A framework for establishing restoration goals for contaminated ecosystems

Considering pollinators' ecosystem services in the remediation and restoration of contaminated lands: Overview of research and its gaps

The concept of ecosystem services provides a useful framework for understanding how people are affected by changes to the natural environment, such as when a contaminant is introduced (e.g., oil spills, hazardous substance releases) or, conversely, when contaminated lands are remediated and restored. Pollination is one example of an important ecosystem service; pollinators play a critical role in any functioning terrestrial ecosystem. Other studies have suggested that consideration of pollinators' ecosystem services could lead to better remediation and restoration outcomes. However, the associated relationships can be complex, and evaluation requires synthesis from numerous disciplines. In this article, we discuss the possibilities for considering pollinators and their ecosystem services when planning remediation and restoration of contaminated lands. To inform the discussion, we introduce a general conceptual model of how pollinators and the ecosystem services associated with them could be affected by contamination in the environment. We review the literature on the conceptual model components, including contaminant effects on pollinators and the direct and indirect ecosystem services provided by pollinators, and identify information gaps. Though increased public interest in pollinators likely reflects increasing recognition of their role in providing many important ecosystem services, our review indicates that many gaps in understanding-about relevant natural and social systems-currently impede the rigorous quantification and evaluation of pollinators' ecosystem services required for many applications, such as in the context of natural resource damage assessment. Notable gaps include information on non-honeybee pollinators and on ecosystem services beyond those benefitting the agricultural sector. We then discuss potential research priorities and implications for practitioners. Focused research attention on the areas highlighted in this review holds promise for increasing the possibilities for considering pollinators' ecosystem services in the remediation and restoration of contaminated lands. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:322-336. © 2023 SETAC.

Experimental investigation on electromagnetic induction thermal desorption for remediation of petroleum hydrocarbons contaminated soil

A novel electromagnetic induction low temperature thermal desorption treatment (EMI LTTD) for petroleum hydrocarbons contaminated soil was introduced in this work. The removal rate of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) under various factors, the morphology changes of soils as well as removal mechanism were investigated. Results suggested that increasing the heating temperature significantly increased the removal rate of TPH. At the beginning of 20 min, most of hydrocarbons (93.44-96.91 wt%) was removed with the temperature ranged from 200 °C to 300 °C. Besides, the initial contaminants concentration, particle size and thickness of soil slightly influenced the removal rate of TPH. Desorption kinetic study demonstrated that first-order model was well-described for desorption behavior. Response surface methodology analysis showed the temperature of 216 °C, the residence time of 21 min and the moisture content of 18% was an optimum condition recommended for potentially practical application. Under this condition, the results for the composition of hydrocarbons based on carbon number fractions indicated that the fractions of C10∼C16, C17∼C22 still existed in soil, while C23∼C28 was not detected after EMI LTTD treatment. Proposed mechanism was both hydrocarbons removed by evaporation at any temperature, while parts of heavy hydrocarbons was cracked within the soil close to induction medium, resulting in re-adsorption of light hydrocarbons. A buckwheat germination and growth test indicated that soil treated by EMI LTTD was potential in reutilization for planting.

A risk management framework for Gentle Remediation Options (GRO)

Gentle Remediation Options (GRO) are remediation measures involving plants, fungi, bacteria, and soil amendments that can be applied to manage risks at contaminated sites. Several studies and decision-support tools promote the wider range of benefits provided by GRO, but there is still skepticism regarding GRO implementation. Key issues that need to be better communicated are the various risk mitigation mechanisms, the required risk reduction for an envisioned land use, and the time perspective associated with the risk mitigation mechanisms. To increase the viability and acceptance of GRO, the phytomanagement approach implies the combination of GRO with beneficial green land use, gradually reducing risks and restoring ecosystem services. To strengthen the decision basis for GRO implementation in practice, this paper proposes a framework for risk management and communication of GRO applications to support phytomanagement strategies at contaminated sites. The mapping of the risk mitigation mechanisms is done by an extensive literature review and the Swedish national soil guideline value model is used to derive the most relevant human health exposure pathways and ecological risks for generic green land use scenarios. Results indicate that most of the expected risk mitigation mechanisms are supported by literature, but that knowledge gaps still exist. The framework is demonstrated to support the identification of GRO options for the case study site given two envisioned land uses: biofuel park and allotment garden. A more easily understandable risk management framework, as proposed here, is expected to act as a communication tool to educate decision-makers, regulatory bodies and other stakeholders for better understanding of risk mitigation mechanisms and preliminary timeframes of various GRO, particularly in the early stages of a brownfield redevelopment project.

