Abstract

The note by Kampas and Adamidis (2004; KA) argues for a series of limitations in the paper by [Gren, I.-M., Destouni, G., Tempone R., 2002. Cost effective policies for alternative distributions of stochastic water pollution. Journal of Environmental Management, 66, 145–157.]. We systematically go through and reply to the arguments made by KA, showing that they are all based on misunderstanding of the pollutant load quantities involved in the GDT study and of the scope and purpose of the study. Specifically, the KA arguments are critically based on the invalid assumption of log-normality in individual, basin-scale annual pollutant loads, which are the basic pollutant transport quantities involved in the GDT study. We show that GDT never made, or had physical reason to make any such assumption, whereby the following KA arguments become irrelevant.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.