Thermal Conductive Heating and Steam-Enhanced … · NEWMOA In-Situ Thermal Remediation Workshops...

NEWMOA In-Situ Thermal Remediation WorkshopsJune 13 and 14, 2012

Thermal Conductive Heating and Steam-Enhanced Extraction

6/11/2012 1


John LaChanceVP HydrogeologyTerraTherm, Inc.

New England Waste Management Officials’ Association

In-Situ Thermal Remediation WorkshopJune 13, 2012 – Quinebaug Valley Community College in Danielson, CT

June 14, 2012 - Westford Regency Inn and Conference Center in Westford, MA

ISTR Technology Alphabet Soup• Steam-Enhanced Extraction (SEE)*

• Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH)*Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH) Electro-Thermal Dynamic Stripping Process (ET-DSP)

• In Situ Thermal Desorption (ISTD)* Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH) + Vacuum Recovery

• Combinations*: ISTD/SEE (ET-DSP/SEE)

• Radio Frequency Heating

Focus of Talk *Offered by TerraTherm, Inc.

2NEWMOA Thermal Remediation Workshop



6/11/2012 2

ISTD/TCH* - Heating governed by thermal conductivity (f~3) nearly uniform

ERH/ET-DSP* - Heating governed by electrical conductivity (f~200) may require stacked electrodes

SEE* - Heating governed by hydraulic conductivity non-uniform steam flow

*Offered by TerraTherm, Inc.


TerraTherm ISTD/TCH Heaters

Covered by one or more of the following: U.S. Patent Nos. 5,190,405, 5,318,116, 6,485,232 and 6,632,047. International patents (e.g., EPC 1272290).




6/11/2012 3

Heater Only Well

Horizontal Vapor Collection Screen

Steam Zone Steam Zone

ISTDISTD(TCH + Vacuum)(TCH + Vacuum)

DNAPL DNAPL

In-Situ TemperaturesEarly in Treatment

e.g., 30 days

In-Situ TemperaturesLater in Treatment

e.g., 90 days

100C50C


Vapor treatment

Treated vapor to atmosphere

ISTD: Typical Simplified Site ISTD: Typical Simplified Site LayoutLayout

Power distribution system

Knockout pot

Blower

Water treatmentDischarge

Heater wells

Extraction well

Heat exchanger

Pump

DischargeVapor cap

Treatment area foot-print

Temperature and pressure monitoring holes




6/11/2012 4

SEE Typical Layout

Steam, upper

Steam, lowerExtraction well


Steam Injection ManifoldSteam Injection Manifold




6/11/2012 5

Power

ISTD+SEEISTD+SEEin Complex Stratigraphyin Complex Stratigraphy

Extraction

Top soil/clay

Permeable zone

Vapor cap

Steam Power Power Steam

SteamSteam

ClayTCHTCH


TCH CVOC BTEXChloro-

benzenes Gasoline DieselOils > 50

cpCreosote, 10-100 cp

MGP coal tar,

viscous

Sand, vadose EffectiveSand, saturatedSilt, vadose Promising/site specificSilt, saturatedClay, vadose Problematic/unprovenClay, saturatedCrystalline rock Will not be effectiveCemented sedimentary rockOrganic rockOrganic rock

SEE CVOC BTEXChloro-



MGP coal tar,

viscous

Sand, vadose EffectiveSand, saturatedSilt, vadose Promising/site specificSilt, saturatedClay, vadose Problematic/unprovenClay, saturatedCrystalline rock Will not be effectiveCemented sedimentary rockOrganic rock

TCH+SEE CVOC BTEXChloro-



MGP coal tar,

viscous

Sand, vadose EffectiveSand, saturatedSilt, vadose Promising/site specificSilt, saturatedClay, vadose Problematic/unprovenClay, saturatedCrystalline rock Will not be effectiveCemented sedimentary rockOrganic rock




6/11/2012 6

Are the COCs volatile?

