Difference between revisions of "User:Kasperi Juntunen"

Revision as of 10:53, 7 February 2013

Homework 1

1. What is the main purpose of environmental health assessment?

The main purpose of environmental health assessment is to apply information which is provided by environmental researches, to make models and calculations how decisions and actions affect to human health and nature. Environmental health assessment is done to support policy making and to ensure that decisions are knowledge-based and that the outcome is wanted.

2. What is pragmatism?

Pragmatism is that theory and practice are not considered as two different entities but instead we have to think decisions and practices and think if they are sensible. Therefore theory and practice are intertwined.

3. What is benefit-risk assessment?

Benefit-risk assessment is needed when benefits of the decision are not so clearly bigger that risk. Benefit-risk assessment is needed to clear the situation and to weight the benefits and risk that decisions can be made. --# : Yes, that is when BRA is needed. Generally, as the name implies, benefit-risk assessments consider and weighs both benefits and risks. --Mikko Pohjola 10:41, 28 January 2013 (EET)

←# : Good answers. --Mikko Pohjola 10:41, 28 January 2013 (EET)

Homework 2

If the thing which risk assessment deals with is so called hot topic and open assessment includes many participants how we handle situation so that discussion does not ramble? In otherwise, how we keep inrelevant information away?

Homework 3

(Niklas Holopainen, Kasperi Juntunen)'

Scope

Talvivaara mining company has been mentioned lately in news several times. They have had problems with environmental issues.

Question

Does waste waters of Talvivaara cause environmental hazard?

--# : Yes/no questions are possible as well, but might want to come up with a question that looks at actions: what to do if there is a hazard? --Jouni 10:37, 31 January 2013 (EET)

Intended use and users

Ministry of environment, representers of Talvivaara company, citizens living nearby Talvivaara, environmental organizations

Participants

Representers of Talvivaara, representers of environmental organizations, especially neutral researchers and specialists

--# : How could you involve these people and actually get contributions from them? --Jouni 10:37, 31 January 2013 (EET)

--# : Does the "neutral researchers" imply that you want to exclude activist researchers? How can you do it and how can you know who is neutral? --Jouni 10:37, 31 January 2013 (EET)

--# : Why local residents aren´t participants in the assessmnent since they live close to the lakes where the waste waters end up? --Juho Kutvonen 12:53, 7 February 2013 (EET)

Scenarios

In this present situation the best option would be to close the mine because of so many environmental problems and their impacts to citizens health. Let assume that leak of the waste water pool was the biggest estimation, because we want to see biological and environmental effects. If effects of the leak are significant, actions have to be made, like improve waste water processing and security cautions

--# : What should be done is not a scenario, that is the question you should try to answer. Scenarios are something that you set beforehand, such as "let's look at the maximally exposed individual instead of average exposure". --Jouni 10:37, 31 January 2013 (EET)

Analyses

Analysis of biological impacts, health analysis, risk assessment, questionnaires to citizens, economical and financial evaluations.

⇤# : Analyses are (statistical) procedures that help you distill the results out of the model and data you have. You should be more specific here to help your statistician. --Jouni 10:37, 31 January 2013 (EET)

Answer

Results

Talvivaara mine has major environmental problems and there are also some prove of health impacts to the citizens.

⇤# : Don't try to jump to results before any work. Instead, try to describe what does the result look like when you're done, e.g. what is the structure of your result table. --Jouni 10:37, 31 January 2013 (EET)

Conclusion

The mine should make some major improvements environmental things, for example to the waste water processing. If the improvements aren’t done, they should consider to close the mine.

⇤# : Same as with results: instead of trying to say what the conclusion is, describe what kind of conclusion you will have. --Jouni 10:37, 31 January 2013 (EET)

Rationale

Endpoints

• Citizens, The mining company, Ministry of environment, environmental organizations.
• Citizens are interested in their health and biological impacts. They do not care about costs of mining company. Ministry of environment is interested in economical and environmental issues. Mining company is interested in their own economical issues and business. Environmental organizations are interested in environmental issues.

--# : Can you be more specific about e.g. what these environmental issues are? Water pollution concentrations or fish deaths, or soil contamination, or recreational value of summer cottages, ... --Jouni 10:37, 31 January 2013 (EET)

Variables

• The environmental hazard should be researched by biological and human health analysis. The state of mining company as employer in that area.
• • In this case emissions to lakes should be considered, because they affects to citizens by spoiling the groundwater. The effects of spoiled groundwater to citizen’s health should be considered.

--# : Try to make a list of issues that you need to look at on a quantitative level. Also, draft causal connections between them. --Jouni 10:37, 31 January 2013 (EET)

Homework 4

User:Niklas#Homework 4. feat Kasperi Juntunen

Homework 5

User:Niklas#Homework 5 feat. Kasperi Juntunen