In situ remediation of MTBE utilizing ozone

There has been a great deal of focus on methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) over the past few years by local, state, and federal government, industry, public stakeholders, the environmental services market, and educational institutions. This focus is, in large part, the result of the widespread detection of MTBE in groundwater and surface waters across the United States. The presence of MTBE in groundwater has been attributed primarily to the release from underground storage tank (UST) systems at gasoline service stations. MTBE's physical and chemical properties are different than other constituents of gasoline that have traditionally been cause for concern [benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX)]. This difference in properties is why MTBE migrates differently in the subsurface environment and exhibits different constraints relative to mitigation and remediation of MTBE once it has been released to subsurface soils and groundwater. Resource Control Corporation (RCC) has accomplished the remediation of MTBE from subsurface soil and groundwater at multiple sites using ozone. RCC has successfully applied ozone at several sites with different lithologies, geochemistry, and concentrations of constituents of concern. This article presents results from several projects utilizing in situ chemical oxidation with ozone. On these projects MTBE concentrations in groundwater were reduced to remedial objectives usually sooner than anticipated. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Expediting sustainable brownfields redevelopment by applying Triad using the membrane interface probe

Redevelopment and reuse plans are often based upon an expedited delineation and remediation life cycle, since delayed reuse usually has economic consequences. It has also become increasingly important to utilize sustainable practices to achieve investigation and remediation goals. In this article, the Triad approach is used to expedite the delineation of a source area within a municipal landfill to complete the remedial effort prior to construction of an urban civic center. The Triad approach uses the three elements of systematic project planning, dynamic work strategy, and real‐time measurement to expedite site characterization (Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council, 2003). In this article, the Triad sampling strategy consisted of two phases. The first phase included in situ screening of soil and groundwater using the membrane interface probe (MIP), and the second phase included confirmatory sampling via vertical profiles in the soil and groundwater. This study found that, using the MIP in a dynamic sampling strategy, a critical element of the Triad approach, combined with the proper placement of confirmatory samples, significantly reduced overall project cost and will expedite the site redevelopment. The use of the Triad approach also contributed to the integration of green and sustainable practices into the project. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

An evaluation of permeable reactive barrier projects in California

Permeable reactive barriers made of zero‐valent iron (ZVI PRBs) have become a prominent remediation technology in addressing groundwater contamination by chlorinated solvents. Many ZVI PRBs have been installed across the United States, some as research projects, some at the pilot scale, and many at full scale. As a passive and in situ remediation technology, ZVI PRBs have many attractive features and advantages over other approaches to groundwater remediation. Ten ZVI PRBs installed in California were evaluated for their performance. Of those ten, three are discussed in greater detail to illustrate the complexities that arise when quantifying the performance of ZVI PRBs, and to provide comment on the national debate concerning the downgradient effects of source‐zone removal or treatment on plumes of contaminated groundwater. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Multiphase extraction radius of influence: Evaluation of design and operational parameters

A common remedial technology for properties with subsurface soil and groundwater contamination is multiphase extraction (MPE). MPE involves the extraction of contaminated groundwater, free‐floating product, and contaminated soil vapor from the subsurface. A network of recovery wells conveys fluids to a vacuum pump and to the treatment system for the contaminated groundwater and soil vapor. This article describes a study of MPE operational data from nine similar remediation projects to determine the most important design parameters. Design equations from guidance manuals were used to estimate the expected radius of influence (ROI) based on measured field data. ROIs were calculated for the vapor flow rate through the subsurface and for the groundwater drawdown caused by the MPE remediation activities. The calculated ROIs were compared to the measured ROIs to corroborate the assumptions made in the calculations. Once it was established that the calculated and field‐measured ROIs were comparable, a sensitivity analysis determined ranges of different design and operational parameters that most affected the ROIs. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Integrating Remediation and Reuse to Achieve Whole‐System Sustainability Benefits

This perspective article was prepared by members of the Sustainable Remediation Forum (SURF), a professional nonprofit organization seeking to advance the state of sustainable remediation within the broader context of sustainable site reuse. SURF recognizes that remediation and site reuse, including redevelopment activities, are intrinsically linked—even when remediation is subordinate to or sometimes a precursor of reuse. Although the end of the remediation life cycle has traditionally served as the beginning of the site's next life cycle, a disconnect between these two processes remains. SURF recommends a holistic approach that brings together remediation and reuse on a collaborative parallel path and seeks to achieve whole‐system sustainability benefits. This article explores the value of integrating remediation into the reuse process to fully exploit synergies and minimize the costs and environmental impacts associated with bringing land back into beneficial use. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Impact: A Model for calculation of soil cleanup levels

The establishment of soil cleanup levels is a primary concern in site remediation projects. Soil cleanup levels provide targets that drive the remediation process from technology selection through closure. Several state regulatory agencies are currently in the process of developing scientifically based soil cleanup standards. The underlying premise in the derivation of such standards is to ensure that the site will not pose a threat to human health and the environment after remediation has been completed. To accomplish this, remediation project managers must consider several contaminant transport pathways. This article presents the salient features of a model named IMPACT, which was developed to assist in the derivation of soil cleanup levels. IMPACT considers the soil-to-groundwater pathway and predicts the cleanup levels in a contaminated soil layer in the vadose zone such that groundwater quality standards are met at any point in the aquifer.     

