Cost‐Effective Sediment Dredge Disposal Options for Small Craft Harbors in Canada

Sediment dredge disposal options were reviewed to improve cost‐effectiveness and environmental safety for dredging of coastal sediments at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Small Craft Harbours (DFO‐SCH) program in Canada. Historically, contaminated dredge sediments exceeding federal guidelines were disposed of in nearby landfills. Recent federal regulatory changes in sediment quality guidelines adopted by provincial regulators in Canada has resulted in updates to guidelines for disposal of contaminated solids in landfills. Updates now require specific and general disposal options for contaminated dredge material destined for land‐based disposal, resulting in more expensive disposal in containment cells (if contaminated sediments exceed federal guidelines). However, as part of this study, a leachate testing method was applied to contaminated sediments to simulate migration of potential contaminants in groundwater. Using this approach, leachate quality was compared to federal freshwater criteria and drinking water quality guidelines for compliance with new regulations. Leachate testing performed on the highest sediment contaminant concentrations triggered less than 2 percent potable water exceedances, meaning that most dredge spoils could be disposed of in privately owned or provincially operated landfill sites, providing less expensive disposal options compared to containment cell disposal. Current dredge disposal practices were reviewed at 35 harbor sites across Nova Scotia and their limitations identified in a gap analysis. Improved site management was developed following this review and consultation with interested marine stakeholders. New disposal options and chemical analyses were proposed, along with improvements to cost efficiencies for management of dredged marine sediments in Atlantic Canada. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Developing Effective Decision Support for the Application of “Gentle” Remediation Options: The GREENLAND Project

Gentle remediation options (GRO) are risk management strategies/technologies that result in a net gain (or at least no gross reduction) in soil function as well as risk management. They encompass a number of technologies, including the use of plant (phyto‐), fungi (myco‐), and/or bacteria‐based methods, with or without chemical soil additives or amendments, for reducing contaminant transfer to local receptors by in situ stabilization, or extraction, transformation, or degradation of contaminants. Despite offering strong benefits in terms of risk management, deployment costs, and sustainability for a range of site problems, the application of GRO as practical on‐site remedial solutions is still in its relative infancy, particularly for metal(loid)‐contaminated sites. A key barrier to wider adoption of GRO relates to general uncertainties and lack of stakeholder confidence in (and indeed knowledge of) the feasibility or reliability of GRO as practical risk management solutions. The GREENLAND project has therefore developed a simple and transparent decision support framework for promoting the appropriate use of gentle remediation options and encouraging participation of stakeholders, supplemented by a set of specific design aids for use when GRO appear to be a viable option. The framework is presented as a three phased model or Decision Support Tool (DST), in the form of a Microsoft Excel‐based workbook, designed to inform decision‐making and options appraisal during the selection of remedial approaches for contaminated sites. The DST acts as a simple decision support and stakeholder engagement tool for the application of GRO, providing a context for GRO application (particularly where soft end‐use of remediated land is envisaged), quick reference tables (including an economic cost calculator), and supporting information and technical guidance drawing on practical examples of effective GRO application at trace metal(loid) contaminated sites across Europe. This article introduces the decision support framework. ©2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Thermal desorption of PCB-contaminated waste at the waukegan harbor superfund site

In June 1992, SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc., completed the soil treatment phase of the Waukegan Harbor Superfund Project in Waukegan, Illinois, after approximately five months of operation. SoilTech successfully treated 12,700 tons of sediment contaminated with polychlorinated hiphenyls (PCBs) using a transportable SoilTech anaerobic thermal processor (ATP) system nominally rated at ten tons per hour throughput capacity. The SoilTech ATP technology anaerobically desorbs contaminants such as PCBs from solids and sludges at temperatures over 1,000° F. Principal products of the process are clean, treated solids and an oil condensate containing the hydrocarbon contaminants. At the Waukegan Harbor Superfund site, PCB concentrations in the sediments excavated and dredged from a ditch, lagoon, and harbor slip averaged 10,400 parts per million (ppm) (1.04 percent) and were as high as 23,000 ppm (2.3 percent). Treated soil was backfilled in an on-site containment cell. The removal efficiency of PCBs from the soil averaged 99.98 percent, relative to the project performance specification of 97 percent, and treated soil PCB concentrations were measured below 2 ppm. Approximately 30,000 gallons of PCB oil, desorbed from the feed material, were returned to the owner for subsequent off-site disposal. After modifications to the emissions control equipment, compliance with the 99.9999 percent destruction and removal efficiency (DRE) for PCBs in stack emissions required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was achieved.     