Risk to ecological resources following remediation can be due mainly to increased resource value of successful restoration: A case study from the Department of Energy's Hanford Site

Many nations are faced with the need to remediate large contaminated sites following World War II, the Cold War, and abandoned industrial sites, and to return them to productive land uses. In the United States, the Department of Energy (DOE) has the largest cleanup challenge, and its Hanford Site in the state of Washington has the most extensive and most expensive cleanup task. Ideally, the risk to ecological resources on remediation sites is evaluated before, during, and after remediation, and the risk from, or damage to, ecological resources from contaminants should be lower following remediation. In this paper, we report the risk to ecological resources before, during, and as a consequence of remediation on contaminated units requiring cleanup, and then examine the causes for changes in risk by evaluating 56 cleanup evaluation units (EUs) at the Hanford Site. In this case, remediation includes a restoration phase. In general, the risk to ecological and eco-cultural resources is currently not discernible or low at most contaminated units, increases during remediation, and decreases thereafter. Remediation often causes physical disruption to ecosystems as it reduces the risk from exposure to contaminants. Most new remediation projects at the Hanford Site include ecological restoration. Ecological restoration results in the potential for the presence of higher quality resources after remediation than currently exists on these contaminated lands and facilities. Although counter-intuitive, our evaluation of the risk to ecological resources following remediation indicated that a significant percentage of units (61%) will be at increased risk in the post-remediation period. This increased risk is due to DOE's successful remediation and restoration that results in a higher percent of native vegetation and higher ecological value on the sites in the post-remediation period than before. These newly-created resources can then be at risk from post-remediation activities. Risks to these new higher quality resources include the potential for spread of invasive species and of noxious grasses used in previous cleanup actions, disruption of ecosystems (including those with state or federally listed species and unique ecosystems), compaction of soil, use of pesticides to control invasive species, and the eventual need for continued monitoring activities. Thus, by greatly improving the existing habitat and health of eco-receptors, and maintaining habitat corridors between high quality habitats, the ecological resources in the post-remediated units are at risk unless care is taken to protect them. Many of the negative effects of both remediation and future monitoring (or other future land uses) can be avoided by planning and management early in the remediation process. We suggest DOE and other agencies convene a panel of managers, remediation scientists, regulators, environmental and ecological scientists, Native Americans, economists, and the public to develop a generic list of performance metrics for the restoration phase of remediation, including evaluation of success, which could be applied across the DOE complex.

A paradigm for protecting ecological resources following remediation as a function of future land use designations: a case study for the Department of Energy's Hanford Site

Since the late 1980s, there has been a US federal mandate to clean up contaminated sites remaining from the Second World War, the Cold War, and abandoned industries. One determinant of cleanup standards for remediation is future land use-how will the land be used and by whom? Land use decisions may be consensus documents developed by site owners, state and federal agencies, and local stakeholders. Often there are competing views and/or claims on how remediated sites should be used, including as open or green space. Large sites are likely to have more ecological heterogeneity within similar land use designations because of differences in climate, geology, topography, and history of human use. This paper uses the Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site as a case study to examine how and whether future land use designations will protect species, species diversity, heterogeneity, and ecosystems once remediation is complete. The objective of this paper is to describe "future land use designations" on a large, complex site (DOE's Hanford Site) and to examine the following: (1) how future land use designations were made and have changed over time, (2) how land use designations included the value of ecological resources, (3) how risk evaluations of ecological resources from remediation were made, and (4) how future land use may affect the health and well-being of ecological resources on site in the post-remediation period. The paper provides a paradigm for integrating ecological protection into future land use designations such that rare and sensitive resources are protected throughout the process. The paradigm includes the following: (1) developing future land use designations, (2) defining resource levels (values), (3) relating resource levels to land use designations and management, (4) defining risk evaluations, (5) determining the likelihood that valuable resources will occur on each land use type after remediation, and (6) evaluating the potential risk to those resources that results from activities allowed under future land use designations. The paper discusses the importance of each step, the implications for protection of ecological resources, and the importance of land use designations in the assessment of risk to ecological resources from both continued monitoring and maintenance by DOE (or other land owners) and the activities permitted by the established future land use designations.

