4.8 Article

Pilot-scale demonstration of surfactant-enhanced PCE solubilization at the Bachman road site. 2. System operation and evaluation

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 39, 期 6, 页码 1791-1801

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es049563r

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A pilot-scale demonstration of surfactant-enhanced aquifer remediation (SEAR) was conducted during the summer of 2000 at the Bachman Road site in Oscoda, MI. Part two of this two-part paper describes results from partitioning and nonpartitioning tracer tests, SEAR operations, and post-treatment monitoring. For this field test, 68 400 L of an aqueous solution of 6% (wt) Tween 80 were injected to recover tetra chloroethene-nonaqueous phase liquid (PCE-DNAPL) from a shallow, unconfined aquifer. Results of a nonreactive tracer test, conducted prior to introducing the surfactant solution, demonstrate target zone sweep and hydraulic control, confirming design-phase model predictions. Partitioning tracer test results suggest PCE-DNAPL saturations of up to 0.74% within the pilot-scale treatment zone, consistent with soil core data collected during site characterization. Analyses of effluent samples taken from the extraction well during SEAR operations indicate that a total of 19 L of PCE and 95% of the injected surfactant were recovered. Post-treatment monitoring indicated that PCE concentrations at many locations within the treated zone were reduced by as much as 2 orders of magnitude from pre-SEAR levels and had not rebounded 450 days after SEAR operations ceased. Pilot-scale costs ($365 900) compare favorably with design-phase cost estimates, with similar to 10% of total costs attributable to the intense sampling density and frequency. Results of this pilot-scale test indicate that careful design and implementation of SEAR can result in effective DNAPL mass removal and a substantial reduction in aqueous concentrations within the treated source zone under favorable geologic conditions.

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

4.8
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