Successful ISCR‐enhanced bioremediation of a TCE DNAPL source utilizing EHC® and KB‐1®

Remediation of chlorinated solvent DNAPL sites often meets with mixed results. This can be attributed to the diametrically opposed nature of the impacts, where the disparate dissolved‐phase plume is more manageable than the localized, high‐concentration source area. A wide range of technologies are available for downgradient plume management, but the relative mass of contaminants in a DNAPL source area generally requires treatment for such technologies to be effective over the long term. In many cases, the characteristics of DNAPL source zones (e.g., depth, soil heterogeneity, structural limitations) limit the available options. The following describes the successful full‐scale implementation of in situ chemical reduction (ISCR) enhanced bioremediation of a TCE DNAPL source zone. In this demonstration, concentrations of TCE were rapidly reduced to below the maximum contaminant level (MCL) in less than six months following implementation. The results described herein suggest that ISCR‐enhanced bioremediation is a viable remedial alternative for chlorinated solvent source zones. © 2010 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.     

Sustainable Remediation and Decision Analysis Practices at an Onshore Gas Well Site

Strategies for remediation of drilling mud wastes at a typical deep sour gas well site in the foothills of Alberta were assessed in terms of financial and social costs and benefits, in alignment with established sustainable remediation and decision analysis principles. Managers of contaminated sites containing historical drilling wastes are challenged with managing liability through several regulatory changes over time. Excavation and disposal of the contaminated soil from the site was the only means of securing regulatory release, with the nearest landfill located 150 km away. A perception exists that in many cases excavation and disposal inflicts unnecessary levels of site intrusiveness and public disturbance when other options achieving a similar risk end point may do so for lower social cost. The study tested this hypothesis to ascertain whether the currently accepted solution is the best option when the wider costs and benefits to society and the environment are included. Eight remedial strategies were assessed using cost–benefit analysis, including using environmental economics techniques to quantify social and environmental impacts. The economic model showed that methods such as capping in‐place or engineered encapsulation were superior to full excavation and disposal from financial and sustainability perspectives. Quantified external costs and benefits such as road damage, greenhouse gas emissions, public nuisance and safety, and community amenity value were influential in identifying superior options. It was demonstrated that $0.2 million of societal costs could be avoided by choosing capping over landfill disposal. This represents substantial implications when viewed in the context of this and other operators’ portfolios of hundreds of abandoned wells in the area. ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Creosote DNAPL Recovery‐Well Design for Mass Removal

Sites with dense nonaqueous‐phase liquid (DNAPL) contamination present significant remediation challenges in terms of technical practicability and cost. Remedial approaches to DNAPL sites often follow a management approach rather than removal or eradication approaches, particularly due to the uncertainties associated with the benefits of partial source mass removal, as complete source removal is unlikely. Mass‐removal technologies should be evaluated for all DNAPL sites, although implementation of recovery technologies will be limited to a few sites based upon site‐specific factors. Sitewide remedial strategies that employ source reduction, where applicable, and incorporate associated risk‐reduction technologies, including monitored natural attenuation, are advised. Creosote DNAPL sites are particularly challenging, as they are predominantly composed of low‐solubility polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons that form long‐term continuing sources. Additionally, the physical properties of creosote DNAPL, including high viscosity and relatively low density, result in significant migration potential and considerable dissolved‐phase groundwater impacts. An innovative creosote DNAPL source recovery well design was developed to achieve separate‐phase removal of pooled creosote DNAPL. The design presented herein employs modified circulation‐well technology to mobilize DNAPL to the engineered recovery well, where it is gravity‐settled into a sump to permit separate‐phase mass removal of the emplaced DNAPL source without groundwater production or treatment. A discharge mass flux protocol was developed to verify dissolved‐phase plume stability and the benefit of the source mass removal. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Remediation of metal-contaminated sites using plants