ISTD >100oC

No

No Yes

Yes

Stringent COC soil treatment criteria?

Start

Primary Factors Affecting Selection of Treatment Technology/Approach

- BP/VP of COCs- Cleanup Criteria - GW flux- Bedrock

Is there a high-flow aquifer?

ISTD, ERH or ET-DSPTM

(100oC)

ISTD 100oC

Is there a thick clay layer?

SEE

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Is bedrock present in the treatment zone?

Bedrock- Stratigraphy

SEE combined with ISTD, ERH or ET-DSPTM (100oC)

Simplified decision tree for identifying applicable thermal technologies for a site

Yes


Fill

S d/ ilt

Example Source Area DNAPL and VOC DistributionExample Source Area DNAPL and VOC Distribution

Sand/silt

Clay

Gravel/weathered rock aquifer (v>1 ft/d)

Fractured bedrock




6/11/2012 7

Fill

ISTDISTD

Extraction well

ISTD heater boring

Sand/silt

Clay

Cool Gravel/weathered rock aquifer (v>1 ft/d)

Fractured bedrock

water flow


Fill

ISTD ISTD –– ResultResult

Extraction well

ISTD heater boring

Sand/silt

Clay


Fractured bedrock




6/11/2012 8

Fill

ISTD ISTD -- SEE CombinationSEE Combination

Steam injection well

Extraction well

ISTD heater boring

Sand/silt

Clay


Fractured bedrock


Fill

ISTD ISTD -- SEE Combination SEE Combination –– ResultResult

Steam injection well

Extraction well

ISTD heater boring

Sand/silt

Clay


Fractured bedrock




6/11/2012 9

Data Needs

• Good Conceptual ModelD fi iti f t t t– Definition of treatment zone

– Comprehensive list of COCs, concentrations, and mass estimates

– Geology and Hydrogeology (stratigraphy, permeability, hydraulic gradients, gw flow velocities))

• Treatment Objectives• Site Constraints


Remediation using ISTD and steam – source removal and plume effectsLindven, Denmark




6/11/2012 10

Why stay and listen?• DNAPL source zone “removed” – does it make

a difference?• How to use thermal in tight spaces under

buildings• Use of steam and conductive heating together

– the site conditions should determine which th d t h t th dmethod, not what the vendor says

• Thermal is cool!


Why clean up? Plume length >3,300 ft

Two municipal wells downgradient of site – supplyingmore than 100,000 citizens

Groundwater velocity ~160 ft/year

Remediation objective: Clean up source zone

Hoejby Water board

Lindved Water board

Contaminated Site

Plume




6/11/2012 11

Source zone location

Dry cleaning facility

Operations had to continue during the source removal


FillLeaking

ti t k

Building

Hydraulic head in clay layer

Depth bgs0 m / 0 ft1 m / 3 ft

Contaminant distribution, geology and hydrogeologyCl

ayey

till

separation tank

Hydraulic head in sand/gravel

Hydraulic head in clay layer

4 m / 13 ft

11 m / 36 ft

PCE

Sand

/gra

vel

Target treatment zoneArea: 2,700 ft2

Volume: 3,300 cyTreatment depth: 13-43 ft bgs

13 m / 43 ft




6/11/2012 12

Fill

BuildingDepth bgs

0 m / 0 ft1 m / 3 ft

Thermal Concept (SEE and TCH)

Clay

ey ti

ll

4 m / 13 ft

11 m / 36 ft

Sand

/gra

vel

/

13 m / 43 ft


Fill

BuildingDepth bgs

0 m / 0 ft1 m / 3 ft

Thermal Concept (SEE and TCH)Cl

ayey

till

4 m / 13 ft

11 m / 36 ft

Sand

/gra

vel

/

13 m / 43 ft




6/11/2012 13

Fill

BuildingDepth bgs

0 m / 0 ft1 m / 3 ft

Thermal Concept (SEE and TCH)

