Sustainable Remediation Considerations for Treatment of 1,4‐Dioxane in Groundwater

1,4‐Dioxane remediation is challenging due to its physiochemical properties and low target treatment levels. As such, applications of traditional remediation technologies have proven ineffective. There are a number of promising remediation technologies that could potentially be scaled for successful application to groundwater restoration. Sustainable remediation is an important consideration in the evaluation of remediation technologies. It is critically important to consider sustainability when new technologies are being applied or new contaminants are being treated with traditional technologies. There are a number of social, economic, and environmental drivers that should be considered when implementing 1,4‐dioxane treatment technologies. This includes evaluating sustainability externalities by considering the cradle‐to‐grave impacts of the chemicals, energy, processes, transportation, and materials used in groundwater treatment. It is not possible to rate technologies as more or less sustainable because each application is context specific. However, by including sustainability thinking into technology evaluations and implementation plans, decisions makers can be more informed and the results of remediation are likely to be more effective and beneficial. There are a number sustainable remediation frameworks, guidance documents, footprint assessment tools, life cycle assessment tools, and best management practices that can be utilized for these purposes. This paper includes an overview describing the importance of sustainability in technology selection, identifies sustainability impacts related to technologies that can be used to treat 1,4‐dioxane, provides an approximating approach to assess sustainability impacts, and summarizes potential sustainability impacts related to promising treatment technologies. ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Brownfield Sites Remediation Technology Overview,Trends, and Opportunities in China

Over decades of economic development, China's industrialization has led to significant environmental issues due to unregulated discharges into air, water, and soil. As cities continue to expand (i.e., urbanization trend) and awareness/concerns about environmental pollution rises, many industrial facilities along the edge of or within the city boundaries have been relocated or closed. This urbanization trend leaves behind idled and abandoned land that is contaminated from the former industrial activities and unregulated discharges. China released its first nationwide soil quality survey in April 2014, and the survey suggests that soil conditions in China represent a significant challenge. China has encouraged local engineering firms to demonstrate soil treatment technologies through pilot‐scale studies, but the outcomes of many demonstrations have not been promising due to the lack of remediation experience and underdeveloped technical guidelines that are needed to guide the remediation processes. During the past decade, some local soil remediation experience has been established, but it is limited for certain technologies that address their primary contaminants of concern: heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants. In 2014, national technical guidelines were published regarding environmental investigation, risk assessment, monitoring, and remediation; however, regulations and funding systems are still underdeveloped. Thus, the remediation processes that should maximize economic and environmental benefits are not streamlined. This article provides an overview of the latest regulatory developments, remediation technologies applied, technology trends, and market opportunities in China. The provided information aims to allow international remediation practitioners to better understand and appreciate this unique and emerging remediation market, which is growing fast, and to highlight the importance of developing a sustainable model that not only provides for cleanup of the environment but also supports economic development. ©2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Review of in situ remediation technologies for lead,zinc, and cadmium in soil

This article presents a review of in situ technologies for the remediation of soils contaminated with lead, zinc, and/or cadmium. The objective of this review is to assess the developmental status of the available in situ technologies and provide a general summary of typical applications and limitations of these technologies. The literature review identified seven in situ remediation technologies—solidification/stabilization, vitrification, electrokinetic remediation, soil flushing, phytoextraction, phytostabilization, and chemical stabilization. These technologies were considered for their ability to meet a specific set of remediation objectives under a range of conditions. Each of these technologies has both strengths and weaknesses for addressing particular remedial situations discussed in the article for each of the technologies. A general summary of which technologies are most applicable to common remedial scenarios is also provided. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Alternatives to incineration in remediation of soil and sediments assessed

Contamination of soil and sediment by pollutants represents a major environmental challenge. Remediation of soil during the original Superfund years consisted primarily of dig and haul, capping, or containment. The 1986 amendments to CERCLA—SARA—provided the incentive for treatment and permanent remedies during site remediation. Thermal treatment, which routinely achieves the low cleanup criteria required by RCRA land-ban regulations, became one of the major technologies used for cleanup under the concept of ARAR. As the remediation industry matured and recognized specific market niches in soil remediation, a number of new technologies emerged. Thermal desorption, bioremediation, soil vapor extraction, soil washing, and soil extraction are being used on sites at which the technology offers advantages over incineration. In addition, a continuing stream of emerging technologies is being presented that requires careful evaluation relative to existing cleanup methods. Each of these technologies offers a range of options for achieving appropriate cleanup criteria, application to different soil matrices, cost, time of remediation, and public acceptability. Balancing cleanup criteria defined by regulation or risk assessment with technology cost and capability affords the opportunity to solve these problems with appropriate balance of cost and protection of human health and the environment.     

