as it develops in the U.S., Europe, Australia

and elsewhere.

For further information contact: Leona Roach, Forum Coordinator

+1 781 248 4306

Paul Holthus, World Ocean Council

Tel: +1 808 277 9008

• Email: paul.holthus@oceancouncil.orgWeb: www.oceancouncil.org

smart Rivers 2011 conference SEPtEMbEr 13-16, 2011WEStin CAnAl PlACEnEW orlEAnS, louiSiAnA, uSA

The next installment of the outstanding Smart Rivers Conference series,

a biennial forum bringing together international professionals involved

in inland/river transport will take place in September 2011. This 3-day

technical conference is organised by PIANC USA, with more than

twenty partnering organisations. The concept of “Smart Rivers” sprang

from a group started in 2004 called SmartRivers21, an international

coalition intent on realising “Strategic Maritime Asset Research and

Transformation for 21st Century River Systems”. It began with a

cooperation agreement between American and European partners and

was followed by the organisation of Smart Rivers Conferences in

Pittsburgh (2005), Brussels (2006), Louisville (2007), and Vienna (2009).

The overarching theme of the 2011 Conference is “Systems Thinking,”

with a particular emphasis on making this a global conference.

For further information contact:PIANC USA

Tel: +1 703 428 9090.

• Email: pianc@usace.army.milwww.pianc.us or www.smartrivers.org

Seminars / Conferences / Events 35

europort 2011noVEMbEr 8-11 2011,Ahoy rottErdAM, thE nEthErlAndS

Europort 2011 is one of the largest exhibition for the international

maritime and dredging industry. The theme in 2011 will be

“Advanced Technology: Your access to the future”. Presenting the

newest technologies which aim at keeping pace with increasingly

demanding maritime markets. Since the Netherlands is home to a

wide variety of maritime disciplines, from world-class shipyards to

innovative suppliers, and excels in complex shipbuilding, high-quality

technologies and engineering, Europort, situated in the heart of the

port of Rotterdam, is the ultimate venue for a maritime exhibition.

CEDA Dredging Days 2011 will be held from November 10-11 in

association with Europort, with a technical visit to one of the

shipyards of IHC Merwede BV on the afternoon of Wednesday,

9 November 2011.

For further information please visit: www.europort.nl

ceDA Dredging Days 2011noVEMbEr 10-11 2011,Ahoy rottErdAM, thE nEthErlAndS

The theme of CEDA Dredging Days 2011, “Dredging and Beyond”,

reflects the insight that dredging is no longer a stand-alone exercise,

but is part of a broader, more integrated project realisation process.

The dredging industry is increasingly confronted by projects involving

environmental protection, nature development, offshore energy

production and mineral mining on the sea floor.

CEDA Dredging Days provide an important forum for presenting and

debating new ways of thinking, innovative approaches, and cutting-

edge dredging tools and technology. The focus will therefore be on

two main areas where an integrated dredging approach is emerging:

• Dredging and rock dumping for the offshore oil and gas industry

and deep-sea mining

• Building with nature for soft and hard dredging solutions (coastal

and inland)

FORUm ON EARLy CONTRACTOR INvOLvEmENT

JunE 23-24 2011hilton doCklAndS london, uk

An interactive forum and networking event for project owners,

financiers, insurers, contractors, construction lawyers, regulators,

government agencies and NGOs, advisors to decision makers in the

maritime infrastructure construction industry. This two-day forum with

the theme Partnering Creates Possibilities will bring together top-level

experts and advisors responsible for construction projects for an

in-depth exchange of knowledge. With well-known keynote speakers

setting the tone for the forum, participants will explore the benefits of

“contractual partnering” – that is, a co-operation amongst all the

contractual players from the very early stages of project development.

Early Contractor Involvement can help identify risks and responsibilities

and obstacles to co-operation, as well as possible methods to deal

with, eliminate or minimise them. The aim of conference is to explore

the practical and legal possibilities of utilising better and more

intelligently the resources associated with “the early involvement of

contractors” in order to bring benefits to society in the form of faster

and more cost-effective solutions.