Heavy metal contamination of soil resulting from anthropogenic sources poses a significant challenge in many industrialized societies. The current technologies employed for removal of heavy metals often involve expensive ex-situ processes requiring sophisticated equipment and removal, transportation, and purification of the soil. Generally, in-situ remedial technologies are favored to ex-situ methods for detoxification, neutralization, degradation, or immobilization of contaminants. In-situ bioremediation is increasingly favored because of its effectiveness and low cost. A new type of bioremediation, known as vegetative remediation or “phytoremediation,” uses metal-tolerant hyperaccumulator plants to take up metal ions from soils and store them in their aboveground parts. To select the appropriate phytoremediation technology, one must understand the technical feasibility, cost effectiveness, and availability of the suitable plant species. Equally important is determining whether the site's soil conditions are optimal to enhance or restore the soil biological activity. Before phytoremediation can be exploited on a contaminated site, greenhouse-scale confirmatory testing is necessary to measure plant uptake and correlate shoot metal concentrations to available soil metals. These tests also validate that the harvesting and subsequent disposal of metal-containing plant tissues are environmentally safe and manageable.     

The treatment of contaminated water at remedial wood preserving sites

Contaminated groundwater and surface water have posed a great challenge in restoring wood preserving sites to beneficial use. Often contaminated groundwater plumes extend far beyond the legal property limits, adversely impacting drinking water supplies and crop lands. To contain, treat, and/or remediate these valuable resources is an important part of restoring these impacted sites. Various options are available for remediating the groundwater and other affected media at these sites. Frequently, pump and treat technologies have been used that can provide well‐head treatment at installed extraction wells. This approach has shown to be costly and excessively time consuming. Some of the technologies used for pump and treat are granular activated carbon (GAC), biotreatment, and chemical oxidation. Other approaches use in‐situ treatment applications that include enhanced bioremediation, monitored natural attenuation (biotic and abiotic), and chemical reduction/fixation. Ultimately, it may only be feasible, economically or practicably, to use hydraulic containment systems. Depending upon site‐specific conditions, these treatment approaches can be used in various combinations to offer the best remedial action. A comparison of water treatment system costs extrapolated from the treatability studies performed on contaminated groundwater from the McCormick/Baxter Superfund site in Stockton, California, yielded operation and maintenance costs of $1.19/1,000 gal. for carbon treatment and $7.53/1,000 gal. for ultraviolet (UV) peroxidation, respectively.     

ART in‐well technology proves effective in treating 1,4‐dioxane contamination

A common industrial solvent additive is 1,4‐dioxane. Contamination of dissolved 1,4‐dioxane in groundwater has been found to be recalcitrant to removal by conventional, low‐cost remedial technologies. Only costly labor and energy‐intensive pump‐and‐treat remedial options have been shown to be effective remedies. However, the capital and extended operation and maintenance costs render pump‐and‐treat technologies economically unfeasible at many sites. Furthermore, pump‐and‐treat approaches at remediation sites have frequently been proven over time to merely achieve containment rather than site closure. A major manufacturer in North Carolina was faced with the challenge of cleaning up 1,4‐dioxane and volatile organic compound–impacted soil and groundwater at its site. Significant costs associated with the application of conventional approaches to treating 1,4‐dioxane in groundwater led to an alternative analysis of emerging technologies. As a result of the success of the Accelerated Remediation Technologies, LLC (ART) In‐Well Technology at other sites impacted with recalcitrant compounds such as methyl tertiarybutyl ether, and the demonstrated success of efficient mass removal, an ART pilot test was conducted. The ART Technology combines in situ air stripping, air sparging, soil vapor extraction, enhanced bioremediation/oxidation, and dynamic subsurface groundwater circulation. Monitoring results from the pilot test show that 1,4‐dioxane concentrations were reduced by up to 90 percent in monitoring wells within 90 days. The removal rate of chlorinated compounds from one ART well exceeded the removal achieved by the multipoint soil vapor extraction/air sparging system by more than 80 times. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