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.     

Recent Developments in Cleanup Technologies

Although the reaction mechanics are somewhat mysterious, the use of iron for in situ groundwater treatment has recently gained considerable attention and respect in the remediation industry. The basic scientific principles of both applications of iron have been known for over a century; however, both were nearly unheard of as remediation technologies five years ago. Both technologies have a strong potential for widespread use. They are commercially available, have been proven in field studies, are less expensive than traditional pump and treat technologies, and, in many types of groundwater systems, may be able to meet difficult-to-achieve groundwater treatment standards. As these technologies continue to undergo development, there could be considerably more aggressive applications used to treat ground-water containing high concentrations of chlorinated organics and DNAPLs.     

Comparing PFAS to other groundwater contaminants: Implications for remediation

Established groundwater contaminants such as chlorinated solvents and hydrocarbons have impacted groundwater at hundreds of thousands of sites around the United States and have been responsible for multibillion dollar remediation expenditures. An important question is whether groundwater remediation for the emerging contaminant class comprised of per‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) will be a smaller, similar, or a larger‐scale problem than the established groundwater contaminants. A two‐pronged approach was used to evaluate this question in this paper. First, nine quantitative scale‐of‐remediation metrics were used to compare PFAS to four established contaminants: chlorinated solvents, benzene, 1,4‐dioxane, and methyl tert‐butyl ether. These metrics reflected the prevalence of the contaminants in the U.S., attenuation potential, remediation difficulty, and research intensity. Second, several key challenges identified with PFAS remediation were evaluated to see similar situations (qualitative analogs) that have been addressed by the remediation field in the past. The results of the analysis show that four out of nine of the evaluated quantitative metrics (production, number of potential sites, detection frequency, required destruction/removal efficiency) indicate that the scale of PFAS groundwater remediation may be smaller compared to the current scale of remediation for conventional groundwater contaminants. One attenuation metric, median plume length, suggests that overall PFAS remediation could pose a greater challenge compared to hydrocarbon sites, but only slightly larger than chlorinated volatile organic compounds sites. The second attenuation metric, hydrophobic sorption, was not definitive regarding the potential scale of PFAS remediation. The final three metrics (regulatory criteria, in‐situ remediation capability, and research intensity) all indicate that PFAS remediation might end up being a larger scale problem than the established contaminants. An assessment of the evolution of groundwater remediation capabilities for established contaminants identified five qualitative analogs for key PFAS groundwater remediation issues: (a) low‐level detection analytical capabilities; (b) methods to assess the risk of complex chemical mixtures; (c) nonaqueous phase dissolution as an analog for partitioning, precursors, and back diffusion at PFAS sites; (d) predictions of long plume lengths for emerging contaminants; and (e) monitored natural attenuation protocols for other non‐degrading groundwater contaminants. Overall the evaluation of these five analogs provided some comfort that, while remediating the potential universe of PFAS sites will be extremely challenging, the groundwater community has relevant past experience that may prove useful. The quantitative metrics and the qualitative analogs suggest a different combination of remediation approaches may be needed to deal with PFAS sites and may include source control, natural attenuation, in‐situ sequestration, containment, and point‐of‐use treatment. However, as with many chlorinated solvent sites, while complete restoration of PFAS sites may be uncommon, it should be possible to prevent excessive exposure of PFAS to human and ecological receptors.     

Improving Objectives for Cleanup Sites

In 1976, the discovery of the Love Canal Superfund Site in New York thrust environmental cleanups into the forefront of the national conscience and essentially launched the remediation industry. Since then, vast efforts have been devoted to improving site remediation. Despite the attention given to key subject areas, such as site characterization, risk assessment, and remediation technologies, relatively little attention has been given to the objectives set forth for conducting cleanups, and they have generally not been rigorously evaluated in the literature. Several of the more common objectives for remediation projects are discussed. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Groundwater Remediation via Marcro Porous Polymer Extraction