Encapsulation of lead from hazardous CRT glass wastes using biopolymer cross-linked concrete systems

Discarded computer monitors and television sets are identified as hazardous materials due to the high content of lead in their cathode ray tubes (CRTs). Over 98% of lead is found in CRT glass. More than 75% of obsolete electronics including TV and CRT monitors are in storage because appropriate e-waste management and remediation technologies are insufficient. Already an e-waste tsunami is starting to roll across the US and the whole world. Thus, a new technology was developed as an alternative to current disposal methods; this method uses a concrete composite crosslinked with minute amounts of biopolymers and a crosslinking agent. Commercially available microbial biopolymers of xanthan gum and guar gum were used to encapsulate CRT wastes, reducing Pb leachability as measured by standard USEPA methods. In this investigation, the synergistic effect of the crosslinking reaction was observed through blending two different biopolymers or adding a crosslinking agent in biopolymer solution. This CRT-biopolymer-concrete (CBC) composite showed higher compressive strength than the standard concrete and a considerable decrease in lead leachability.     

PFAS Experts Symposium: Statements on regulatory policy,chemistry and analytics,toxicology, transport/fate,and remediation for per‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination issues

Sixty leading members of the scientific, engineering, regulatory, and legal communities assembled for the PFAS Experts Symposium in Arlington, Virginia on May 20 and 21, 2019 to discuss issues related to per‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) based on the quickly evolving developments of PFAS regulations, chemistry and analytics, transport and fate concepts, toxicology, and remediation technologies.  The Symposium created a venue for experts with various specialized skills to provide opinions and trade perspectives on existing and new approaches to PFAS assessment and remediation in light of lessons learned managing other contaminants encountered over the past four decades. The following summarizes several consensus points developed as an outcome of the Symposium:

• Regulatory and policy issues: The response by many states and the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to media exposure and public pressure related to PFAS contamination is to relatively quickly initiate programs to regulate PFAS sites. This includes the USEPA establishing relatively low lifetime health advisory levels for PFAS in drinking water and even more stringent guidance and standards in several states. In addition, if PFAS are designated as hazardous substances at the federal level, as proposed by several Congressional bills, there could be wide‐reaching effects including listing of new Superfund sites solely for PFAS, application of stringent state standards, additional characterization and remediation at existing sites, reopening of closed sites, and cost renegotiation among PRPs.
• Chemistry and analytics: PFAS analysis is confounded by the lack of regulatory‐approved methods for most PFAS in water and all PFAS in solid media and air, interference with current water‐based analytical methods if samples contain high levels of suspended solids, and sample collection and analytical interference due to the presence of PFAS in common consumer products, sampling equipment, and laboratory materials.
• Toxicology and risk: Uncertainties remain related to human health and ecological effects for most PFAS; however, regulatory standards and guidance are being established incorporating safety factors that result in part per trillion (ppt) cleanup objectives. Given the thousands of PFAS that may be present in the environment, a more appropriate paradigm may be to develop toxicity criteria for groups of PFAS rather than individual PFAS.
• Transport and fate: The recalcitrance of many perfluoroalkyl compounds and the capability of some fluorotelomers to transform into perfluoroalkyl compounds complicate conceptual site models at many PFAS sites, particularly those involving complex mixtures, such as firefighting foams. Research is warranted to better understand the physicochemical properties and corresponding transport and fate of most PFAS, of branched and linear isomers of the same compounds, and of the interactions of PFAS with other co‐contaminants such as nonaqueous phase liquids. Many PFAS exhibit complex transport mechanisms, particularly at the air/water interface, and it is uncertain whether traditional transport principles apply to the ppt levels important to PFAS projects. Existing analytical methods are sufficient when combined with the many advances in site characterization techniques to move rapidly forward at selected sites to develop and test process‐based conceptual site models.
• Existing remediation technologies and research: Current technologies largely focus on separation (sorption, ion exchange, or sequestration). Due to diversity in PFAS properties, effective treatment will likely require treatment trains. Monitored natural attenuation will not likely involve destructive reactions, but be driven by processes such as matrix diffusion, sorption, dispersion, and dilution.

The consensus message from the Symposium participants is that PFAS present far more complex challenges to the environmental community than prior contaminants. This is because, in contrast to chlorinated solvents, PFAS are severely complicated by their mobility, persistence, toxicological uncertainties, and technical obstacles to remediation—all under the backdrop of stringent regulatory and policy developments that vary by state and will be further driven by USEPA. Concern was expressed about the time, expense, and complexity required to remediate PFAS sites and whether the challenges of PFAS warrant alternative approaches to site cleanups, including the notion that adaptive management and technical impracticability waivers may be warranted at sites with expansive PFAS plumes. A paradigm shift towards receptor protection rather than broad scale groundwater/aquifer remediation may be appropriate.     

The challenge of remediation technology development

A huge commercial environmental industry, currently estimated at some $130 billion in size in the United States alone, has sprung up to manage and remediate environmental problems. Hundreds of innovative remediation technologies are being developed under EPA's SITE program, which has provided R&D funding for more than 100 new treatment technologies. Despite the obvious demand, numerous regulatory, marketing, technical, and financial barriers have impeded progress in the field of remediation technology development. Developers of remediation technologies are faced with a significant challenge to overcome these barriers and successfully bring a technology to market. This article examines the barriers to technology development and offers strategic planning alternatives for long-term economic success and commercial viability of remediation technologies.     

地下水原位修复渗透性反应墙反应介质的改良与展望

渗透性反应墙(PRBs)是倍受关注的地下水原位修复技术之一,具有高效廉价、安装简便、维护简单等优点。详细总结了零价铁、活性炭、无机矿物材料和生物质材料等PRBs反应介质的结构、性能、适用范围、改良方法及增强吸附机制,介绍了PRBs技术在国内外地下水原位修复领域的工程应用实例,指出研发可再生型反应介质、深入研究复杂体系的污染物去除主导机制以及开展多介质混合、多种原位修复技术集成应用研究将是今后PRBs的主要研究方向。     

Comparing the Adoption of Contaminated Land Remediation Technologies in the United States,United Kingdom,and China

In many locations across the world, land contamination poses a serious threat to human health and the wider environment. For instance, a report published on April 17, 2014, revealed that China now has 16.1 percent of its land contaminated by various organic and inorganic contaminants, posing a range of challenges from human health risk to food security. The innovation and adoption of suitable remediation technologies is critical for solving land contamination issues. However, little is known about the pattern of remediation technology adoption, as well as its determining factors. This study uses a questionnaire survey in the United States, United Kingdom, and China to examine the spatial variation of remediation technology adoption. It further explores the temporal trend of remediation technology adoption using secondary data from the U.S. Superfund program. The study identified significant differences in remediation technology adoption among these countries, which are attributed to the different environmental, social, economic, and regulatory contexts. It is argued that the full implications of remediation technology adoption to sustainable development should be further studied, and policy instruments should be designed accordingly to promote those remediation technologies that align the best with long‐term sustainability. Technology developers may also use these implications to adjust their research and development priorities. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Evaluation of algal phytoremediation of light extractable petroleum hydrocarbons in subarctic climates

The presence of an organic mat in a hydrocarbon‐impacted creek in Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, Canada was examined for contributions to in situ remediation of petroleum‐contaminated water. This article investigates the role of algae, found in the organic mat, in the remediation of light extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (LEPHs) at the site and in the laboratory. During the study, LEPH concentrations were reduced by 16.8 percent in the presence of algae alone (algal solution) and 30.4 percent in the combined organic mat solution containing microbial consortia. The study results indicate that algal species at the site did not directly phytoremediate hydrocarbons. Rather, they were part of the total biological degradation taking place. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Ten years later: The progress and future of integrating sustainable principles,practices, and metrics into remediation projects

In 2009, the Sustainable Remediation Forum released a white paper entitled “Integrating sustainable principles, practices, and metrics into remediation projects” (Ellis & Hadley, 2009, Remediation, 19, pp. 5–114). Sustainable remediation was a relatively new concept, and the white paper explored a range of approaches on how sustainability could be integrated into traditional remediation projects. This paper revisits the 2009 white paper, providing an overview of the early days of the evolving sustainable remediation practice and an assessment of the progress of sustainable remediation over the last 10 years with a primary focus on the United States. The current state of the sustainable remediation practice includes published literature, current practices and resources, applications, room for improvement, international progress, the virtuous cycle that applying sustainable remediation creates, and the status of the objectives cited in the 2009 white paper. Over the last decade, several sustainable remediation frontiers have emerged that will likely be a focus in advancing the practice. These frontiers include climate change and resiliency, weighting and valuation to help better consolidate different sustainable remediation metrics, programmatic implementation, and better integration of the societal impacts of sustainable remediation. Finally, as was the case for the 2009 white paper, this paper explores how sustainable remediation may evolve over the next 10 years and focuses on the events and drivers that can be significant in the pace of further development of the practice. The events and drivers include transformation impacts, societal influences, and the continued development of new technologies, approaches, and tools by remediation practitioners. The remediation industry has made significant progress in developing the practice of sustainable remediation and has implemented it successfully into hundreds of projects. While progress has been significant, an opportunity exists to implement the tenets of sustainable remediation on many more projects and explore new frontiers to help improve the communication, integration, and derived benefits from implementing sustainable remediation into future remediation projects.     

Towards an international standard: The ISO/DIS 18504 standard on sustainable remediation

Sustainable remediation is the elimination and/or control of unacceptable risks in a safe and timely manner while optimizing the environmental, social, and economic value of the work. Forthcoming International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Standard on Sustainable Remediation will allow countries without the capacity to develop their own guidance to benefit from work done over the past decade by various groups around the world. The ISO standard has progressed through the committee draft (ISO/CD 18504) and draft international standard (ISO/DIS 18504) stages. The risk‐based approach to managing the legacy of historically contaminated soil and groundwater has been incorporated into policy, legislation, and practice around the world. It helps determine the need for remediation and the end point of such remediation. Remediation begins with an options appraisal that short lists strategies that could deliver the required reduction in risk. A remediation strategy comprises one or more remediation technologies that will deliver the safe and timely elimination and/or control of unacceptable risks. The ISO standard will help assessors identify the most sustainable among the shortlisted, valid alternative remediation strategies. Practitioners presenting case studies claiming to constitute sustainable remediation should now report how they have aligned their work with the new standard. Indicators are used to compare alternative remediation strategies. The simplest metric that allows a characteristic to act as an indicator should be chosen. Weightings indicators can become a contested exercise and should only be undertaken where there is a clear desire for it by stakeholders and a clear need for it in identifying a preferred strategy. The simplest means of ranking alternative remediation strategies should be adopted.     

Environmental Effects Monitoring in Sydney Harbor During Remediation of One of Canada's Most Polluted Sites: A Review and Lessons Learned

This article reviews a comprehensive marine environmental effects monitoring program (MEEMP) comprised of components capable of detecting changes in the marine environment over short or extended temporal scales during remediation of one of Canada's most polluted sites at the Sydney Tar Ponds. The monitoring components included: water and sediment quality, amphipod toxicity testing, mussel tissue, crab hepatopancreas tissue, and benthic community assessments. The MEEMP was designed to verify the impact predictions for the remediation project (i.e., no immediate damage to the marine ecosystem through remediation activities). Some components were capable of providing conclusive data (e.g., sediment and water quality), while others only yielded data that were inconclusive or difficult to attribute to remediation activities (e.g., intertidal community assessments and amphipod toxicity testing). Components that provided only inconclusive results or were difficult to attribute to remediation activities were discontinued, resulting in substantial cost savings during the project, but without compromising the overall objectives of the program, which was to monitor for potential adverse environmental effects of remediation on the marine environment in Sydney Harbor and to verify environmental effects predictions made in the Environmental Impact Statement for the project. The rationale for discontinuing certain MEEMP components and discussion of conclusive results are incorporated into “lessons learned” for environmental remediation practitioners and regulators working on similar large‐scale multiyear remediation projects. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Treatment technology for remediation of wood preserving sites: Overview

