Estimating and Optimising Analytical and Sampling Uncertainty in Environmental Investigations: Application and Evaluation

Measurements taken to characterise environmental contamination contain uncertainty, which is generated by both field sampling and chemical analyses. Recently devised techniques have been applied for the first time to estimate this uncertainty in the commercial monitoring and assessment of contaminated land. The uncertainty reduces the reliability of the classification of the land that is made following a site investigation. The possible misclassification of areas of land, as a result of measurement uncertainty, can lead to substantial financial penalties, resulting from litigation or unnecessary remediation. Previous studies have developed methods for the estimation and financial optimisation of measurement uncertainty. These methods have now been applied to a series of six contrasting site investigations, which were conducted by various commercial organisations. The previous uses of these sites included a gas works, a tin mine and railway sidings. The measurement uncertainty was successfully estimated for each of the six investigations, showing its applicability to a wide range of different sampling methods, such as trial pits, window sampling and augering. The measurement uncertainty ranged widely between sites from 25% to 158%, indicating that investigations can differ widely in their reliability. The field sampling tended to generate the largest component of the measurement uncertainty when compared to the contribution from the chemical analysis. The Optimised Contaminated Land Investigation (OCLI) method was applied to each site, with the initial aim of estimating the financial losses that could be incurred as a result of misclassifying the land, due to the uncertainty. It showed that the expectation of loss value per sampling location ranged from only £58 at one site to over £ 11 000 at another. The optimal level of uncertainty that produced the minimal financial loss was then calculated for each site. It provided a reduction in the expectation of loss for the whole site of over £ 10 000 at two of the sites and over £90 000 at two others. These findings demonstrate that implementing concepts of uncertainty can have practical benefits in environmental monitoring, and can enable improvements to be made in the quality of sampling and hence of measurements in general.

[1]  P. Potts,et al.  Spatial contaminant heterogeneity: quantification with scale of measurement at contrasting sites. , 2005, Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM.

[2]  Václav Synek,et al.  Attempts to include uncorrected bias in the measurement uncertainty. , 2005, Talanta.

[3]  P. Minkkinen Practical applications of sampling theory , 2004 .

[4]  P. Potts,et al.  Balancing measurement uncertainty against financial benefits: comparison of in situ and ex situ analysis of contaminated land. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[5]  M. Ramsey Sampling the Environment: Twelve Key Questions That Need Answers , 2004 .

[6]  R. Wood,et al.  Measurement uncertainty from physical sample preparation: estimation including systematic error. , 2003, The Analyst.

[7]  Deana M. Crumbling,et al.  Improving Decision Quality: Making the Case for Adopting Next-Generation Site Characterization Practices , 2003 .

[8]  M. Ramsey,et al.  Optimized contaminated land investigation at minimum overall cost to achieve fitness-for-purpose. , 2002, Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM.

[9]  Sabrina Barbizzi,et al.  A practical approach to assessment of sampling uncertainty , 2002 .

[10]  Michael H. Ramsey,et al.  Estimation of measurement uncertainty from field sampling: implications for the classification of contaminated land , 1997 .

[11]  M. Hale,et al.  Objective evaluation of precision requirements for geochemical analysis using robust analysis of variance , 1992 .

[12]  H. Muntau,et al.  Estimation of measurement uncertainty by the budget approach for heavy metal content in soils under different land use , 2004 .

[13]  Bertil Magnusson,et al.  Handbook for Calculation of Measurement Uncertainty in Environmental Laboratories Version 3 January 2008 , 2003 .

[14]  M. Ramsey,et al.  Inter-organisational sampling trials for the uncertainty estimation of landfill gas measurements. , 2001, Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM.

[15]  Tom Fearn,et al.  What exactly is fitness for purpose in analytical measurement , 1996 .

[16]  Michael H. Ramsey,et al.  Quality concepts and practices applied to sampling—an exploratory study , 1995 .

[17]  R. Bilonick Sampling of Particulate Materials: Theory and Practice , 1979 .