Akzo Nobel's Macro Porous Polymer Extraction (MPPE) technology effectively removes dissolved hydrocarbons from groundwater via liquid-liquid extraction with an innovative medium. Excellent performance in removal of chlorinated, aromatic, and aliphatic solvents, coupled with simple, robust design, make MPPE an attractive process for groundwater remediation applications. Hydrocarbon-contaminated water is passed through a column packed with MPPE particles. An extraction fluid, immobilized within the polymer matrix, removes the hydrocarbons from the water. All hydrocarbons with affinity for the extraction fluid (compared to water) are removed. Regeneration is accomplished in situ with low-pressure steam. The steam volatilizes the hydrocarbons but not theimmobilized extraction fluid. Volatilized hydrocarbons are condensed and then separated from condensate by gravity. The hydrocarbon product is available for recycle or reuse. MPPE systems achieve removal efficiencies of 99.99 percent for wide varieties and combinations of aliphatic, aromatic, and chlorinated compounds. For a broad range of mass loadings and effluent requirements, especially rigorous ones, the MPPE system offers lower investment and operating costs than traditional water treatment technologies. Currently, 14 industrial units are running or under construction in the United States and Europe. Eight of these are treating groundwater.     

Lessons learned from classroom training on natural attenuation of chlorinated solvents

Technology and information transfer are critical functions within the remediation industry. Researchers in the private sector, academia, and government all struggle to have their findings accepted and put to good use by the remediation industry at large but must work even harder to have their findings accepted and put into practice by state and federal regulators in the environmental agencies overseeing cleanups. Unfortunately, many technology and information transfer efforts fail to reach state and federal regulators, and even fewer achieve regulatory acceptance. A two‐year‐long campaign to deliver a training class on the natural attenuation of chlorinated solvents in groundwater is one prominent example of very effective technology and information transfer. Several of the elements and aspects of that successful training class are presented and discussed in order to provide others with a proven and workable template. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Debunking myths about sustainable remediation

Sustainable remediation concepts have evolved during the decade 2007–2017. From the establishment of the first Sustainable Remediation forum (SURF) in 2007, to publication of ASTM and ISO standards by 2017. Guidance has been developed around the world to reflect local regulatory systems, and much has been learned in applying sustainability assessment to contaminated site management projects. In the best examples, significant improvements in project sustainability have been delivered, including concurrent reduction of the environmental footprint of the remediation program, improved social performance, and cost savings and/or value creation. The initial advocates for the concept of sustainable remediation were quickly supported by early adopters who saw its potential to improve the remediation industry's performance, but they also had to overcome some inertia and scepticism from other parties. During the debates and discussions that occurred at numerous international conferences and SURF workshops around the world, various opinions were formed and positions stated. Some proved to be correct, others not so. With the recent publication of ISO Standard 18504 and the benefit of a decade's‐worth of hindsight on sustainable remediation programs implementation and project delivery, this paper summarizes a number of myths and misunderstandings that have been stated regarding sustainable remediation and seeks to debunk them. Sustainable remediation assessment shows us how to manage unacceptable risks to human health and the environment in the best, that is to say the most sustainable, way. It provides the contaminated land management industry a framework to incorporate sustainable development principles into remediation projects and deliver significant value for affected parties and society more broadly. In dispelling some myths about sustainable remediation set out in this paper, it is hoped that consistent application of ISO18504/SuRF‐UK (or equivalently robust guidance) will facilitate even wider use of sustainable remediation around the world.     

1,4‐Dioxane Treatment Technologies

The chlorinated solvent stabilizer 1,4‐dioxane (DX) has become an unexpected and recalcitrant groundwater contaminant at many sites across the United States. Chemical characteristics of DX, such as miscibility and low sorption potential, enable it to migrate at least as far as the chlorinated solvent from which it often originates. This mobility and recalcitrance has challenged remediation professionals to redesign existing treatment systems and monitoring networks to accommodate widespread contamination. Furthermore, remediation technologies commonly applied to chlorinated solvent co‐contaminants, such as extraction and air stripping or in situ enhanced reductive dechlorination, are relatively ineffective on DX removal. These difficulties in treatment have required the industry to identify, develop, and demonstrate new and innovative technologies and approaches for both ex situ and in situ treatment of this emerging contaminant. Great strides have been made over the past decade in the development and testing of remediation technologies for removal or destruction of DX in groundwater. This article briefly summarizes the fate and transport characteristics of DX that make it difficult to treat, and presents technologies that have been demonstrated to be applicable to groundwater treatment at the field scale.  ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Yardsticks to Integrate Risk Assessment,Risk Management,and Groundwater Remediation

Remediation of contaminated sites has focused largely on restoration of groundwater aquifers. Often the stated remedial goal is to achieve conditions allowing unrestricted use and unrestricted exposure. Such total groundwater cleanup has occurred at some sites, but is the exception rather than the rule. At the same time, significant effort occurs to perform risk assessments for potential exposure to contaminants in groundwater at sites, both before and after remediation. The logical synergy between risk assessment and remediation is for risk management to seek opportunities for optimal use of groundwater based upon realistic expectations of cleanup technologies and the relevant acceptable residual (postremediation) levels of contaminants. This article explores an approach to improve this synergistic relationship between risk assessment, risk management, and remediation for groundwater cleanups. ©2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Perchlorate: Sources,uses, and occurrences in the environment