This is the first in a series of five articles describing the applicability, performance, and cost of technologies for the remediation of contaminated soil and water at wood preserving sites. Site‐specific treatability studies conducted under the supervision of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL), from 1995 through 1997 constitute much of the basis for the evaluations presented, although data from other treatability studies, literature sources, and actual site remediations have also been included to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of remediation technologies. This article provides an overview of the wood preserving sites studied, including contaminant levels, and a summary of the performance of the technologies evaluated. The subsequent articles discuss the performance of each technology in more detail. Three articles discuss technologies for the treatment of soils, including solidification/stabilization, biological treatment, solvent extraction and soil washing. One article discusses technologies for the treatment of liquids, water and nonaqueous phase liquids (NAPLS), including biological treatment, carbon adsorption, photolytic oxidation, and hydraulic containment. The reader should be aware that other technologies including, but not limited to, incineration, thermal desorption, and base catalyzed dehalogenation, also have application for treating contaminants on wood preserving sites. They are not discussed in these five articles since the focus was to evaluate lesser known and hopefully lower cost approaches. However, the reader should include consideration of these other technologies as part of any evaluation or screening of technologies applicable to remediation of wood preserving sites.     

Determination of the remediability score for remediation liability allocation among polluters

When a pollution incident occurs, there can be impact liability and/or remediation liability on the polluter. The impact liability pays for the loss of life and property due to pollution. The remediation liability is to pay for remediating the environment in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. If there is only one polluter in a pollution incident, the entire liability can be placed on the sole polluter. However, liability allocation becomes complex when there are multiple polluters. To allocate the fractional remediation liability among multiple polluters, it is important to identify the factors that determine the cost of remediation so that a just distribution of liability can be made based on the contribution of each polluting party to the factors identified. Along with factors such as “quantity of the chemical released by the polluter,” “distribution of the chemical in the environmental medium,” “persistence of the chemical in the environmental medium,” and so forth, the ease with which the chemical pollutant can be separated from the contaminated medium, which we name as “remediability,” is important in deciding the remediation liability. The “remediability” of a chemical is critical in selecting the remediation technologies to be adopted and, consequently, in deciding the cost of remediation. Determination of a remediability score (RS) for each “chemical–environment medium” pair will help in quantifying the ease with which the site can be remediated. The score is envisaged on a 0–100 scale. The higher the score, the more difficult it is to remediate the chemical in the environmental medium under consideration. The score is estimated based on a set of predetermined factors that are characteristic to the technologies available for remediation. The factors are then subjected to a Delphi process to arrive at the weights. The overall RS is determined by determining the weighted impact of the identified factors after the normalization of the magnitudes of factors.     

A review of emerging technologies for remediation of PFASs

The need for remediation of poly‐ and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) is growing as a result of more regulatory attention to this new class of contaminants with diminishing water quality standards being promulgated, commonly in the parts per trillion range. PFASs comprise >3,000 individual compounds, but the focus of analyses and regulations has generally been PFASs termed perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs), which are all extremely persistent, can be highly mobile, and are increasingly being reported to bioaccumulate, with understanding of their toxicology evolving. However, there are thousands of polyfluorinated “PFAA precursors”, which can transform in the environment and in higher organisms to create PFAAs as persistent daughter products. Some PFASs can travel miles from their point of release, as they are mobile and persistent, potentially creating large plumes. The use of a conceptual site model (CSM) to define risks posed by specific PFASs to potential receptors is considered essential. Granular activated carbon (GAC) is commonly used as part of interim remedial measures to treat PFASs present in water. Many alternative treatment technologies are being adapted for PFASs or ingenious solutions developed. The diversity of PFASs commonly associated with use of multiple PFASs in commercial products is not commonly assessed. Remedial technologies, which are adsorptive or destructive, are considered for both soils and waters with challenges to their commercial application outlined. Biological approaches to treat PFASs report biotransformation which creates persistent PFAAs, no PFASs can biodegrade. Water treatment technologies applied ex situ could be used in a treatment train approach, for example, to concentrate PFASs and then destroy them on‐site. Dynamic groundwater recirculation can greatly enhance contaminant mass removal via groundwater pumping. This review of technologies for remediation of PFASs describes that:

• GAC may be effective for removal of long‐chain PFAAs, but does not perform well on short‐chain PFAAs and its use for removal of precursors is reported to be less effective;
• Anion‐exchange resins can remove a wider array of long‐ and short‐chain PFAAs, but struggle to treat the shortest chain PFAAs and removal of most PFAA precursors has not been evaluated;
• Ozofractionation has been applied for PFASs at full scale and shown to be effective for removal of total PFASs;
• Chemical oxidation has been demonstrated to be potentially applicable for some PFAAs, but when applied in situ there is concern over the formation of shorter chain PFAAs and ongoing rebound from sorbed precursors;
• Electrochemical oxidation is evolving as a destructive technology for many PFASs, but can create undesirable by‐products such as perchlorate and bromate;
• Sonolysis has been demonstrated as a potential destructive technology in the laboratory but there are significant challenges when considering scale up;
• Soils stabilization approaches are evolving and have been used at full scale but performance need to be assessed using appropriate testing regimes;
• Thermal technologies to treat PFAS‐impacted soils show promise but elevated temperatures (potentially >500 °C) may be required for treatment.