By examining four successful recent projects from different parts of

the world, this free-spirited event aims to disseminate existing

knowledge and to stimulate new, creative ideas for achieving

solutions for Best for the Project (win-win). A hypothetical case study

will challenge the participating professionals to think out of the box

and confront their own doubts and preconceptions. Whilst the event’s

primary focus will be maritime infrastructure construction projects,

experience and lessons learned in other industries will also be sought.

The target audience comprises but is not limited to experts involved

in maritime infrastructure projects: project principles/project owners

(both experienced and less experienced), development agencies;

dredging contractors; consulting engineers; construction lawyers

and legal counsels; project financiers; and decision makers and their

advisors.

Registration: Fees: CEDA/WEDA/EADA and IADC Members:

£ 595 excl. VAT; Non-Members: £ 655 excl. VAT. Accommodation:

A limited number of rooms are available at the Hilton London

Docklands (the conference venue) at a reduced rate, £ 169 excl VAT.

These are available on a first come, first served basis. Online booking

at http://www.hilton.com/en/hi/groups/personalized/L/LONNDHI-

GINTB-20110622/index.jhtml.

Register online at:

www.dcm-conference.org or contact

Richard Hart at Event Logistics

• Email: richard.hart@event-logistics.co.uk

For further information please contact:Anna Csiti, CEDA Secretariat

Tel: +31 15 268 2575

• Email: ceda@dredging.org orRené Kolman, IADC Secretariat

Tel: +31 70 352 3334

• Email: info@iadc-dredging.com

36 Terra et Aqua | Number 123 | June 2011

In the framework of CEDA’s support of the industry’s younger

members, papers by students and young professionals will be

presented as part of the new Academic Session - an integral, and

popular, part of the technical programme. The International

Association of Dredging Companies (IADC) will present its Best Paper

Award for a Young Author 35 years of age or under.

A technical exhibition will be located in the area adjacent to the

technical session room providing organisations with an opportunity to

present their products and services to a focused group of international

experts. CEDA Dredging Days will be held in conjunction with

Europort 2011.

For further up-to-date information see:CEDA Secretariat

Tel: +31 15 268 2575

• Email: ceda@dredging.orgwww.cedaconferences.org/dredgingdays2011

Fourth International congress for Dredging technology DevelopmentnoVEMbEr 16-17, 2011ChonGQinG, ChinA

The Theme of the Congress is “Improving the dredging technology for

rivers and lakes by building an unimpeded, efficient, secure and

environmentally modern inland navigation system.”The dredging

industry will play a big role in building unimpeded, efficient, secure

and environmentally modern inland navigation system.

Development of dredging technology research and communication in

the dredging industry will be energetic. The Congress will be hosted

by the China Dredging Association (CHIDA) and the Eastern Dredging

Association (EADA) of the World Organization of Dredging

Associations.

The Eastern Dredging Association is responsible for calling, appraising

and selecting papers from abroad, while the China Dredging

Association is responsible for calling, appraising and selecting papers

from China as well as the detailed works of the Congress. The specific

works will be undertaken by the ChangJiang Waterway Bureau.

For further information contact:Secretariat, China Dredging Association.

503 Room No.9 Dong Zhi Men Wai Chun Xiu Road

Beijing,China

Tel: +10 6417 4498 /+10 6417 4426 /+10 6417 4496

Fax: +10 6415 9215

• Email: world.chida@yahoo.com.cnhttp://www.chida.org

PIAnc-coPeDec VIIIFEbruAry 20-24 2012indiAn inStitutE oF tEChnoloGy MAdrASChEnnAi, indiA

The First International Conference on Coastal and Port Engineering in

Developing Countries (COPEDEC) was held in Colombo, Sri Lanka, in

March 1983, resulting in the creation of a Permanent Secretariat to

organize this special conference once every four years in a developing

country. Subsequent conferences were held in China (September 1987),

Kenya (September 1991), Brazil (September 1995), South Africa (April

1999), Sri Lanka (September 2003) and Dubai, UAE (February 2008).

During the COPEDEC VI conference in Colombo in 2003, a merger

agreement between PIANC, the World Association for Waterborne

Transport Infrastructure, and COPEDEC was signed and consequent to

this agreement, a new International Organizing Committee (IOC) was

formed. The merger of PIANC and COPEDEC resulted in a tremendous

response during the VII COPEDEC conference held in Dubai, UAE in

2008 and was the first COPEDEC Conference held under the aegis of

PIANC.

The Eighth International Conference on Coastal and Port Engineering

in Developing Countries (PIANC-COPEDEC VIII) is to be held in

Chennai, a vibrant port city of south India. This is the first time that

the Conference will be held in a developing country where the

National Section of PIANC is actively participating in the event.

Loc and IItMDr. Vallam Sundar, Professor, Department of Ocean Engineering

Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600 036, India

Tel: +91 44 2257 4809, Mobile: +91 94440 49629

Fax: +91 44 2257 4809 / 4802

• Email: vsundar@iitm.ac.in • Email: copedec2012@iitm.ac.in

Ioc and PIAnc - cocomFreddy Wen, PIANC - COPEDEC VIII IOC Secretary

c/o Flanders Hydraulics p.a., Berchemlei 115

2140 Borgerhout - Antwerpen, Belgium

Tel: +32 3 224 61 69, Mobile: +32 475 78 27 41

Fax +32 3 224 60 36

• Email: freddy.wens@mow.vlaanderen.be

PIAncLouis Van Schel, Secretary General PIANC

Koning Albert II laan, 20, Box 3

B-1000 Brussels, Belgium

Tel: +32 2 553 71 17, Mobile: +32 475 415 471

Fax: + 32 2 553 71 55

• Email: louis.vanschel@pianc-aipcn.org

Editor

Marsha R. Cohen

Editorial Advisory Committee

Hubert Fiers, Chair

Bert Groothuizen

Neil Haworth

René Kolman

Heleen Schellinck

Martijn Schuttevâer

Roberto Vidal Martin

IADC Board of Directors

Jac. G. van Oord, President

Y. Kakimoto, Vice President

C. van Meerbeeck, Treasurer

Th. Baartmans

P. Catteau

N. Haworth

G. Vandewalle

IADC Secretariat

René Kolman, Secretary General

Alexanderveld 84

2585 DB The Hague

Mailing adress:

P.O. Box 80521

2508 GM The Hague

The Netherlands

T +31 (0)70 352 3334

F +31 (0)70 351 2654

E info@iadc-dredging.com

I www.iadc-dredging.com

I www.terra-et-aqua.com

Please address enquiries to the editor.

Articles in Terra et Aqua do not necessarily

reflect the opinion of the IADC Board or

of individual members.

CovER

In the foreground a small elevated platform for geotechnical sampling through a shallow rock seabed and in the background

a landing craft for soils sampling in excess of 5 m water depth. Conducting a detailed geotechnical site investigation is crucial

to the execution of a successful project, therefore, dredging contractors and consultants need to be involved early on so as to

avoid expensive “surprises” once work starts (see page 24).

TERRA ETAQUA

Guidelines for Authors

Terra et Aqua is a quarterly publication of the International Association of Dredging Companies,

emphasising “maritime solutions for a changing world”. It covers the fields of civil, hydraulic

and mechanical engineering including the technical, economic and environmental aspects

of dredging. Developments in the state of the art of the industry and other topics from the

industry with actual news value will be highlighted.

• As Terra et Aqua is an English language journal, articles must be submitted in English.

• Contributions will be considered primarily from authors who represent the various disciplines

of the dredging industry or professions, which are associated with dredging.

• Students and young professionals are encouraged to submit articles based on their research.

• Articles should be approximately 10-12 A4s. Photographs, graphics and illustrations are

encouraged. Original photographs should be submitted, as these provide the best quality.

Digital photographs should be of the highest resolution.

• Articles should be original and should not have appeared in other magazines or publications.

An exception is made for the proceedings of conferences which have a limited reading public.

• In the case of articles that have previously appeared in conference proceedings, permission

to reprint in Terra et Aqua will be requested.

• Authors are requested to provide in the “Introduction” an insight into the drivers (the Why)

behind the dredging project.

• By submitting an article, authors grant IADC permission to publish said article in both the

printed and digital version of Terra et Aqua without limitations and remunerations.