Perchlorate contamination of groundwater and soil continues to be a hot topic in many sectors, including industry, the federal Departments of Defense and Energy, regulators, and the general public. This article presents information on what is currently known regarding perchlorate uses, known and suspected naturally occurring versus anthropogenic perchlorate sources, and past and present manufacturing locations. It provides the reader with a baseline as well as background information to facilitate an understanding of perchlorate in the environment for the ultimate purpose of remediation. The article is based on research conducted by the Interstate Technology Regulatory Council for a forthcoming, more substantial perchlorate overview document scheduled for publication later in 2005. The document will include an overview of the chemical and discussions of remediation techniques and methods of analysis. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Groundwater geochemistry diagnostics during in situ ERH remediation

In situ remediation represents a series of challenges in interpreting the monitoring data on remedial progress. Among these challenges are problems in determining the progress of the remediation and the mechanisms responsible, so that the process can be optimized. The release of organic pollutants to groundwater systems and in situ remediation technologies alter the groundwater chemistry, but outside of natural attenuation studies using inorganic chemical analyses as indicators of intrinsic biodegradation, typically little attention has been paid to the changes in inorganic groundwater chemistry. Smith (2008) noted that during an electrical resistance heating remediation that took place at a confidential site in Chicago, a two‐orders‐of‐magnitude increase in chloride concentrations occurred during the remediation. This increase in chloride resulted in a corresponding increase in calcium as a result of what is known as the common ion effect. Carbon dioxide is the gas found in highest concentrations in natural groundwater (Stumm & Morgan, 1981), and its fugacity (partial pressure) corresponds directly with calcium concentrations. Carbon dioxide at supersaturation in groundwater is capable of dissolving organic compounds, such as trichloroethene, facilitating removal of nonaqueous‐phase liquids at temperatures below the boiling point of water. One means of diagnosing these reactions is through the use of compound‐specific isotopic analysis, which is capable of distinguishing between evaporation, biodegradation, and differences in sources. The appropriate diagnosis has the potential to optimize the benefits from these reactions, lower energy costs for removal of nonaqueous‐phase liquids, and direct treatment where it is needed most. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Operating windows to assess whether monitored natural attenuation is a technically feasible remediation option for BTEX‐contaminated groundwater

When used in combination with source management strategies, monitored natural attenuation (MNA) is likely to be a technically feasible remediation option if the contaminant persistence time along the flow path is less than (a) the transport time to the compliance point and (b) the time available for groundwater remediation objectives to be achieved. Biodegradation is often the most significant natural attenuation process for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) in groundwater. While BTEX transport rates increase with groundwater velocity, examination of data obtained from the published literature for seven sites undergoing MNA revealed significant positive correlations between groundwater velocity and first‐order biodegradation rates for toluene (r = 0.83, P < 0.05), ethylbenzene (r = 0.93, P < 0.01), m‐ and p‐xylene (r = 0.96, P < 0.01), and o‐xylene (r = 0.78, P < 0.05). This is attributed to increased dispersion at higher velocities leading to more mixing of electron acceptors with the contaminant plume. There was no positive correlation between groundwater velocity and first‐order biodegradation rates for benzene due to noise in the relationship caused by variations in (a) the concentrations of electron acceptors in the uncontaminated groundwater and (b) the proportions of benzene in the total BTEX concentration in the source area. A regression model of the relationship between groundwater velocity and the first‐order biodegradation rate can be used to delineate operating windows for groundwater velocity within which the contaminant persistence time is less than the transport and remediation times for a given source concentration, target concentration, distance to compliance point, retardation factor, and remediation time. The operating windows can provide decision makers with a rapid indication of whether MNA is likely to be a technically feasible remediation option at a given site. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Using uncertainty analysis to reduce costs at a pump-and-treat site

The former Nebraska Ordnance Plant site in east-central Nebraska was included on the National Priorities List because of explosives and trichloroethene contamination. The preferred groundwater remedy includes hydraulic containment of the contaminated groundwater and focused extraction of the more highly contaminated groundwater as components of the remedial action. The purpose of hydraulic containment is to stop the spread of contamination, while the more aggressive focused extraction will be used to speed up the remediation and reduce total cleanup costs. This case study illustrates how straightforward groundwater models were combined with uncertainty analysis to select a precise definition of the focused extraction areas. The purpose of the analysis was to reduce ultimate remediation costs, given the significant uncertainty associated with the estimated remediation times. The selected definition provides a basis for more sophisticated groundwater modeling, the goal of which was to locate extraction wells and define their flow rates. The batch flushing model provided the governing equations, and Monte Carlo analysis was used for the uncertainty analysis. All of the analysis was performed on a personal computer using commercially available software.