Contaminated soils are a common environmental risk all over the world. One major source of risk is heavy metal soil contamination caused by industrial emissions. This quasiexperimental study investigated the perception of these risks by exposed and nonexposed people, their attitudes toward bioremediation methods using hyperaccumulating plants, and the influence of long-term aspects of sustainability on the acceptance of bioremediation methods. Major findings were that people living in a contaminated area perceived the risk of the heavy metal soil contamination as higher than the general risk of contamination. Second, a factor analysis showed that the factors dread, control, and catastrophic potential were relevant for the perception and valuation of low-dose environmental risks such as the contamination of the investigated area. In addition, a cluster analysis showed that the risk of heavy metal soil contamination was perceived as similar to that of oil contamination, ozone layer, preservatives and genetic technology. It was perceived indifferently with regard to dread. The uncontrollability of heavy metal soil contamination was estimated as medium, and its catastrophic potential as low. Third, exposed and nonexposed participants preferred bioremediation methods to classical methods (e.g., excavation and chemical treatment of the soil), because they perceived the environmental and esthetical performance of the bioremediation as important criteria. Sustainability or precautionary issues, such as the prevention of harm for future generations, were highly correlated with the acceptance of the use of bioremediation methods in people's residential areas.