Clay

ey ti

ll

4 m / 13 ft

11 m / 36 ft

Sand

/gra

vel

/

13 m / 43 ft


Fill

BuildingDepth bgs

0 m / 0 ft1 m / 3 ft

Thermal Concept (SEE and TCH)Cl

ayey

till

4 m / 13 ft

11 m / 36 ft

Sand

/gra

vel

/

13 m / 43 ft




6/11/2012 14

Drilling between dry cleaning machines, walls, cables and pipes


Indoor heater installation




6/11/2012 15

Vapor

Heater

pcollector

Deep extraction well

Wells


Treatment system in two levels due to limited space at site




6/11/2012 16

80

100

120[

de

g C

]

8000

10000

12000

mg

/m3

]

Steam heat-up (38 days) Hot floor (70 days)

Average Temperature and ConcentrationCooling (17 days)

40

60

80

Ave

rag

e T

emp

era

ture

[

4000

6000

8000

PC

E c

on

cen

tra

tio

n [

m

Temperature ISTD Zone [C]Temperature Steam Zone [C]PCE concentration [mg/m3]

Mass removed ~ 4,000 kg

Confirmation Sampling

0

20

6-287-12

7-268-9

8-239-6

9-2010-4

10-18

11-111-15

A

0

2000[ g ]


Hot Soil Sampling - Equipment

• Intact core samples are needed to minimize vaporization of CVOCs during sampling

• Samples typically collected using a core barrel-type sampler equipped with stainless steel or Teflon sleeves

• Lengths and diameter of sample tools may vary from driller to driller



6/11/2012 17

Hot Soil Sampling - Sample Collection• The core barrel sampler and sample sleeve are assembled and

advanced to the desired depth• Samples are collected• Full recovery not always possible

• Standard drilling equipment utilized

• Once removed from the borehole, the core barrel is disassembled and the sample sleeve is removed

• The ends of the sample sleeve are immediately covered with Teflon tape and capped

Hot Soil Sampling - Sample Collection (Cont.)

p pp



6/11/2012 18

• Samples are placed into an ice bath for cooling containing drains to allow melt water to freely drain

• Once cooled to a temperature no higher than 10⁰C (50⁰F) the sample is ready to be containerized


p y

• Samples are sealed tightly in a plastic bag for shipment to the laboratory

• Laboratory will extrude the soil • Alternatively the cooled samples may


Alternatively, the cooled samples may be processed in the field

• Commercial systems like the En Core®

sampler may also be utilized

www.ennovativetech.com



6/11/2012 19

Soil concentrations before remediation

0

2

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000

Concentration [mg/kg]

PCE i soil prior treatment [mg/kg]

Average pre: 340 mg/kg

4

6

8

10

Dep

th [

m b

gs]

g p g/ g

Max pre: 13,000 mg/kg

10

12Detection limit Remediation goal


0

2

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000

Concentration [mg/kg]

PCE i soil post treatment [mg/kg]

Soil concentrations after remediation

4

6

8

10

De

pth

[m

bg

s]

Average post: 0.50 mg/kg

Max post: 4.4 mg/kg

10

12Detection limit Remediation goal

Mass remaining in source zone: 10 kg (22 lbs). Removal efficiency: 99.75%




6/11/2012 20

Effect on plume?

146.517

B415

B405

B407

B408

G5

G6

B410

B404

B403

Tetrachlorethylen (PCE)

146.533

0 50 m

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

21-08-06

19-11-06

17-02-07

18-05-07

16-08-07

14-11-07

12-02-08

12-05-08

10-08-08

08-11-08

06-02-09

07-05-09

05-08-09

03-11-09

01-02-10

02-05-10

31-07-10

Dato

Ko

nce

ntr

atio

n (

µg

/l)

