Technology Status Report: In Situ Flushing - CLU-IN

More documents

Recommendations

Info

In Situ Flushing Project Summaries GWRTAC Case Study Database PITTs. The present test configuration is composed of an injection well, a hydraulic-control backstop well, and three extraction wells. A conservative interwell tracer test (CITT) will be conducted first to: (1) demonstrate hydraulic control of the injectate, (2) determine the actual swept pore volume of the test zone, and (3) provide empirical data to fine tune the final design of PITT/SEAR/PITT demonstration. Following the CITT, the subsurface will be heated to approximately 50°C through the injection of heated potable water. Once the subsurface in the demonstration area is at the proper temperature, the PITT/SEAR/PITT sequence will be conducted. Current design calls for the injection of approximately 3,200 gallons of surfactant solution, corresponding to a five to six pore volume surfactant flood over a five day period. The introduction of surfactant will be followed by approximately three days of water flooding to remove the remaining surfactant and solubilized NAPL from the subsurface before the final PITT. The field work is scheduled to begin in early December 1998. Report(s)/Publication(s) (Additional Information Sources): None Ground-Water Remediation Technologies Analysis Center Operated by Concurrent Technologies Corporation Appendix - Page 132 of 164 Copyright GWRTAC 1998 Revision 1 Tuesday, November 17, 1998
In Situ Flushing Project Summaries GWRTAC Case Study Database GWRTAC ID: FLSH0066 Project Name: Aluminum Company Site City: State/Province: QC Primary GWRTAC Personal Communication Source (Name/Organization): Project Summary: Charles Boulanger GSI Environnement Report(s)/Publication(s) (GWRTAC Source): GSI Environnement (formerly Ecosite, Inc.), 965 Newton Ave., Office 270, Québec City, Qc. Canada G1P 4M4, Marketing Information The following text was excerpted from marketing information provided by GSI Environnement (formerly Ecosite, Inc.), 965 Newton Ave., Office 270, Québec City, Qc. Canada G1P 4M4 in August 1998: The site was contaminated with transformer oil and PCBs. Initial concentrations were 60,000 ppm MOG and 20 ppm PCB. The 1,000 m3 (approx. 1,300 yd3) contaminated zone extended from 0,0 to 1.5 m (0.0 to 4.9 ft) below ground surface (bgs), and was comprised of heterogeneous silty backfill material. After performance of a risk assessment, treatability studies were conducted in the laboratory, and ultimately, surfactants were developed which would provide highly efficient treatment of the source material. To lower concentrations to a non-toxic level for biodegradation to take place, Injecsol TM enhanced in situ soil flushing was applied to the contaminated matrix, and the site remediation was completed with in situ bioremediaiton. The Injecsol TM technology was used for enhanced flushing, nutrient injection and free phase recovery. All work was done without interruption to plant activities or dismantling of existing infrastructures. The contaminant levels were lowered to 5,000 ppm (MOG) and 10 ppm (PCB). The project was performed over a one year duration, at a cost of +/- $300,000. (Canadian). Report(s)/Publication(s) (Additional Information Sources): None Ground-Water Remediation Technologies Analysis Center Operated by Concurrent Technologies Corporation Appendix - Page 133 of 164 Copyright GWRTAC 1998 Revision 1 Tuesday, November 17, 1998
Page 1 and 2:
Technology Status Report Technology
Page 3 and 4:
ABSTRACT This technology status rep
Page 5 and 6:
LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 1 I
Page 7 and 8:
1.0 INTRODUCTION / PURPOSE OF STATU
Page 9 and 10:
a laboratory-scale project. As illu
Page 11 and 12:
3.1 Flushing Solutions 3.0 ANALYSIS
Page 13 and 14:
(approximately eight) full-scale pr
Page 15 and 16:
Table 1. In Situ Flushing - Summary
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Table 3 In Situ Flushing - Geology
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Table 4 In Situ Flushing - Recovere
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Full-Scale/Commercial 26% Figure 2.
Page 35 and 36:
Site Remediation 25% Figure 4. In S
Page 37 and 38:
NAPL Removal 34% Figure 6. In Situ
Page 39 and 40:
Figure 8. In Situ Flushing - Distri
Page 41 and 42:
Number of Projects 35 30 25 20 15 1
Page 43 and 44:
Number of Case Studies 45 40 35 30
Page 45 and 46:
25 ft and 50 ft and 10 ft and 100 f
Page 47 and 48:
Unconfined Aquifer 65% Figure 16. I
Page 49 and 50:
In Situ Flushing Project Summaries
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130: In Situ Flushing Project Summaries
Page 179: In Situ Flushing Project Summaries
show all

Technology Status Report: In Situ Flushing - CLU-IN

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?