1. Preliminary Judgement of Impacts
Step 3
Preliminary Judgement of Impacts
The purpose of Step 3 is to express the environmental pressures (identified in a general way in Step 2) as environmental impacts and then aggregate them for the five environmental outcome categories or endpoints. The economic viability of the technology intervention is also considered.

2. The environmental pressures identified in Step 2 are now described in terms of the impacts they are likely to cause.

3. Any known adverse impacts on human health and safety are then characterised as being one of six levels, first for each category and then subsequently overall.

4. Similar Worksheets for:
Impacts on
local natural environment
global environment
sustainability of resource use
social impacts
Similar worksheets are then completed for:
Local natural environment
Global environment
Sustainability of resource use
Social impacts

5. This part of the assessment is designed to help ensure that no environmental or related damage will occur as a result of a technology intervention failing to meet its goals due to poor economic performance. The lifecycle costs approach is used as it brings attention to the consequences of providing inadequate financial resources for design and development, and decommissioning costs. Failure to do so may lead to poor environmental performance during the technology’s lifetime, and high environmental costs due to shortcomings in the decommissioning of the technology.
The assessment of economic viability undertaken in EnTA includes:
1. An overview of the general economics … see next slide

6. Explicit consideration of cost elements (externalities) that would not always be included in a conventional assessment of economic viability
Assessment of the economic viability of the proposed technology investment should also include consideration of “uninternalised cost element” or “externalities”. External costs include both monetary and non-monetary costs. An example of the former is additional health care costs incurred by individuals living in a community impacted by air pollution from an industrial plant. An example of a non-monetary cost is the value individuals place on a landscape that is not degraded due to air and other forms of pollution. Sound environmental management calls for external costs to be internalised as much as possible.
Given the aim of EnTA, it is impractical to place a monetary value on most if not all of the environmental, social and other externalities. Rather this step simply requires that the external cost element be identified and described in terms of their relative contribution to the total cost of that stage of the technology investment.
Externalities can arise at any stage of the life cycle of the technology intervention. Special attention should be paid to externalities that might arise during the planning, commissioning and decommissioning of the technology.

7. The highlighting of those cost elements that are subject to significant change under certain conditions and have the potential to determine the profitability of the technology investment.
The viability of the technology investment may be compromised by unanticipated changes in production costs – such as undesirable fluctuations in raw material, labour and energy costs. Such cost elements should be identified for each stage of the technology life cycle, and an assessment made as to the extent to which they pose a significant threat to the economic viability of the technology investment.
4. Assess the overall economic performance
The overall economic viability of the technology investment should be described in qualitative terms, with the assessment based on the economic performance indicators, on the relative size of the uninternalized costs, on the importance of the critical cost elements, and on any other relevant information available to the assessment team.

8. At this stage in the assessment it is important to identify the gaps that have impeded the assessment of impacts to the outcome endpoints. It is also important to consider whether there is sufficient information to characterise and evaluate the environmental pressures and impacts of the technology.

9. Step 4 Comparison of Options
The purpose of Step 4 is to consider if there are alternative ways to achieve the same goals as those to be met by the existing or proposed technology. These alternatives may be either macro (e.g. a significantly different approach) or micro (e.g. a variation of the same process) in nature.
Step 4 provides the opportunity to identify whether there is a feasible alternative technology intervention that is associated with less adverse impacts on the environmental and related systems.

10. As you already know, the purpose of EnTA is to inform the decision makers, and the stakeholders. Ideally, therefore, the assessment is not limited to examining just one proposed technology intervention. If best practice is followed, the assessment will identify and consider a range of alternative technologies, some of which might well have been overlooked if an EnTA had not been undertaken.

12. With reference to each of the goals to be satisfied by the intervention, compare the extent to which the alternative technology will achieve the goal, relative to the performance of the existing or originally proposed technology.

13. The overall performance of the alternative technology can now be compared to the technology intervention being assessed. In all cases the assessment is relative to the performance of the existing or proposed technology. The findings of this and Step 4b will, to a large extent, help decide if a more comprehensive assessment of an alternative technology is appropriate.
The assessment involves a comparison with the environmental impacts and economic viability of the proposed technology, as determined in Step 3. To aid the comparison, the letter codes used in Step 3 to describe the corresponding environmental impacts and the overall economic viability of the proposed technology are automatically transferred to the worksheets for Step 4.
For each of the environmental endpoints and for the economic viability, the conclusions reached in Step 3 are transferred to the column labelled “Impact or viability of assessed technology”. In each case the descriptor will be one of the following, as appropriate to the context:
U - Impacts unknown; technology intervention uneconomic;
B - Beneficial impacts
N - No impacts identified;
S - Slight impacts; slight level of concern; slight level of economic viability
M - Moderate impacts; modest level of concern; modest level of economic viability; or
H - High impacts; high level of concern; economic viability is high.
Guidance on the categories of environmental impacts can again be obtained by consulting Worksheet B.
It should be noted that this evaluation of each alternative technology is a very simplified analysis i.e. the “Short Form”. Where appropriate, each alternative technology should be evaluated to the same extent as the proposed technology.

