|
|||||
|
|
When is a soil remediated? Comparison of biopiled and windrowed soils contaminated with bunker-fuel in a full-scale trial |
|
| Authors: | Frédéric Coulon William Cowie Simon Pollard Graeme Risdon Kirk T Semple Graeme I Paton |
| Institution: | a Centre for Resource Management and Efficiency, Sustainable Systems Department, School of Applied Sciences, Cranfield University, Cranfield MK43 0AL, UK b Institute of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Cruickshank Building, St Machar Drive, Aberdeen AB24 3UU, UK c Remedios Limited, Campus 3, Unit E2, Aberdeen Science and Technology Park, Aberdeen AB22 8GW, UK d CLARRC, John Muir Building, The Kings Buildings, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3LJ, UK e TES Bretby, Bretby Business Park, Ashby Road, Burton upon Trent DE15 0YZ, UK f Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, UK |
| Abstract: | A six month field scale study was carried out to compare windrow turning and biopile techniques for the remediation of soil contaminated with bunker C fuel oil. End-point clean-up targets were defined by human risk assessment and ecotoxicological hazard assessment approaches. Replicate windrows and biopiles were amended with either nutrients and inocula, nutrients alone or no amendment. In addition to fractionated hydrocarbon analysis, culturable microbial characterisation and soil ecotoxicological assays were performed. This particular soil, heavy in texture and historically contaminated with bunker fuel was more effectively remediated by windrowing, but coarser textures may be more amendable to biopiling. This trial reveals the benefit of developing risk and hazard based approaches in defining end-point bioremediation of heavy hydrocarbons when engineered biopile or windrow are proposed as treatment option. |
| Keywords: | Bunker fuel Windrows Biopiles Bioremediation Soil ecotoxicology |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ | |