From activated carbon in polluted Norwegian fjords to biochar ... - NGI

From activated carbon in polluted Norwegianfjords to biochar in weathered tropical soilsGerard Cornelissen 1,2,3 , Sarah Hale 1 , Espen Eek 1 , GijsBreedveld 1 , Magnus Sparrevik 1 , and many others1Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI), Oslo, Norway2 University of Life Sciences (UMB), 5003 Ås, Norway3Stockholm University, Sweden

Presentation OutlineA. Polluted fjord sediment and thin caps with AC• 3 projects, Research Council Project andJoint Industry ProjectB. Biochar in agricultural soil: agronomy and technology• Zambia• Indonesia• Malaysia• Nepal

Case study 1:Field study AC amendmentTrondheim Harbour, PAHsReferenceField(do nothing)50 m50 mACpowderAC powder+sandsandAC powder+clay

Field application site2007-2010AC+ clayAC only

AC placementAC + clay best: lowest AC loss, bestchemical and biological effectOnly ACAC+clay after 5 monthsAC+sandCornelissen, G; Kruså, ME; Breedveld, GD; Eek, E; Oen, AM; Arp, HP; Raymond, C; Samuelsson, G; Hedman, JE; Stokland, Ø;Gunnarsson, JS. Remediation of contaminated marine sediment using thin-layer capping with activated carbon--a field experimentin Trondheim harbor, Norway. Environmental science & technology 2011;45(14):6110-6.

Pollutant flux from sediment to waterCornelissen, G; Kruså, ME; Breedveld, GD; Eek, E; Oen, AM; Arp, HP; Raymond, C; Samuelsson, G; Hedman, JE; Stokland, Ø;Gunnarsson, JS. Remediation of contaminated marine sediment using thin-layer capping with activated carbon--a field experimentin Trondheim harbor, Norway. Environmental science & technology 2011;45(14):6110-6.

Bioaccumulation and biodiversityAC+clay most benign

Field test 2:Grenlandfjords,dioxins

53 km 2 polluted by Mg smelterMg smelterComparison of AC withcrushed limestone andlocal clean clayEidangerfjordOrmerfjordTests at 30 and 100 mdepthpGoogle EarthTest fields up to 40,000 m 2

How to place 80tAC and d20t salt on the seafloor?

Mixing on boardDredging clean clayMixing AC and clay

Determination of layer thicknessLimestoneClayClay+ACReference

Reduction of dioxin flux from sediment by 50-90%Gerard Cornelissen, Katja Amstaetter, Audun Hauge, Morten Schaanning, Bjørnar Beylich, Jonas S. Gunnarsson, Gijs D.Breedveld, Amy M.P. Oen, and Espen Eek. Large-Scale Field Study on Thin-Layer Capping of Marine PCDD/F-ContaminatedSediments in Grenlandfjords, Norway: Physicochemical Effects. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2012, 46, 12030-12037.

Reduction of dioxin uptake in organisms:increases over time for passive caps, stays low for ACSnail Snail Worm6 months 18 months 18 monthsLimestone 9 % 54 % 189 %Clean Clay 14 % 79 % 93 %Clay + AC 30 m depth 12 % 14 % 17 %Clay + AC 100 m depth 33 % 17 % 25 %

Case study 3:Fiskerstrand, TriButylTinn

Field siteArea of greatest contaminationCalcite onlyCalcite and AC

Reduction in TBT concentration above sedimentC w (ng L ‐1 )16.014.012.010.008.06.040 4.02.00.0Before capping1 month after8 months after12 months aftercapping capping cappingTest field capped with BiokalkTest field capped with AC and Biokalk

Sustainable solutions; Life-Cycle Analysissediment remediation: use biochar!”Do nothing”NRClayHuman HealthEcosystemsResourcesLime”Coal AC”AC (coal based)”Biochar”AC (coconutwaste)‐10 ‐5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35Weighted damage mPtSparrevik, M; Saloranta, T; Cornelissen, G; Eek, E; Fet, AM; Breedveld, GD; Linkov, I. Use of life cycle assessments to evaluate theenvironmental footprint of contaminated sediment remediation. Environmental science & technology 2011;45(10):4235-41.