There are a plethora of technologies evolving to manage PFASs but development is in its early stage, so there are opportunities for much ingenuity.     

Integration of RBCA frameworks and remediation technologies

Decisions that determine the proper risk-based remediation approach are based on technical, regulatory, cost, legal, and political factors. A wide variety of options such as the ASTM RBCA tiered approach, the API Decision Support Software, and a host of agency-specific methods and commercial risk assessment software are all available. The optimization of a remediation project requires the right remediation technology coupled with the appropriate analytical framework. For groundwater remediation, the application of various “risk reduction” technologies can be classified as aggressive (pump and treat), moderate intensity (air sparging), low intensity (oxygen release compound-ORC®), and intrinsic (monitor only). The time frame of risk analysis will establish the proper risk reduction strategy. The selection process is inherently iterative, and the approach by which an optimal solution can be derived forms the basis of this article. A case study of a Texas site put these issues into context.     

Current status and challenges of remediating petroleum‐derived PAHs in soils: Nigeria as a case study for developing countries

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are among the world's most significant environmental organic contaminants because of their carcinogenic properties. PAHs are widely distributed globally as a result of releases from numerous natural and anthropogenic activities. Consequently, several PAH monitoring studies have been conducted and remediation approaches explored. This article aims to provide the current status of PAH distribution in Nigeria's oil and gas industrial region in relation to the technologies adopted for PAH remediation. Ideally, the findings will provide insight into the challenges in managing organic contaminants derived from petroleum exploration activities in developing countries with Nigeria as a case study.     

A review on the adsorption of diuron,carbaryl, and alachlor using natural and activated clays

Pesticides are considered predominant organic pollutants because they are widespread in many ecosystems. Pesticide residues can degrade chemically, physically, and biochemically in nature, but, because of their high stability and, in some cases, water solubility, they continue to persist in the environment. Pesticides have been eliminated from contaminated waters using a variety of methods that fall under the categories of biological, chemical, physical, and physicochemical remediation processes from various types of matrices, including water and soil. Due to their excellent qualities as adsorbents and pesticide transporters, the use of natural soil components such as clays, iron oxides, or humic acid has recently attracted growing interest. Clays have several advantages over other adsorbents, including large specific surface areas due to their small particle size, low cost, and widespread availability. Clay minerals have a great capacity for adsorption due to Coulombic forces and, attributable to their large surface area, van der Waals forces. This review describes historical, current, and emerging techniques and materials to remove the pesticides diuron, carbaryl, and alachlor using clays as adsorbents.     

Directionally drilled horizontal wells offer cost savings and technical advantages over alternative soil and groundwater remediation systems

Directionally drilled horizontal wells offer the opportunity for significant cost savings and technical advantages over alternative trenched well and vertical well soil and groundwater remediation systems in many cases. The magnitude of the cost savings is a function of the remediation technology deployed and the values placed on the reduction of site impacts, dramatic reduction in the time required to achieve site remediation goals and requirements, the ability of horizontal well remediation to easily treat normally recalcitrant contaminants such as MTBE, and the ability to drill under paved areas, operating plants, residential areas, landfills, lagoons, waterways, ponds, basins, and other areas that are normally difficult or impossible to access with conventional drilling or trenching methods. In addition to improvements in site access capabilities, horizontal wells have been found capable of addressing contaminants that vertical wells do not readily treat, even with the same remediation technology deployed, especially if air‐based remediation technologies are deployed. With biosparging, for example, greater treatment capabilities of horizontal wells over vertical wells are attributed to greater oxygen flux over a broader area, a larger treatment zone, and extremely prolonged residence of groundwater contaminants in the aerobic treatment area, typically months or years. This article describes the use of directionally drilled horizontal wells for application of a variety of treatment technologies and includes costs of various options with a detailed comparison of biosparging options. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.