E1-PCE E4-PCE I5-PCE

Oprensning

• Mass discharge reduced following thermal treatment


Predicted PCE Plume - Without Source Removal - expected to reach municipal wells




6/11/2012 21

Predicted PCE Plume - With Source Removal-- mass flux significantly reduced

- natural degradation attenuates plume- municipal drinking water wells protected


• 4000 kg of DNAPL were removed – 10 kg left

• Mass discharge reduced by ~ 300-800 times

• Plume has started shrinking

Conclusion

• Long-term benefit predicted – no need to treat groundwater for drinking purposes




6/11/2012 22

Fractured Rock Site in Southeastern US

• Focused Cleanup of TCE Source Zone– DNAPL

– Above and below the water table– Above and below the water table

– Saprolite, weathered bedrock, and fractured bedrock

• Leave groundwater plume for MNA and/or Enhanced Bio

• November 2006 to July 2007

• Active Manufacturing Facilityg y


Fractured Rock Site Fractured Rock Site -- Plan ViewPlan View




6/11/2012 23

ISTD WellfieldISTD Wellfield

Heater Well

Heater Vacuum Well

Vapor Collection Manifold


Conceptual CrossConceptual Cross--Section Through Treatment Section Through Treatment ZoneZone

Fill/Saprolite30 ft

Fill/Saprolite30 ft

Saprolite 55 ft

75 ft

90 ft

Weathered BR

Saprolite 55 ft

75 ft

90 ft

Weathered BR

BR – FRX Gneiss

Weathered BR

Treatment zone = 8,700 cy

BR – FRX Gneiss

Weathered BR

Treatment zone = 8,700 cy




6/11/2012 24

ISTD Thermal WellsISTD Thermal Wells

Fill/Saprolite

Heater Well

Heater Vacuum Well To off gas treatment

Fill/Saprolite

Heater Well

Heater Vacuum Well To off gas treatment

Fill/Saprolite

Saprolite 55 ft

30 ft

75 ft

90 ft

Fill/Saprolite

Saprolite 55 ft

30 ft

75 ft

90 ft

Weathered BR

BR – FRX Gneiss

Boostedgrout

Weathered BR

BR – FRX Gneiss

Boostedgrout


Starting Temperature ProfileStarting Temperature Profile

Fill

Temperature Profiles at Thermocouples T1 - T7

0

50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250

Temperature - oF

2/1/2007Starting Temperature

Boiling PointH2O

Fill


0

50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250

Temperature - oF

2/1/2007Starting Temperature

Boiling PointH2O

Saprolite

10

20

30

40

50Dep

th -

Ft

T1

T2

T3

T4

T5

T6

T7

Hea

ted

Inte

rval

Temperature Profile

H2O

W th d B d k

Saprolite

10

20

30

40

50Dep

th -

Ft

T1

T2

T3

T4

T5

T6

T7

Hea

ted

Inte

rval

Temperature Profile

H2O

W th d B d k

BR – FRX Gneiss

60

70

80

90

Weathered Bedrock

BR – FRX Gneiss

60

70

80

90

Weathered Bedrock




6/11/2012 25

Temperature Profile at 4 WeeksTemperature Profile at 4 Weeks

Fill


0

10

50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250

Temperature - oF

2/27/2007Fill


0

10

50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250

Temperature - oF

2/27/2007Fill


0

10

50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250

Temperature - oF

2/27/2007

Saprolite

10

20

30

40

50

60

Dep

th -

Ft

T1

T2

T3

T4

T5

T6

T7

Weathered Bedrock

Saprolite

10

20

30

40

50

60

Dep

th -

Ft

T1

T2

T3

T4

T5

T6

T7

Weathered Bedrock

Saprolite

10

20

30

40

50

60

Dep

th -

Ft

T1

T2

T3

T4

T5

T6

T7

Weathered Bedrock

BR – FRX Gneiss

60

70

80

90

Weathered Bedrock

BR – FRX Gneiss

60

70

80

90

Weathered Bedrock

BR – FRX Gneiss

60

70

80

90

Weathered Bedrock


Final Temperatures within Treatment ZoneFinal Temperatures within Treatment Zone

Fill


0

50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250

Temperature - oF

5/29/2007Fill


0

50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250