A systematic approach to in situ bioremediation in groundwater

In situ bioremediation (ISB) melds an understanding of microbiology, chemistry, hydrogeology, and engineering into a strategy for planned and controlled microbial degradation of specific contaminants. ISB creates subsurface environmental conditions, typically through reduction oxidation manipulation, which induce the degradation of contaminants via microbial catalyzed biochemical reactions. In turn, the microbes produce enzymes that are utilized to derive energy and that are instrumental in the degradation of target chemicals. To accomplish this chain of events, the type of microorganisms, contaminant, and the geological conditions at the site must be considered. Since in situ conditions are manipulated by engineered means, the most important consideration is the ability to transmit and mix liquids in the subsurface. The Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC)–ISB Team has recently completed a guidance document that describes a systematic approach to ISB in groundwater. ITRC is a state‐led coalition of more than 40 states working together with industry and stakeholders to achieve regulatory acceptance of environmental technologies. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Risk communication as a key component of a successful remediation project

Decisions made during the course of investigating and remediating a contaminated site, as well as the technology used, are most often driven exclusively by physical, technical, and health-based concerns. Additionally, in both determining and managing the potential risks posed by a remediation project, the focus tends to be placed primarily on health risks. However, a contaminated site and its remediation are neither static over time nor do they exist in a vacuum. Other elements of risk associated with the site and remedial activities include continuing regulatory oversight and compliance, public and agency relations, remedial technology costs, current and future land-use issues, and future technological/regulatory risks. Agencies, consultants, contractors, and facility management must consider these other non-health-related elements of risk. Additionally, efforts made to communicate a project's decisions, technologies, and risks are often made in a defensive or reactive posture, resulting in ineffective communication and an alienated, angry, or distrustful public. Proactive risk communication, as well as public involvement in the remedial process, are critical to the success of any remedial activity.     

A New Perspective on Sustainable Soil Remediation—Case Study Suggests Novel Fungal Genera Could Facilitate in situ Biodegradation of Hazardous Contaminants

Deciding upon a cost effective and sustainable method to address soil pollution is a challenge for many remedial project managers. High pressure to quickly achieve cleanup goals pushes for energy‐intensive remedies that rapidly address the contaminants of concern with established technologies, often leaving little room for research and development especially for slower treatment technologies, such as bioremediation, for the more heavily polluted sites. In this case study, new genomic approaches have been leveraged to assess fungal biostimulation potential in soils polluted with particularly persistent hydrophobic contaminants. This new approach provides insights into the genetic functions available at a given site in a way never before possible. In particular, this article presents a case study where next‐generation sequencing has been used to categorize fungi in soils from the Atlantic Wood Industries Superfund site in Portsmouth, Virginia. Data suggest that original attempts to harness fungi for bioremediation may have focused on fungal genera poorly suited to survive under heavily polluted site conditions, and that more targeted approaches relying on native indigenous fungi which are better equipped to survive under site‐specific conditions may be more appropriate. ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Mitigation of global greenhouse gas emissions from waste: conclusions and strategies from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report. Working Group III (Mitigation).