Thermal remediation of cyanide-contaminated soils：process optimization and mechanistic study

Site soils with persistent cyanide compounds (primarily iron-cyanide complex) pose potential hazards to the environment and require remediation before redevelopment. This study evaluated the possibility of thermal treatment on remediation of cyanide-contaminated soils via batch heating experiments spanning a wide temperature range (200-500 °C). The change with operation variables of total cyanide and some reaction intermediates (e.g. CN^-) was analyzed in order to elucidate the optimal variables that guarantee cyanide removal while generating no hazardous byproducts. Temperature, heating time and cyanide species have been found to be important parameters influencing removal/destruction of cyanide in soils. For soils bearing K₃[Fe(CN)₆] and K₄[Fe(CN)₆], a removal efficiency of >99.9% can be obtained with temperatures over 350 °C at 1 h, while for samples bearing Fe₄[Fe(CN)₆]₃, a higher temperature (>450 °C) is needed to obtain an equivalent efficiency. During heating, the iron-cyanide complexes decomposed, releasing highly toxic free cyanides, which will subsequently be oxidized. However, a small percentage of free cyanide can always be detected as a result of incomplete oxidation, thus caution should be taken to minimize the accumulation of free cyanide during thermal treatment.

Importance of buffer lands to determining risk to ecological resources at legacy contaminated sites: A case study for the Department of Energy's Hanford Site, Washington, USA

Contaminated lands remain from World War II, the Cold War, and industrial development. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) faces the largest cleanup task, with Hanford Site having the biggest challenge. DOE is committed to protection of human health and the environment during remediation. The Hanford Site has extensive ecological resources and unique ecosystems that require protection. The aims of this study were to: 1) describe a rapid evaluation method for ecological resources, 2) examine the relationship between the resource values on evaluation units (EU) and associated buffer lands for legacy waste sites, 3) discuss risk ratings for ecological resources during remediation, and 4) determine why the relationship may differ among different types of waste sites. For legacy sites, the risk rating for ecological resources was largely a function of % of valued resources on EUs and their buffer (in a 1:1 ratio). This ratio differs from that on operating facilities considered previously, where the relationship between high-quality resources was 1:4. The differences are unusual because both types of facilities are located on the Hanford Central Plateau where active waste management occurs. Differences may be due to 1) location of legacy sites close to the edge of waste area, 2) size of legacy site EUs, which indicates that buffers are large and extend into shrub-steppe habitat, and 3) less human activities on legacy sites. Considering risk from cleanup on ecological resources before the planning and during execution of a remediation strategy may reduce damages to ecological resources and remediation costs.

A framework for increasing sustainability and reducing risk to ecological resources through integration of remediation planning and implementation

Remediation of lands contaminated with radionuclides and hazardous chemicals provides an ongoing challenge for many countries. It is particularly problematic for remediation of old industrial sites remaining from World War II and the Cold War. Remediating and restoring large sites is often costly, time-consuming, and involves complex planning and sequencing, as well as consideration of future land use policies. The goal of remediation is to reduce contamination, reduce risk to humans and the environment, and restore land to productive land uses, and ultimately, to sustainability. Often reducing risk to people takes precedence over protecting ecological resources in overall planning, characterization, and execution of remediation strategies. This paper examines when and how stakeholders, including anyone interested and affected by remediation on ecological resources, can become involved in the planning, decision-making, and implementation of remediation. There is a formal process under federal law (e.g. CERCLA) in the US for examining risk to resources, including indicator species. However, there are other informal points during the cleanup process when managers should consider the value of ecological resources, the public may express their concerns for particular ecological resources, and ecologists may provide data and expert advice early in the process as critical decisions are being made about remediation that impact ecological resources. The framework presented in this paper for increasing sustainability of ecological resources has three periods of intervention 1) major decision points, 2) process interdiction points, and 3) remediation action points. Major decision points include site and problem identification, regional ecological resource and local land use practice determination, remediation goals and options determination, and other local issues. Interdiction points include examining remediation options, and in-depth assessments of ecological resources on-site. Remediation action points are aimed at reducing risk to ecological resources during remediation, and include defining the remediation site and buffer, understanding the effects of timing and sequencing of remediation, education of all remediation personnel, and specific suggestions for reducing risk during active remediation. While this framework was developed for Department of Energy remediation sites, it is applicable to brownfields and other contaminated lands world-wide. The overall goal is to provide interested and affected parties with a framework for protecting and enhancing ecological resources during the planning and execution of remediation on contaminated lands.