Temperature - oF

5/29/2007Fill

Saprolite

10

20

30

40

50Dep

th -

Ft

5/29/2007

T1

T2

T3

T4

T5

T6

T7

Fill

Saprolite

10

20

30

40

50Dep

th -

Ft

5/29/2007

T1

T2

T3

T4

T5

T6

T7

BR – FRX Gneiss

60

70

80

90

Weathered Bedrock

BR – FRX Gneiss

60

70

80

90

Weathered Bedrock




6/11/2012 26

Mass Removal During ISTD TreatmentMass Removal During ISTD Treatment

14.0

16.0

18.0

6.00

7.00

~12,000 lbs ofTCE14.0

16.0

18.0

6.00

7.00

~12,000 lbs ofTCE

4 0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Rem

ov

al R

ate

(lb

s/h

r)

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

To

tal R

emo

ved

(T

on

s)

4 0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Rem

ov

al R

ate

(lb

s/h

r)

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

To

tal R

emo

ved

(T

on

s)

0.0

2.0

4.0

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150

Days after Initial Startup (Jan 29, 2007)

0.00

1.00

Removal Rate Total Removed

0.0

2.0

4.0

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150

Days after Initial Startup (Jan 29, 2007)

0.00

1.00

Removal Rate Total Removed


Confirmation Soil Data: ISTD Project in Confirmation Soil Data: ISTD Project in Fractured RockFractured Rock

0

10

1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000

g/kg TCE

0

10

1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000

g/kg TCE

20

30

40

50

60

Location 1

Location 2

Location 3

ft b

gs

56

20

30

40

50

60

Location 1

Location 2

Location 3

ft b

gs

56

70

80

90

Location 4

Location 5

Location 6

MaxPre-Treatment

ND DNAPLCleanup Objective: 95% UCL of mean less than 60 g.kg

Min. Soil Conc.For DNAPL

foc: 0.05% - 0.1%n: 0.3-0.35

95% UCL of mean TCE conc. = 17 g/kg

Samples

70

80

90

Location 4

Location 5

Location 6

MaxPre-Treatment

ND DNAPLCleanup Objective: 95% UCL of mean less than 60 g.kg

Min. Soil Conc.For DNAPL

foc: 0.05% - 0.1%n: 0.3-0.35

95% UCL of mean TCE conc. = 17 g/kg

Samples




6/11/2012 27

Summary, ISTD Project in Fractured RockSummary, ISTD Project in Fractured Rock

Rock heats more readily than overburden (less water and porosity).

Crystalline rock cleans up readily.

Total project cost including power: ~$1.1M

~1.5M kWhr or 170 kWhr/cy.

Unit cost including power: $125/cy (power: ~$12/cy)


Summary• Steam-Enhanced Extraction (SEE)*

• Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH)*Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH) Electro-Thermal Dynamic Stripping Process (ET-DSP)

• In Situ Thermal Desorption (ISTD)* Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH) + Vacuum Recovery

• Combinations*: ISTD/SEE (ET-DSP/SEE)

• Radio Frequency Heating

Focus of Talk *Offered by TerraTherm, Inc.




6/11/2012 28

Think Thermal When… You have a Source Zone, or Hot Spots Site is Heterogeneous and/or Low in Permeability Stringent Cleanup Levels Must be Achieved,Stringent Cleanup Levels Must be Achieved,

Quickly (or you just need to remove a lot of mass)

Excavation is Ruled Out or Impractical

Thermal is Especially Well Suited if: The Treatment Zone is Deep There’s a Mixture of Contaminants There s a Mixture of Contaminants The Site is Complex, and/or Long-Term O&M is Too Costly

55

NEWMOA Thermal Remediation Workshop 56



6/11/2012 29

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL -HOT SOIL SAMPLING

Griepke-Nielsen, S., et al, Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds, Monterey, CA. 2012

NEWMOA Thermal Remediation Workshop 57

Soil Sampling during and after Thermal –How and When?

