Field experiments on remediation of coastal sediments using granulated coal ash

  • Published source details Kim K., Hibino T., Yamamoto T., Hayakawa S., Mito Y., Nakamoto K. & Lee I. (2014) Field experiments on remediation of coastal sediments using granulated coal ash. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 83, 132-137.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Add chemicals or minerals to sediments to remove or neutralise pollutants

Action Link
Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation
  1. Add chemicals or minerals to sediments to remove or neutralise pollutants

    A controlled, before-and-after study in 2008–2010 in one area of soft seabed in Hiroshima Bay, Japan (Kim et al. 2014) found that adding coal ash to sediments to remove phosphate and hydrogen sulphide appeared to result in more species and individual invertebrates compared to before treatment and to adjacent untreated sites, during winter but not summer. However, results were not statistically tested. In winter, species richness increased (post-treatment: 17–22; pre-treatment: 8; untreated: 0–11/sample), and invertebrate abundance increased (post-treatment: 3,345–3,859; pre-treatment: 42; untreated: 0–507/m2). In summer, species richness and invertebrate abundance were similar in post-treatment sites (species: 3–7/sample; abundance: 49–944/m2), pre-treatment sites (species: 2 /sample; abundance: 204/m2), and untreated sites (species: 0–6/sample; abundance: 0–261/m2). Annually between August 2008 and August 2012 (except 2009), two sites were sampled once in winter and once in summer (one sample/site/time point). In May 2010, coal ash was scattered onto the sediment at one site to a depth of 10 cm; the other site was untreated. At the treated site, sediment samples were collected using a 25 x 25 cm quadrat to a depth of 10 cm. At the untreated site, sediment samples were collected using a sediment grab (dimensions unspecified). Invertebrates (> 1 mm) were identified and counted.

    (Summarised by: Anaëlle Lemasson)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust