Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Mitigation planning identifies policies and actions that can be taken over the long term to reduce risk, and in the event of a disaster occurring, minimize loss. Such policies and actions are based on a risk assessment , using the identified hazards , vulnerabilities and probabilities of occurrence and estimates of impact to calculate risks ...
Environmental mitigation refers to the process by which measures to avoid, minimise, or compensate for adverse impacts on the environment are applied. [1] In the context of planning processes like Environmental Impact Assessments, this process is often guided by applying conceptual frameworks like the "mitigation hierarchy" or "mitigation sequence". [2]
Mitigation is often used interchangeably with risk reduction, however the terms have a few key differences. Both aim to reduce the number of negative effects of hazards, but risk reduction focuses on reducing the likelihood of the event itself, while mitigation focuses on reducing the impact of the event.
These could reduce CO 2 emissions and lower existing atmospheric CO 2 levels. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a method to mitigate climate change by capturing CO 2 from large point sources, such as cement factories or biomass power plants. It then stores it away safely instead of releasing it into the atmosphere.
Flood management is a broad term that includes measures to control or mitigate flood waters, such as actions to prevent floods from occurring or to minimize their impacts when they do occur. [4] [5] Flood management methods can be structural or non-structural:
Halon fire suppression systems may mitigate that risk, but the cost may be prohibitive as a strategy. Acknowledging that risks can be positive or negative, optimizing risks means finding a balance between negative risk and the benefit of the operation or activity; and between risk reduction and effort applied.
Minimize the impact; Rectify the impact; Reduce/eliminate the impact over time; Compensate for the impact; The general goals of a mitigation program are to offset the immediate incidental take by either positively contributing to the species as a whole or to the objectives of the recovery plan designed for that species by USFWS. Mitigating for ...
Even where case law speaks of a "duty to mitigate", the duty has been cited as "not a demanding one". [4] The issue of what is reasonable is especially contentious in personal injury cases where the plaintiff refuses medical advice. This can be seen in cases such as Janiak v. Ippolito. [5] The antonym of mitigation is aggravation.