Steffen Griepke Nielsen, Pia Juul Jensen (formerly NIRAS A/S, Alleroed, Denmark)Gorm Heron (TerraTherm, Inc., Bakersfield, CA USA)

Jim Galligan and John LaChance (TerraTherm, Inc., Gardner, MA USA)Peder Johansen (Capital Region of Denmark, Hillerød, Denmark)

Niels Ploug, Jesper Holm (Krüger, Gladsaxe, Denmark)



6/11/2012 30

H l h t il f li bl CVOC t ti

Key Questions

• How can one sample hot soil for reliable CVOCs concentration data?

• Will the thermally treated site experience rebound during the cooling period?

• Will it be necessary to repeat soil sampling once the site cools?

Sampling Equipment

• Intact core samples are needed to minimize vaporization of CVOCs during sampling

• Samples typically collected using a core barrel-type sampler equipped with stainless steel or Teflon sleeves

• Lengths and diameter of sample tools may vary from driller to driller



6/11/2012 31

Equipment Decontamination

• Downhole equipment (augers, core barrels, drive rods, etc.) must be decontaminated prior to use

• Samples sleeves and end caps must be decontaminated if reused

Sample Collection• The core barrel sampler and sample sleeve are assembled and

advanced to the desired depth• Samples are collected• Full recovery not always possible

• Standard drilling equipment utilized



6/11/2012 32

• Once removed from the borehole, the core barrel is disassembled and the sample sleeve is removed

• The ends of the sample sleeve are immediately covered with Teflon tape and capped

Sample Collection (Cont.)

p pp

• Samples are placed into an ice bath for cooling containing drains to allow melt water to freely drain

• Once cooled to a temperature no higher than 10⁰C (50⁰F) the sample is ready to be containerized


p y



6/11/2012 33

• Samples are sealed tightly in a plastic bag for shipment to the laboratory

• Laboratory will extrude the soil • Alternatively the cooled samples may


Alternatively, the cooled samples may be processed in the field

• Commercial systems like the En Core®

sampler may also be utilized

www.ennovativetech.com

Reerslev – PCE Source Zone with Plume

Source zoneClay

Sand

Clay

Limestone

• Area: 1,300 m2

• Volume: 11,500 m3

• Days of operation:169 days• CVOC mass removed: 2,300 -2,500 kg PCE (>97% of mass was PCE)



6/11/2012 34

Reerslev (Capital Region of Denmark) - ISTD

N S

W

E

Wellfield Layout



6/11/2012 35

Pre-treatment

6 weeks prior to shut-down

5 locations

1st post-treatment

12 locations

2nd post-treatment4 locations

Sample Collection

12 locations38 samples

17 samples 50 samples 17 samples

9/201111/2009

11/200910/20093-5/2009

22 months

2 weeks prior to shut-down

6 locations30 samples

Pre-Treatment PCE Soil Concentrations

Pre-Treatment38 samplesMax: 360.4 mg/kgAvg: 41.3 mg/kg

0

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Soil Concentrations [mg/kg]

1

2

3

4

5

6Dept

h [m

bgs

]

7

8

9

10

D

PCE Soil Concentrations - Pre-Treatment

Detection Limit Remediation Goal



6/11/2012 36

1st Event – Random Sampling

1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8 9

Sampling Subset

Sample Locations

1st post treatment sampling event



6/11/2012 37

1st Post-Treatment Soil Sampling Event

1st Post-Treatment50 samplesMax: 0.057 mg/kgAvg: 0.014 mg/kg

0


1

2

3

4

5

6Dept

h [m

bgs

]