Evaluation of ecological resources at operating facilities at contaminated sites: The Department of Energy's Hanford Site as a case study

The U.S. and other developed nations are faced with many contaminated sites remaining from World War II, the Cold War, and abandoned industries, that require remediation and restoration to allow future land uses with minimum acceptable risk to humans and ecological resources. For large Department of Energy (DOE) sites with massive remediation tasks remaining, it is important for managers to be able to assure regulators, Tribal Nations, and the public that human and ecological health are protected. Hanford Site has the largest and most expensive cleanup task within the DOE complex; cleanup will continue beyond 2090. Cleanup involves the use of operating facilities, which also may present a risk to humans or ecological resources. We present a brief description of a methodology to evaluate risks to ecological receptors at the Hanford Site from remaining remediation tasks, and evaluate the risk to ecological resources that operating facilities present currently, during active cleanup of these facilities, and during the post cleanup period. Operating facilities include current, active operations that are located on the site and aid in site cleanup, including both storage and treatment operations. At the Hanford Site, they include waste treatment plants, sludge basins, waste trenches, Central Waste Complex, storage facilities, and disposal facilities, among others. Risk ratings for ecological resources are highest during the remediation phase. Risk ratings for the operating facilities at the Hanford Site range from not discernible to medium currently, from not discernible (ND) to high during active cleanup, and from not discernible to medium following cleanup. The highest ratings are for the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant that is being constructed to stabilize radioactive and chemical wastes, and the Liquid Effluent Retention and Treatment Facility that removes and deactivates hazardous contaminants from waste water. Higher ratings in the post-cleanup period are largely due to restoration of ecological resources during cleanup, which increases the potential for injury (if these resources are harmed) because a site will then have higher quality resources after cleanup than it did before. Assessing the value of ecological resources, and determining potential consequences during active remediation and after remediation is essential for compliance with state and federal laws. Understanding the risks to ecological resources from now until clean-up is completed at these facilities is important because of the potential for ecological resources of high value to be degraded, and because cleanup completion is not expected until 2090 or later. The methodology can be applied to any contaminated site requiring a rapid method of assessing potential damages to ecological resources from proposed management actions.

Mine land rehabilitation in Brazil: Goals and techniques in the context of legal requirements

Environmental legislation in many countries demands the rehabilitation of degraded areas to minimize environmental impacts. Brazilian laws require the restitution of self-sustaining ecosystems to historical conditions but ignore the emergence of novel ecosystems due to large-scale changes, such as species invasions, extinctions, and land-use or climate changes, although these novel ecosystems might fulfill ecosystem services in similar ways as historic ecosystems. Thorough discussions of rehabilitation goals, target ecosystems, applied methods, and approaches to achieving mine land rehabilitation, as well as dialogues about the advantages and risks of chemical inputs or non-native, non-invasive species that include all political, economic, social, and academic stakeholders are necessary to achieve biological feasibility, sociocultural acceptance, economic viability, and institutional tractability during environmental rehabilitation. Scientific knowledge of natural and rehabilitating ecosystems is indispensable for advancing these discussions and achieving more sustainable mining. Both mining companies and public institutions are responsible for obtaining this knowledge.

Comparative effectiveness of natural by-products and synthetic sorbents in oil spill booms

Sorbent booms are considered a 'first line of defence' technology used for containing and minimizing the impacts of crude oil spills. Booms containing human hair waste as sorbent were compared to other natural sorbents, including cotton by-product, recycled cellulose, as well as booms containing synthetic polypropylene, in order to evaluate their effectiveness in adsorbing petroleum crude oil pollution, remaining buoyant, and adsorbing seawater. A series of oceanic mesocosm experiments were used to simulate oil spill pollution events and to test sorbent effectiveness. Hair by-product was found to be significantly better at adsorbing crude oil on average (i.e. 0.84 g of crude oil per 1 g of sorbent) than all other materials, although it had wider variation in adsorbency likely associated with the non-homogeneous nature of mixed human hair. Hair sorbent was also observed to be less naturally buoyant than other materials, potentially due to low surface tension or increased porosity.