14. Worksheet B
Worksheet B is intended to help the assessor compare an alternative option with the assessed technology. This worksheet is used to evaluate the characteristics of the alternative technology options against the proposed technology using the list of potential pressures as guidance.

15. To complete Step 4 we need to elaborate on the information gaps and uncertainties associated with the comparison. This will help us reach a decision as to whether there is sufficient information to assess the alternative technologies.
Finally we ask the question: ‘Is there a viable alternative?’

16. Consensus and Recommendations
Step 5
Consensus and Recommendations
The aim of this Step 5 is to facilitate a consensus regarding the environmental and related performances of the proposed technology intervention. Normally completion of this step will not require any additional information. Rather, it draws on the findings of the preceding four steps.

17. The questions answered in this step are designed to identify whether all necessary steps have been completed, at least to the extent that some useful conclusions can be reached. If there are shortcomings, suggestions are given as to which steps need to be repeated in order to move towards a conclusion.

18. The major gaps and uncertainties identified earlier are summarised
The major gaps and uncertainties identified earlier are summarised. This information should be made available to the decision makers and other stakeholders, in order to show the extent to which they can rely on the guidance provided by the assessment.

19. This Step provides the opportunity to describe the impacts of principal concern and the types of changes in the technology intervention that might result in further reduction of these impacts and hence improve acceptability of the technology.

20. Factors influencing the decision to complete a more comprehensive environmental assessment include the existence of large information gaps, high levels of uncertainty, inability to reach a consensus due to polarisation of views among stakeholders, and the serious nature of the environmental impacts that have been identified.
The acceptability of the technology being assessed is indicated.

21. The viability of any alternative interventions is described and, finally, the consensus recommendations regarding the preferred technology, and any viable alternatives, are provided.

22. Follow-up Activities
Document and present the assessment methods and findings
Carry out some follow-up activities
Careful attention should be given as to how, and to whom, the results of the assessment should be communicated. Those interested in receiving and reviewing the results of the information could include:
the principal beneficiaries of the proposed technology intervention;
the stakeholders who would carry the burden if the environmental values were not protected; and
those who will use the assessment findings to guide their decisions regarding implementation of the technology intervention.
Examples of follow-up activities:
Responding to the decisions, needs and actions of the key players and stakeholders;
Revising the existing assessment and preparing new intervention strategies and recommendations;
Undertaking, as appropriate, more comprehensive assessments of the proposed and/or alternative technologies; and
Providing additional information and guidance to key players and stakeholders.

23. Discussion and Questions
EnTA often involves subjective assessment. What are the benefits of this approach?
This discussion and question session, which concludes Section IV, is designed to encourage participants to extend the learning process by reflecting on the Worksheets and their application.
Q: EnTA often involves subjective assessment, what are the benefits of this approach?
A:The opinions and judgements of experts and other concerned parties involve a degree of subjectivity, especially where the required information and understanding is deficient. The use of opinions is a means of incorporating the values and views of stakeholders. Since EnTA is designed, in part, to facilitate a multi stakeholder dialogue and build a consensus, it is important that the views and judgments of both experts and interested parties are incorporated in the assessment.
Often check boxes are provided in the worksheets, in order to facilitate a more orderly approach to the assessment. As incorporation of diverse opinions is essential to the successful conclusion of an assessment, it may be appropriate to check more than one box. This might be done for two reasons, at least:
to acknowledge that it is appropriate to reflect the differences in the opinions of stakeholders and hence in the conclusions reached by those undertaking the assessment; and
to acknowledge uncertainties that arise from a lack of information and/or understanding.
It is important to recognize both variations in opinion and the existence of uncertainties, where they exist.
In all cases there is also an opportunity to provide descriptive responses that can elaborate and qualify the choices that have been made – and to elaborate on the differences in opinions and judgement, as well as the uncertainties. Both sets of information may well provide useful guidance to other stakeholders and to the decision makers.
Click on the Section Va or Section Vb button to automatically open the next presentation.