• All articles will be reviewed by the Editorial Advisory Committee (EAC). Publication of an

article is subject to approval by the EAC and no article will be published without approval

of the EAC.

MEMbERShip liST iADC 2011Through their regional branches or through representatives, members of IADC operate directly at all locations worldwide

AfricAVan Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors, Luanda, Angola Boskalis International Egypt, Cairo, EgyptDredging and Reclamation Jan De Nul Ltd., Lagos, NigeriaDredging International Services Nigeria Ltd, Ikoyi Lagos, NigeriaNigerian Westminster Dredging and Marine Ltd., Lagos, NigeriaVan Oord Nigeria Ltd, Victoria Island, Nigeria

AsiABeijing Boskalis Dredging Technology Co. Ltd., Beijing, P.R. ChinaVan Oord (Shanghai) Dredging Co. Ltd, Shanghai, P.R. ChinaVan Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors bv Hong Kong Branch, P.R. ChinaBoskalis Dredging India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai, IndiaInternational Seaport Dredging Private Ltd., New Delhi, IndiaJan De Nul Dredging India Pvt. Ltd., IndiaVan Oord India Pte Ltd, Mumbai, IndiaP.T. Boskalis International Indonesia, Jakarta, IndonesiaPT Penkonindo LLC, Jakarta, IndonesiaPenta-Ocean Construction Co. Ltd., Tokyo, JapanToa Corporation, Tokyo, JapanHyundai Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., Seoul, KoreaVan Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors bv Korea Branch, Busan, Republic of KoreaVan Oord (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, Selangor, MalaysiaVan Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors bv Philippines Branch, Manilla, PhilippinesBoskalis International Pte Ltd., SingaporeDredging International Asia Pacific (Pte) Ltd., SingaporeJan De Nul Singapore Pte. Ltd., SingaporeVan Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors bv Singapore Branch, SingaporeZinkcon Marine Singapore Pte. Ltd., SingaporeVan Oord Thai Ltd, Bangkok, Thailand

AusTrAliA + NEW ZEAlANDBoskalis Australia Pty, Ltd., Sydney, AustraliaDredeco Pty. Ltd., Brisbane, QLD, AustraliaJan De Nul Australia LtdVan Oord Australia Pty Ltd., Brisbane, QLD, AustraliaWA Shell Sands Pty Ltd, Perth, AustraliaNZ Dredging & General Works Ltd, Maunganui, New Zealand

EuropEBaggerwerken Decloedt & Zoon NV, Oostende, BelgiumDEME Building Materials NV (DBM), Zwijndrecht, BelgiumDredging International N.V., Zwijndrecht, BelgiumJan De Nul n.v., Hofstade/Aalst, BelgiumBoskalis Westminster Dredging & Contracting Ltd., CyprusBoskalis Westminster Middle East Ltd., Limassol, CyprusVan Oord Middle East Ltd, Nicosia, CyprusRohde Nielsen, Copenhagen, DenmarkTerramare Eesti OU, Tallinn, EstoniaTerramare Oy, Helsinki, FinlandAtlantique Dragage Sarl, St. Germain en Laye, FranceSociété de Dragage International ‘SDI’ SA, Lambersart, FranceSodraco International S.A.S., Lille, France Sodranord SARL, Le Blanc-Mesnil Cédex, FranceBrewaba Wasserbaugesellschaft Bremen mbH, Bremen, GermanyHeinrich Hirdes G.m.b.H., Hamburg, GermanyNordsee Nassbagger-und Tiefbau GmbH, Bremen, GermanyVan Oord Gibraltar Ltd, GibraltarIrish Dredging Company, Cork, IrelandVan Oord Ireland Ltd, Dublin, IrelandBoskalis Italia, Rome, Italy