7

8

9

10

D

PCE Soil Concentrations - 1st Post-Treatment Sampling Event


120T6 - 4.0 m bgs T6 - 10.0 m bgs T18 - 1.0 m bgs T18 - 4 m bgs

Post-Treatment Temperature Monitoring

• Temperatures monitored at 2 locations post-treatment• Eight temperature monitoring rounds over a 22 month

period

60

80

100

120

atur

e [°

C]

2nd post-treatment soil sampling event

0

20

40

8/15/09 11/14/09 2/13/10 5/15/10 8/14/10 11/13/10 2/12/11 5/14/11 8/13/11 11/12/11

Tem

pera

Shut-down and 1st

post-treatment soil samling event



6/11/2012 38

Sample Locations

1st post treatment sampling event2nd post treatment sampling event

2nd Post Treatment Soil Sampling Event

2nd Post Treatment17 samplesMax: <0.01 mg/kgAvg: <0.01 mg/kg

0


1

2

3

4

5

6epth

[m b

gs]

6

7

8

9

10

De

PCE Soil Concentrations - 2nd Post-Treatment Sampling Event




6/11/2012 39

Comparison of Pre- and Post-Treatment Soil Concentrations

Pre-Treatment38 samplesMax: 360.4 mg/kgAvg: 41.3 mg/kg

Post Treatment

0


Post-Treatment67 samplesMax: 0.057 mg/kgAvg: ND-0.014 mg/kgDRE: 99.9-100%

1

2

3

4

5

6Dept

h [m

bgs

]

7

8

9

10

D

PCE Soil Concentrations - Pre-TreatmentPCE Soil Concentrations - 1st Post-Treatment Sampling EventPCE Soil Concentrations - 2nd Post-Treatment Sampling Event


Lessons Learned

• How can one sample hot soil for reliable CVOCs concentration data?

Use proper hot soil sampling procedures.

Will h h ll d i i b d d i h• Will the thermally treated site experience rebound during the cooling period?

No, data collected in this study documents that no reboundoccurs following cooling when the flux of contaminants backinto the TTZ is limited.

• Will it be necessary to repeat soil sampling once the site cools?

N d ll d i hi d d h CVOCNo, data collected in this study documents that CVOCconcentrations actually decreased after 22 months of coolingdue to biological polishing at the Reerslev site.



6/11/2012 40

Capital Region of Denmark. 2008a. MW Gjøes Vej, Reerslev. Forklassificerings-undersøgelse. NIRAS. May 2008 (in Danish).

Capital Region of Denmark. 2008b. MW Gjøes Vej, Reerslev. Supplerende Undersøgelser –Supplerende Forklassificering, Risikovurdering og Ventilationstest. NIRAS, August 2008 (in Danish)

References

Danish).

Capital Region of Denmark. 2011. ISTD Entreprise, Entreprise 1, MW Gjøes Vej, Reerslev. Slutdokumentation. NIRAS. February 2011 (in Danish).Capital Region of Denmark. 2012. ISTD Oprensning, MW Gjøes Vej, Reerslev. Jordprøvetagning i Afkølet Område. NIRAS. January 2012 (in Danish).

Gaberell, M., A. Gavaskar, E. Drescher, J. Sminchak, L. Cumming, W.-S. Yoon, and S. De Silva. 2002. “Soil Core Characterization Strategy at DNAPL Sites Subjected to Strong Thermal or Chemical Remediation.” in: A.R. Gavaskar and A.S.C. Chen (Eds.), Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds—2002. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds (Monterey, CA; May 2002). ISBN 1-57477-132-9. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH.

TerraTherm. 2011. Standard Operating Procedure. Hot Soil Sampling for Chlorinated Volatile Organic Compounds. TerraTherm. December 2009.

Date post:	20-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dinhdang
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

Thermal Conductive Heating and Steam-Enhanced … · NEWMOA In-Situ Thermal Remediation Workshops...

Documents