Thermal remediation alters soil properties - a review

Contaminated soils pose a risk to human and ecological health, and thermal remediation is an efficient and reliable way to reduce soil contaminant concentration in a range of situations. A primary benefit of thermal treatment is the speed at which remediation can occur, allowing the return of treated soils to a desired land use as quickly as possible. However, this treatment also alters many soil properties that affect the capacity of the soil to function. While extensive research addresses contaminant reduction, the range and magnitude of effects to soil properties have not been explored. Understanding the effects of thermal remediation on soil properties is vital to successful reclamation, as drastic effects may preclude certain post-treatment land uses. This review highlights thermal remediation studies that have quantified alterations to soil properties, and it supplements that information with laboratory heating studies to further elucidate the effects of thermal treatment of soil. Notably, both heating temperature and heating time affect i) soil organic matter; ii) soil texture and mineralogy; iii) soil pH; iv) plant available nutrients and heavy metals; v) soil biological communities; and iv) the ability of the soil to sustain vegetation. Broadly, increasing either temperature or time results in greater contaminant reduction efficiency, but it also causes more severe impacts to soil characteristics. Thus, project managers must balance the need for contaminant reduction with the deterioration of soil function for each specific remediation project.

Opportunities and challenges of integrating ecological restoration into assessment and management of contaminated ecosystems

Ecosystem restoration planning near the beginning of the site assessment and management process ("early integration") involves consideration of restoration goals from the outset in developing solutions for contaminated ecosystems. There are limitations to integration that stem from institutional barriers, few successful precedents, and limited availability of guidance. Challenges occur in integrating expertise from various disciplines and multiple, sometimes divergent interests and goals. The more complex process can result in timing, capacity, communication, and collaboration challenges. On the other hand, integrating the 2 approaches presents new and creative opportunities. For example, integration allows early planning for expanding ecosystem services on or near contaminated lands or waters that might otherwise have been unaddressed by remediation alone. Integrated plans can explicitly pursue ecosystem services that have market value, which can add to funds for long-term monitoring and management. Early integration presents opportunities for improved and productive collaboration and coordination between ecosystem restoration and contaminant assessment and management. Examples exist where early integration facilitates liability resolution and generates positive public relations. Restoration planning and implementation before the completion of the contaminated site assessment, remediation, or management process ("early restoration") can facilitate coordination with offsite restoration options and a regional approach to restoration of contaminated environments. Integration of performance monitoring, for both remedial and restoration actions, can save resources and expand the interpretive power of results. Early integration may aid experimentation, which may be more feasible on contaminated lands than in many other situations. The potential application of concepts and tools from adaptive management is discussed as a way of avoiding pitfalls and achieving benefits in early integration. In any case, there will be challenges with early integration of restoration concepts for contaminated ecosystems, but the benefits are likely to outweigh them.

Integrated risk and recovery monitoring of ecosystem restorations on contaminated sites

Ecological restorations of contaminated sites balance the human and ecological risks of residual contamination with the benefits of ecological recovery and the return of lost ecological function and ecosystem services. Risk and recovery are interrelated dynamic conditions, changing as remediation and restoration activities progress through implementation into long-term management and ecosystem maturation. Monitoring restoration progress provides data critical to minimizing residual contaminant risk and uncertainty, while measuring ecological advancement toward recovery goals. Effective monitoring plans are designed concurrently with restoration plan development and implementation and are focused on assessing the effectiveness of activities performed in support of restoration goals for the site. Physical, chemical, and biotic measures characterize progress toward desired structural and functional ecosystem components of the goals. Structural metrics, linked to ecosystem functions and services, inform restoration practitioners of work plan modifications or more substantial adaptive management actions necessary to maintain desired recovery. Monitoring frequency, duration, and scale depend on specific attributes and goals of the restoration project. Often tied to restoration milestones, critical assessment of monitoring metrics ensures attainment of risk minimization and ecosystem recovery. Finally, interpretation and communication of monitoring findings inform and engage regulators, other stakeholders, the scientific community, and the public. Because restoration activities will likely cease before full ecosystem recovery, monitoring endpoints should demonstrate risk reduction and a successional trajectory toward the condition established in the restoration goals. A detailed assessment of the completed project's achievements, as well as unrealized objectives, attained through project monitoring, will determine if contaminant risk has been minimized, if injured resources have recovered, and if ecosystem services have been returned. Such retrospective analysis will allow better planning for future restoration goals and strengthen the evidence base for quantifying injuries and damages at other sites in the future.