Dravo SA, Italia, Amelia (TR), ItalySocieta Italiana Dragaggi SpA ‘SIDRA’, Rome, ItalyBaltic Marine Contractors SIA, Riga, LatviaDredging and Maritime Management s.a., Steinfort, LuxembourgDredging International (Luxembourg) SA, Luxembourg, LuxembourgTOA (LUX) S.A., Luxembourg, LuxembourgAannemingsbedrijf L. Paans & Zonen, Gorinchem, NetherlandsBaggermaatschappij Boskalis B.V., Papendrecht, NetherlandsBoskalis B.V., Rotterdam, NetherlandsBoskalis International B.V., Papendrecht, NetherlandsBoskalis Offshore bv, Papendrecht, NetherlandsDredging and Contracting Rotterdam b.v., Bergen op Zoom, NetherlandsMijnster zand- en grinthandel bv, Gorinchem, NetherlandsTideway B.V., Breda, NetherlandsVan Oord ACZ Marine Contractors bv, Rotterdam, NetherlandsVan Oord Nederland bv, Gorinchem, NetherlandsVan Oord nv, Rotterdam, NetherlandsVan Oord Offshore bv, Gorinchem, NetherlandsDragapor Dragagens de Portugal S.A., Alcochete, PortugalDravo SA, Lisbon, PortugalBallast Ham Dredging, St. Petersburg, RussiaDravo SA, Madrid, SpainFlota Proyectos Singulares S.A., Madrid, SpainSociedade Española de Dragados S.A., Madrid, SpainBoskalis Sweden AB, Gothenburg, SwedenDredging International (UK) Ltd., Weybridge, UKJan De Nul (UK) Ltd., Ascot, UKRock Fall Company Ltd, Aberdeen, UKVan Oord UK Ltd., Newbury, UKWestminster Dredging Co. Ltd., Fareham, UK

MiDDlE EAsTBoskalis Westminster Middle East Ltd., Manama, BahrainBoskalis Westminster (Oman) LLC, Muscat, OmanBoskalis Westminster Middle East, Doha, QatarMiddle East Dredging Company (MEDCO), Doha, QatarBoskalis Westminster Al Rushaid Co. Ltd., Al Khobar, Saudi ArabiaBoskalis Westminster M.E. Ltd., Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.Gulf Cobla (Limited Liability Company), Dubai, U.A.E.Jan De Nul Dredging Ltd. (Dubai Branch), Dubai, U.A.E.National Marine Dredging Company, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.Van Oord Gulf FZE, Dubai, U.A.E.

ThE AMEricAsBoskalis International bv Sucural Argentina, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaCompañía Sud Americana de Dragados S.A, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaJan De Nul do Brasil Dragagem LtdaVan Oord ACZ Marine Contractors bv Argentina Branch, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaVan Oord Dragagens do Brasil Ltda, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilVan Oord Curaçao nv, Willemstad, CuraçaoDragamex SA de CV, Coatzacoalcos, MexicoDredging International Mexico SA de CV, Veracruz, MexicoMexicana de Dragados S.A. de C.V., Mexico City, MexicoCoastal and Inland Marine Services Inc., Bethania, PanamaDredging International de Panama SA, Panama Westminster Dredging Overseas, TrinidadStuyvesant Dredging Company, Louisiana, U.S.A.Boskalis International Uruguay S.A., Montevideo, UruguayDravensa C.A., Caracas, VenezuelaDredging International NV - Sucursal Venezuela, Caracas, Venezuela

Terra et Aqua is published quarterly by the IADC, The International Association

of Dredging Companies. The journal is available on request to individuals or

organisations with a professional interest in dredging and maritime infrastructure

projects including the development of ports and waterways, coastal protection,

land reclamation, offshore works, environmental remediation and habitat restoration.

The name Terra et Aqua is a registered trademark.

for a free subscription register at www.terra-et-aqua.com

© 2011 IADC, The Netherlands

All rights reserved. Electronic storage, reprinting or

abstracting of the contents is allowed for non-commercial

purposes with permission of the publisher.

ISSN 0376-6411

Typesetting and printing by Opmeer Drukkerij bv,

The Hague, The Netherlands.

TERRA ETAQUA

International Association of Dredging Companies

Maritime Solutions for a Changing World

Number 123 | June 2011

FIXED LINK AT FEHMARNBELTuniting Europe’s transportation network

WHO REGULATES REMEDIATION?global survey on contaminated sediment

FIRST EXAMINE THE SEABEDwhy early sampling and testing matter