ABSTRACT
A net environmental benefits analysis (NEBA) approach offers a powerful set of tools for rigorously evaluating and comparing the natural resource benefits of alternative mitigation, restoration, enhancement, and preservation actions for compensating for natural resource damages, site remediation and pipeline-siting projects, for example. Combining the results of the NEBA with an assessment of the costs of the alternative measures shows which alternative(s) achieve a net environmental benefit at least cost. NEBA uses environmental or monetary metrics to measure the change in the value of ecological services from the site under alternative actions compared to the baseline condition. This presentation describes a NEBA application to a pipeline-siting project. The approach is equivalent to evaluating compensatory restoration as part of a natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90). For example, under NRDA, a habitat equivalency analysis (HEA) model almost always is used in a two-sided NEBA, which sums the negative environmental benefits—interim losses—that result from the oil spill injury on the debit side and compares to the sum of the positive environmental benefits due to the compensatory restoration actions on the credit side. Most reports prepared as part of NRDAs are confidential. However, the NEBA used in the present pipeline-siting example is equivalent to how it has been applied in NRDA applications including two oil spills involving pipelines, the Colonial Pipeline Sugarland Run NRDA and the Colonial/Texaco Pipeline San Jacinto River Oil Spill. The present pipeline-siting example uses NEBA to determine the quantity of quality-adjusted acres of forested wetland that are needed to offset a loss in forested wetland acreage because of the construction and operation of the proposed pipeline.