Restoration of impaired ecosystems: An ounce of prevention or a pound of cure? Introduction, overview, and key messages from a SETAC-SER workshop

A workshop on Restoration of Impaired Ecosystems was held in Jackson, Wyoming, in June 2014. Experts from Australia, Canada, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and the United States in ecotoxicology, restoration, and related fields from both the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry and the Society for Ecological Restoration convened to advance the practice of restoring ecosystems that have been contaminated or impaired from industrial activities. The overall goal of this workshop was to provide a forum for ecotoxicologists and restoration ecologists to define the best scientific practices to achieve ecological restoration while addressing contaminant concerns. To meet this goal, participants addressed 5 areas: 1) links between ecological risk assessment and ecological restoration, 2) restoration goals, 3) restoration design, 4) monitoring for restoration effectiveness and 5) recognizing opportunities and challenges. Definitions are provided to establish a common language across the varied disciplines. The current practice for addressing restoration of impaired ecosystems tends to be done sequentially to remediate contaminants, then to restore ecological structure and function. A better approach would anticipate or plan for restoration throughout the process. By bringing goals to the forefront, we may avoid intrusive remediation activities that close off options for the desired restoration. Participants realized that perceived limitations in the site assessment process hinder consideration of restoration goals; contaminant presence will influence restoration goal choices; social, economic, and cultural concerns can factor into goal setting; restoration options and design should be considered early during site assessment and management; restoration of both structure and function is encouraged; creative solutions can overcome limitations; a regional focus is imperative; monitoring must occur throughout the restoration process; and reciprocal transfer of knowledge is needed among theorists, practitioners, and stakeholders and among varied disciplines.

Coordinating ecological restoration options analysis and risk assessment to improve environmental outcomes

Ecological risk assessment as currently practiced has hindered consideration of ecosystem services endpoints and restoration goals in the environmental management process. Practitioners have created barriers between procedures to clean up contaminated areas and efforts to restore ecosystem functions. In this article, we examine linkages between contaminant risk assessment approaches and restoration efforts with the aim of identifying ways to improve environmental outcomes. We advocate that project managers and other stakeholders use an ecological planning framework, with restoration options included upfront in the risk assessment. We also considered the opportunities to incorporate ecosystem services as potential assessment endpoints in the Problem Formulation stages of a risk assessment. Indeed, diverse perspectives of stakeholders are central to understand the relevance of social, cultural, economic, and regional ecology as influences on future use options for the landscape being restored. The measurement endpoints used to characterize the existing ecological conditions for selected ecosystem services can also be used to evaluate restoration success. A regional, landscape, or seascape focus is needed throughout the risk assessment process, so that restoration efforts play a more prominent role in enhancing ecosystem services. In short, we suggest that practitioners begin with the question of "how can the ecological risk assessment inform the decision on how best to restore the ecosystem?"

Transforming ecosystems: When, where, and how to restore contaminated sites

Chemical contamination has impaired ecosystems, reducing biodiversity and the provisioning of functions and services. This has spurred a movement to restore contaminated ecosystems and develop and implement national and international regulations that require it. Nevertheless, ecological restoration remains a young and rapidly growing discipline and its intersection with toxicology is even more nascent and underdeveloped. Consequently, we provide guidance to scientists and practitioners on when, where, and how to restore contaminated ecosystems. Although restoration has many benefits, it also can be expensive, and in many cases systems can recover without human intervention. Hence, the first question we address is: "When should we restore contaminated ecosystems?" Second, we provide suggestions on what to restore-biodiversity, functions, services, all 3, or something else--and where to restore given expected changes to habitats driven by global climate change. Finally, we provide guidance on how to restore contaminated ecosystems. To do this, we analyze critical aspects of the literature dealing with the ecology of restoring contaminated ecosystems. Additionally, we review approaches for translating the science of restoration to on-the-ground actions, which includes discussions of market incentives and the finances of restoration, stakeholder outreach and governance models for ecosystem restoration, and working with contractors to implement restoration plans. By explicitly considering the mechanisms and strategies that maximize the success of the restoration of contaminated sites, we hope that our synthesis serves to increase and improve collaborations between restoration ecologists and ecotoxicologists and set a roadmap for the restoration of contaminated ecosystems.