Comparing Two Methods for Addressing Uncertainty in Risk Assessments
Publication: Journal of Environmental Engineering
Volume 125, Issue 7
Abstract
The Monte Carlo method is a popular method for incorporating uncertainty relative to parameter values in risk assessment modeling. But risk assessment models are often used as screening tools in situations where information is typically sparse and imprecise. In this case, it is questionable whether true probabilities can be assigned to parameter estimates, or whether these estimates should be considered as simply possible. This paper examines the possibilistic approach of accounting for parameter value uncertainty, and provides a comparison with the Monte Carlo probabilistic approach. The comparison illustrates the conservative nature of the possibilistic approach, which considers all possible combinations of parameter values, but does not transmit (through multiplication) the uncertainty of the parameter values onto that of the calculated result. In the Monte Carlo calculation, on the other hand, scenarios that combine low probability parameter values have all the less chance of being randomly selected. If probabilities are arbitrarily assigned to parameter estimates, without being substantiated by site-specific field data, possible combinations of parameter values (scenarios) will be eliminated from the analysis as a result of Monte Carlo averaging. This could have a detrimental impact in an environmental context, when the mere possibility that a scenario may occur can be an important element in the decision-making process.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Andricevic, R., and Cvetkovic, V. ( 1996). “Evaluation of risk from contaminants migrating by groundwater.” Water Resour. Res., 32(3), 611–621.
2.
Bardossy, A., Bronstert, A., and Merz, B. ( 1995). “1-, 2- and 3-dimensional modeling of groundwater movement in the unsaturated soil matrix using a fuzzy approach.” Adv. in Water Resour., 18(4), 237–251.
3.
Bobba, A., Singh, V., and Bengtsson, L. ( 1995). “Application of uncertainty analysis to groundwater pollution modeling.” Envir. Geol., 26, 89–96.
4.
Côme, B., Guyonnet, D., and Magnouni, S. ( 1997). “Apports potentiels de la théorie des possibilités à l'évaluation des risques environnementaux. (Potential contributions of the theory of possibility to the evaluation of environmental risks).” Déchets-Sci. et Techniques, 7, 40–46 (in French).
5.
Connor, J., Nevin, J., Malander, M., Stanley, C., and DeVaull, G. ( 1995). RBCA (risk based corrective action): Tier 2 guidance manual. Groundwater Services, Inc., Houston, Tex.
6.
de Marsily, G., Delay F., Teles, V., and Schafmeister, M. T. ( 1998). “Some current methods to represent the heterogeneity of natural media in hydrogeology.” Hydrogeol. J., 6, 115–130.
7.
Domenico, P. ( 1987). “An analytical model for multidimensional transport of a decaying contaminant species.” J. Hydro., 91, 49–58.
8.
Dou, C., Woldt, W., Bogardi, I., and Dahab, M. ( 1995). “Steady-state groundwater flow simulation with imprecise parameters.” Water Resour. Res., 31(11), 2709–2719.
9.
Dubois, D., and Prade, H. ( 1988). Possibility theory. Plenum, New York.
10.
Duke, D., Rong, Y., and Harmon, T. (1998). “Parameter-induced uncertainty in modeling vadose zone transport of VOCs.”J. Envir. Engrg., ASCE, 124(5), 441–448.
11.
Fang, J., and Chen, H. ( 1990). “Uncertainties are better handled by fuzzy arithmetic.” Am. Assn. Petr. Geol. Bull., 74(8), 1228–1233.
12.
Freeze, A., and Cherry, J. ( 1979). Groundwater. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
13.
Galya, D. ( 1987). “A horizontal plane source model for groundwater transport.” Ground Water, 25(6), 733–739.
14.
Guyonnet, D. ( 1998). “Approche mathématique de l'impact des sites contaminés sur les eaux souterraines dans un contexte d'analyse de risque. (Mathematical approach of the impact of contaminated sites on groundwater in a risk assessment framework),” PhD thesis, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
15.
Haas, C., Anotai, J., and Engelbrecht, R. ( 1996). “Monte Carlo assessment of microbial risk associated with landfilling of fecal material.” Water Envir. Res., 68(7), 1123–1131.
16.
HESP (human exposure to soil pollutants) user guide: Version 2.10a. (1994). SHELL Internationale Petroleum Maatschappij B.V., The Hague, The Netherlands.
17.
Javendal, I., Doughty, C., and Tsang, C. ( 1984). Groundwater transport: Handbook of mathematical models. American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C.
18.
Kool, J., Huyakorn, P., Sudicky, E., and Saleem, Z. ( 1994). “A composite modeling approach for subsurface transport of degrading contaminants from land-disposal sites.” J. Contaminant Hydro., 17, 69–90.
19.
Labieniec, P., Dzombak, D., and Siegrist, R. (1996). “SoilRisk: A risk assessment model for organic contaminants in soil.”J. Envir. Engrg., ASCE, 122(5), 388–398.
20.
Labieniec, P., Dzombak, D., and Siegrist, R. (1997). “Evaluation of uncertainty in a site-specific risk assessment.”J. Envir. Engrg., ASCE, 123(3), 234–243.
21.
Lee, Y., Dahab, M., and Bogardi, I. ( 1994). “Fuzzy decision making in ground water nitrate risk management.” Water Resour. Bull., 30(1), 22–33.
22.
Oreskes, N., Shrader-Frechette, K., and Belitz, K. ( 1994). “Verification, validation, and confirmation of numerical models in the earth sciences.” Sci., 263, 641–645.
23.
“Soil screening guidance: Technical background document (May).” (1996). EPA/540/R-95128, PB96-9635012, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
24.
Sudicky, E. ( 1986). “A natural gradient experiment on solute transport in a sand aquifer: Spatial variability of hydraulic conductivity and its role in the dispersion process.” Water Resour. Res., 22(13), 2069–2082.
25.
Vollmer, M., Gupta, S., and Krebs, R. ( 1997). “New standards on contaminated soil in Switzerland—Comparison with Dutch and German quality criteria.” Conf. on Contaminated Soil, Les Colloques, 85, INRA, Paris, ed.
26.
Vose, D. ( 1996). Quantitative risk analysis—A guide to Monte-Carlo simulation modeling. Wiley, New York.
27.
Zadeh, L. ( 1965). “Fuzzy sets.” Information and Control, 8, 338–353.
28.
Zadeh, L. ( 1978). “Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility.” Fuzzy Sets and Sys., 1, 3–28.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Environmental Engineering
Volume 125 • Issue 7 • July 1999
Pages: 660 - 666
History
Received: Jul 14, 1998
Published online: Jul 1, 1999
Published in print: Jul 1999
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.