4.5 Article

A Case Study of Deep DNAPL Contamination in Marine Soft Clays

期刊

GEOFLUIDS
卷 2023, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-HINDAWI
DOI: 10.1155/2023/5059543

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aquifers in China's southeast coastal areas are protected by marine soft clays, but understanding of DNAPL contamination in these clays is limited. A study conducted on a former pharmaceutical factory site in Shanghai found serious 1,1,2-trichloroethane (DNAPL) contamination. The contamination was found to accumulate at the interface of the upper soft silty clay and lower soft clay, and the vertical transport was determined to be due to the displacement of pore water by pure DNAPL.
Aquifers in China's southeast coastal areas are protected by the overlying marine soft clays formed in Holocene transgression. However, a fundamental understanding of the characteristics of DNAPL (dense nonaqueous phase liquid) contamination in marine soft clays is limited. The study was conducted on the site of a former pharmaceutical factory in Shanghai, where serious 1,1,2-trichloroethane (DNAPL) contamination was detected up to the depth of 22.0 m below the existing grade. Partitioning calculation method was used to identify the presence of pure phase, and the results showed that pure 1,1,2-trichloroethane was accumulated at the interface of the upper soft silty clay and lower soft clay. The vertical transport was believed to be the pure DNAPL displacing pore water following the principle of two-phase flow, rather than the convection and diffusion of aqueous phase. The contamination (NAPL-soil interaction) impacted the soil properties slightly, and this effect could not account for the deep contamination. Soil structure analysis showed that these clays contained a proportion of large interaggregate pores, providing pathways for the transport of pure DNAPL. Considering their flocculated structure, the marine soft clays are not capable to perform as a barrier to prevent the downward migration of pure DNAPL.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据