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from post-consumer waste and wastewater are a small contributor (about 3%) to total global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Emissions for 2004-2005 totalled 1.4 Gt CO2-eq year(-1) relative to total emissions from all sectors of 49 Gt CO2-eq year(-1) [including carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and F-gases normalized according to their 100-year global warming potentials (GWP)]. The CH4 from landfills and wastewater collectively accounted for about 90% of waste sector emissions, or about 18% of global anthropogenic methane emissions (which were about 14% of the global total in 2004). Wastewater N2O and CO2 from the incineration of waste containing fossil carbon (plastics; synthetic textiles) are minor sources. Due to the wide range of mature technologies that can mitigate GHG emissions from waste and provide public health, environmental protection, and sustainable development co-benefits, existing waste management practices can provide effective mitigation of GHG emissions from this sector. Current mitigation technologies include landfill gas recovery, improved landfill practices, and engineered wastewater management. In addition, significant GHG generation is avoided through controlled composting, state-of-the-art incineration, and expanded sanitation coverage. Reduced waste generation and the exploitation of energy from waste (landfill gas, incineration, anaerobic digester biogas) produce an indirect reduction of GHG emissions through the conservation of raw materials, improved energy and resource efficiency, and fossil fuel avoidance. Flexible strategies and financial incentives can expand waste management options to achieve GHG mitigation goals; local technology decisions are influenced by a variety of factors such as waste quantity and characteristics, cost and financing issues, infrastructure requirements including available land area, collection and transport considerations, and regulatory constraints. Existing studies on mitigation potentials and costs for the waste sector tend to focus on landfill CH4 as the baseline. The commercial recovery of landfill CH4 as a source of renewable energy has been practised at full scale since 1975 and currently exceeds 105 Mt CO2-eq year(-1). Although landfill CH4 emissions from developed countries have been largely stabilized, emissions from developing countries are increasing as more controlled (anaerobic) landfilling practices are implemented; these emissions could be reduced by accelerating the introduction of engineered gas recovery, increasing rates of waste minimization and recycling, and implementing alternative waste management strategies provided they are affordable, effective, and sustainable. Aided by Kyoto mechanisms such as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI), the total global economic mitigation potential for reducing waste sector emissions in 2030 is estimated to be > 1000 Mt CO2-eq (or 70% of estimated emissions) at costs below 100 US$ t(-1) CO2-eq year(-1). An estimated 20-30% of projected emissions for 2030 can be reduced at negative cost and 30-50% at costs < 20 US$ t(-) CO2-eq year(-1). As landfills produce CH4 for several decades, incineration and composting are complementary mitigation measures to landfill gas recovery in the short- to medium-term--at the present time, there are > 130 Mt waste year(-1) incinerated at more than 600 plants. Current uncertainties with respect to emissions and mitigation potentials could be reduced by more consistent national definitions, coordinated international data collection, standardized data analysis, field validation of models, and consistent application of life-cycle assessment tools inclusive of fossil fuel offsets.     

Pyrolysis technologies for municipal solid waste: A review

Pyrolysis has been examined as an attractive alternative to incineration for municipal solid waste (MSW) disposal that allows energy and resource recovery; however, it has seldom been applied independently with the output of pyrolysis products as end products. This review addresses the state-of-the-art of MSW pyrolysis in regards to its technologies and reactors, products and environmental impacts. In this review, first, the influence of important operating parameters such as final temperature, heating rate (HR) and residence time in the reaction zone on the pyrolysis behaviours and products is reviewed; then the pyrolysis technologies and reactors adopted in literatures and scale-up plants are evaluated. Third, the yields and main properties of the pyrolytic products from individual MSW components, refuse-derived fuel (RDF) made from MSW, and MSW are summarised. In the fourth section, in addition to emissions from pyrolysis processes, such as HCl, SO₂ and NH₃, contaminants in the products, including PCDD/F and heavy metals, are also reviewed, and available measures for improving the environmental impacts of pyrolysis are surveyed. It can be concluded that the single pyrolysis process is an effective waste-to-energy convertor but is not a guaranteed clean solution for MSW disposal. Based on this information, the prospects of applying pyrolysis technologies to dealing with MSW are evaluated and suggested.     

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.     

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.     

油基钻屑处理处置研究新进展

油基钻屑是在勘探和开采油气资源的钻井过程中产生的一种典型危险废弃物。本文首先将现有各类繁杂技术划分为处置技术和处理技术,再通过进一步细化分类,系统综述了每项技术的原理、优缺点及应用潜力,总结出了“环保达标、经济可行”的处理处置基本原则,指出高值资源化是未来的研究方向之一。