Short Course‐ Soil Vapor Treatment Design & Technology Review The short course will be presented in three components: Review and introduction of all vapor treatment technologies commercially available, data collection and pilot testing design, and full scale design considerations and the use of life cycle costing as a management tool. The scope of the workshop will be to review the types of commercially available vapor treatment technologies and their application for remediation at sites employing soil vapor extraction (SVE) or multi phase extraction (MPE) remediation of soils and or groundwater. SVE and MPE are common approaches to soil and groundwater remediation and have been applied at multiple sites for over 50 years under various chemistries and site conditions. The aim of the short course is to highlight the variability of applications and to identify the unique benefits of all available off‐gas treatment technologies including refrigeration, regenerative zeolite, activated carbon and thermal and catalytic oxidation. The chart below (Figure 1) provides an overview of the off‐gas treatment space combining performance characteristics and economics. The use and applicability of the chart is discussed for site specific modification and practice.
The short course will be presented in three components: Review and introduction of all vapor treatmenttechnologies commercially available, data collection and pilot testing design, and full scale designconsiderationsandtheuseoflifecyclecostingasamanagementtool.
Thescopeoftheworkshopwillbetoreviewthetypesofcommerciallyavailablevaportreatmenttechnologiesand their application for remediation at sites employing soil vapor extraction (SVE) ormulti phase extraction(MPE)remediationofsoilsandorgroundwater.SVEandMPEarecommonapproachestosoilandgroundwaterremediation and have been applied at multiple sites for over 50 years under various chemistries and siteconditions.Theaimof theshortcourse is tohighlight thevariabilityofapplicationsandto identify theuniquebenefits of all available off‐gas treatment technologies including refrigeration, regenerative zeolite, activatedcarbon and thermal and catalytic oxidation. The chart below (Figure 1) provides an overview of the off‐gastreatmentspacecombiningperformancecharacteristicsandeconomics.Theuseandapplicabilityofthechartisdiscussedforsitespecificmodificationandpractice.
PartI:ReviewofVaporTreatmentTechnologiesCurrentlyavailablecommercialoff‐gastreatmenttechnologiesarecategorizedintothreemaingroups:thermal and catalytic oxidation, adsorption, and biofiltration. A detailed review of the treatmenttechnologyoperation,designandoperationisreviewed.
The short course will review the technical aspects of the two more common off‐gas treatmenttechnologygroups includingactivatedcarbonadsorptionand thermalandcatalyticoxidationbutwillaugmenttraditionalpracticeandexperienceknowledgewithinclusionofinternationallycommerciallyavailabletechnologies includingregenerativezeoliteforadsorptionandrefrigeratedcondensationfortherecoveryofchemicalsandpetrolforreuseandrecycling.
PartII:DataCollection(FeasibilityAnalysis)andPilotTestingDesignAcomparisonevaluationofoff‐gastreatmenttechnologieswasprovidedbyEPA(2001and2006)andtheAirForceCenterfor Environmental Excellence (AFCEE; 1996) guidance documents, which includes the primary components of feasibility
studies employed in the practice of environmental engineering today. The criteria include applicability, site orphysicochemical property limitations, technology performance, engineering considerations, residuals management, cost,andeconomics.
approach; second, they will determine which technology to employ based on a number of factors, including thecontaminant type, site conditions, cost, and time scale. In the case of off‐gas treatment, a comparative analysis thatincorporatesperformance,cost,andsustainabilityconcernsispresentedthatalsoincludestheresultsofaGHGfootprintfor
twocasestudies.SoilvaporextractionorMPEarecommonmethodologiesusedtoremediatesiteswithsandandsiltysandimpacted with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and remain to be the most readily implemented and cost‐effectivemethodologiesavailableforNAPLremediationandchemicalrecovery.SVEenhancementmethods(EPA,1997),suchas in‐
situ thermal heating, are not presented in this evaluation; however, the authors contribute to recommendations andmethods for assessing the performance and cost of soil venting presented in the 2001 EPA report titled RemediationTechnologyCostCompendium‐Year2000andHansenetal.(1998).
ContaminantCharacteristicsThe success of a selected off‐gas treatment technology is dependent on the subject contaminants’ physicochemical
(VOCs)thatarelikelytobeextractedduringtheearlystagesofoperationoftheSVEsystem.Apilot test is recommended forevaluatingSVEeffectivenessanddesignparameters foranysite,especiallywhereSVE is
andwellheadvacuumsareappliedtotheextractionwellstodeterminetheoptimaloperatingconditions.Vapor concentrations are also measured at two or more intervals during the pilot study to estimate initial vapor
thescreenisparalleltothewatertablesurface.Surface sealsmight be included in an SVE systemdesign to prevent surfacewater infiltration that can reduce air flow
rates,reduceemissionsoffugitivevapors,preventverticalshort‐circuitingofairflow,or increasethedesignROI.Theseresultsareaccomplishedbecausesurfaceseals force freshair tobedrawnfromagreaterdistance fromtheextractionwell.Ifasurfacesealisused,thelowerpressuregradientsresultindecreasedflowvelocities.Thisconditionmayrequirea
(SURF), a non‐profit organization dedicated to helping the environmental industry prepare and apply sustainable practices toenvironmentalengineeringandremediationwhicharefoundedonbenefitstotheEnvironment,SocietyandLocalEconomy.
